The URL can be used to link to this page

NBSWork Proposal for: Development Impact Fee Study Update October 15, 2015 Aerial view of City of La Quinta via Google Earth nbsgov.com Prepared by: helping communities fund tomorrow 32605 Temecula Parkway, Suite 100 Temecula, CA 92592 Toll free: 800.676.7516 nbsgov.com COVER LETTER October 15, 2015 Bryan McKinney, PE, City Engineer City of La Quinta Design and Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Work Proposal for Development Impact Fee Study Update Dear Mr. McKinney, We appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal for a Development Impact Fee Study Update to the City of La Quinta (“City”). Our role in helping any agency establish fees is to set the sound and legal maximum, beneath which, community goals and values may influence the fees ultimately imposed. Per the requirements of the RFP, the project’s primary contact information is as follows: Nicole Kissam, Director 32605 Temecula Parkway, Suite 100 Temecula, CA 92592 Phone: 800.676.7516 | Email: nkissam@nbsgov.com NBS has reviewed the City’s PSA and requests changes as detailed in Section 5, page 15. NBS will partner with subconsultant Colgan Consulting on this project. Together we create a cohesive team of senior professionals with approximately 30 years of experience performing impact fee studies. NBS has a well-established and exclusive relationship with Colgan Consulting. Thank you for the opportunity to serve the City in this capacity. Please contact me at 800.676.7516 or via email at nkissam@nbsgov.com for further discussion. We would genuinely like to work on this project and help the City move forward. Sincerely, Nicole Kissam Director TABLE OF CONTENTS COVER LETTER …………………………………………………………………………………………………………. PREVIOUS PAGE SECTION 1 | STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS ........................................................................................ 1 SECTION 2 | PROJECT UNDERSTANDING & APPROACH ........................................................................... 9 SECTION 3 | SCOPE OF WORK PROGRAM .............................................................................................. 10 SECTION 4 | PROJECT SCHEDULE .......................................................................................................... 14 SECTION 5 | ADDITIONS OR EXCEPTIONS .............................................................................................. 15 SECTION 6 | COST PROPOSAL ................................................................................................................ 16 APPENDICES .......................................................................................................................................... 17 APPENDIX A | NON-COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT ........................................................................................... 18 APPENDIX B | INSURANCE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ................................................................................. 19 Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 1 SECTION 1 | STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS Qualifications Helping communities fund tomorrow. In 1996, California municipalities were struggling to appropriately implement local funding tools while trying to interpret Proposition 13 and a host of other rules and regulations. Then, Proposition 218 entered the scene making municipal funding even more challenging. Seeing the potentially negative effects this could have on local communities, several experienced and concerned finance and engineering professionals gathered to create NBS. While the firm originally focused on Special Financing Districts, specifically the formation and administration of special assessments and taxes, we have evolved with our clients’ needs. That evolution gave rise to a Financial Consulting practice that focuses legally justified fee design, cost recovery policy, cost allocation, and sustainable water and wastewater utility rate programs. Across all practice areas, we have worked with more than 400 public agencies to date; including cities, counties, municipal utilities, and special purpose districts. Our primary areas of continual investment include the highest-quality training, software and technology. In an effort to control overhead and maximize local understanding, many team members operate out of satellite offices spanning California and reaching as far as Colorado. NBS Financial Consulting Group This project falls squarely in NBS’ financial consulting area where we focus primarily on cost recovery mechanisms and supporting justification for various agency revenue streams. Our areas of expertise include: • Development impact fees • User and regulatory fees for a wide variety of local government programs and services • Overhead cost allocation analysis • Rate studies for municipal water, sewer, storm drainage and solid waste utilities • Financial plans for public utilities and special districts The Group is comprised of experienced professionals who are recognized leaders in their field. They are often asked to teach continuing education courses and participate in workouts for troubled agencies. In addition, they have an in-depth understanding of all changes to laws, codes and regulations affecting local governments, including the Mitigation Fee Act, and Propositions 26 and 218. Company Structure Established: May 13, 1996 Structure: California S-Corporation Legal Name: NBS Government Finance Group DBA: NBS Headquarters: Temecula, CA Address: 32605 Temecula Pkwy., Suite 100 Temecula, CA 92592 Regional Office: San Francisco, CA Employees: 40 Shareholders 100 % Employee Owned (ESOP) Contact: Nicole Kissam Telephone: 800.676.7516 Email: nkissam@nbsgov.com Location: Temecula Office Individual Authorized to Negotiate and Execute Agreement Name: Michael Rentner Title: President Address: 32605 Temecula Pkwy., Suite 100 Temecula, CA 92592 Telephone: 800.676.7516 Fax: 951.296.1998 Email: mrentner@nbsgov.com Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 2 Colgan Consulting Corporation Colgan Consulting is a small Sacramento-based consulting firm that specializes in development impact fee studies for California cities, counties, and special districts. Its president, Joe Colgan, is a professional planner and recognized impact fee expert with almost three decades of experience in the field. Joe founded Colgan Consulting in 2004 after 14 years as the principal impact fee consultant for David M. Griffith & Associates (DMG) and for MAXIMUS, Inc., which acquired DMG in 1998. Over his consulting career, Joe has prepared impact fee studies for a number of Riverside County cities including Beaumont, Desert Hot Springs, La Quinta, Moreno Valley, Rancho Mirage, Temecula and Wildomar. Project Team / Resumes NBS and Colgan Consulting are staffed with seasoned experts who are dedicated to providing clients with the best possible results. They have extensive experience in the fields of finance, management, and local governance, and are fully conversant with all changes to laws, codes, and regulations affecting the requirements for this Study. Recognized as leaders in their field, they may teach university courses, serve as expert witnesses, and participate in workouts for troubled agencies. In addition, we work with our clients as partners, developing an intimate knowledge of their needs and responding with strategic, timely solutions. The project team resumes begin on the next page. Company Structure Established: May 24, 2004 Structure: California S-Corporation Legal Name: Colgan Consulting Corporation Headquarters: Sacramento, CA Address: 3308 El Camino Ave. Ste. 300-212 Sacramento, CA 95821 Contact: Joe Colgan Telephone: 916-205-2446 Email: joe@colgan-consulting.com Individual Authorized to Negotiate and Execute Agreement Name: Joe Colgan Title: President Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 3 NICOLE KISSAM Director RESUME HIGHLIGHTS • More than 15 years of experience in public sector consulting, city government, marketing and public relations • Expertise in financial and management consulting • Specialized in cost allocation plan, user fee and rate studies for California agencies EDUCATION Bachelor of Science, Business Administration, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS • Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) • American Public Works Association (APWA) • California Society of Municipal Finance Officers (CSMFO) SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS • Building Department Fees….you need a plan, CALBO 2018 • Revenue Remedies, Pre-Conference Workshop, CSMFO 2013 • Verdict on User Fees, Panel on User Fees, CSMFO 2013 • Strategies for Managing Your Building Department’s Budget, CBOAC, 2011 BIOGRAPHY Nicole Kissam is Director of Financial Consulting for NBS. She has more than 15 years total work experience in public sector consulting, city government, marketing, and public relations. Nicole has been a financial and management consultant to local government for the majority of her career, specializing in cost allocation plans, and user fee and rate studies for California agencies. She also spent several years performing management audits to improve the operational efficiency of various municipal services, including wastewater, community development, public works, recreation and human resources. She has supported, developed, and directed financial services consulting practices for three private consulting firms offering similar services to those proposed to be completed by NBS in this document. Nicole has participated in, managed, and completed more than 100 separate consulting engagements throughout her career, from small jurisdictions with less than 10,000 population, to large jurisdictions such as the City of San Jose’s Development Services Department, and City of Los Angeles’ Planning and Fire Departments. “I really appreciate all of the extra time you spent educating me (and my staff) on the basis for the rates. It was extremely valuable and gives me the detail I need to explain and justify any increases. Thanks again for everything. It was a pleasure working with you!” CHAD DAVISSON WASTEWATER MANAGER CITY OF RICHMOND [Nicole Kissam served as the Project Manager on various financial analyses for the City.] Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 4 JOE COLGAN Sub-Consultant/Impact Fee Specialist RESUME HIGHLIGHTS • 28 years of experience preparing impact fee studies, including 14 years with two national consulting firms and 14 years in his own firm • 10 years of direct experience in local government as a planner and planning director • Three terms on the board of the National Impact Fee Roundtable, including one term as Vice Chair EDUCATION Master of City Planning degree, University of Pennsylvania Bachelor of Architecture degree, University of Nebraska, Lincoln PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS • Growth and Infrastructure Consortium (formerly the National Impact Fee Roundtable) • Over 35 years as a member of the American Planning Association (APA) and the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS • National Impact Fee Roundtable | 2004 2005, 2007, 2009, 2011 • League of California Cities • UC Davis Extension QUALIFICATIONS Joe Colgan is founder and president of Colgan Consulting Corporation, a small Sacramento firm specializing in development impact fees for cities, counties and special districts. He has a thorough understanding of the constitutional and statutory requirements for defensible impact fees and is an expert in impact fee methodologies. The vast majority of Joe’s impact fee work has been done for California clients, but he has also done impact fee studies in Oregon, Arizona, Utah, New Mexico and Florida. He has prepared more than 150 impact fee studies since 1990, for clients as large as Albuquerque, NM (pop. 555,000) and the Orange County (CA) Fire Authority (serving 22 cities and unincorporated Orange County), and as small as Angels Camp, CA (pop. 4,050) Because of his background in city planning, Joe has broad experience in both land use planning and capital facilities planning. He also has wide-ranging knowledge of facility planning practices for water, wastewater, drainage, parks and recreation and transportation facilities. In addition to his experience with impact fees, Joe has performed numerous management audits and process improvement studies focusing on the development review process in planning, building and engineering departments. His clients for those studies have included major cities such as San Jose, CA, San Diego, CA, and San Antonio TX. Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 5 Similar Work Experience The following is a list of Colgan Consulting Corporation and NBS impact fee clients for the last several years. • City of Albuquerque, NM. Peer Review of the Impact Fee Program (2011) • City of Aliso Viejo, General Plan Maintenance and Technology Surcharges (2017) • City of Angels Camp, CA. Impact Fee Study (2016) • City of Beaumont, CA. Impact Fee Study (2017) • City of Cloverdale, CA. Accessory Dwelling Unit Impact Fee Study (2017) • City of Encinitas, CA. Impact Fee Update Study (2015) • City of Lemoore, CA. Update of Traffic Impact Fees (2011) • City of Madera, CA. Impact Fee Update Study (Currently underway) • City of Manhattan Beach, CA. Impact Fee Feasibility Study (2011) • Moraga-Orinda (CA) Fire District Impact Fee Study (2014) • City of Moreno Valley, CA. Impact Fee Update Study (2011-12) • City of Orange, CA. Impact Fee Study (2011-12) • City of Orland, CA. User Fee Study & Update of Development Impact Fee Study (Currently underway) • City of Rancho Cucamonga, CA. Impact Fee Study (2014) and General Plan Maintenance Surcharge (2018) • City of Rocklin, CA. Public Facilities Fee Study (currently underway) • City of Vista, CA. Update of Traffic Impact Fee Study (2013) • City of Wildomar, CA. Impact Fee Study (2013-14) and Update (2015) • Town of Windsor, CA. Impact Fee Study (2016-17) • Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District, Capital Facilities (Impact) Fee Study (2015) Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 6 References CITY OF BEAUMONT IMPACT FEE STUDY FOR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS, POLICE, FIRE, PUBLIC FACILITIES, PARKS AND RECREATION Project Dates: February 2017 – November 2017 Contact Information This study updated all of Beaumont’s existing impact fees except for wastewater and recycled water which are awaiting facility planning updates. The impact fee program was restructured to clarify which facilities were covered by each fee and the methods used to calculate the impact fees were completely revamped. In order to coordinate adoption of the transportation facilities impact fees with Beaumont’s re-adoption of regional transportation unified mitigation fees (TUMF), the study was split into two parts and completion of the transportation facilities impact fee report was accelerated. The transportation facilities impact fees were adopted in August 2017. The rest of the study was completed in October 2017. Colgan Consulting worked with the City to address several issues raised by the Building Industry Association and the remaining impact fees were adopted in November 2017. Kyle Warsinski Economic Development Manager 550 East 6th Street Beaumont, CA 92223 P: 951.769.8527 E: kylew@beaumontca.gov Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 7 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA IMPACT FEE STUDY FOR PARKS, LIBRARIES, COMMUNITY AND RECREATION CENTERS, POLICE FACILITIES, THE ANIMAL CENTER AND PUBLIC ART Completed: October 2013 – June 2014 Contact Information Much of the focus of this study was on levels of service underlying the impact fee calculations. Rancho maintains high levels of service for parks and recreational facilities and wanted to ensure that new development would not reduce the quality and availability of those facilities for the community as a whole. The fees calculated in this study were designed to maintain the pre-existing levels of service in the City. To support calculation of the police impact fees, Colgan Consulting carried out a detailed analysis of police calls for service to establish the distribution of calls among various types of development and to calculate calls-per-unit-per year factors for use in the impact fee calculations. The scope of this study also included advising the City on development of a public art fee program. In light of the California Supreme Court decision in Erhlich v. Culver City, Colgan Consulting recommended that the City structure its public art fees using in-lieu fees based on a public art design standard, rather than as impact fees. When the draft report on the Rancho Cucamonga impact fee study was released, the Building Industry Association and several developers opposed adoption of the fees, arguing that they were not justified because existing parks and recreation facilities were adequate to support new development. The BIA hired a consultant to critique the study. However, after negotiations with the City, supported by Colgan Consulting, the BIA withdrew its opposition and the fees were adopted as recommended. Dan James Senior Civil Engineer (since retired) Tiffany Cooper Management Analyst II 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 P: 909.477.2740 Ext 4020 F: 909.477.2849 E: Tiffany.Cooper@CityofRC.us TOWN OF WINDSOR IMPACT FEE STUDY FOR PARKS, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, TRAILS, PUBLIC FACILITIES, POLICE AND FIRE Project Dates: August 2016 – March 2017 Contact Information This study updated several of Windsor’s existing impact fees and calculated new impact fees for open space and trails, which were not previously charged by the Town. Impact fees calculated in this study used land use forecasts from the 2016 draft General Plan update. Colgan Consulting worked with the City staff to examine alternative fee calculation methods and select methodologies that met Windsor’s objectives and preserved the defensibility of the fees. The process also addressed impact fees for accessory dwelling units to comply with recently adopted legislation. The impact fees recommended in the report were adopted by the Town Council with no opposition from the building industry. Camille Kazarian Assistant Town Manager 9291 Old Redwood Hwy. Windsor, CA 95492 P: 707.838.5350 E: ckazarian@townofwindsor.com Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 8 SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN FIRE DISTRICT USER FEE STUDY, COST ALLOCATION PLAN, GEMT REIMBURSEMENT ANALYSIS AND IMPACT FEE STUDY Service Dates: 2012 – Current Contact Information NBS has conducted a wide array of consulting services for the District, including preparation of Full and OMB A-87 compliant cost allocation plans, calculation of CalOES rates, GEMT cost reimbursement services, Community Risk Reduction Department (Fire Prevention) User Fee Study, and Capital Facilities Fee (impact fee) Study. NBS is currently under contract to perform an update to the District’s User Fee Study. Lisa Barsdale Deputy Fire Marshal 10545 Armstrong Ave., Suite 200 Mather, CA 95655 P: 916.859.4312 E: Barsdale.lisa@metrofire.ca.org NBS Project Team: Nicole Kissam, Director; Greta Davis, Associate Director; NBS Financial Analysts CITY OF INDIO OVERHEAD COST ALLOCATION, FEE STUDY, FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS Project Dates: Fiscal Years 2012, 2015, 2017 Contact Information NBS has routinely consulted the City on overhead cost allocation, fees and charges, and cost recovery policy since 2012. The most recent Study of all City fees was completed in November 2017. As a result of these efforts completed with the City over the years, the City Council reviews and refines their local cost recovery performance and policy at a frequency consistent with industry Best Management Practices. Rob Rockwell Assistant City Manager and Finance Director 100 Civic Center Mall Indio, CA 92201 P: 760-391-4029 E: rrockwell@indio.org Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 9 SECTION 2 | PROJECT UNDERSTANDING & APPROACH We understand that the City desires to update La Quinta’s existing development impact fee (DIF) program, which was most recently updated in February 2013. The 2013 update was the fifth in a series of revisions based on a 1999 consultant study. Joe Colgan, our proposed Project Manager, completed the 1999 study while an employee of DMG-MAXIMUS, Inc. The Request for Proposals identifies the existing development impact fees to be updated in the current study as follows: • Transportation Improvements • Park and Recreation Improvements • Civic Center • Libraries • Community Center Facilities • Maintenance Facilities • Fire Protection Facilities In addition, this study will consider the feasibility of a new impact fee for drainage improvements. According to the RFP, the City intends to adopt and implement the updated impact fee schedule prior to July 1, 2019. Because the Mitigation Fee Act specifies that such fees do not go into effect until 60 days after adoption, and because the RFP calls for two presentations to the City Council, a final draft of the study will need to be completed in early April 2019. Please see the schedule in Section 4, page 14 of this proposal. It is worth noting that because La Quinta has a substantial seasonal population, the official population figures derived from Census data and California Department of Finance estimates understate the service demand experienced by the City during the peak season. That discrepancy will have to be addressed in the study. Project Management and Control. Coordination with the City throughout the project will be based on procedures agreed to during project initiation. At each stage of the process, we will present the City’s project director with a summary of what has been accomplished to date, next steps, alternative courses of action and the outcomes to be expected from different choices. We prefer to use email as the primary means of day-to-day communication between the consultant and staff so the exchange of information is easily documented. We satisfy clients by maintaining ongoing communication throughout a project, responding positively to staff direction, and completing the work on time and within budget. We don’t make policy decisions. We present issues and offer alternative solutions, explaining the implications of each alternative. Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 10 SECTION 3 | SCOPE OF WORK PROGRAM Scope of Work In general, the scope of work covered by this proposal involves the work necessary to prepare a development impact fee study that complies with the requirements of the California Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.), the Quimby Act (Government Code Section 66477), where applicable, and relevant case law. The specific scope offered in this proposal is defined by the tasks described in the work plan that follows. It excludes legal, engineering, architectural, cost estimating and appraisal services. Impact Fee Calculation Methods Laws governing impact fees, including both the California Mitigation Fee Act (Govt. Code Sections 66000 et seq.) and relevant court decisions, require that local agencies imposing fees as a condition of development approval demonstrate that there is a reasonable relationship or “nexus” between those fees and the impact of a development project on facilities to be funded by the fees. The required nexus for impact fees, as set forth in relevant court decisions, can be thought of as having three elements: • Need. The City must show that development creates a need for the improvements funded by impact fees; • Benefit. The City must show that development derives a benefit from the provision of improvements funded by impact fees, and: • Proportionality. The City must show that the fees charged to a development project are proportional to the impact of that project on facilities funded by the impact fees. The “reasonable relationship” requirements contained in Section 66001 of the California Mitigation Fee Act address the same elements in somewhat more convoluted language. Any one of several methods may be used to calculate impact fees for a particular type of facility. The choice of an appropriate method may depend on the availability of information and how the impact of development is to be measured. Our project team will work closely with City staff to select the most appropriate fee calculation method for each fee addressed in this study. Information to be Provided by the City The work to be performed by NBS on this impact fee study will depend heavily on information to be provided by the City. Among the types of information that may be needed by NBS for this study are: • The 2035 General Plan, and any specific plans or other relevant planning studies • Data on the amount of existing development and planned future development in the study area, by land use type • The Capital Improvement Program, level of service policies, facility master plans and other facility planning data, including the Citywide transportation deficiency analysis. • Inventories of existing facilities, vehicles and equipment of types to be funded by impact fees • Cost estimates for land, capital improvements, vehicles, and/or equipment to be funded by impact fees Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 11 • Information on capital improvement funding sources and financing plans, and any outstanding debt related to existing capital facilities This proposal assumes that all information needed to perform the work covered by the scope of this proposal will be provided by the City or is readily available from other sources such as the U.S. Census Bureau or the California Department of Finance. Work Plan The following tasks comprise the detailed work plan for this impact fee study. Tasks 1 through 6 represent the typical requirements of an impact fee study, and may be adjusted to meet the needs of this project. TASK 1. KICKOFF MEETING/PROJECT INITIATION To kickoff this study, the Project Director and Project Manager will attend a kickoff meeting with key City staff and carry out other activities required to initiate the study, including: • Discuss the goals, work plan and schedule for the project • Establish coordination, communication and reporting procedures • Conduct initial interviews with key City staff members • Evaluate available information resources • Review the existing impact fee program to identify any issues of concern to the staff or City Council • Assess the City’s current development patterns and growth potential TASK 2. COMPILE DATA ON EXISTING AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT In this task, NBS will collect, review, organize and analyze data on existing and future development in the City and compile it in a form useful for this study. Steps in that process may include: • Establish boundaries of the study area to be used in the analysis (e.g., existing City vs. sphere of influence) and the time horizon for the study • Define the breakdown of land use types to be used in the study • Analyze land use data provided by the City to establish a baseline of existing development and a forecast of future development by land use type • Select demand variables and specify demand factors that will be used to represent the impact of development in the impact fee calculations • Prepare development data tables to incorporate into the fee calculation model and the study report TASK 3. FACILITY NEEDS ANALYSIS Using forecasts of future development from Task 2, NBS will review the Capital Improvement Program, facility master plans and other available data, and work with staff to identify new facilities, facility expansions, vehicles and equipment needed to serve future development. Steps in that process will include the following: • Review adopted level-of-service standards and actual service levels for relevant facility types • Work with City staff to identify the operative level-of-service standard to be used for each facility type in the impact fee • Identify any existing deficiencies or available capacity relative to the selected level of service standard • Project the additional service demand that will be created by new development • Translate service demand into facility needs by facility type Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 12 • Compile cost estimates for relevant facilities and other assets • Identify costs eligible for impact fee funding TASK 4. IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS Using the information developed in Tasks 2 and 3, we will conduct the impact fee analysis and calculate impact fees by land use type for each type of facility addressed in the study. That process typically includes these steps: • Review the methods used to calculate existing impact fees and work with staff to consider alternative methods where appropriate • Construct a spreadsheet fee calculation model incorporating data on existing and future development, demand factors and eligible facility costs • Specify formulas in the model to allocate facility costs in proportion to the impact of new development by land use type • Calculate a cost per unit of service for each facility type • Convert the cost per unit of service into a schedule of impact fees per unit of development by development type • Project potential revenue from the proposed impact fees TASK 5. DRAFT AND FINAL STUDY REPORTS The impact fee study report will explain the data, methodology and formulas used in the fee calculations and document the nexus between the proposed fees and the impacts of development for each type of impact fee calculated in the study. The report will also propose findings to satisfy the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act regarding the purpose of the fees, the use of the fees, and the reasonable relationship between the fees and development. As the study progresses, the Consultant will submit preliminary drafts of portions of the study report for review and comment by City staff. Once all sections are in draft form, an administrative draft of the entire study report, incorporating any previous staff comments, will be submitted for review. Then a final draft document will be prepared for the City Council and public review. If necessary, additional changes will be incorporated into the final study report. The study report will include the following components: • An Executive Summary including summary impact fee tables • A chapter discussing the legal requirements for impact fees and methods used to calculate the fees • A chapter presenting data on existing and future development in the study area and the factors used to measure the impacts of development on individual facility types • A separate chapter for each type of fee presenting the data and methodology used in the analysis, a detailed explanation the impact fee calculations, and documentation of the nexus • A chapter on implementation recommendations, covering steps needed to comply with the Mitigation Fee Act through proper administration of the impact fees, including but not limited to: • Findings and enactment of fees • Collection and expenditure of fees • Accounting and reporting requirements • Administrative appeals, waivers, and exemptions • Credits and reimbursements for developer-provided facilities • Updating and indexing the fees Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 13 • Recovery of administrative costs for the impact fee program Deliverables include: (1) Preliminary chapter drafts; (2) a complete draft report for staff review; (3) a final draft report for City Council and public review; (4) the final report. All drafts and the final report will be submitted electronically in .pdf format. All original Microsoft Word and Excel files will be provided to the City at completion of the work. TASK 6. MEETINGS AND PRESENTATIONS The RFP specifies that the Consultant will attend a minimum of one City Council study session, one City Council Public Hearing, and one Financial Advisory Committee Meeting, as well as monthly meetings with the Project Development Team. Addendum Number 1 to the RFP also directs that a stakeholder outreach meeting be included in the scope of the project. To meet the City’s goal of implementing the updated impact fees by July 1, 2019, the fees would have to be adopted at the City Council’s second meeting in April 2019, because the fees would not go into effect until 60 days after adoption. Assuming the study begins on December 3, as indicated in the RFP, the draft report would have to be completed in four months. Consequently, this proposal allows for four monthly meetings with the Project Development Team in addition to the meetings with City Council, the Financial Advisory Committee, and stakeholders for a total of eight (8) on-site meetings. In order to remain within the City’s desired timeline, it might be necessary for the Financial Advisory Committee meeting and the stakeholder meeting to be scheduled very closely with other meetings listed under this task. TASK 7. CALCULATE ADDITIONAL IMPACT FEES (OPTIONAL TASK) Addendum Number 1 to the RFP directs that the proposal include optional tasks to calculate new impact fees in addition to those currently imposed by the City, and for a new storm drainage impact fee. We have combined those two requirements within this optional task. As part of this task, we will investigate the potential for new impact fees, including an impact fee for future drainage improvements, and make recommendations to City staff. We will also determine whether it is feasible to incorporate any additional impact fees into this study within the constraints of the schedule. That will depend on whether the necessary information on facility needs and costs can be provided by the City early in the study process. • Investigate the potential for new impact fees • Make recommendations to City staff regarding the potential for new impact fees • Incorporate a new storm drainage impact fee into the scope of this study, if feasible • Incorporate other new impact fees into the scope of this study, if feasible Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 14 SECTION 4 | PROJECT SCHEDULE The following is an overview of our proposed project schedule. To begin this project at the beginning of December and complete it in time for the impact fees to go into effect on July 1, 2019, the updated impact fees must be adopted at the second City Council meeting in April 2019. That timeline is very tight and will depend on our ability to receive needed information from the City in a timely manner. Specifically, we will need to obtain all required data o n existing and future development in La Quinta by the end of December 2018 and all data on facility needs and costs by January 15, 2019. NOTE: This page intentionally formatted differently for legibility of content below. PROJECT SCHEDULE FOR THE CITY OF LA QUINTA DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE STUDY Task 1. Kickoff Meeting/Project Initiation Task 2. Compile Development Data Task 3. Facility Needs Analysis Task 4. Impact Fee Analysis Task 5. Draft and Final Reports 1 2 Task 6a. Monthly Meetings (4) Task 6b. Financial Advisory Cmte Meeting (1) Task 6c. Stakeholder Meeting (1) Task 6d. City Council Meetings (2) Consultant Task Time City Staff Task/Review Time Meetings and Presentations Deliver Draft Report 1 Deliver Final Report 2 June JulyAprilMay TASK DESCRIPTION November December January February March Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 15 SECTION 5 | ADDITIONS OR EXCEPTIONS NBS accepts the terms, conditions and general form of the City of La Quinta standard Consultant Services Agreement with the following modification(s): Regarding Exhibit E Insurance Requirements, paragraph 1 on page 2, NBS has a $1million combined single- limit for any auto. Please strike the sentence as shown: If Contracting Party or Contracting Party’s employees will use personal autos in any way on this project, Contracting Party shall provide evidence of personal auto liability coverage for each such person. Also, under item E.3(1) please remove “with an edition prior to 1999 and insert “or equivalent” as shown: 1. Contacting Party agrees to have its insurer endorse the third party general liability coverage required herein to include as additional insureds City, its officials, employees, and agents, using standard ISO endorsement No. CG210 with an edition prior to 1992 or equivalent. For item E.3(10) NBS declares a $20,000 retention. Regarding Section 6. INDEMNIFICATION in Attachment 1, please make the following change as shown below to item 6.1: To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contracting Party shall indemnify, protect, defend (with counsel selected approved, with reasonable approval not to be withheld by City), and hold harmless City and any and all of its officers, employees, agents and volunteers as set forth in “Exhibit F” (“Indemnification”) which is incorporated herein by this reference and expressly made a part hereof. Regarding Exhibit F Indemnification, please make the same change as shown below in section F.1 Indemnity for the Benefit of the City to items (a) and (b): a. Indemnification for Professional Liability. When the law establishes a professional standard of care for Contracting Party’s Services, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Contracting Party shall indemnify, protect, defend (with counsel selected approved, with reasonable approval not to be withheld by City), and hold harmless City… b. Indemnification for Other Than Professional Liability. Other than in the performance of professional services and to the full extent permitted by law, Contracting Party shall indemnify, defend (with counsel selected approved, with reasonable approval not to be withheld by City), and hold harmless the Indemnified Parties… Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 16 SECTION 6 | COST PROPOSAL As requested in the RFP, the Cost Proposal is included under separate cover. Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 17 APPENDICES The appendices contain: • Appendix A: Non-Collusion Affidavit Form • Appendix B: Insurance Acknowledgement Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 18 APPENDIX A | NON-COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT Proposal for City of La Quinta NBS | 19 APPENDIX B | INSURANCE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Per the addendum issued by the City, NBS provides this sample Certificate of Insurance. Our full Insurance Certificate is available upon request.