Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/18/1999, C4 - SURPLUS CITY PROPERTY council M..dMDw°s p-99 j apenaa nEpoit "c4 CITY O F SAN LUIS O B I S P O FROM: Bill Statler,Director of Finance V Prepared By: Vi Sheldon,Accounting Supervisor SUBJECT: SURPLUS CITY PROPERTY CAO RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution declaring equipment as surplus property. DISCUSSION Section 906 of the City Charter requires that the City Council approve the sale or disposal of surplus property with an estimated value greater than$100. The following items are recommended for surplus by the Departments of Public Works,Utilities,Fire,Police and Parks and Recreation. • Public Works Department The Director of Public Works has identified two pickup trucks, a station wagon, a mower, a paver and a sidewalk scrubber as surplus to the needs of the City. Each item has been replaced in accordance with the City's fleet management or equipment replacement policy. • Utilities Department The Utilities Director has identified one backhoe as surplus to the needs of the City. The backhoe has not been replaced because the department has no need for it at this time. • Fire Department The Fire Chief has identified one sedan as surplus to the needs of the City. This vehicle has been replaced in accordance with the City's fleet management policy. • Police Department The Police Chief has identified one van as surplus to the needs of the City. This vehicle has been replaced in accordance with the City's fleet management policy. • Parks & Recreation Department The Parks &Recreation Director has identified one pickup truck as surplus to the needs of the City. This vehicle has been replaced in accordance with the City's fleet management policy. All items proposed for disposal are more fully described on Exhibit A. The disposal method will be in accordance with the City's surplus property policy as determined by the Director of Finance to be in the best interest of the City. CONCURRENCES The Department Heads for Public Works, Utilities, Fire, Police and Parks &Recreation concur with this recommendation. FISCAL EMPACT It is anticipated that the City will receive$20,700 in proceeds from the disposal of the vehicles. ATTACHMENT Resolution declaring equipment as surplus property C4-1 RESOLUTION NO. (1999 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DECLARING EQUIPMENT AS SURPLUS PROPERTY WHEREAS, the City Charter requires that the Council approve the sale or disposal of surplus property with an estimated value greater than$100; and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works, the Director of Utilities, the Director of Fire, the Director of Police and the Director of Parks and Recreation have identified equipment items as set forth in Exhibit A which are no longer needed by the City. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,that the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo hereby declares: SECTION 1. All items of property listed in Exhibit A are no longer needed by the City and are surplus property. SECTION 2. Disposal of the property shall be made by sale at public auction or by another method of disposal in accordance with the City's surplus property policy as determined by the Director of Finance to be in the best interest of the City. Upon motion of seconded by , and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was adopted this day of . 1999. ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor Allen Settle APPROVED AS TO FORM: els -, 0 C4-2 EXHIBIT A Year Make Model License # Vehicle I.D.# Estimated Value 1985 GMC S-10 483131 1GTBS14E3F8542024 500 1986 Torro Mower 30782-60840 900 1986 Ford 1/2 Ton P/U 492910 1 FTDF15Y4GPB98538 3,000 1987 Chevrolet Station Wagon 74199 1 G 1 AW81 W8J6119815 2,000 1990 Layton Tow Paver 10255 3,000 1992 Clark Sidewalk Scrubber QJ2281 300 Year Make Model License # Vehicle I.D.# Estimated Value 1977 Case 580C Backhoe 8959473 5,000 Year Make Model License # Vehicle I.D.# Estimated Value 1991 Chevrolet Lumina 347560 2G1 WN54T6M9186564 2,500 Year Make Model License # Vehicle I.D.# Estimated Value 1990 Ford Aerostar 939439 1 FMDA31 U2LZB00968 2,500 Year Make Model License # Vehicle I.D.# Estimated Value 1985 Chevrolet S-10 483123 1GTCS1465F8533576 1,000 Total $20,700 C4-3 council j acEnoa Report c5 CITY OF SAN LUIS 0BISPP0 FROM: Bill Statler,Director of Finance WOQ— SUBJECT: CAL POLY ANNEXATION FISCAL MIPACT STUDY CAO RECOMNMNDATION • Approve a request for proposals (RFP) to evaluate the fiscal impacts of annexing Cal Poly; and authorize the CAO to award the contract to the best overall proposer if within the project budget of$30,000. • Reappropriate$30,000 from 1998-99 to 1999-00 for this study. DISCUSSION Background. As part of the Long-Tenn Fiscal Health major City goal in the 1997-99 Financial Plan, the Council approved $30,000 to evaluate the fiscal impacts of annexing Cal Poly. The Council reaffirmed their interest in continuing to pursue this study by adopting it as a Council goal for 1999-01. In addition to evaluating the fiscal impacts of annexation on the City, County and Cal Poly, the study will analyze the experience of other communities with a state university in its city limits as well as governance issues. At a high level, it will also address other potential benefits of annexation to the City, County and Cal Poly. This item was previously presented for Council approval in November of 1998. However, the Council deferred action at that time based on Cal Poly's request for additional time to review the workscope. Since then, both Cal Poly and the County have reviewed the RFP, and their comments are reflected in the workscope. It is important to note that no formal proposal has been made or is under consideration to annex Cal Poly to the City. This is simply a fact-finding effort. Based on the results of this study, we may explore this idea further. Workscope. Provided in Attachment A is the Workscope section of the RFP. (The RFP in its entirety is available for review in the Council office.) In summary, the study will evaluate the following five issues: Fiscal Impacts on the City • What City services would be affected by annexation? How will service costs change? • What revenue sources would be affected by annexation? How will revenues change? • How will existing service agreements be affected? C5-1 Council Agenda Report-Cal Poly Annexation Fiscal Impact Study Page 2 Fiscal Impacts on Cal Poly and the County • What are the likely fiscal impacts on Cal Poly and the County? Experience of Other Communities in California • What other cities have State universities within their city limits? • What has been their service delivery and governance experience? • Have any cities previously annexed an existing college campus? • If yes, what problems (if any) did they encounter during the annexation process, and have there been any subsequent fiscal or governance issues? Governance Issues • What are the basic "authorities" that determine intergovernmental relationships between the City, County and Cal Poly? • What governance issues are likely to emerge for the City and Cal Poly? • What regulatory authority (if any) would the City have over Cal Poly? How is this different (if at all) from the County's existing regulatory authority? • What are the likely boundaries for the annexation if it should go forward? Other Opportunities for Mutual Benefits At a high level, the study will also discuss: • Are there ways that annexation could improve relationships between the City and Cal Poly, especially in the area of student and faculty housing needs? • What other potential benefits might Cal Poly and the County experience if Cal Poly was annexed to the City? Proposal Evaluation and Selection. Proposals will be evaluated by a review team composed of the CAO, Assistant CAO, Director of Finance and Revenue Manager based on the following criteria: • Understanding of the work required by the City. • Quality,clarity and responsiveness of the proposal. • Demonstrated competence and professional qualifications necessary for successfully performing the work required by the City. • Recent experience in successfully performing similar services. C5-2 Council Agenda Report—Cal Poly Annexation Fiscal Impact Study Page 3 • Proposed approach in completing the work. • References. • Background and related experience of the specific individuals to be assigned to this project. • Proposed compensation. As reflected above, contract award will not be based solely on price, but on a combination of factors representing the best overall proposal. Provided in Attachment B is a list of firms that have successfully worked with us in the past on similar fiscal impact analyses, or have previously requested that they receive an RFP. Proposal Review, Contract Award and Work Schedule. The following is an outline of the anticipated schedule for reviewing proposals, awarding the contract and completing the work: • Issue RFP 5/19 • Conduct pre-proposal conference 6/7 • Receive proposals 6/23 • Complete proposal evaluation 6/30 • Conduct finalist interviews 7/23 • Finalize staff recommendation; award contract 7/30 • Start work 8/15 • Complete administrative draft 10/15 • Coordinate review by City, Cal Poly and County staff 11/15 • Finalize findings and present to Council, others 1/4 FISCAL IMPACT The 1997-99 Financial Plan includes funding in the amount of $30,000 to perform this study. Since the contract will be not be awarded before the end of the fiscal year, we recommend that the Council reappropriate this funding into 1999-00. ATTACHMENTS A. Workscope excerpt from RFP B. Proposers list ON FILE IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE RFP for evaluating the fiscal impacts of annexing the Cal Poly—Specification No. 9210 G:Finance/UP's and 1FB's/U Poly Annexadon/Agenda Report—May 18,1999 C5-3 Achment A Section A DESCRIPTION OF WORK PURPOSE The City of San Luis Obispo wants to contract with a qualified firm to evaluate the potential costs and revenues of annexing the California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo (Cal Poly) to the City. As part of this study, we also want to analyze the experience of other communities with a state university in their city limits as well as governance issues. At a high level, this study will also address other potential benefits of annexation to the City, County and Cal Poly. It is important to note that no formal proposal has been made to annex Cal Poly to the City, this study is simply a fact-finding effort. Based on its results, we may explore this idea further. However, unless there are sufficient benefits for all three agencies,it is unlikely that it will occur. BACKGROUND While Cal Poly is not in the City limits, it is immediately adjacent to the City, and its operations provide significant benefits as well as impacts on the community. Historically, there has been a close correlation between Cal Poly's growth,and the City's growth. In addition to many informal partnerships and liaison committees, the City has several formal service relationships with Cal Poly,including: ■ Water supply. Along with the California Men's Colony (CMC), the City and Cal Poly are members of the Whale Rock Reservoir Commission, a joint powers authority that owns and operates the Whale Rock Reservoir. The 40,000 acre foot reservoir was completed in 1960 in order to meet help meet the water supply needs of its members. The City owns 55%of the reservoir,Cal Poly 34%,and CMC 11%. ■ Water treatment and distribution. The City treats and distributes Cal Poly's domestic water needs. Cal Poly has an equity interest of 8.93% in the City's water treatment plant. This equity contribution, combined with their ownership of their water supply, results in a lower rate structure for Cal Poly than other City customers. For 1998-99, Cal Poly will pay about$444,000 for this service. ■ Wastewater collection and reclamation. The City collects and treats Cal Poly's wastewater. Cal Poly has an equity interest of 9.24% in the City's water reclamation plant, and 7% in the City's relief sewer main. This equity contribution results in a lower rate structure for Cal Poly than other City customers. For 1998-99, Cal Poly will pay about $315,000 for this service. ■ Fire protection. For an annual fee ($107,800 in 1998-99), the City provides fine suppression services to Cal Poly. ■ Transit. The City provides transit service to the Cal Poly campus. Through a cooperative agreement, Cal Poly pays an annual fee to the CS-4 -1- Description of Work City based on its proportionate share of ridership($174,600 in 1998-99), and in turn provides free bus service to its students, faculty and staff. (Note: Cal Poly has indicated that they plan to discontinue this program after 1998-99.) ■ Performing arts center. The City, Cal Poly and a private, non-profit community group(the Foundation for the Performing Arts)have entered into a unique partnership to plan,design,build and operate a world-class performing arts center on the Cal Poly campus. This partnership exists for the benefit Cal Poly's educational programs and the community's enjoyment of the performing arts. Under this partnership, Cal Poly donated the land and paid two-thirds of the construction costs, with the City and the Foundation each contributing one-sixth of the construction costs. All building operation and maintenance costs are paid by Cal Poly, while the City and the Foundation are responsible for any net operating losses. The $35 million center has completed in second year of operations, and attendance has far exceeded initial estimates. A recent analysis by UCSB shows that the center has resulted in significant economic benefits for local businesses,the County and the City. Our partnerships and inter-relationships with Cal Poly are likely to increase over time, with a proposal for a Cal Poly business research park as the most recent example. As such,it is timely to ask in a comprehensive way what the costs and revenues would be if Cal Poly was a formal part of the City. Additionally, we want to look at the experience of other communities that have major State universities within their city limits. We also want to consider the fiscal and governance impacts on Cal Poly and the County, as well as (at a high level) other potential benefits of annexation for these two agencies. We would need their support if the results of the study show that annexing Cal Poly would be fiscally desirable for the City. WORKSCOPE Approach The City is contracting for this work, and will be the only client for the engagement. However, we want to work collaboratively with Cal Poly and the County on this project and involve them in the review process. Tasks Fiscal Impacts on the City ■ What City services would be affected by annexation? How will service costs change? ■ What revenue sources would be affected by annexation? How will revenues change? CS-5 -2- Description of Work ■ How will existing service agreements be affected? Fiscal Impacts on Cal Poly and the County ■ What are the likely fiscal impacts on Cal Poly and the County? Experience of Other Communities in California ■ What other cities have state universities within their city limits? ■ What has been their service delivery and governance experience? ■ Have any cities previously annexed an existing college campus? ■ If yes, what problems (if any) did they encounter during the annexation process, and have there been any subsequent fiscal or governance issues? Governance Issues ■ What are the basic "authorities" that determine intergovernmental relationships between the City,County and Cal Poly? ■ What governance issues are likely to emerge for the City and Cal Poly? ■ What regulatory authority (if any) would the City have over Cal Poly? How is this different (if at all) from the County's existing regulatory authority? ■ What are the likely boundaries for the annexation if it should go forward? Other Opportunities for Mutual Benefits At a high level,the study should also discuss: ■ Are there ways that annexation could improve relationships between the City and Cal Poly, especially in the area of student and faculty housing needs? ■ What other potential benefits might Cal Poly and the County experience if Cal Poly was annexed to the City? BUDGET The City has budgeted$30,000 for this work. TEVIEFRAME The City would like to complete this project within 90 days after contract execution. CS-6. -3- Aj&hment-..F-'-P- PROPOSERS LIST Specification No. 9210 EVALUATING THE FISCAL IMPACTS OF ANNEXING CAL POLY David Taussig&Associates PCR Kotin Susan Goodwin Allan Kotin 425 University Avenue, Suite 110 12100 Wilshire Boulevard Sacramento,CA 95825 Los Angeles,CA 90025 Phone No: (916)920-1109 Phone No. (310) 820-1703 Fax No: (916)920-4134 Fax No. (310) 850-1703 Economic Research Associates Mundie&Associates Bill Andersen Roberta Mundie 964 Fifth Avenue, Suite 214 3452 Sacramento Street San Diego, CA 92101 San Francisco,CA 94118 Phone No. (619)5441402 Phone No. (415)441-9640 Fax No. (619)5441404 Fax No. (415)441-6983 David M. Griffith&Associates Crawford,Multari&Clark Associates Erin Payton Mike Multari 4320 Auburn Boulevard,Suite 2000 641 Higuera Street Sacramento,CA 95841 San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Phone No. (916)485-8102 Phone No. (805)541-3848 Fax No. (916)485-0111 Fax No. (805)541-5512 Williams-Kuebelbeck&Associates Kosmont&Associates Lawrence E. Williams Mike Metcalf 1765 Challenge Way, Suite 100 601 South Figueroa Street,Suite 4895 Sacramento,CA 95815 Los Angeles,CA 90017 Phone No. (916)564-0600 Phone No. (213)623-8484 Fax No. (916)564-7186 Fax No. (213)623-8288 Pacific Group Thomas Feeney 1110 Marquita Avenue Burlingame,CA 94010 Phone/Fax No. (650)3441288 C5-7 ��a3 Request for Proposals EVALUATING THE FISCAL IMPACTS OF ANNEXING CAL POLY May 19, 1999 City Of SAn WIS OBI SPO IIIIIIIIIIII�� Illl 11 city or san WIS OBISPO 990 Palm Street ■ San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Notice Requesting Proposals for EVALUATING THE FISCAL IMPACTS OF ANNEXING CAL POLY The City of San Luis Obispo is requesting sealed proposals for evaluating the fiscal impacts of annexing the Cal Poly campus to the City pursuant to Specification No. 9210. All proposals must be received by the Department of Finance by 2:00 PM,Wednesday,June 23, 1999,when they will be opened publicly in the City Hall Council Chambers,990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401. Proposals received after said time will not be considered. To guard against premature opening, each proposal shall be submitted to the Department of Finance in a sealed envelope plainly marked with the proposal title, specification number, proposer name, and time and date of the proposal opening. Proposals shall be submitted using the forms provided in the specification package. A pre-proposal conference will be held at City Hall, Council Hearing Room, 990 Palm Street on Monday, June 7, 1999, at 10:00 AM to answer any questions that the prospective proposers may have regarding the City's request for proposals. Specification packages and additional information may be obtained by contacting Bill Statler, Director of Finance at(805) 781-7125. ® The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to including disabled persons in all of our services,programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. Specification No. 9210 TABLE OF CONTENTS A. DESCRIPTION OF WORK Purpose 1 Background 1 Workscope 2 Project Budget 3 Timeframe for Completing Work 3 B. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS Proposal Requirements 4 Contract Award and Execution 5 Contract Performance 5 C. SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS Proposal Content and Evaluation Process Proposal Content 9 Proposal Evaluation and Selection 9 Proposal Review,Contract Award and Work Schedule 10 Pre-Proposal Conference 10 Ownership and Release of Information Ownership of Materials 10 Release of Reports and Information 10 Copies of Reports and Information 10 Work Product Required Deliverables 11 Attendance at Meetings and Hearings 11 D. FORM OF AGREEMENT 12 E. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS 14 F. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL FORMS .Proposal Submittal Summary 16 References 17 Section A DESCRIPTION OF WORK PURPOSE The City of San Luis Obispo wants to contract with a qualified firm to evaluate the potential costs and revenues of annexing the California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo (Cal Poly) to the City. As part of this study, we also want to analyze the experience of other communities with a state university in their city limits as well as governance issues. At a high level, this study will also address other potential benefits of annexation to the City, County and Cal Poly. It is important to note that no formal proposal has been made to annex Cal Poly to the City; this study is simply a fact-finding effort. Based on its results, we may explore this idea further. However, unless.there are sufficient benefits for all three agencies, it is unlikely that it will occur. BACKGROUND While Cal Poly is not in the City limits, it is immediately adjacent to the City, and its operations provide significant benefits as well as impacts on the community. Historically, there has been a close correlation between Cal Poly's growth,and the City's growth. In addition to many informal partnerships and liaison committees, the City has several formal service relationships with Cal Poly,including: ■ Water supply. Along with the California Men's Colony (CMC), the City and Cal Poly are members of the Whale Rock Reservoir Commission, a joint powers authority that owns and operates the Whale Rock Reservoir. The 40,000 acre foot reservoir was completed in 1960 in order to meet help meet the water supply needs of its members. The City owns 55%of the reservoir,Cal Poly 34%,and CMC 11%. ■ Water treatment and distribution. The City treats and distributes Cal Poly's domestic water needs. Cal Poly has an equity interest of 8.93% in the City's water treatment plant. This equity contribution, combined with their ownership of their water supply, results in a lower rate structure for Cal Poly than other City customers. For 1998-99, Cal Poly will pay about$444,000 for this service. ■ Wastewater collection and reclamation. The City collects and treats Cal Poly's wastewater. Cal Poly has an equity interest of 9.24% in the City's water reclamation plant, and 7% in the City's relief sewer main. This equity contribution results in a lower rate structure for Cal Poly than other City customers. For 1998-99, Cal Poly will pay about $315,000 for this service. ■ Fire protection. For an annual fee ($107,800 in 1998-99), the City provides fire suppression services to Cal Poly. ■ Transit. The City provides transit service to the Cal Poly campus. Through a cooperative agreement, Cal Poly pays an annual fee to the -1- Description of Work City based on its proportionate share of ridership ($174,600 in 1998-99), and in tum provides free bu§ service to its students, faculty and staff. (Note: Cal Poly has indicated that they plan to discontinue this program after 1998-99.) ■ Performing arts center. The City, Cal Poly and a private, non-profit community group(the Foundation for the Performing Arts)have entered into a unique partnership to plan, design,build and operate a world-class performing arts center on the Cal Poly campus. This partnership exists for the benefit Cal Poly's educational programs and the community's enjoyment of the performing arts. Under this partnership, Cal Poly donated the land and paid two-thirds of the construction costs, with the City and the Foundation each contributing one-sixth of the construction costs. All building operation and maiatenance costs are paid by Cal Poly, while the City and the Foundation are responsible for any net operating losses. The $35 million center has completed in second year of operations, and attendance has far exceeded initial estimates. A recent analysis by UCSB shows that the center has resulted in significant economic benefits for local businesses,the County and the City. Our partnerships and inter-relationships with Cal Poly are likely to increase over time, with a proposal for a Cal Poly business research park as the most recent example. As such,it is timely to ask in a comprehensive way what the costs and revenues would be if Cal Poly was a formal part of the City. Additionally, we want to look at the experience of other communities that have major State universities within their city limits. We also want to consider the fiscal and governance impacts on Cal Poly and the County, as well as (at a high level) other potential benefits of annexation for these two agencies. We would need their support if the results of the study show that annexing Cal Poly would be fiscally desirable for the City. WORKSCOPE Approach The City is contracting for this work, and will be the only client for the engagement. However, we want to work collaboratively with Cal Poly and the County on this project and involve them in the review process. Tasks Fiscal Impacts on the City ■ What City services would be affected by annexation? How will service costs change? ■ What revenue sources would be affected by annexation? How will revenues change? -2- Description of Work ■ How will existing service agreements be affected? Fiscal Impacts on Cal Poly and the County ■ What are the likely fiscal impacts on Cal Poly and the County? Experience of Other Communities in California ■ What other cities have state universities within their city limits? ■ What has been their service delivery and governance experience? ■ Have any cities previously annexed an existing college campus? ■ If yes, what problems (if any) did they encounter during the annexation process, and have there been any subsequent fiscal or governance issues? Governance Issues ■ What are the basic "authorities" that determine intergovernmental relationships between the City,County and Cal Poly? ■ What governance issues are likely to emerge for the City and Cal Poly? ■ What regulatory authority (if any) would the City have over Cal Poly? How is this different (if at all) from the County's existing regulatory authority? ■ What are the likely boundaries for the annexation if it should go forward? Other Opportunities for Mutual Benefits At a high level,the study should also discuss: ■ Are there ways that annexation could improve relationships between the City and Cal Poly, especially in the area of student and faculty housing needs? ■ What other potential benefits might Cal Poly and the County experience if Cal Poly was annexed to the City? BUDGET The City has budgeted$30,000 for this work. T AMFRAME The City would like to complete this project within 90 days after contract execution. -3- Section B GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS 1. Requirement to Meet All Provisions. Each individual or firm submitting a proposal (proposer) shall meet all of the terms, and conditions of the Request for Proposals (RFP) specifications package. By virtue of its proposal submittal, the proposer acknowledges agreement with and acceptance of all provisions of the RFP specifications. 2. Proposal Submittal. Each proposal must be submitted on the form(s) provided in the specifications and accompanied by any other required submittals or supplemental materials. Proposal documents shall be enclosed in an envelope which shall be sealed and addressed to the Department of Finance, City of San Luis Obispo, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401. In order to guard against premature opening, the proposal should be clearly labeled with the proposal title, specification number, name of proposer, and date and time of proposal opening. No FAX submittals will be accepted. 3. Insurance Certificate. Each proposal must include a certificate of insurance showing: a. ' The insurance carrier and its A.M. Best rating. b. Scope of coverage and limits. C. Deductibles and self-insured retention. The purpose of this submittal is to generally assess the adequacy of the proposer's insurance coverage during proposal evaluation; as discussed under paragraph 12 below, endorsements are not required until contract award. The City's insurance requirements are detailed in Section E. 4. Proposal Quotes and Unit Price Extensions. The extensions of unit prices for the quantities indicated and the lump sum prices quoted by the proposer must be entered in figures in the spaces provided on the Proposal Submittal Form(s). Any lump sum bid shall be stated in figures. The Proposal Submittal Form(s)must be totally completed. If the unit price and the total amount stated by any proposer for any item are not in agreement, the unit price alone will be considered as representing the proposer's intention and the proposal total will be corrected to conform to the specified unit price. 5. Proposal Withdrawal and Opening. A proposer may withdraw its proposal, without prejudice prior to the time specified for the proposal opening, by submitting a written request.to the Director of Finance for its withdrawal, in which event the proposal will be returned to the proposer unopened. No proposal received after the time specified or at any place other than that stated in the "Notice Inviting Bids/Requesting Proposals" will be considered. All proposals will be opened and declared publicly. Proposers or their representatives are invited to be present at the opening of the proposals. -4- 6. Submittal of One Proposal Only. No individual or business entity of any kind shall be allowed to make or file, or to be interested in more than one proposal, except an alternative proposal when specifically requested, however, an individual or business entity which has submitted a sub-proposal to a proposer submitting a proposal, or who has quoted prices on materials to such proposer, is not thereby disqualified from submitting a sub-proposal or from quoting prices to other proposers submitting proposals. 7. Cooperative Purchasing. During the term of the contract, the successful proposer will extend all terms and conditions to any other local governmental agencies upon their request. These agencies will issue their own purchase orders, will directly receive goods or services at their place of business, and will be directly billed by the successful proposer. 8. Communications. All timely requests for information submitted in writing will receive a written response from the City. Telephone communications with City staff are not encouraged, but will be permitted. However,any such oral communication shall not be binding on the City. CONTRACT AWARD AND EXECUTION 9. Proposal Retention and Award. The City reserves the right to retain all proposals for a period of 60 days for examination and comparison. The City also reserves the right to waive non-substantial irregularities in any proposal,to reject any or all proposals,to reject or delete one part of a proposal and accept the other, except to the extent that proposals are qualified by specific limitations. See the "special terms and conditions" in Section C of these specifications for proposal evaluation and contract award criteria. 10. Competency and Responsibility of Proposer. The City reserves full discretion to determine the competence and responsibility, professionally and/or financially, of proposers: `Proposers will provide, in a timely manner, any and all information which the City deems necessary to make such a decision. 11. Contract Requirement. The proposer to whom award is made (Contractor) shall execute a written contract with the City within ten (10) calendar days after notice of the award has been sent by mail to it at the address given in its proposal. The contract shall be made in the form adopted by the City and incorporated in these specifications. 12. Insurance Requirements. The Contractor shall provide proof of insurance in the form, coverages, and amounts specified in Section E of these specifications within 10 (ten) calendar days after notice of contract award as a precondition to contract execution. 13. Business Tax. The Contractor must have a valid City of San Luis Obispo business tax certificate prior to execution of the contract. Additional information regarding the City's business tax program may be obtained by calling(805)781-7134. CONTRACT PERFORMANCE 14. Ability to Perform. The Contractor warrants that it possesses, or has arranged through subcontracts, all capital and other equipment, labor, materials, and licenses necessary to cant' out and complete the work hereunder in compliance with any and all federal, state, county, city, and special district laws,ordinances,and regulations. -5- 15. Laws to be Observed. The Contractor shall keep itself fully informed of and shall observe and comply with all applicable state and federal laws and county and City of San Luis Obispo ordinances,regulations and adopted codes during its performance of the work. 16. Payment of Taxes. The contract prices shall include full compensation for all taxes which the Contractor is required to pay. 17. Permits and Licenses. The Contractor shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees,and give all notices necessary. 18. Safety Provisions. The Contractor shall conform to the rules and regulations pertaining to safety established by OSHA and the California Division of Industrial Safety. 19. Public and Employee Safety. Whenever the Contractor's operations create a condition hazardous to the public or City employees, it shall, at its expense and without cost to the City, furnish, erect and maintain such fences, temporary railings, barricades, lights, signs and other devices and take such other protective measures as are necessary to prevent accidents or damage or injury to the public and employees. 20. Preservation of City Property. The Contractor shall provide and install suitable safeguards, approved by the City, to protect City property from injury or damage. If City property is injured or damaged as a result of the Contractor's operations, it shall be replaced or restored at the Contractor's expense. The facilities shall be replaced or restored to a condition as good as when the Contractor began work. 21. Immigration Act of 1986. The Contractor warrants on behalf of itself and all subcontractors engaged for the performance of this work that only persons authorized to work in the United States pursuant to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 and other applicable laws shall be employed in the performance of the work hereunder. 22. Contractor Non-Discrimination. In the performance of this work, the Contractor agrees that it will not engage in,nor permit such subcontractors as it may employ, to engage in discrimination in employment of persons because of age, race, color, sex, national origin or ancestry, sexual orientation,or religion of such persons. 23. Work Delays. Should the Contractor be obstructed or delayed in the work required to be done hereunder by changes in the work or by any default, act, or omission of the City, or by strikes, fire, earthquake, or any other Act of God, or by the inability to obtain materials, equipment, or labor due to federal government restrictions arising out of defense or war programs, then the time of completion may, at the City's sole option,be extended for such periods as may be agreed upon by the City and the Contractor. In the event that there is insufficient time to grant such extensions prior to the completion date of the contract, the City may, at the time of acceptance of the work, waive liquidated damages which may have accrued for failure to complete on time, due to any of the above, after hearing evidence as to the reasons for such delay, and making a finding as to the causes of same. 24. Payment Terms. The City's payment terms are 30 days from the receipt of an original invoice and acceptance by the City of the materials, supplies, equipment, or services provided by the Contractor(Net 30). -6- 25. Inspection. The Contractor shall furnish City with every reasonable opportunity for City to ascertain that the services of the Contractor are being performed in accordance with the requirements and intentions of this contract. All work done and all materials furnished, if any, shall be subject to the City's inspection and approval. The inspection of such work shall not relieve Contractor of any of its obligations to fulfill its contract requirements. 26. Audit. The City shall have the option of inspecting and/or auditing all records and other written materials used by Contractor in preparing its invoices to City as a condition precedent to any payment to Contractor. 27. Interests of Contractor. The Contractor covenants that it presently has no interest, and shall not acquire any interest direct or indirect or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the work hereunder.The Contractor further covenants that, in the performance of this work,no subcontractor or person having such an interest shall be employed. The Contractor certifies that no one who has or will have any financial interest in performing this work is an officer or employee of the City. It is hereby expressly°agreed that, in the performance of the work hereunder,the Contractor shall at all times be deemed an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the'City. 28. Hold Harmless and Indemnification. The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold the City and its agents, officers and employees harmless from and against any and all claims asserted or liability established for damages or injuries to any person or property, including injury to the Contractor's employees, agents or officers which arise from or are connected with or are caused or claimed to be caused by the acts or omissions of the Contractor, and its agents, officers or employees, in performing the work or services herein, and all expenses of investigating and defending against same, provided, however, that the Contractor's duty to indemnify and hold harmless shall not include any claims or liability arising from the established sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its agents, officers or employees. 29. Contract Assignment. The Contractor shall not assign, transfer,convey or otherwise dispose of the contract,or its right, title or interest, or its power to execute such a contract to any individual or business entity of any kind without the previous written consent of the City. 30. Termination. If, during the term of the contract, the City determines that the Contractor is not faithfully abiding by any term or condition contained herein, the City may notify the Contractor in writing of such defect or failure to perform; which notice must give the Contractor a 10 (ten) calendar day notice of time thereafter in which to perform said work or cure the deficiency. If the Contractor has not performed the work or cured the deficiency within the ten days specified in the notice, such shall constitute a breach of the contract and the City may terminate the contract immediately by written notice to the Contractor to said effect. Thereafter, neither party shall have any further duties, obligations, responsibilities, or rights under the contract except, however, any and all obligations of the Contractor's surety shall remain in full force and effect, and shall not be extinguished, reduced, or in any manner waived by the termination thereof. -7- In said event, the Contractor shall be entitled to the reasonable value of its services performed from the beginning date in which the breach occurs up to the day it received the City's Notice of Termination, minus any offset from such payment representing the City's damages from such breach. "Reasonable value" includes fees or charges for goods or services as of the last milestone or task satisfactorily delivered or completed by the Contractor as may be set forth in the Agreement payment schedule; compensation for any other work, services or goods performed or provided by the Contractor shall be based solely on the City's assessment of the value of the work-in-progress in completing the overall workscope. The City reserves the right to delay any such payment until completion or confirmed abandonment of the project, as may be determined in the City's sole discretion, so as to permit a full and complete accounting of costs. In no event, however, shall the Contractor be entitled to receive in excess of the compensation quoted in its proposal. -8- Section C SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS 1. Proposal Content. Your proposal must include the following information: Submittal Forms a. Proposal submittal summary. b. Certificate of insurance. C. References from at least three firms for whom you have provided similar services. Qualifications d. Experience of your firm in performing similar services. e. Resumes of the individuals who would be assigned to this project, including any sub- consultants. Work Program f. Description of your approach to completing the work. g. Tentative schedule by phase and task for completing the work. h. Estimated hours for your staff in performing each major phase of the work, including sub-consultants. i. Services or data to be provided by the City. j. Any other information that would assist us in making this contract award decision. Compensation k. Proposed compensation and payment schedule tied to accomplishing key tasks. Proposal Length and Copies 1. Proposals should not exceed 10 pages, including attachments and supplemental materials. M. Five copies of the proposal must be'submitted. 2. Proposal Evaluation and Selection. Proposals will be evaluated by a staff review committee based on the following criteria: a. Understanding of the work required by the City and familiarity with the policy issues. b. Quality,clarity and responsiveness of the proposal. C. Demonstrated competence and professional qualifications necessary for successfully performing the work required by the City. d. Recent experience in successfully performing similar services. e. Proposed approach in completing the work. f. References. g. Background and related experience of the specific individuals to be assigned to this project. h. Proposed compensation. -9- As reflected above, contract award will not be based solely on price, but on a combination of factors as determined to be in the best interest of the City. After evaluating the proposals and discussing them further with the finalists or the tentatively selected contractor, the City reserves the right to further negotiate the proposed work and/or method and amount of compensation. 3. Proposal Review, Contract Award and Work Schedule. The following is an outline of the anticipated schedule for reviewing proposals, awarding the contract award and performing the work: a. Issue RFP May 19, 1999 b. Conduct pre proposal conference June 7, 1999 C. Receive proposals June 23, 1999 d. Complete proposal evaluation June 30, 1999 e. Conduct finalist interviews(reserve this date) July 23, 1999 f. Finalize staff recommendation July 28, 1999 g. Award contract July 30, 1999 h. Execute contract August 10, 1999 i. Start work August 15, 1999 j. Complete administrative draft October 15, 1999 k. Coordinate review by City,Cal Poly and County staff November 15, 1999 1. Finalize findings and present to Council, others January 4,2000 4. Pre-Proposal Conference. A pre-proposal conference will be held at the following location, date,and time to answer any questions that prospective proposers may have regarding this RFP: Monday,June 7, 1999 10:00 AM City Hall, Council Hearing Room 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo 5. Ownership of Materials. All original drawings, plan documents and other materials prepared by or in possession of the Contractor as part of the work or services under these specifications shall become the permanent property of the City,and shall be delivered to the City upon demand. 6. Release of Reports and Information. Any reports, information, data, or other material given to, prepared by or assembled by the Contactor as part of the work or services under these specifications shall be the property of City and shall not be made available to any individual or organization by the Contractor without the prior written approval of the City. 7. Copies of Reports and Information. If the City requests additional copies of reports, drawings, specifications, or any other material in addition to what the Contractor is required to furnish in limited quantities as part of the work or services under these specifications, the Contractor shall provide such additional copies as are requested, and City shall compensate the Contractor for the costs of duplicating of such copies at the Contractor's direct expense. -10- 8. Required Deliverables. The Contractor will be required to provide: a. Twenty five copies of the final report which addresses all elements of the workscope. Any documents or materials provided by the Contractor will be reviewed by City staff and, where necessary, the Contractor will be required to respond to staff comments and make such changes as deemed appropriate. b. One camera-ready original, unbound, each page printed on only one side, including any original graphics in place and scaled to size,ready for reproduction. C. When computers have been used to produce materials submitted to the City as a part of the workscope,the Contractor must provide the corresponding computer files to the City, compatible with the following programs whenever possible unless otherwise directed by the project manager: • Word Processing Word • Spreadsheets Excel • Desktop Publishing Coreldraw,Pagemaker • Computer Aided Drafting(CAD) AutoCad Computer files must be on 3'/2", high-density, write-protected diskettes, formatted for use on IBM-compatible systems. Each diskette must be clearly labeled and have a printed copy of the directory. 9. Attendance at Meetings and Hearings. As part of the workscope and included in the contract price is attendance at up to two public meetings to present and discuss the Contractor's findings and recommendations. Contractor shall attend as many "working" meetings with staff as necessary in performing workscope tasks. -11- Section D FORM OF AGREEMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on this [ ] day of[ ],by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as City,and[ ],hereinafter referred to as Contractor. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, on May 19, 1999, the City requested proposals for evaluating the fiscal impacts of annexing Cal Poly to the City per Specification No.9210. WHEREAS,pursuant to said request,Contractor submitted a proposal which was accepted by City for said services. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations, and covenants hereinafter contained,the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of this Agreement is made and entered,as first written above,until acceptance or completion of said services. 2. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. City Specification No. 9210 and Contractor's proposal dated June 23, 1999 are hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Agreement. 3. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For providing services as specified in this Agreement, City will pay and Contractor shall receive therefor compensation in a total sum not to exceed$ .00. 4. CONTRACTOR'S OBLIGATIONS. For and in consideration of the payments and agreements hereinbefore mentioned to be made and performed by City, Contractor agrees with City to do everything required by this Agreement and the said specification. 5. AMENDMENTS. Any amendment, modification,or variation from the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the City Administrative Officer of the City. -12- 6. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This written Agreement, including all writings specifically incorporated herein by reference, shall constitute the complete agreement between the parties hereto. No oral agreement, understanding, or representation not reduced to writing and specifically incorporated herein shall be of any force or effect,nor shall any such oral agreement, understanding, or representation be binding upon the parties hereto. 7. NOTICE. All written notices to the parties hereto shall be sent by United States mail, postage prepaid by registered or certified mail addressed as follows: City City Clerk City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Contractor [ ] [ l [ l 8. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Both City and Contractor do covenant that each individual executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized and empowered to execute Agreements for such party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day and year first above written. ATTEST: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,A Municipal Corporation By: City Clerk City Administrative Officer APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONTRACTOR By: City Attorney -13- Section E INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS: Consultant Services The Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor,its agents,representatives,employees, or subcontractors. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). 2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87)covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). 3. Workers'Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. 4. Errors and Omissions Liability insurance as appropriate to the consultant's profession. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than: I. General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. 2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. 4. Errors.and Omissions Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations,claim administration and defense expenses. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. The City,its officers,officials,employees,agents and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor, or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, official,employees,agents or volunteers. 2. For any claims related to this project, the Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. 3. Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees,agents or volunteers. -14- 4. The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought,except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. S. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than ANLL Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall furnish the City with a certificate of insurance showing maintenance of the required insurance coverage. Original endorsements effecting general liability and automobile liability coverage required by this clause must also be provided. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. -15- PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL SUMMARY The undersigned declares that she or he has carefully examined Specification No. 9210, which is hereby made a part of this proposal; is thoroughly familiar with its contents; is authorized to represent the proposing firm; and agrees to perform the specified work for the following cost quoted in full: Evaluating the Fiscal Impacts of Annexing Cal Poly $ ❑ Certificate of insurance attached; insurance company's A.M. Best rating: Firm Name and Address Contact Phone Signature of Authorized Representative Date -16- REFERENCES Number of years engaged in providing the services included within the scope of the specifications under the present business name: Describe fully the last three contracts performed by your firm which demonstrate your ability to provide the services included with the scope of the specifications. Attach additional pages if required. The City reserves the right to contact each of the references listed for additional information regarding your fun's qualifications. Reference No. 1 Customer Name Contact Individual Telephone&FAX number Street Address City, State,Zip Code Description of services provided including contract amount,when provided and project outcome Reference No.2 ` Customer Name Contact Individual Telephone&FAX number Street Address City,State,Zip Code Description of services provided including contract amount,when provided and project outcome Reference No.3 Customer Name Contact Individual Telephone&FAX number Street Address City,State,Zip Code Description of services provided including contract amount,when provided and project outcome -17- PROPOSERS LIST Specification No. 9210 EVALUATING THE FISCAL IMPACTS OF ANNEXING CAL POLY David Taussig&Associates PCR Kotin Susan Goodwin Allan Kotin 425 University Avenue,Suite 110 12100 Wilshire Boulevard Sacramento,CA 95825 Los Angeles,CA 90025 Phone No: (916)920-1109 Phone No. (310) 820-1703 Fax No: (916) 920-4134 Fax No. (310) 850-1703 Economic Research Associates Mundie&Associates Bill Andersen Roberta Mundie 964 Fifth Avenue, Suite 214 3452 Sacramento Street San Diego,CA 92101 San Francisco, CA 94118 Phone No. (619) 5441402 Phone No. (415)441-9640 Fax No. (619) 544-1404 Fax No. (415)441-6983 David M. Griffith&Associates Crawford, Multari&Clark Associates Erin Payton Mike Multari 4320 Auburn Boulevard, Suite 2000 641 Higuera Street Sacramento, CA 95841 San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Phone No. (916)485-8102 Phone No. (805) 541-3848 Fax No. (916)485-0111 Fax No. (805)541-5512 Williams-Kuebelbeck&Associates Kosmont&Associates Lawrence E.Williams Mike Metcalf 1765 Challenge Way, Suite 100 601 South Figueroa Street, Suite 4895 Sacramento,CA 95815 Los Angeles,CA 90017 Phone No. (916)5640600 Phone No. (213)623-8484 Fax No. (916)5647186 Fax No. (213)623-8288 Pacific Group Thomas Feeney 1110 Marquita Avenue Burlingame,CA 94010 Phone/Fax No. (650) 344-1288