Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-07-07 City Council (15)TO: C ty HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL C ty of Palo Alt Manager’s Report ATTN:FINANCE COMMITTEE FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DATE: SUBJECT: JULY 7, 1999 CMR: 302:99 APPROVAL OF DRAFT SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR STORM DRAINAGE AND STREET SWEEPING FEE ANALYSIS, PUBLIC OUTREACH SERVICES RELATED TO A STORM DRAINAGE FEE INCREASE, AND MAIL BALLOT PROCEDURE SERVICES REPORT IN BRIEF On May 3, the City Council directed staff to work toward the goal of seeking ratepayer approval for a storm drainage fee increase. The Council further directed staff to return with a draft scope of services for the Finance Committee to review. Finance Committee approval is now needed in order to solicit consultant services to culminate in a ratepayer vote in Spring. 2000. Staff has attached a draft scope of services for Finance Committee review, which includes four tasks: Review" of existing storm drainage rate structure; Preparation of public outreach materials (most likely brochures) and assist staff in conducting several public outreach and educational meetings. Mail ballot administration services, including tabulation services for the mail ballot procedure. Review the City’s street sweeping costs and recommend a fee structure for street sweeping that is separate from the refuse charge on the monthly utility bill. This change is needed as a result of Proposition 218 provisions on voter approval for certain property related fees. The next overall refuse rate increase is not estimated to be needed until fiscal year 2001-02, so this task can logically be included as a later phase of work. CMR:302:99 Page 1 of 4 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Finance Committee review and approve the attached draft Scope of Services for fee analysis for the storm drainage and street sweeping services, and public outreach and mail balloting services for storm drainage services. BACKGROUND At the March 2, 1999 Finance Committee meeting, staff presented a proposal for financing the next phase of storm drainage improvements, which will require a rate increase that must be voted on by ratepayers, in compliance with Proposition 218 (CMR:147:99). Staff returned on May 3, 1999 with additional information about the 30-year storm drainage master plan improvements that the rate increase would fund. On May 3, the City Council directed staff to work toward the goal of seeking ratepayer approval in 2000 for a storm drain fee increase from $4.25 per month (the current fee) to approximately $10 in 2001, $11 in 2002, with increases no more than the Consumer Price Index (CPI) thereafter. The Council further directed staff to return with a draft scope of consultant services for the Finance Committee to review on: a) validating the existing storm drainage fee structure; and b) a public education and awareness effort on the Storm Drain Fund status and the proposed rate increase. Finance Committee approval is now needed in order to solicit consultant services to culminate in a ratepayer vote in Spring 2000. DISCUSSION Staff has attached a draft scope of services for Finance Committee review. It includes the following two elements that were reported to the Finance Committee: Review of existing storm drainage rate structure; Prepare a public outreach program and assist staff in conducting public education meetings. A third task is also included to provide: Mail ballot administration services, including tabulation services for the mail ballot procedure. Since this type of election is not similar to the traditional election process, most cities that have conducted mail ballot elections have done so with the services of a consultant. The City Clerk concurs that it would be cost effective to contract out these services. Finally, staff has added a fourth task because it is related to task 1, and could therefore be CMR.~02:99 Page 2 of 4 done by the same consultant. Staff has inserted this task as a second phase in the scope of work to be done after all storm drainage work is completed, because it is not as time sensitive. Task 4 is to: Review the City’s street sweeping costs and recommend a fee structure for street sweeping that is separate from the refuse charge on the monthly utility bill. This change is needed as a result of Proposition 218 provisions on voter approval for certain property related fees. The next Refuse Fund rate increase is not estimated to be needed until fiscal year 2001-02, so this task can logically be included as a later phase of work. While refuse collection services are specifically exempted from the Proposition 218 vote requirement for property related fee rate increases, staff has been advised that any future rate increases proposed for refuse must separate street sweeping from the general refuse collection fee. This change in the fee structure is necessary because street sweeping is not exempt from the vote requirements of Proposition 218, although refuse collection services are exempt. Staff will bring back a proposed street sweeping fee structure to the Finance Committee later in 2000, after storm drainage work is completed. RESOURCE IMPACT Staff estimates that the costs of consultant services described in the Scope of Services will be between $50,000-75,000. Because the City has not undertaken this type of work before, a better estimate cannot be made at this time. Staff will return to Council with a Budget Amendment Ordinance in late October after a contract is negotiated. TIMELINE A rough schedule follows: Mailing of RFP Selection of Consultant Contract to Council for approval (if over $65,000) with Budget Amendment Ordinance July 16, 1999 Late September 1999 Late October 1999 CMR:302:99 Page 3 of 4 PHASE I (Storm Drains): Analyze storm drainage rate structure, and begin drafting outreach materials Presentation and draft report on rate analysis Finalize rate report and proposals, prepare first draft of outreach materials for Council review Hold community meetings & mail outreach materials Public Hearing Send out mail ballots Tabulate mail ballots October-December 1999 December 1999 January 2000 February - March 2000 Early to mid-March Mid to late March April 2000 PHASE II (Street Sweeping): Work on this phase will take place from April-November 2000. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Analysis of rate structures and preparing outreach materials does not require California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A:Scope of Services PREPARED BY: Jim Steele, Manager of Investments and Debt DEPARTMENT HEAD: CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: Director of Administrative Services EMITY HARRISON Assistant City Manager CMR:302:99 Page 4 of 4 Attachment A DRAFT Scope of Work Storm Drainage and Street Sweeping Rate Analyses; Storm Drainage Election Consulting Services BACKGROUND The City of Palo Alto is a full service City located between San Francisco and San Jose, and adjacent to Stanford University. It has a vibrant downtown, a cutting edge research park, and is at the center of many Internet and venture capital business transactions. Palo Alto has a resident population of about 60,000, and a daytime population of about twice that number. It has a highly educated, very aware, and very involved citizenry, provides a high level of city services, and is unique in that it owns and operates six of its own utilities: Electric, Gas, Water, Wastewater, Refuse, and Storm Drainage. Phase I." Storm Drainage Fee The Storm Drainage Fund is a separate utility fund that pays for storm system capital improvements and operations and maintenance activities through a separate storm drainage charge on the City’s monthly utility bill. There are approximately 17,250 customers billed monthly for utility charges, including storm drainage fees, on one combined City of Palo Alto utility billing. The storm drainage rate structure is currently apportioned based upon the method of "Equivalent Residential Unit", or ERU. When the Fund was set up in 1989, aerial mapping was used to measure the typical single family dwelling’s impervious area, i.e., the area that contributes runoff into the City’s storm drain system. Based upon this analysis, it was determined that the average single-family residential parcel in Palo Alto contains 2,500 square feet of impervious area, which is the basis of the ERU. For simplicity’s sake, each single family and duplex residential parcel is charged one ERU per month. Each multi- family residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional property is charged an amount based on the actual measured impervious area at a rate of one ERU per 2,500 square feet of impervious area. For example, a business with 25,000 square feet of impervious area would get billed 10 ERUs per month. At the current rate of $4.25 per ERU, that business would get charged $42.50 per month. There are currently 17,250 customers served by the storm drainage system. Annual revenue is approximately $2.1 million; 37% of revenue is from single family residential parcels; and 63% of revenue is from multi-family, commercial, industrial, and institutional parcels. The City completed a review, assessment, and analysis of its aging storm drainage infrastructure several years ago, and has almost expended the proceeds from its second bond issuance to accommodate the most critical capital needs. Additional capital work (on a pay as you go basis) will require a rate increase. In accordance with Proposition 218, an increase in this property related fee will require both a notice/protest proceeding and a vote of the ratepayers. The last time the fee was increased was in 1994. Staff has received preliminary approval from the City Council for a 30-year storm drainage capital improvement master plan that will require a rate increase from the current monthly fee of $4.25 per ERU per month to $10 per month. The City wishes to bring this proposal to the storm drainage rate payers through the use of a mail ballot procedure in Spring 2000. In order to bring the rate proposal to the ratepayers, the City desires the services of a consultant to assist with: analyzing the existing rate structure and/or development of suggested improvements, preparation of educational brochures and materials, conducting public education meetings, and administration of all required procedures, including the mail ballot procedure, in accordance with Proposition 218. Phase II: Street Sweeping Fee The Refuse Fund is a separate Utility Fund operated by the City. There are approximately 17,500 refuse billings sent out monthly on a combined utility billing, similar to the storm drainage fee (above). Refuse pickup and disposal services are currently performed by the Palo Alto Sanitation Company (PASCO), recently acquired by Waste Management Incorporated. The City is currently renegotiating its long term contract with PASCO..Street sweeping services are provided by the City’s Public Works’ crews, using City equipment. The current Refuse (solid waste) rate structure includes all refuse services imbedded in one fee, including solid waste pickup and disposal, recycling, as well as street sweeping services. While refuse collection services are specifically exempted from Proposition 218’s vote requirements for fee increases, street sweeping is not exempted from the vote requirements. Although no Refuse rate increase has occurred since the passage of Proposition 218, the City should separate the street sweeping charge from the refuse charge on customers’ utility billings prior to the next rate increase proposal. A pending rate increase in the Refuse Fund is not needed until at least July 2001. Therefore, this phase will not be needed until after completion of the storm drainage phase. Staff proposes to utilize consulting services to analyze the Refuse Fund’s fee structure in order to recommend a methodology for separating the street sweeping fee from all other refuse services on customers’ utility billings. SCOPE OF WORK This scope of work has four tasks built into two phases. The first three tasks will occur first, and are related to storm drainage fees. The need for a rate increase in the Storm Drainage Fund is more time critical. The last task, part of phase two, includes analysis of options for street sweeping fee and is less time sensitive and can wait until the storm drainage work is completed. For administrative ease, the City would prefer to work with one consultant, but will have the option of selecting the most qualified firms to best meet its needs. I.Storm Drainage Rate Structure Analysis Analyze the rate structure of the City ofPalo Alto’s existing storm drainage fee for compliance with Proposition 218’s provisions on property related fees. Suggest changes, if warranted. Deliverables:The deliverables for this phase would be: a draft written report analyzing the City’s storm drainage rate structure in terms of compliance with Proposition 218, including suggestions for improvements, if warranted; o a presentation of this analysis to appropriate staff; and O a final report based on comments received. Final report will be transmitted to the City Council. II.Storm Drainage Rate Increase Public Education and Outreach Assist City staff in preparing educational materials for a storm drainage rate increase election in Spring 2000. The City anticipates that the election will be a mail ballot proceeding under the terms of Proposition 218. Tasks include assisting staff in 1.Developing a public outreach strategy; Designing educational materials on the City’s recommended 30- year Storm Drainage infrastructure improvement plan and on the proposed rate increase. Staff envisions the primary outreach media to be brochures designed in an attractive, easy to read, accessible format. Staff expects that the materials will be educational and objective in tone and content, and that separate brochures may be designed for residents and for the business community. Planning for and conducting approximately 3-5 community meetings to present staff’s proposed 30- year storm drainage capital improvement plan and the proposed rate increase to fund those improvements. Staff envisions that at least one meeting will be geared towards the business community, and at least two will be geared for residents. Palo Alto has several active neighborhood associations and other community groups that could provide a useful starting place for planning the meetings. For purposes of responding to this proposal, assume there will be three public meetings. The City may wish to hold additional meetings to be paid for under consultant’s hourly fee schedule. Deliverables:Draft educational brochures, final brochures. III.Storm Drainage Fee Increase--Proposition 218 Compliance Procedures and Ballot Administration Under City direction: prepare a proceedings schedule and advise staff in noticing and public hearing requirements; and prepare, mail out, receive, and tabulate the storm drainage mail ballots. The City, would prefer an automated tabulation solution (such as bar coding), and would expect the consultant to provide tabulation services as well as supply whatever related equipment and/or hardware would be needed (such as bar coding equipment) in order to tabulate the mail ballots at City Hall. Deliverables:Draft mail ballots, final mail ballots. IV. Street Sweeping Rate Methodology (Phase II of this project) As a second phase to this project next calendar year, the consultant will be asked to review the City’s street sweeping costs, which are currently imbedded in an overall solid waste (refuse) collection fee on customers’ monthly utility bill. The City would like to explore ways to separate the street sweeping charge from the overall refuse charge on customers’ utility bills. As part of that work, staff will want a consultant to help define a street sweeping rate structure that complies with the Proposition 218 provisions on proportionality of costs and relationship of fee charged to services received. Proposed methodologies should be fairly straightforward, easy to explain, and relatively simple to administer. Deliverables: O a working paper which proposes several alternative street sweeping fee structures; O a draft written report on the alternative fee structures that the City indicates it wishes to pursue; o a presentation of the recommendations to appropriate staff, and later, to be available at a City Council meeting to answer questions on the report; and o a final report based on comments received. Final report will be transmitted to the City Council. Project Schedule A rough schedule follows: Mailing of RFP Optional Proposal Conference at City Hall to ,answer consultant questions on the RFP Proposals Due Interviews of selected consultants Selection of consultant Contract signed and finalized/consultants begin work PHASE I: Analyze storm drain rate structure, begin drafting outreach materials Presentation and draft report on rate analysis Finalize rate report and proposals, prepare first draft of outreach materials Hold community meetings/mail outreach materials Send out mail ballots Tabulate mail ballots PHASE II: Analyze Refuse Fund rates in order to recommend alternatives for a separate street sweeping fee on customers’ utility billings Presentation of working paper on alternative rate structures Draft report to City staff Attendance at City Council meeting Final report to City staff July 16, 1999 July 29, 1999 3 PM Tuesday, August 24, 1999 Week of September 7 Late September 1999 Late October 1999 October-December 1999 December 1999 January 2000 February - March 2000 Mid to late March April 2000 April-July 2000 July 2000 September 2000 October 2000 November 2000 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS Proposers are requested to submit eight (8) sets of their proposal to the City for review purposes. Proposals shall include the following information: A brief statement of the Proposer’s general background and technical capabilities. o A statement of the Proposer’s understanding of Proposition 218 as it applies to storm drainage and street sweeping fees as described in this Request for Proposal (RFP). 3.A fee schedule showing hourly rates for Proposer’s staff members. 4.An approximate proposed fee for each task outlined in the scope of work. 5.A proposed project schedule, with key milestone dates. A summary of the Proposer’s relevant experience similar to the project described in this RFP, particularly prior experience with Proposition 218 compliance, elections, and public outreach. A list of names and resumes for proposed project personnel, including who will be the project manager, who will be the everyday contact, and an indication of the approximate time allocations of staff members on this project. A list of subcontractors (if any), their scope of work, a description of their relevant experience, and a list of their proposed project personnel. 9.Samples of outreach brochures produced for other public sector clients. A separate cost estimate shall be provided for each task listed in the scope of work. The estimated cost shall be supported by a fee schedule listing hourly rates for all proposed project personnel. Cost information requested for this proposal will not be the main determining factor in the selection of a consultant. This information will be used as a basis for negotiation of the final contract amount. The actual consultant fee will be negotiated after the selection of a firm and will be based upon a scope of work to be refined during contract negotiations. Consultant(s) will be selected based on: o o Their knowledge of Proposition 218, and demonstrated experience on similar property related fee analyses for other clients. Direct experience with storm drainage and street sweeping fees would be desirable; The quality of their educational outreach materials; Their understanding of the City’s needs, and their ability to work successfully with City staff in developing an outreach plan and materials. Experience and qualifications of staff assigned to this project. Attachments:1. Staff Reports: "Financing the Next Phase of Storm Drainage Improvements", dated March 2, 1999 (CMR: 147:99); "Storm Drainage Infrastructure Improvements", dated May 3, 1999 (CMR:227:99). 2. Sample City utility billing. Pages from City budget document on Refuse and Storm Drainage Funds.