DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Agree No 2020- 28
CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF LOMITA AND WILLDAN FINANCIAL SERVICES ( WFS) This AGREEMENT for preparation of a Comprehensive User Fees and Charges Rate Study is entered into this 1st day of September, 2020, by and between the CITY OF LOMITA, a general law city and municipal corporation (" CITY") and Willdan Financial Services ( WFS) (" CONSULTANT").
RECITALS
A. CITY does not have the personnel able and/ or available to perform the services required under this agreement.
B. Therefore, CITY desires to contract out for preparation of a Comprehensive User Fees and Charges Rate Study,
C. CONSULTANT warrants to CITY that it has the qualifications, experience and facilities to perform properly and timely the services under this Agreement.
D. CITY desires to contract with CONSULTANT to perform the services as described in Exhibit A of this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, based on the foregoing recitals, CITY and CONSULTANT agree as follows:
1. CONSIDERATION AND COMPENSATION.
A. As partial consideration, CONSULTANT agrees to perform the work listed in the SCOPE OF SERVICES, attached as Exhibit A;
B. As additional consideration, CONSULTANT and CITY agree to abide by the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement;
C. As additional consideration, CITY agrees to pay CONSULTANT an amount not to exceed $ 49, 170, for CONSULTANT' s services, unless otherwise specified by written amendment to this Agreement.
D. No additional compensation shall be paid for any other expenses incurred, unless first approved by the City Manager or his designee.
E. CONSULTANT shall submit to CITY, by not later than the 10th day of each month, its bill for services itemizing the fees and costs incurred during the previous month. CITY shall pay CONSULTANT all uncontested amounts set
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 forth in the CONSULTANT' S bill within 30 days after it is received.
2. SCOPE OF SERVICES.
A. CONSULTANT will perform the services and activities set forth in the SCOPE OF SERVICES attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. If any part of Exhibit A is inconsistent with the terms of this Agreement, the terms of this Agreement shall control.
B. Except as herein otherwise expressly specified to be furnished by CITY, CONSULTANT will, in a professional manner, furnish all of the labor, technical, administrative, professional and other personnel, all supplies and materials, equipment, printing, vehicles, transportation, office space, and facilities necessary or proper to perform and complete the work and provide the professional services required of CONSULTANT by this Agreement.
3. PAYMENTS. For CITY to pay CONSULTANT as specified by this Agreement, CONSULTANT must submit an invoice to CITY which lists the reimbursable costs, the specific tasks performed, and, for work that includes deliverables, the percentage of the task completed during the billing period.
4. TIME OF PERFORMANCE. The services of CONSULTANT are to commence upon receipt of a notice to proceed from CITY and shall continue until all authorized work is completed to CITY' s reasonable satisfaction, in accordance with the schedule incorporated in " Exhibit A," unless extended in writing by CITY.
5. FAMILIARITY WITH WORK. By executing this Agreement, CONSULTANT represents that CONSULTANT has ( a) thoroughly investigated and considered the scope of services to be performed; ( b) carefully considered how the services should be performed; and ( c) understands the facilities, difficulties, and restrictions attending performance of the services under this Agreement.
6. KEY PERSONNEL. CONSULTANT' s key person assigned to perform work under this Agreement is Chris Fisher. CONSULTANT shall not assign another person to be in charge of the work contemplated by this Agreement without the prior written authorization of CITY.
7. TERM OF AGREEMENT. The term of this Agreement shall commence upon execution by both parties and shall expire on April 30, 2021, unless earlier termination occurs under Section 11 of this Agreement, or extended in writing in advance by both parties.
8. CHANGES. CITY may order changes in the services within the general scope of this Agreement, consisting of additions, deletions, or other revisions, and the contract sum and the contract time will be adjusted accordingly. All such changes must be authorized in writing, executed by CONSULTANT and CITY. The cost or
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 credit to CITY resulting from changes in the services will be determined in accordance with written agreement between the parties.
9. TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER. CONSULTANT will provide CITY with a Taxpayer Identification Number.
10. PERMITS AND LICENSES. CONSULTANT will obtain and maintain during the term of this Agreement all necessary permits, licenses, and certificates that may be required in connection with the performance of services under this Agreement.
11. TERMINATION.
A. Except as otherwise provided, CITY may terminate this Agreement at any time with or without cause. Notice of termination shall be in writing.
B. CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement. Notice will be in writing at least 30 days before the effective termination date.
C. In the event of such termination, CONSULTANT shall cease services as of the date of termination, all finished or unfinished documents, data, drawings, maps, and other materials prepared by CONSULTANT shall, at CITY' s option, become CITY's property, and CONSULTANT will receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed up to the effective date of notice of termination.
D. Should the Agreement be terminated pursuant to this Section, CITY may procure on its own terms services similar to those terminated.
12. INDEMNIFICATION.
A. CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend with counsel approved by CITY, and hold harmless CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against all liability, loss, damage, expense, cost ( including without limitation reasonable attorneys fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of litigation) of every nature arising out of or in connection with CONSULTANT' s performance of work hereunder or its failure to comply with any of its obligations contained in this AGREEMENT, regardless of CITY'S passive negligence, but excepting such loss or damage which is caused by the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of CITY. Should CITY in its sole discretion find CONSULTANT' S legal counsel unacceptable, then CONSULTANT shall reimburse CITY its costs of defense, including without limitation reasonable attorneys fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of litigation. CONSULTANT shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against CITY ( and its officers, officials, employees and volunteers) covered by this indemnity obligation. It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions are
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 intended to be as broad and inclusive as is permitted by the law of the State of California and will survive termination of this Agreement.
B. The requirements as to the types and limits of insurance coverage to be maintained by CONSULTANT as required by Section 17, and any approval of said insurance by CITY, are not intended to and will not in any manner limit or qualify the liabilities and obligations otherwise assumed by CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement, including, without limitation, to the provisions concerning indemnification.
13. ASSIGNABILITY. This Agreement is for CONSULTANT' s professional services. CONSULTANT' s attempts to assign the benefits or burdens of this Agreement without CITY's written approval are prohibited and will be null and void.
14. INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT. CITY and CONSULTANT agree that CONSULTANT will act as an independent CONSULTANT and will have control of all work and the manner in which is it performed. CONSULTANT will be free to contract for similar service to be performed for other employers while under contract with CITY. CONSULTANT is not an agent or employee of CITY and is not entitled to participate in any pension plan, insurance, bonus or similar benefits CITY provides for its employees. Any provision in this Agreement that may appear to give CITY the right to direct CONSULTANT as to the details of doing the work or to exercise a measure of control over the work means that CONSULTANT will follow the direction of the CITY as to end results of the work only.
15. AUDIT OF RECORDS.
A. CONSULTANT agrees that CITY, or designee, has the right to review, obtain, and copy all records pertaining to the performance of this Agreement. CONSULTANT agrees to provide CITY, or designee, with any relevant information requested and will permit CITY, or designee, access to its premises, upon reasonable notice, during normal business hours for the purpose of interviewing employees and inspecting and copying such books, records, accounts, and other material that may be relevant to a matter under investigation for the purpose of determining compliance with this Agreement. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain such records for a period of three (3) years following final payment under this Agreement.
B. CONSULTANT will keep all books, records, accounts and documents pertaining to this Agreement separate from other activities unrelated to this Agreement.
16. CORRECTIVE MEASURES. CONSULTANT will promptly implement any corrective measures required by CITY regarding the requirements and
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 obligations of this Agreement. CONSULTANT will be given a reasonable amount of time as determined by CITY to implement said corrective measures.
Failure of CONSULTANT to implement required corrective measures shall result in immediate termination of this Agreement.
17. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS.
A. CONSULTANT, at CONSULTANT' s own cost and expense, shall procure and maintain, for the duration of the contract, the following insurance policies:
Workers Compensation Insurance as required by law. CONSULTANT shall require all subconsultants similarly to provide such compensation insurance for their respective employees. Any notice of cancellation or non -renewal of all Workers' Compensation policies must be received by CITY at least thirty ( 30) days prior to such change. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against CITY, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by CONSULTANT for CITY.
2. General Liability Coverage. CONSULTANT shall maintain commercial general liability insurance in an amount of not less than one million dollars ($ 1, 000, 000) per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. If a commercial general liability insurance form or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be performed under this Agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be at least twice the required occurrence limit.
3. Automobile Liability Coverage. CONSULTANT shall maintain automobile liability insurance covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of CONSULTANT arising out of or in connection with the work to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage for owned, hired, and non -owned vehicles, in an amount of not less than one million dollars ($ 1, 000, 000) combined single limit for each occurrence.
4. Professional Liability Coverage. CONSULTANT shall maintain professional errors and omissions liability insurance for protection against claims alleging negligent acts, errors, or omissions which may arise from CONSULTANT' S operations under this Agreement, whether such operations be by CONSULTANT or by its employees,
subconsultants, or subconsultants. The amount of this insurance shall not be less than one million dollars ($ 1, 000, 000) on a claims -made annual aggregate basis, or a combined single -limit -per -occurrence
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 basis. When coverage is provided on a " claims made basis," CONSULTANT will continue to renew the insurance for a period of three 3) years after this Agreement expires or is terminated. Such insurance will have the same coverage and limits as the policy that was in effect during the term of this Agreement, and will cover CONSULTANT for all claims made by CITY arising out of any errors or omissions of CONSULTANT, or its officers, employees or agents during the time this Agreement was in effect.
B. Endorsements. Each general liability, automobile liability and professional liability insurance policy shall be issued by a financially responsible insurance company or companies admitted and authorized to do business in the State of California, or which is approved in writing by CITY, and shall be endorsed as follows. CONSULTANT also agrees to require all CONSULTANTs, and subconsultants to do likewise.
1. " The CITY, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of work performed by or on behalf of the CONSULTANT, including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations."
2. This policy shall be considered primary insurance as respects CITY, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. Any insurance maintained by CITY, including any self - insured retention CITY may have, shall be considered excess insurance only and shall not contribute with this policy.
3. This insurance shall act for each insured and additional insured as though a separate policy had been written for each, except with respect to the limits of liability of the insuring company.
4. The insurer waives all rights of subrogation against CITY, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, or agents.
5. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to CITY, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents, or volunteers.
6. The insurance provided by this policy shall not be suspended, voided, canceled, or reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty ( 30) days' written notice has been received by CITY.
C. CONSULTANT agrees to provide immediate notice to CITY of any claim or loss against CONSULTANT arising out of the work performed under this agreement. CITY assumes no obligation or liability by such notice, but has
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 the right ( but not the duty) to monitor the handling of any such claim or claims if they are likely to involve CITY.
D. Any deductibles or self -insured retentions must be declared to and approved by CITY. At CITY' s option, CONSULTANT shall demonstrate financial capability for payment of such deductibles or self -insured retentions.
E. CONSULTANT shall provide certificates of insurance with original endorsements to CITY as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein. Certificates of such insurance shall be filed with CITY on or before commencement of performance of this Agreement. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with CITY at all times during the term of this Agreement.
F. Failure on the part of CONSULTANT to procure or maintain required insurance shall constitute a material breach of contract under which CITY may terminate this Agreement pursuant to Section 11 above.
G. The commercial general and automobile liability policies required by this Agreement shall allow CITY, as additional insured, to satisfy the self - insured retention (" SIR") and/or deductible of the policy in lieu of the CONSULTANT ( as the named insured) should CONSULTANT fail to pay the SIR or deductible requirements. The amount of the SIR or deductible shall be subject to the approval of the City Attorney and the Finance Director. CONSULTANT understands and agrees that satisfaction of this requirement is an express condition precedent to the effectiveness of this Agreement. Failure by CONSULTANT as primary insured to pay its SIR or deductible constitutes a material breach of this Agreement. Should CITY pay the SIR or deductible on CONSULTANT' S behalf upon
CONSULTANT' S failure or refusal to do so in order to secure defense and indemnification as an additional insured under the policy, CITY may include such amounts as damages in any action against CONSULTANT for breach of this Agreement in addition to any other damages incurred by CITY due to the breach.
18. USE OF OTHER CONSULTANTS. CONSULTANT must obtain CITY' s prior written approval to use any CONSULTANTs while performing any portion of this Agreement. Such approval must include approval of the proposed CONSULTANT and the terms of compensation.
19. FINAL PAYMENT ACCEPTANCE CONSTITUTES RELEASE. The
acceptance by the CONSULTANT of the final payment made under this Agreement shall operate as and be a release of CITY from all claims and liabilities for compensation to the CONSULTANT for anything done, furnished or relating to the CONSULTANT' S work or services. Acceptance of payment
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 shall be any negotiation of CITY'S check or the failure to make a written extra compensation claim within ten ( 10) calendar days of the receipt of that check.
However, approval or payment by CITY shall not constitute, nor be deemed, a release of the responsibility and liability of CONSULTANT, its employees, subCONSULTANTs and agents for the accuracy and competency of the information provided and/ or work performed; nor shall such approval or payment be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility or liability by CITY for any defect or error in the work prepared by CONSULTANT, its employees, sub- CONSULTANTs and agents.
20. CORRECTIONS. In addition to the above indemnification obligations, the CONSULTANT shall correct, at its expense, all errors in the work which may be disclosed during CITY' S review of CONSULTANT' S report or plans. Should the CONSULTANT fail to make such correction in a reasonably timely manner, such correction shall be made by CITY, and the cost thereof shall be charged to CONSULTANT. In addition to all other available remedies, CITY may deduct the cost of such correction from any retention amount held by CITY or may withhold payment otherwise owed CONSULTANT under this Agreement up to the amount of the cost of correction.
21. NON -APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS. Payments to be made to CONSULTANT by CITY for services preformed within the current fiscal year are within the current fiscal budget and within an available, unexhausted fund.
In the event that CITY does not appropriate sufficient funds for payment of CONSULTANT' S services beyond the current fiscal year, the Agreement shall cover payment for CONSULTANT'S only to the conclusion of the last fiscal year in which CITY appropriates sufficient funds and shall automatically terminate at the conclusion of such fiscal year.
22. NOTICES. All communications to either party by the other party will be deemed made when received by such party at its respective name and address as follows:
CITY
City of Lomita
24300 Narbonne Avenue
Lomita, CA 90717
ATTN: City Manager
CONSULTANT
Willdan Financial Services
27368 Via Industria,
Suite 200
Temecula, CA 92590
ATTN: Chris Fisher, VP
Any such written communications by mail will be conclusively deemed to have been received by the addressee upon deposit thereof in the United States Mail, postage prepaid and properly addressed as noted above. In all other instances, notices will be deemed given at the time of actual delivery. Changes may be made in the names or addresses of persons to whom notices are to be given by
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 giving notice in the manner prescribed in this paragraph. Courtesy copies of notices may be sent via electronic mail, provided that the original notice is deposited in the U. S. mail or personally delivered as specified in this Section.
23. SOLICITATION. CONSULTANT maintains and warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company or person, other than CONSULTANT' s bona fide employee, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, CONSULTANT warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any company or person, other than CONSULTANT's bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. Should CONSULTANT breach or violate this warranty, CITY may rescind this Agreement without liability.
24. THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES. This Agreement and every provision herein is generally for the exclusive benefit of CONSULTANT and CITY and not for the benefit of any other party. There will be no incidental or other beneficiaries of any of CONSULTANT' s or CITY' s obligations under this Agreement.
25. INTERPRETATION. This Agreement was drafted in, and will be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, and exclusive venue for any action involving this agreement will be in Los Angeles County.
26. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement, and its Attachments, sets forth the entire understanding of the parties. There are no other understandings, terms or other agreements expressed or implied, oral or written.
27. RULES OF CONSTRUCTION. Each Party had the opportunity to independently review this Agreement with legal counsel. Accordingly, this Agreement will be construed simply, as a whole, and in accordance with its fair meaning; it will not be interpreted strictly for or against either Party.
28. AUTHORITY/ MODIFICATION. The Parties represent and warrant that all necessary action has been taken by the Parties to authorize the undersigned to execute this Agreement and to engage in the actions described herein, This Agreement may be modified by written amendment with signatures of all parties to this Agreement. CITY' s city administrator, or designee, may execute any such amendment on behalf of CITY.
29. ACCEPTANCE OF FACSIMILE OR ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES. The Parties agree that this Agreement, agreements ancillary to this Agreement, and related documents to be entered into in connection with this Agreement will be considered signed when the signature of a party is delivered by facsimile transmission or scanned and delivered via electronic mail. Such facsimile or electronic mail copies will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519
30. FORCE MAJEURE. Should performance of this Agreement be impossible due to fire, flood, explosion, war, embargo, government action, civil or military authority, the natural elements, or other similar causes beyond the Parties' control, then the Agreement will immediately terminate without obligation of either party to the other.
31. TIME IS OF ESSENCE. Time is of the essence to comply with dates and schedules to be provided.
32. ATTORNEY' S FEES. The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that each will bear his or its own costs, expenses and attorneys' fees arising out of and/ or connected with the negotiation, drafting and execution of the Agreement, and all matters arising out of or connected therewith except that, in the event any action is brought by any party hereto to enforce this Agreement, the prevailing party in such action shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees and costs in addition to all other relief to which that party or those parties may be entitled.
33. STATEMENT OF EXPERIENCE. By executing this Agreement, CONSULTANT represents that it has demonstrated trustworthiness and possesses the quality, fitness and capacity to perform the Agreement in a manner satisfactory to CITY. CONSULTANT represents that its financial resources, surety and insurance experience, service experience, completion ability, personnel, current workload, experience in dealing with private CONSULTANTs, and experience in dealing with public agencies all suggest that CONSULTANT is capable of performing the proposed contract and has a demonstrated capacity to deal fairly and effectively with and to satisfy a public agency.
34. DISCLOSURE REQUIRED. ( CITY and CONSULTANT initials required at one of the following paragraphs)
By their respective initials next to this paragraph, CITY and CONSULTANT hereby acknowledge that CONSULTANT is a " CONSULTANT" for the purposes of the California Political Reform Act because CONSULTANT' S duties would require him or her to make one or more of the governmental decisions set forth in Fair Political Practices Commission Regulation 18700. 3( a)( 2) or otherwise serves in a staff capacity for which disclosure would otherwise be required were CONSULTANT employed by CITY.
CONSULTANT hereby acknowledges his or her assuming - office, annual, and leaving -office financial reporting obligations under the California Political Reform Act and the CITY' S Conflict of Interest Code and agrees to comply with those obligations at his or her expense. Prior to CONSULTANT commencing services hereunder, the City' s Manager shall prepare and deliver to CONSULTANT a memorandum detailing the extent of CONSULTANT' S
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B-4543-8ED8-4E216CBB1519 XV
disclosure obligations in accordance with the CITY' S Conflict of Interest Code.
City Initials [(;
CONSULTANT Initials i
By their initials next to this paragraph, CITY and CONSULTANT hereby acknowledge that CONSULTANT is not a " CONSULTANT" for the purpose of the California Political Reform Act because CONSULTANT' S duties and responsibilities are not within the scope of the definition of CONSULTANT in Fair Political Practice Commission Regulation 18700. 3( a)( 2) and is otherwise not serving in staff capacity in accordance with CITY'S Conflict of Interest Code.
City Initials
S
C
CONSULTANT Initials
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this contract the day and year first hereinabove written.
CITY OF LOMITA CONSULTANT
DocuSigned by:
Ryan oot". c ty anag r By: Chris Fisher, Vice President A T T33- 0302345
Ka t eenFiorn Gregdry, City Clerk Taxpayer ID No. APPROVED AS TO FORM: UI
DocuSigned
by: awr
ruslt& City
ttorney If
Page
12 of 25
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599-709B- 4543-8ED8-4E216CBB1519
EXHIBIT A - SCOPE OF WORK ( WFS)
Work Plans
WFS proposed work plans, described in detail by task, are provided below. WFS proposes to maximize efficiency and cost-effectiveness by combining meetings and data gathering efforts between the studies wherever possible. WFS explains how each task will be accomplished and identify associated meetings and deliverables. WFS wants to ensure our scope provides quality and clarity and is responsive to the City' s needs and specific local circumstances. WFS will work in concert with the City to adjust scopes as needed during the course of the studies.
Full and OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan
This proposed scope of services addresses the completion of both the full and OMB compliant versions of the Cost Allocation Plan ( CAP). WFS have noted where activities specific to the OMB compliant plan occur.
Task 1: Initial Document Request
Objective: Initial due diligence.
Description: Prior to the kick-off call, relevant documentation will be obtained and reviewed in order to enhance our understanding of the City's current cost allocation plan and internal structure of the agency.
A written request for specific data will be sent to the City. The data provided in this task will provide the building blocks for later model development.
Our request may include ( but is not limited to):
Detailed budget and accounting data;
Prior year's financial data, salary, position and staffing data; Organizational structure;
Prior cost allocation plan and/ or user fee documentation and models; and Data related to various allocation bases that may be incorporated as part of the methodology, i. e.
City Council agenda frequencies by department, AP/AR transactions by department, IT equipment distribution by department, etc.
Deliverables: Willdan: Submit information request to City.
City: Provide requested data to Willdan ( prior to Task 2, Kick-off Call/ Refine Scope). WFS will follow up with the City to confirm in writing the data that WFS have received, or which is still outstanding.
Task 2: Kick- off Conference Call / Refine Scope
Objective: Confirm project goals and objectives. Identify and discuss policy issues raised by the study and
determine appropriate fee categories.
Description: Willdan will identify and discuss policy issues typically raised by these studies and address data gaps in order to gain a full understanding of the City' s goals for the cost allocation plan. WFS will establish effective lines of communication and processes for information gathering and review.
WFS will also discuss costs that may not be allocable for OMB purposes, and the potential impact on the OMB version of the CAP.
During this call, WFS will ask that the City assign a project manager to serve as its primary contact. The selected City project manager will ensure that available data is provided to Willdan in a timely manner, thereby maintaining adherence to the project' s schedule.
WFS will obtain and review the current cost allocation methodology and discuss with City staff. The objective of this review is to determine specific areas of focus as they relate to the City's objectives, and to discuss and evaluate current and potential allocation factors.
Meetings: One ( 1) project kick- off conference call to initiate the project, discuss data needs and methodologies
and to address policy issues. WFS would propose to conduct the user fee study kick- off during this same call, to maximize efficiency and cost effectiveness of staff and Willdan time.
Deliverables: Willdan: If needed, a revised project scope and schedule.
City: Provide further data requirements and select / introduce City' s project manager.
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Task 3: Gather Staffing Information and Develop Cost Allocation Plan Model Description: This task involves the gathering of specific information, directly from City staff, through interviews and discussion, related to the functions served by indirect staff and the departments served by their activities. This task also focuses on the development of, and/ or adjustment of existing, allocation bases, and the development and testing of a model that will ultimately be used to calculate the proper cost allocations derived from data gathered in prior tasks.
The model will be developed to incorporate any recent changes in the provision of City services, and fully allocate central service costs.
The model will also be developed to allocate only those costs eligible under 2 CFR Part 200. This is accomplished by loading relevant data into the model, identifying which costs are not allocable under the OMB guidelines. The OMB Super Circular compliant model is valuable as the City may receive Federal or State grant funding that mandates compliance with Federal OMB regulations.
WFS will utilize budget and organizational information, and other required information gathered from City staff to complete the work in this task. Specific discussions will be held to discuss bases, how central overhead services are provided to and utilized by other departments, cost categories and allocation criteria, and how these will factor into the overall cost allocation methodology.
The model and methodology will also produce indirect cost rates. These rates will be suitable for a variety of uses, including incorporation into the User Fee Study's personnel rates, billing to CIP projects, and in the OMB Super Circular compliant CAP, to Federal grants.
Meetings: Online meetings with staff to understand structure and operations as model and allocation bases are developed. Key staff will be interviewed to best understand central overhead staffing and functions and the departments served.
Deliverables: Willdan: One ( 1) user- friendly model in Microsoft Excel format that provides both a full cost allocation plan and an OMB Super Circular compliant cost allocation plan.
Task 4: Test and Review Cost Allocation Methodology
Objective: Test and review model and results with City.
Description: The draft cost allocation plan model will be reviewed with City staff, and adjusted as necessary, to ensure that preliminary allocations provide an accurate depiction of how the central overhead costs should be borne by the operating programs and funds. Over the past several years, WFS have successfully integrated online meetings by using WebExTm as an element to our approach. This allows us to remotely guide staff through the model review and allows you the opportunity to interactively change inputs and test approaches.
Meetings: One ( 1) WebEx meeting and demonstration with City Staff to review the model.
Deliverables: Willdan and City: Draft cost allocation plan model review.
Task 5: Prepare and Present Draft Report
Objective: Prepare the draft cost allocation report.
Description: This task involves the draft report preparation. The cost allocation plan' s background, model methodologies, and results will be discussed; calculations and supporting data will be presented textually and in easily understood tables and provided to the City.
Meetings: One ( 1) WebEx meeting to present the draft report to City Staff.
Deliverables: Willdan: Draft report for City review and input.
City: Review of draft report, with comments, and edits.
Task 6: Discuss and Revise Report
Objective: Review of draft report, cost distribution methods, and model.
Description: An in- depth review of the draft report and model will be conducted to arrive at an optimum allocation method for each expenditure type. Often, through the course of an engagement, comments usually revolve around issues of understandability; appropriate levels of enterprise funds' cost recovery, etc.; ease of calculation; and overhead costs' distribution methods.
WFS reports are structured to include both the full and OMB compliant plan, but in the course of review if a separate report is desired for each or just one of the plans, they will be split.
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B-4543-8ED8-4E216CBB1519 Following a round of comments from City staff concerning the draft report, the final report will be prepared for presentation to the Council.
Meetings: One ( 1) conference call with City staff to review the report with changes and revisions.
Deliverables: Draft report, and revised draft/ final report.
Task 7: Prepare and Present Final Report and Model
Objective: Prepare and present the final report to City Council. Educate City staff on the operation and use of the model for future modifications.
Description: This task is the culmination of the cost allocation plan project. Based on staff comments on the draft report, Willdan will prepare the final report for presentation to City Council.
Meetings: One ( 1) meeting with the City Council to present the final plan if necessary. This meeting would be held in conjunction with the presentation of the user rate study results.
WFS will also provide staff training on the operation and use of the model.
Deliverables: Willdan: Provide one ( 1) electronic PDF file copy of the final report and models (full and OMB Super Circular compliant); and two ( 2) bound copies, and one ( 1) unbound copy to the City. Using Microsoft Word and Excel, an updateable electronic copy of the study and models, as well as related schedules, will also be provided on CD/ ROM.
Comprehensive User Fee Study
Task 1: Initial Document Request
Objective: Initial due diligence; obtain study -related data.
Description: Prior to the kick-off meeting, WFS will obtain and review relevant documentation to further enhance WFS' s understanding of the services, fees, and rates to be studied. A written request for data will be sent to the City. Please note that Time Survey data is not part of this request and will be gathered during the on -site interviews described in Task 5.
WFS will request information and documentation on current fees and fee programs, activity levels, and budget and staffing information ( to the extent not already available) related specifically to programs and activities which have associated fees, and for which the City has this level of detail.
Deliverables: Willdan: Submit information request to City.
City: Provide requested data to Willdan ( prior to Task 3, Kick- off Meeting/ Refine Scope). As with the cost allocation plan, WFS will follow up with the City to confirm receipt of requested data and information and highlight data elements that are outstanding.
Task 2: Compile Inventory of Current and Potential Fees Objective: Willdan will identify a schedule of fees and methodology for calculating the fees.
Description: Based on the results of the initial document request and independent research, incorporate into WFS' s model the existing fees, provided by the City, to comprise the parameters of the fee study.
Meetings: It is possible that a conference call with the City may be necessary to discuss new fees to implement or existing fees that may no longer be required.
Deliverables: Willdan: One ( 1) draft list of current fees based on initial data provided (to be discussed and finalized during the kick-off call).
City: Review completed fee schedule with comments/ revisions to be discussed during the kick-off meeting.
Task 3: Kick- off Conference Call / Refine Scope
Objective: Confirm goals and objectives for the User Fee Study. Identify and resolve policy issues typically raised by a User Fee Study, address gaps in data, and refine appropriate existing or new fee categories ( based on Task 2).
Description: Verify WFS' s understanding of the City's goals, the City's cost -recovery policy for user fees, and to fill any gaps in data/ information necessary for the project. It is important for the City and Willdan to identify and address any foreseeable problems and maintain open communication throughout the process.
During this call, WFS will ask that the City identify a project manager who will serve as the primary contact for the project. The project manager shall have responsibility for ensuring that all available
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 data is provided in a timely manner, thereby maintaining adherence to the project's schedule.
Meetings: One ( 1) project kick- off call to initiate the entire project, discuss data needs, and address policy issues.
This will be held in conjunction with the kick-off for the cost allocation plan. As mentioned in the cost allocation plan work plan, WFS suggest combining the kick- off calls to increase efficiency.
Deliverables: Willdan: 1) Revised project scope and schedule ( if needed); and 2) brief summary of policy decisions ( if needed).
City: 1) Provide further data needs; and 2) determine/ introduce City' s project manager.
Task 4: Develop User Fee Model
Objective: Develop and test model.
Description: This task involves the development of the model ultimately used to calculate the departmental fees, based on data and information gathered in previous tasks and in the Time Survey Interviews described in Task 5. To ensure that City policies are met through the imposition of the calculated fees, the model will be formatted to include appropriate costs.
Key model inputs will include staff and allocated overhead costs per position, and relevant budget data on salaries and benefits. Most of this information will be developed during the cost allocation plan phase of this project and will be incorporated directly into the user fee model. WFS will request clarification and/ or additional data if necessary.
The model will build upon the cost allocation plan results, to provide an allocation of administrative and overhead costs to fee related activities and departments providing services to customers, so that fees and billable rate schedules incorporate applicable costs. Furthermore, the fees and rates charged to customers will also reflect the cost of the services being provided, to the extent possible given policy and/ or political considerations.
Deliverables: Willdan: One ( 1) user- friendly model in Microsoft Excel format, which, when finalized, City staff can use to calculate fee changes annually, or as often as deemed appropriate by the City Council.
Task 5: Time Survey Interviews and On -site Information Gathering Objective: Meet with City staff to complete Time Surveys and understand service delivery processes.
Description: In order to assist staff with the completion of the survey worksheets, WFS will schedule one 1) full day of on -site meetings with staff; however, the number of meetings needed may vary depending on the number of staff and departments involved.
The Willdan Team will conduct interviews with supervisors/ managers, as well as other staff, as deemed appropriate and/ or necessary, from each department involved in the user fee study to determine the average time required by City staff to provide each of the services for which a fee is collected.
The fee model is designed so that full cost recovery fees are calculated immediately upon input of staff time. These full costs are also compared to current cost recovery levels. This will allow Willdan and City staff to conclude with a final meeting to review the draft full cost recovery fees and adjust any times as necessary once all information has been compiled and input into the fee model. WFS will schedule the interviews with staff to minimize any disruption to their normal workflow.
Meetings: Up to two ( 2) business days of WebEx or on -site meetings/ staff interviews. The ability to conduct in person meetings will depend upon any Covid- 19 related health and safety restrictions that may be in place.
Deliverables: Willdan and City: Time surveys and draft full cost recovery fees.
Task 6: Common Fees Comparison
Objective: Examine selected user fees charged by up to five ( 5) comparable cities in Los Angeles County, or jurisdictions that are similar to the City of Lomita.
Description: WFS will access and use our knowledge of other jurisdictions to benchmark the City' s five 5) most
common fees or highest yielding fees with comparable jurisdictions agreed.
Fee schedules are rarely readily or directly comparable from agency to agency due to definitional and operational differences. For example, a grading permit in one jurisdiction may include the plan check
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B-4543-8ED8-4E216CBB1519 service, while the same permit in another jurisdiction may not, resulting in similar sounding services with widely varying costs. For this reason, Willdan takes a selection of the City' s most commonly used and/ or highest yielding fees.
The survey will contain the following, a comparison of common or similar fees and charges used by the City and other jurisdictions; current and proposed fees and charges unique to the City of Lomita; fees and charges used by other public entities not currently used in the City; and If possible, identify characteristics and processes unique to the City that account for significant variances in fees and charges used by other jurisdictions.
Deliverables: Willdan: Recommendations provided in Task 9 will incorporate the data gathered during our examination.
Task 7: Review of Development Tax and Business License Tax Objective: To review current City taxes for Business Licenses and Development/ Construction and provide
feedback.
Description: WFS will request City policies/ ordinances/ resolutions, and other documentation as available, related to
these mechanisms. WFS will discuss the taxes with staff to determine whether there are specific questions or areas of concern and whether they are achieving their objectives.
To the extent possible, depending on available information, WFS will provide feedback based on 3 to 5 similar neighboring cities with similar tax mechanisms; examining those cities' policies, approaches and structures as compared with Lomita.
Deliverables: Willdan: Recommendations provided in Task 9 will incorporate the data gathered during our examination.
Task 8: Data Analysis and Final User Fee Schedule
Objective: Incorporate information obtained from on -site surveys to fully develop model.
Description: WFS will update the model, based on information received during the on -site surveys, to generate a
comprehensive user fee schedule. In addition, it is very common that a supplemental data request may be necessary, based on new fees identified that the City is not currently collecting. Where appropriate, WFS will suggest and discuss with staff alternate approaches to existing fee programs ( i. e. building fees) and suggest potential areas where fees could be collected where they are not currently.
WFS will present the full cost recovery level for fees, both current and projected under the new calculated fees, and revenue projections, given certain assumptions about the levels of subsidy for different fees. Current levels of cost recovery will be compared to actual full costs calculated during the course of this study. Cost will be calculated at reasonable activity levels and include all appropriate direct and indirect costs and overhead. WFS will review fee programs for compliance with Propositions 218 and 26.
in developing the fee schedule, WFS will make recommendations for new fees where appropriate, based on our experience with other cities. Some areas for new fees may be due to changes in law ( legalized cannabis), or for activities that the City finds itself performing regularly, but for which no fee is collected.
Where possible, WFS will incorporate discussion of the City's economic development policies, and where these may intersect with fee programs, for instance setting fees in a manner that encourages certain activities.
The user fee data analysis and model development may take three (3) to four (4) weeks with frequent correspondence with City staff to discuss current cost recovery amounts, necessary to recover full cost and frequency activity.
Meetings: One ( 1) WebEx or in -person meeting, as necessary, to gather additional input, complete analysis and finalize fee schedule. The ability to conduct in person meetings will depend upon any Covid19 related health and safety restrictions that may be in place.
Deliverables: Final user fee model for City Council presentation and discussion.
Task 9: Prepare and Present Draft Report
Objective: Prepare draft report.
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Description: This task involves the preparation of the draft report that discusses the study' s background, the methodologies utilized in the study, and the results and presentation to various stakeholder groups.
As noted below, meetings may occur during this or the next task as appropriate. The calculations used to generate the user fee study will be included textually, as well as in easy to understand tables.
Individual fee summaries by department and a comprehensive fee schedule will be included. The draft report will include the following:
Key results and findings;
Basic descriptions of each service;
The full cost of each service and current cost recovery levels; Costs broken down graphically into indirect and direct components, with a graphic display of the level of cost recovery;
Fee recommendations with associate levels of cost recovery; Projections of potential fee revenue;
Assessment of reasonableness of each City' s costs;
Review of reasonableness of current consultant cost structure ( for Building Division services); As appropriate, recommend alternative methodologies for building permit fee calculation; and Summary and recommendations.
The objective of the report is to communicate the recommendation of appropriate fees, which include the appropriate subsidy percentage for those fees where full cost recovery may be unrealistic.
Meetings: One ( 1) conference call with City staff, to present draft results address questions and receive feedback.
Deliverables: Willdan: Draft report for City review and comment.
City: Review of draft report, with comments and edits.
Task 10: Revise Draft Report/Determine Cost Recovery Levels for Recommended Adoption
Objective: Review of draft report and fee model.
Description: The goal of this task is to conduct an in- depth review of the draft report and model, incorporate
feedback and changes as a result of previous discussions, and arrive at an optimum fee structure.
Often through the course of an engagement, City staff will volunteer insightful likes and dislikes regarding the existing fee structure. WFS listens to this feedback carefully because your staff members know the community best. Comments usually revolve around issues of:
Understandability;
Fairness to applicants;
Ease of calculation;
Appropriate levels of cost recovery; and
Full cost recovery hourly rates.
When adjusting fee recovery levels, WFS believe it is important to address these concerns.
Following one ( 1) round of comments from City staff on the draft report and feedback from City staff, WFS will prepare the final report for presentation to the City Council.
Meetings: One ( 1) online demonstration ( WebEx) to review the report and model, with any revisions.
Deliverables: Draft report, revised draft / final report.
Task 11: Prepare and Present Final Report/ Train Staff on Model Objective: Prepare and present final report to City Council. Train staff on the operation and use of the model for
future modifications.
Description: This task is the culmination of the entire project. Based on staff comments received regarding the draft
report, WFS will prepare the final report for presentation.
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Meetings: One ( 1) meeting with City Council to present the results and adopt the updated fee schedule.
WFS will also provide staff training on the operation and use of the model on the same day, during regular business hours.
Deliverables: Provide one ( 1) electronic PDF file copy of the final report and models; and if requested provide three ( 3) bound copies, and one ( 1) unbound copy to the City. Using Microsoft Word and Excel, an updateable electronic copy of the study and models, as well as related schedules, will also be provided on CD/ ROM.
Development Impact Fee Analysis
Willdan will consider and recommend modifications to the existing program structure, cost components, and fee amounts. In addition to the services for which the City presently charges fees, the study shall identify and recommend other potential impact fees consistent with the City' s goals and objectives.
Task 1: Identify and Resolve Policy Issues
Objective: Identify and resolve policy issues raised by the study.
Description: Review agency documents related to existing capital planning policies and funding programs including existing impact fees. Bring policy issues to City staff's attention, as appropriate, during the project and seek guidance prior to proceeding. Potential policy issues include:
Potential new impact fees for consideration
Adequacy of General Plan and other public facility planning policies ( e. g. level of service standards); impact fee ordinances and resolutions, and prior nexus studies; Availability of existing public facility master plans and CIPs to identify needed facilities; Types of facilities to be funded by each fee;
Land use categories for imposition of fees;
Nexus approach to determining facility standards;
Nexus approach to allocating cost burden among land uses, including need for separate fee zones;
Potential alternative funding sources, if needed;
Funding existing deficiencies, if identified; and
Implementation concerns and strategies.
Deliverables: ( 1) Information requests; ( 2) revised project scope and schedule ( if needed); and ( 3) brief summary of policy decisions ( if needed).
Task 2: Comparison
Objective: Provide a comparison of the current and proposed impact fees to those of comparable/ surrounding jurisdictions.
Description: Typically, this would be neighboring jurisdictions, and a few that are nearby and comparable to the City. Willdan will compare a total of five jurisdictions to be selected by the City. Typically, Willdan prepares an analysis of fees charged to a series of prototype developments ( such as residential, retail, etc.) in order to provide an " apples to apples" comparison, but the exact methodology will be set in consultation with the City. This comparison will be limited to five other jurisdictions.
Task 3: Prepare Report
Description: Provide a technical memorandum the summarizes Willdan' s findings and outlines a roadmap to future actions to consider ( such as a fee update study, adoption of additional fee categories, etc.).
Deliverables: WFS will provide up to five ( 5) hard copies of the technical memorandum, one ( 1) unbound copy, and a copy in Microsoft Word.
Task 4: Meetings
Objective: The project manager or other necessary Willdan staff will attend project meetings. A member of the Impact project team will attend up to two meetings throughout the Impact Fee Analysis portion of the City' s engagement. Phone conferences are not considered meetings for the purposes of this scope.
Additional meetings may be requested for an additional fee based on WFS hourly billing rates.
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Project Schedules
vvlldan understands time is of the essence for the City of Lomita to begin this engagement. These schedules can only be met with the cooperation of City staff. Delays in responding to our requests for data and review will result in corresponding delays to the project schedule. If that is the case, we will notify the City immediately of the possible impact on the schedule.
Cost Allocation Plan
Legend•
1: Information Request 11111116: Draft Report
x 2: Revised Project Scope and Schedule ( d n«edeo9 NO: Revised Draft Report/ Final Report 03: User-friendly Model in Microsoft Excel U7: Final Report —Hard and Electronic Copies i4: Draft Cost PJlocation Plan Model Review
1" WILLDAN CwtAe« anon wan, UrorkeSaMywtfD ebpmentlmpwtFe* D@vfcpm f1mpwtF" AnLy3is 37
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 City of tt]I ilia
User Fee Study
Legend
1: Information Request US: Revised Draft Report/ Final Report 2: Revised Project Scope and Schedule ( if needec) 7: Final Report - - hrd and Electronic Copies 3: Lser- friendly Model in Microsoft Excel t8: Draft List of Current Fees 4: Draft Fee and Rate Model Review NO: Trre Surveys and Draft Full Cost Recovery Fees 5: Draft Report SIO: Corrrron Fee Corperison
WILLDAN oostAAw. elm P?-, lMar F;"$ M wd o. wwpm. ntMowt F. 0rIW ~ tfmp, ct Fee AnNyala 39
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Development Impact Fee Analysis
ry WILLDAN Co$ tA#Iwwion F#w, Us F" SWdY wd DBvelapmentlmPwt Fee Dev* IOP ntfmPwtFae AnWysfs 39
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Schedule of Fees
Not to Exceed Fee
Wilidan Financial Services (" Willdan") proposes a not -to -exceed fixed fee of $49,170 for the Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study, and Development Impact Fee Analysis engagement. The tables below provide a breakdown of each fee by task and project team member.
Cost Allocation Plan
Based on the corresponding work plan identified within the scope of services, we propose a not -to -exceed fixed fee of$ 10, 440to prepare a Full and OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan.
Fee Proposal
C. Fisher T. Thrasher P. Patel R. Olmid
PthelpaHo- Tech Prated Aruly kA QNTarh
fetal
S 260 $ 185 $ 125 $ 210i Flours Cost
e of Services
1: Initial Document Request 1. 0 1. 0 2.0 $ 310
2: Kick- off / Refine Scope 1. 0 1. 0 2.0 310
3: Gather Staffing Information, Develop Cost Alocation Plan Model 1. 0 4. 0 16. 0 21. 0 2, 990 4: Test and Review Cost Allocation Methodology 1. 0 3. 0 8. 0 1. 0 13. 0 Z015 5; Prepare and Present Draft Report 2.0 20 10.0 1. 0 15.0 2,330 6: Discuss and Revise Report 1. 0 2, 0 6. 0 9.0 1, 370
7: Prepare and Present Final Report/ Train Staff on Model 1. 0 4. 0 1. 0 8.0 1, 115 ser Fee Study
Based on the corresponding work plan identified within the scope of services, we propose a not -to -exceed fixed fee of $24, 780 to prepare a User Fee Study.
Fee Proposal
Scope of Services
Task 1: Initial Document Request
Task Z Compile Inventory of Current and Potential Fees
Task 3: ift-off /Refine Scope
Task 4: Dewlap User Fee Model
Task 5: Time Surrey Interviews and Information Gathering Task 6: Common Fees Comparison
Task 7: Review of Development/ Business License Taxes
Task 6: Data Analysis and Final Fee and Rate Shcedu' e
Task 9: Prepare and Present Draft Report
Task 10: Revise DraftYDetermine, Cost Recovery Levels
Task 11: Prepare and Present Final Report/ Train Staff on Model C. Fisher T. Thrasher P. Paw
Prhndpal- R Tech Project Analytical
charge Manager--- -. support_.
250 $ 185 $ 1I
IL atald
QNTach
1. 0 1. 0 $ 125
1. 0 2. 0 3. 0 435
1. 0 1. 0 2. 0 4. 0 685
20 12.0 14. 0 1, 870
1. 0 10. 0 10. 0 21. 0 3, 350
1. 0 2. 0 16. 0
I 19. 0
2, 620
3. 0 3. 0 5. 0 1. 01 120 2, 140
1. 0 6. 0 34. 0 20 43. 0 1, 030
2. 0 4. 0 12. 0 1. 0 19. 0 2, 950
1. 0 8. 0 80 20 19. 0 3, 150
1. 0 5. 0 2.0 1 8. 0 1. 425
WN' I LLDAN CostAllocat/ on Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 40
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709E- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Development Impact Fee Analysis
Based on the corresponding work plan identified within the scope of services, we propose a not -to -exceed fixed fee of $13, 950 prepare a Development Impact Fee Analysis.
Fee Proposal
J. Edison C. Villarreal
Project Manager eniof_ s na" Total
240 S 165. Hours Cast
Scope of Services
Task 1: Identify and Resolve Policy Issues 8. 0 12. 0 20. 0 3, 900 Task 2: Comparison 6. 0 10. 0 16.0 3, 090
Task 3: Prepare Report 8. 0 12. 0 20. 0 3, 900
Task 4: Meetings 10. 0 4.0 14. 0 3, 060
Development Impact Fee Liutitutions
Our fees stated in the Development Impact Fee Budget include attendance at a total of two in - person meetings with City staff, stakeholders, and City Council. Attendance at more than two in -person meetings shall be billed at our current hourly rates, provided below.
Comprehensive written responses to resolve conflicts or preparation of more than one set of major revisions to the draft report, will be classified as Additional Services, and may require additional billing at hourly rates stated in the Hourly Rates table listed below. These additional fees shall only take effect once the fixed fee stated above has been exceeded.
Examples of Additional Services include:
Additional analysis based on revised assumptions requested by the City, including possible changes in Facilities needs list, infrastructure costs, populations projections, and related data once preparation of draft administrative report has been approved;
Negotiations with stakeholders once the report has been prepared ( beyond the two meetings included in the proposal); and
Time expended related to obtaining data assigned to City under " City Staff Support", as stated in our work plan.
Notes
Our fee includes all direct expenses associated with the project, We will invoice the City monthly based on percentage of project completed.
Additional services may be authorized by the City and will be billed at our then - current hourly overhead consulting rates.
City shall reimburse Willdan for any costs Willdan incurs, including without limitation, copying costs, digitizing costs, travel expenses, employee time and attorneys' fees, to respond to the legal process of any governmental agency relating to City or relating to the project. Reimbursement shall be at Willdan ' s rates in effect at the time of such response.
The cost of preparing the Fee Study can be included in the resulting new fee schedule. Therefore, over time, the City can recover the initial outlay of funds that was required to complete the studies.
Willdan will rely on the validity and accuracy of the City' s data and documentation to complete the analysis. Willdan will rely on the data as being accurate without performing an independent verification of accuracy and will not be responsible for any errors that result from inaccurate data provided by the client or a third party.
V/ W I LLDAN cost Allocatlon Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 41
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 7098- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Additional Professional Services
Hourly Fee Schedule
Our current hourly rates are listed below.
Position Team Member Hourly Rate
Group Manager Chris Fisher 250
Managing Principal James Edison 240
Principal Consultant Bob Quaid 210
Senior Project Manager Tony Thrasher 185
Project Manager Carlos Villarreal 165
Senior Project Analyst 136
Senior Analyst Priti Patel 125
Analyst II 110
Analyst 1 100
W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Alan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 42
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- BED8- 4E216CBB1519
EXHIBIT A
City of Lomita
Technical Proposal
Comprehensive User Fee &
Charges Rate Study
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519
W I LLDAN
FINANCIAL SERVICES
June 4, 2020
Ms. Kathleen Hill
City Clerk
City of Lomita
24300 Narbonne Avenue
Lomita, California 90717
Re: Proposal to Conduct a Comprehensive User Fees and Charges Rate Study for the City of Lomita Dear Ms. Hill:
Following the extended shutdown of most of the economy as a result of the COVID outbreak, now more than ever municipalities throughout California are challenged with doing more with less. As cities are faced with limited financial resources to address numerous competing priorities and objectives, they are always striving to maintain high standards of service to their communities. Considering this, it is critical for the City of Lomita (" City") to ensure that its fees for requested services have been developed and updated to ensure maximum appropriate cost recovery, so that the revenues generated by fees cover the cost of those services to the greatest extent possible. City Staff, and ultimately the City Council, need a clear understanding of standards, service levels and the associated costs. Recognizing this, the City has responded by soliciting proposals for a Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study Development Impact Fee Analysis.
Unique Combination of Services and Expertise/ Public Engagement — Willdan Financial Services (" Willdan") is a team of nearly 80 professionals who provide essential financial consulting services throughout California, and the United States. Willdan has provided the requested services to municipal clients for over two decades; and is the only firm providing these types of consulting services that also has a long history of providing contract staff support to public agencies for the delivery of municipal services. This direct experience as " agency staff' provides us with firsthand understanding of City operations and is uniquely useful in determining the full effort associated with service delivery and in developing a fee schedule that is easy to communicate and implement.
Please note: Willdan is submitting proposals in response to both of the RFPs recently issued by the City. We are one of the only firms who combine Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee, Development Impact Fee and Water Rate expertise and experience under one roof, without the need to team with other consultants — ensuring a seamless coordinated execution of these important projects for the City.
Broad Experience with Impact Fee Programs Statewide and Across the Country — Willdan has wide experience with the range of impact fees charged in the region and the state, and the typical pros, cons and challenges of each, both in implementation and management. Willdan will be pleased to bring its expertise to the City' s process of considering financial, practical and policy issues in deciding on its future impact fee program.
Extensive Experience with Similar Work for Los Angeles/ Orange County Area Cities — Willdan has worked recently with numerous cities in relative proximity to the City of Lomita on User Fee and Development Impact Fee projects, with objectives very similar to those for this study. This local experience enables us to bring valuable perspective and insight from other local cities' approaches to fees and their policies on fee setting and subsidies, and will also assist us in conducting meaningful and efficient fee comparisons. Recent studies include Paramount, Signal Hill, Lynwood, Monterey Park, Cerritos, Irvine, Chino Hills and Claremont, with ongoing studies in Arcadia, West Hollywood, El Monte and Fullerton.
Collaborative Approach and User- friendly Models and Reports — Willdan prides itself on working closely with City staff to develop an approach that is targeted toward your specific objectives and accounts for your reality, and then working together with you to gather first- hand information regarding the processes and tasks required to provide services to those requesting them.
This is a distinct advantage we will bring in our approach with the City of Lomita. A collaborative approach ensures we clearly understand your goals and challenges, and just as importantly, you understand the process and the results. We have included one full day of on -site data gathering and staff interviews to ensure we obtain the information we need efficiently and accurately, with limited need for follow- up.
T 951. 587. 3500 800, 755. 6864 1 F 951. 587. 3510 888. 326, 6864 1 27368 Via Industria, Suite 200, Temecula, CA 92590 1 www. wilidan. com DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Ms. Kathleen Hill, City Clerk
City of Lomita
Proposal to Comprehensive User Fees and Charges Rate Study June 4, 2020
Page ii
We create user- friendly Excel - based models that the City can retain and conduct our analysis and develop the model collaboratively with City staff. Rather than using an inflexible proprietary software program, we construct our models from the ground up, mirroring the City' s budget format wherever possible. As a result, the information contained in our models is easy for City staff to interpret, and the familiar software ensures ease of navigation.
This also allows for easy on -the -fly adjustments and updates, inclusion of updated budgets, or changes in organizational structure. Created directly from the models, our reports clearly and graphically illustrate full and recommended levels of cost recovery and projections of revenue for fee programs, break down the costs into direct and indirect overhead categories, and present the fee methodologies.
Our models and project approach are geared toward delivering work on schedule and presenting results at public meetings and council workshops.
The Willdan Team is experienced at communicating complex analytical results in a manner that is easy to understand by non -finance - oriented individuals and facilitates discussion. We have coordinated or participated in numerous public and staff workshops regarding fees and cost of service -based charges.
We are excited about this opportunity to serve the City of Lomita. To discuss any aspect of our proposal, please contact me; my contact information is provided in the table below.
Principal -in -Charge
Chris Fisher
Vice President
27368 Via Industria, Suite 200
Temecula, CA 92590
Tel#: ( 800) 755- 6864 1 Fax #: ( 888) 326- 6864
Email: CFisherCcDWilldan. com
As a Vice President of Willdan Financial Services, I am authorized to bind the firm to the terms of this proposal, as well as the subsequent agreement.
Sincerely,
WILLDAN FINANCIAL SERVICES
Chris Fisher
Vice President - Group Manager
Financial Consulting Services
COMPREHENSIVE. INNOVATIVE. TRUSTED. W"
DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Table of Contents
TABLEOF CONTENTS................................................................................................................................................. III EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS......................................................................................................................... 1 FirmProfile..................................................................................................................................................................... 1 WilldanFinancial Services...................................................................................................................................... 1 ProfessionalExpertise.................................................................................................................................................. 2 Unique Combination of Services and Expertise/ Public Engagement..................................................................... 2 Broad Experience Across the Country .................................................................................................................... 2 StaffContinuity........................................................................................................................................................ 2 ProjectDedication................................................................................................................................................... 2 FinancialStability.......................................................................................................................................................... 3 ProjectStatement.......................................................................................................................................................... 3 SimilarStudies............................................................................................................................................................... 4 ProjectTeam.................................................................................................................................................................. 7 Principal- in- Charge.................................................................................................................................................. 7 Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study............................................................................................................... 7 Development Impact Fee Analysis.......................................................................................................................... 7 Resumes................................................................................................................................................................. 7 REFERENCES.............................................................................................................................................................. 19 Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study............................................................................................................. 19 Development Impact Fee Analysis........................................................................................................................ 20 CombinedStudies................................................................................................................................................. 22 PROJECTAPPROACH................................................................................................................................................ 23 ProjectUnderstanding................................................................................................................................................ 23 ProjectMethodologies................................................................................................................................................ 24 Cost Allocation Plan Methodology........................................................................................................................ 24 UserFee Study Methodology................................................................................................................................ 25 Development Impact Fee Analysis........................................................................................................................ 27 RelatedApproach Issues...................................................................................................................................... 28 StakeholderParticipation...................................................................................................................................... 28 WorkPlans................................................................................................................................................................... 29 Full and OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan...................................................................................................... 29 ComprehensiveUser Fee Study........................................................................................................................... 31 Development Impact Fee Analysis........................................................................................................................ 35 CityStaff Support .................................................................................................................................................. 36 ProjectSchedules........................................................................................................................................................ 37 CostAllocation Plan.............................................................................................................................................. 37 UserFee Study...................................................................................................................................................... 38 Development Impact Fee Analysis........................................................................................................................ 39 SCHEDULEOF FEES................................................................................................................................................... 40 Notto Exceed Fee........................................................................................................................................................ 40 CostAllocation Plan.............................................................................................................................................. 40 UserFee Study...................................................................................................................................................... 40 Development Impact Fee Analysis........................................................................................................................ 41 Notes............................................................................................................................................................................. 41 Additional Professional Services...............................................................................................................................42 HourlyFee Schedule............................................................................................................................................. 42 W"W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis iii DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Experience and Qualifications
Firm Profile
Willdan Financial Services is an operating division within Willdan Group, Inc. ( WGI), which was founded in 1964 as an engineering firm working with local governments. Today, WGI is a publicly owned company on NASDAQ ( WLDN). WGI provides technical and consulting services that ensure the quality, value, and security of our nation' s infrastructure, systems, facilities, and environment. WGI has been a consistent industry leader through its subsidiaries and provides professional technical and consulting services that ensure the quality, value and security of our nation' s infrastructure, systems, facilities, and environment.
The firm has pursued two primary service objectives since its I;w'
inception — ensuring the success of its clients and enhancing its complementary
surrounding
and
planning,
client
reputation
The
energy
responsiveness
communities.
company'
disciplines
efficiency
for technical
s service
In
and
in
that
doing
excellence,
providing
sustainability,
offerings
include
so, Willdan
span
superior
costengineering
financial
a
effectiveness,
has
broad co
gained
and
set
and
of
economic
a
consulting. Willdan has crafted this set of
integrated services so that, in the face of an evolving environment — whether economic, natural, or built — Willdan can continue to extend the reach and resources of its clients.
WGI has over 1, 300 employees operating from offices in Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Utah, Texas, and Washington.
Willdan Financial Services
Established on June 24, 1988, Willdan Financial Services, a California Corporation, is a national firm, and is one of the largest public sector financial consulting firms in the United States. Since that time, we have helped over 1, 200 public agencies successfully address a broad range of financial challenges, such as financing the costs of growth and generating revenues to fund desired services. Willdan assists local public agencies by providing the following services:
User fee studies;
Cost allocation studies;
Tax increment finance district formation and
amendment;
Housing development and implementation
strategies;
Financial consulting;
Real estate acquisition;
Feasibility studies;
Development Impact Fee establishment and analysis;
Utility rate and cost of service studies;
Municipal Advisory;
Real estate economic analysis;
Economic development plans and strategies;
Debt issuance support;
Long- term financial plans and cash flow modeling; and
Property tax audits.
Our staff of nearly 80 full-time employees supports our clients by conducting year-round workshops and on -site training to assist them in keeping current with the latest
developments in our areas of expertise. WI LLDAN
FINANCIAL SERVICES
The organization chart located to the right represents
Willdan' s reporting structure, principals, including the operating groups; it as well defines the assets
available to the City of Lomita.
36 Profs MMS 22 ProMsio" s 6 Ploft" oryls
W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Professional Expertise
Unique Combination of Services and Expertise/ Public Engagement Willdan has provided User Fee and Impact Fee services to municipal clients for over 20 years; and has prepared comprehensive impact fee studies, user fee studies, as well as cost allocation plans, and OMB compliant cost allocation plans for clients throughout California and the United States. Willdan' s proven and successful track -record conducting fee studies for public agencies dates to 1998. Since that time, we have developed the expertise to successfully integrate this service into the Financial Consulting Services group' s primary functions.
We are also one of the only firms who combine Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee and Development Impact Fee expertise and experience under one roof, without the need to team with other consultants — ensuring a seamless coordinated execution of this important project for the City.
Willdan' s Financial Consulting Services staff has assisted well over 100 California government agencies with the development and/ or update of all fee types. Each project has required defensible documentation and thorough coordination of fee program changes for different agency departments and stakeholders within the business community. In some cases, Willdan has been required to negotiate fees with stakeholders and, on occasion, defend them in meetings and public forums.
We are particularly strong in advising our clients on the advantages and disadvantages of different fee schedule structures ( citywide versus multiple -fee districts/ zones; more versus fewer land -use categories; etc.) and methods of fee calculation that are based on the City's and stakeholder priorities and applicable regulations that comply with Proposition 26 and Proposition 218.
Our record of success within the industry provides assurance of the professionalism and capability we will bring to this engagement. A team composed of project managers and analysts develop and/or, update user fee studies, cost allocation plans and development impact fees.
Broad Experience Across the Country
Willdan Financial Services is a team of professionals who provide essential financial consulting services throughout the United States. Willdan has provided the requested services to municipal clients for over two decades; and is the only firm providing these types of consulting services that also has a long history of providing contract staff support to public agencies for the delivery of municipal services. This direct experience as " agency staff' provides us with firsthand understanding of City operations and is uniquely useful in determining the full effort associated with service delivery and in developing a fee schedule that is easy to communicate and implement.
Willdan has extensive experience with the range of fees charged in the region and the state, and the typical pros, cons and challenges of each, both in implementation and management. Willdan will be bring its expertise to the City's process of considering financial, practical and policy issues in deciding on its future fee program.
Staff Continuity
Mr. Fisher has been assigned to serve as the City' s representative; he has been selected for this role due to his extensive experience, which includes the It /s Important to note that preparation and supervision of numerous fee studies, as well as his experience Mr. Fisher has been with presenting to governing bodies, stakeholders, and industry groups. Willdan for more than 21 years, ensuring the City
Project Dedication of Lomita of continuity
Willdan' s Financial Consulting Services group is composed of a team of over 20 and dedication in staffing senior -level professional consultants. While each member of the project team during the completion of currently has work in progress with other clients, the workload is at a manageable the project. level with sufficient capacity to meet the needs of the City specific to the schedule and budget for this engagement.
The Willdan Team is experienced at communicating complex analytical results in a manner that is easy to understand by non -finance -oriented individuals and facilitates discussion. The Team has coordinated or participated in numerous public stakeholder and staff workshops regarding fees and cost of service -based charges.
WWI LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 The team presented within this proposal has worked collectively on numerous projects, such as the one requested by the City of Lomita; an established work practice between the team members has been forged, this proven long- standing system has benefited our clients.
The proposed project team collectively maintains decades of experience providing financial consulting services, the project team' s key resources are comprised of the following individuals:
Mr. Chris Fisher, Vice President and Group Manager; Principal - in -Charge Mr. James Edison, Managing Principal-, Development Impact Fee Analysis Project Manager Mr. Robert Quaid, CPA, Principal Consultant; User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan QA/ QC Mr. Tony Thrasher, Senior Project Manager; User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan Project Manager Mr. Carlos Villarreal, Project Manager; Development Impact Fee Analysis Lead Analyst Ms. Priti Patel, Senior Analyst; User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan Lead Analyst Financial Stability
To establish our financial stability, we are providing the following information.
Willdan Group, Inc. ( WGI) has sustained a healthy financial performance record due to the outstanding performance of our operating divisions and a strong, dependable reputation in municipal consulting. A snapshot of WGI' s financial statistics are provided to the right demonstrating our financial position and stability. As a publicly traded company ( WLDN), must provide public financial information as required by the SEC.
Detailed financial statements and annual reports are included on our webpage ( http:// ir.wilidangroup. com/).
Financial Stability
In business for over 55 years
Market capitalization of $ 413M
as of end of 2nd Quarter, 2019)
Fiscal 2nd Quarter 2019 revenue
6 months) of $ 196M
Fiscal Year 2018 revenue of
272M
Willdan Financial Services is not currently involved in any condition e. bankruptcy, current or pending litigation, planned office closures, $ 50 million Line of Credit with the
9- P 9- 9
impending merger) that may impede our ability to complete this ability to increase up to $ 60 million engagement. (
as of end of 2" d Quarter, 2019)
27. 6M in cash and cash
equivalents
as of end of 2nd Quarter, 2019)
Project Statement
Willdan has read and understands, and agrees to, all statements in this request for proposal, and acknowledges receipt of all addendums and amendments, as well as to the terms, conditions, and attachments referenced. 1IO' W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 3 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Similar Studies
Listed in the table below, is an abbreviated list of the public agencies in which similar services are currently in progress, or have been completed, in the previous five years by the project team included within this submission.
Willdan Financial Services
5 Year Cost of Services Study
Agency Impact Fee Study
Experience
User Fee Study Cost Allocation Plan
City of Alameda, CA
City of Banning, CA
City of Bell, CA
City of Bell Gardens, CA
City of Bellflower, CA
City of Belmont, CA
City of Blythe, CA
City of Brea, CA
City of Carpinteria, CA
City of Cerritos, CA
City of Chino Hills, CA
City of Claremont, CA
City of Coalinga, CA
City of Colton, CA
City of Commerce, CA
City of Compton, CA
City of Corona, CA
City of Cudahy, CA
City of DeSoto, TX
City of Dinuba, CA
City of El Centro, CA
City of El Cerrito, CA
City of El Monte, CA
City of Emeryville, CA
City of Encinitas, CA
City of Fillmore, CA
City of Fountain Hills, AZ
City of Fremont, CA
City of Galt, CA
City of Gardena, CA
City of Garden Grove, CA
City of Gilroy, CA
City of Glendale, AZ
City of Hawthorne, CA
City of Hayward, CA
City of Hesperia, CA
City of Hollister, CA
City of Indian Wells, CA
W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 4 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599-
AVMW
709B- 4543- 8EDB- 4E216CBB1519
Year Cost
knpad
of Services
Fee Study
S
e
User Fee Cost Allocation Plan
City of Irvine, CA
City of Irwindale, CA
City of La Mesa, CA
City of La Mirada, CA
City of La Puente, CA
City of Laguna Hills, CA
City of Lake Elsinore, CA
City of Lynwood, CA
City of Menifee, CA
City of Mission Viejo, CA
City of Missouri City, TX
City of Montebello, CA
City of Monterey Park, CA
City of Monterey, CA
City of Morgan Hill, CA
City of Murrieta, CA
City of Napa, CA
City of National City, CA
City of Oroville, CA
City of Pacifica, CA
City of Palm Desert, CA
City of Patterson, CA
City of Petaluma, CA
City of Pismo Beach, CA
City of Pittsburg, CA
City of Rancho Mirage, CA
City of Rialto, CA
City of Richmond, CA
City of Rocklin, CA
City of Rosemead, CA
City of St. Helena, CA
City of Salinas, CA
City of San Anselmo, CA
City of San Bruno, CA
City of San Fernando, CA
City of San Jacinto, CA
City of Santa Ana, CA
City of Sierra Madre, CA
City of Signal Hill, CA
City of Soledad, CA
City of South San Francisco, CA
W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Willdan
5 Year Cost of Services Study
itrnpaat Fee Study
Experience
User Fee Study Cost Allocation Plan
City of Sunnyvale, TX
City of Surprise, AZ
City of Tehachapi, CA
City of Temecula, CA
City of Tulare, CA
City of Twenty -Nine Palms, CA
City of Union City, CA
City of Watsonville, CA
City of West Covina, CA
City of West Hollywood, CA
City of Yucaipa, CA
County of Los Angeles, CA
County of Riverside, CA
County of Sacramento, CA
County of San Benito, CA
County of San Diego, CA
County of Stanislaus, CA
County of Tulare, CA
Kentuckiana Works, KY
San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, CA
Town of Loomis, CA
Town of Los Altos Hills, CA
Town of Paradise Valley, AZ
Truckee Fire Protection District, CA
1l W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Project Team
Our management and supervision of the project team is very simple: staff every position with experienced, capable personnel in sufficient numbers to deliver a superior product to the City, on time and on budget. With that philosophy in mind, we have selected experienced professionals for this engagement. We are confident that our team possesses the depth of experience that will successfully fulfill your desired work performance.
Our employees know and understand the problems facing local government under the current economic climate, and we have oriented our practice to support an agency' s modified budget policies and public service priorities.
Principal -in -Charge
Mr. Chris Fisher will administer the City of Lomita project as the Principal -in -Charge. He will apply his extensive financial rate design/ modeling experience and ability to clearly communicate results through the facilitation of numerous stakeholder forums. In this role, he will attend meetings and presentations, provide technical guidance, produce key study elements, and will be responsible for work deliverables.
Mr. Fisher is also proposed to serve as the Principal -in -Charge for the Water Rate Study. Guaranteeing continuity in the City' s projects, and maximizing the opportunity to leverage relationships, data and efforts between the two projects.
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study
Mr. Tony Thrasher will serve as the Technical Project Manager and primary contact for the Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study portion of the engagement. He will work closely with Mr. Fisher to develop the analyses under the City' s scope of services and develop complete and accurate models that will best fit the project needs.
Ms. Priti Patel will provide Analytical Support as the project analyst, she will work closely with Mr. Fisher and Mr.
Thrasher, and the City, to ensure that data is collected, interpreted, researched, and correctly entered into the model.
Mr. Robert Quaid, CPA, will provide quality assurance/ quality control to this engagement in the role of Quality Assurance/Technical Advisor. Mr. Quaid will review the models as a third -party internal reviewer prior to their submittal to City staff. His continual review of data entry and model development assures that the draft, and final products have been thoroughly evaluated for potential errors; thus, providing quality client deliverables, and high levels of integrity and outcomes throughout the duration of the project.
Development Impact Fee Analysis
Mr. James Edison, Managing Principal, will serve as the Project Manager for the Development Impact Fee Analysis portion of the project. His responsibilities will include leading tasks, overseeing the quality of work products, and assuring timely completion of the project; as well as serve as the primary contact and will be present at key meetings.
He has been selected for this role because of his familiarity with innovative approaches to funding public facilities and recent legislative and case -law changes that alter how California agencies can use the Mitigation Fee Act.
Mr. Edison is a former bond attorney; with this knowledge and expertise overseeing the City' s project, he can be of assistance in advising, and addressing matters that are related to the review or preparation of a nexus study.
Mr. Carlos Villarreal, a Willdan project manager, will serve as Lead Analyst for the Development Impact Fee Analysis engagement. Mr. Villarreal will be responsible for data gathering and report writing for the Development Impact Fee update engagement. He will also be responsible for coordinating with the client to ensure that data gathering proceeds smoothly and minimizes the burden on client staff.
Resuilles
Resumes for Willdan' s project team are presented on the following pages.
W"W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 7 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599-709B-4543-8ED8-4E216CBB1519 Chris Fisher
Principal -in -Charge
Education Mr. Chris Fisher, Vice President and Group Manager of Willdan' s Financial Consulting Services San Francisco State group, will serve as Principal -in -Charge for the City of Lomita' s project. He will also share his University, Bachelor of extensive knowledge related to cost -of -service principles with members of the project team.
Science, Finance
Mr. Fisher joined Willdan in April of 1999, and during that time has managed an array of financial Areas of Expertise consulting projects for public agencies in California, Arizona, Colorado, Texas, and Florida, Cost of Service coordinating the activities of resources within Willdan, as well as those from other firms working Analyses on these projects. He is one of the firm' s leading experts for special district financing related to public infrastructure, maintenance, and services, including public safety.
Multi -disciplinary Team
Management Related Experience
City of Irvine, CA — OMB Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Willdan Special District completed a cost allocation plan and user fee study for the City of Irvine. Mr. Fisher managed and Formations provided quality assurance to this project, ensuring the accuracy of the models, as well as the final Client Presentations reports. He also presented the results to the City' s Finance Commission and to the City Council.
City of Murrieta, CA — Cost Allocation and OMB Compliant Plan and Comprehensive User Proposition 218 Fee Study: Mr. Fisher served as the project manager on the City' s fee study. The primary objective for the cost allocation study was to ensure that general government costs were fairly and Affiliations equitably allocated to appropriate programs and funds.
California Society of
Municipal Finance City of West Covina, CA — Comprehensive Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: Mr.
Officers Fisher served in the role of project manager for the City' s engagement. The cost allocation plan developed will aid the City in the recovery of overhead costs related to central service activities.
Municipal Management City of Laguna Hills, CA — Comprehensive Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Association of
Northern California Fee Study: Mr. Fisher oversaw the update of the City' s general overhead allocation plan and cost - of -service user fees.
California Municipal City of Palm Desert, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study:
Treasurers Association Mr. Fisher is the principal - in -charge for the ongoing full cost allocation plan and user fee study.
Willdan' s work includes the gathering of necessary data and information, interviews with City Staff 21 Years' Experience to identify overhead support services and how they are used and interviews to gather information related to fee -based services. We are also developing financial models to calculate overhead allocations and personnel rates and the full cost of services for which fees are charged. We are working with Staff to finalize cost recovery targets, prepare reports and present the results.
City of Indian Wells, CA — User Fee Study: Mr. Fisher was the principal - in -charge for the City' s user fee study for the Administrative, Building, Planning and Public Works Departments. Our team gathered and confirmed data, met with City Staff to discuss the City' s overhead support structure and how operating activities use and benefit from overhead support services. We conducted interviews to gather information related to fee -based services to be used in calculating the full cost of providing services. We developed financial models to calculate overhead allocations and the full cost of services and worked with Staff to develop fee -setting recommendations. We prepared reports and presented the results and met with the development community to address their questions about the study' s methodology and results.
City of National City, CA — Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study, and ISF Allocation Study: Mr. Fisher served as the principal -in -charge for the City of National City' s Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee, and ISF Allocation Study.
City of Hayward, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: Mr. Fisher served as the project manager for the City' s full overhead cost allocation plan and OMB A- 87 cost allocation plan, along with a comprehensive master user fee study. He worked with the City and Willdan staff to gather the necessary data and is overseeing Willdan' s development of the cost allocation model. The City has a complicated and detailed budget and the cost allocation plan that Willdan developed is tailored to their structure and includes provision for several Internal Service Funds.
W' W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B-4543-8ED8-4E216CBB1519 City of Salinas, CA — Comprehensive Fee Study and Full Cost Allocation Plan: Mr. Fisher C. Fisher served as the project manager for the City of Salinas engagement, to prepare an OMB A-87- Resume Continued compliant full cost allocation plan and comprehensive fee study for the development of a master list of fees. Mr. Fisher led an all -departments overview meeting, where the framework and general process was reviewed, and global practical and policy questions were addressed. Immediately following the overview meeting, individual meetings were held with representatives from each department to discuss their specific fee related activities and gather necessary information to update fees.
City of Belmont, CA — Master Fee Study and Cost Allocation Refinement: Mr. Fisher served as the project manager for Willdan' s work with the City of Belmont and the Belmont Fire Protection District' s fee study. Willdan completed a Master Fee Study and an analysis and review of the existing Cost Allocation Plan for the City of Belmont, and a Fee and Rate Study for the Belmont Fire Protection District.
City of Union City, CA — Comprehensive Fee and Rate Study & Overhead Cost Allocation Plan: Mr. Fisher served as the principal - in -charge for the City' s fee study. He oversaw the development of an overhead cost allocation plan, OMB compliant cost allocation plan, as well as a comprehensive user fee study.
City of Signal Hill, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: As principal -in -charge, Mr.
Fisher oversaw the development and review of a Full and OMB compliant cost allocation study and a comprehensive user fee and rate study for the City' s master list of fees.
City of Petaluma, CA — Overhead Cost Allocation Plan and OMB Circular A- 87 Plan, User Fee Study, CIP Rate Analysis, and Hourly Overhead Rate Study: Mr. Fisher served as project manager for the project team and provided oversight for this thorough and intensive study for the City of Petaluma.
City of Pittsburg, CA —Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: Mr. Fisher provided policy guidance and quality assurance to the City' s update and development of a comprehensive user fee study for the development of a master user fee and rate schedule and a cost allocation plan to recover overhead costs related to central service activities.
City of Desoto, TX — User Fee Study: Mr. Fisher served as the principal -in -charge for City' s Comprehensive User Fee Study.
WWI IIDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Tony Thrasher
Technical Project Manager — Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Education Due to his cost allocation and user fee analyses experience, Mr. Tony Thrasher has been selected Bachelor of Science in to serve as Technical Project Manager for the City' s User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan Economics; California engagement. Currently, Mr. Thrasher is a Project Manager within the Financial Consulting State Polytechnic Services group, whereby his responsibilities include managing projects and conducting fiscal University, Pomona analyses for cost allocation plans, user fees, and utility rate studies.
Areas of Expertise Mr. Thrasher's prior employment was as a financial analyst working in bond, equity, and mortgage - Cost Allocation Plans backed security markets for Wells Fargo Bank, Bank of New York Mellon, and Deutsche Bank.
His experience includes portfolio accounting, differential analysis, and forecasting.
Fiscal Analysis for Related Experience User Fees and Rates City of Chino Hills, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Mr.
District Administration Thrasher is serving as the technical project manager for the City' s Cost Allocation Plan and Services Comprehensive User Fee Study. He is working directly with the City contact throughout the engagement.
Utility Rate Studies City of Indian Wells, CA — User Fee Study: Mr. Thrasher served as the technical project manager for the City' s Administrative, Building, Planning and Public Works Departments. The 11 Years' Experience
study involved the identification of existing and potential new fees, fee schedule restructuring, data collection and analysis, orientation and consultation, quality control, communication and presentations, and calculation of individual service costs cost recovery levels.
City of Palm Desert, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study:
Mr. Thrasher is currently serving as the technical project manager for the City' s full cost allocation plan and user fee study. He is directly responsible for the creation of both models for the study, gathering and verification of the data, managing the analysts working to support him and presenting results to the City.
City of Mission Viejo, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: Mr. Thrasher was assigned to work with the City on this project, providing analytical support, gathering data, working with staff to make refinements, and developing cost allocation and fee models to ensure full -cost recovery for building and safety, planning, community development, and public works departments.
City of Irvine, CA — OMB Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Serving as the project' s analyst, Mr. Thrasher provided analytical support; and designed micro - level allocation models to ensure full -cost recovery for public safety, public works, community development, community services, and administrative departments.
City of Cerritos, CA — Development Services User Fee Study: Mr. Thrasher served as the technical project manager for this engagement, whereby he designed micro - level allocation models to ensure full -cost recovery for building and safety, planning, community development, and public works departments.
City of Bellflower, CA — OMB Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study Update: In Willdan' s initial engagement with the City, Mr. Thrasher provided analytical support, with his primary duties including finalizing model figures and generating reports. In the subsequent update of both the CAP and the Fee Study, Mr. Thrasher assumed a lead technical role, working directly with the client to develop a new Cost Allocation Model, update the comprehensive fee model, and resolve policy and fee setting issues. He was directly responsible for delivery of reports and presentations to the City.
City of National City, CA — Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study, and ISF Allocation Study: Mr. Thrasher served as the technical project manager for the City of National City' s Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee, and ISF Allocation Study.
tlY WI LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 10 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8F_DR- 4F_216CRR1519 City of Hayward, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: For this project, Mr.
T. Thrasher Thrasher provided analytical support, and was largely responsible for the development of the Resume Continued models. Primary duties include gathering and verifying necessary data, finalizing model figures and generating reports. The City hired Willdan to complete the original Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study, and has subsequently hired us for updates to both studies.
City of Petaluma, CA — Overhead Cost Allocation Plan and OMB Circular Plan, User Fee Study, CIP Rate Analysis, and Hourly Overhead Rate Study: Mr. Thrasher provided analytical support for this engagement. His primary duties were to work with City staff to gather data, provide assistance to the project manager, and produce reports. The City has hired Willdan for multiple updates since we completed the original study.
City of Richmond, CA — Cost Allocation Plan& User Fee Study: Mr. Thrasher is serving as the project manager for the City of Richmond' s fee study.
City of Salinas, CA — Full Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive Fee Study: Mr. Thrasher provided analytical support for the City of Salinas OMB A- 87- compliant full cost allocation plan and comprehensive fee study engagement. He worked closely with City staff to gather and analyze data to produce reports, participated in multiple meetings, and assisted the City appointed Project Manager in the adoption of the new fees.
City of Monterey, CA — Cost Allocation Plan: Mr. Thrasher is serving as the technical project manager for the City of Monterey Cost Allocation Plan engagement and updates. He is assisting in the development of the City's general overhead allocation plan, whereby he applies his expertise on alternative allocation methods. The City hired Willdan for the original study, and has since hired us for multiple updates.
City of Galt, CA — Cost Allocation Plan: As the assigned technical lead, Mr. Thrasher worked directly with City Staff to develop the Cost Allocation Model and report and worked with Staff to test and adjust the model and methodology where appropriate before finalizing. Following completion of the initial CAP, he worked with the City to update the model for the subsequent budget update.
Sacramento Public Library Authority, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and OMB Circular A- 87:
Mr. Thrasher provided analytical support. His primary duties included finalizing model figures and generating reports.
City of Desoto, TX — User Fee Study: Mr. Thrasher served as the technical project manager for City's Comprehensive User Fee Study.
City of Missouri City, TX — Comprehensive User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan: Mr.
Thrasher served as the technical project manager for City' s Fee Study.
City of Mesquite, TX — Cost Allocation Plan: Mr. Thrasher served as the technical project manager for City' s Cost Allocation Study.
City of Surprise, AZ — Cost Allocation Plan: Mr. Thrasher served as the technical project manager for the 2017 Cost Allocation Plan to identify the City's costs related to rendering internal central support services, and the allocation of those costs to operating departments.
Kentuckiana Works, KY — Cost Allocation Plan: Mr. Thrasher was the technical project manager for Kentuckiana Works Cost Allocation Plan.
W' W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 11 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Priti Patel
Project Analyst — Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Education Ms. Priti Patel is a Senior Analyst within the Financial Consulting Services group, whereby she Bachelor of Arts; supports project managers in conducting utility rate analyses, fee studies, cost allocation plans, Business monitoring Proposition 218 compliance, and forming special districts.
Management,
Information Systems Coordinatingg and conductingg activities associated with Cost Allocation Plans and User Fee and Studies, including database integration and manipulation, revenue and expenditure analyses, and International Business, documentation preparation are just some of Ms. Patel' s duties. With these duties, she interacts University of Cincinnati with clients on a regular basis.
Areas of Expertise Ms. Patel joined Willdan as an analyst with the District Administration Group, while with DAS she Cost Allocation Plans performed research and analysis needed for local government financial issues related to district administration, including document data entry and updating, database management, research and User Fee Studies report preparation. She also provided general information on questions pertaining to Assessment Districts and special taxes ( such as Mello -Roos Pools), as well as the status of property Proposition 218 delinquencies. Ms. Patel came to Willdan with more than five years' experience as an Analyst.
R
7 Years' Experienceelated Experience
City of Palm Desert, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study:
Ms. Patel is assigned as the analyst to the City of Palm Desert' s full cost allocation plan and user fee study. She supports the project manager by gathering necessary data, preparing the initial draft models and reports, and working directly with City Staff to refine and update results during review iterations.
City of Indian Wells, CA — User Fee Study: Ms. Patel served as the analyst for the City' s user fee study for the Administrative, Building, Planning and Public Works Departments. She led the analytical efforts by developing the User Fee model and report, and gathering and evaluating the data necessary for the study. She also participated in the on -site interviews with Staff to discuss service delivery processes.
City of Chino Hills, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study:
Providing analytical support in the preparation of a cost allocation plan and comprehensive fee study, Ms. Patel is working to identify and take into account direct and indirect costs, along with changes in staffing, structure, and service delivery methods. She is also assisting in the preparation of user-friendly Excel -based models that City staff can easily update in the future to determine the proper allocation of expenditures and ongoing full cost of City -provided services.
City of Laguna Hills, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study:
Ms. Patel provided analytical support in the preparation of a full cost allocation plan and comprehensive fee study for the development of a master list of fees.
City of Lake Elsinore, CA — User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan: Ms. Patel provided analytical support and gathering budget and allocation basis data for this engagement.
City of National City, CA — Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study, and ISF Allocation Study: Ms. Patel is providing analytical support in the preparation of this study, her primary duties include development of the models, finalizing model figures and results, and generating reports.
City of San Fernando, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study:
Ms. Patel is currently providing support to senior team members in the preparation of a cost allocation plan, OMB compliant plan and comprehensive user fee study.
City of Yucaipa, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Provided analytical support in the preparation of a Cost Allocation Plan and OMB compliant cost allocation plan and comprehensive fee study for the development of a master list of fees. Ms. Patel worked to identify and take into account direct and indirect costs, along with changes in staffing, structure, and service delivery methods. She also assisted in the preparation of user-friendly Excel -based models that City staff could easily update in the future to determine the proper allocation of expenditures and ongoing full cost of City -provided services.
W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 12 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 City of Richmond, CA — Cost Allocation Plan & User Fee Study: Ms. Patel is the financial P. Patel analyst on the City of Richmond' s ongoing User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan. She is assisting the project manager with gathering and validation of data, development of the models Resume Continued
and related analysis, staff interviews and preparation of reports and presentations.
City of Pittsburg, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: Ms. Patel was assigned to provide assistance to senior project team members on the City of Pittsburg Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study engagement. She will be a technical lead for the gathering of data, creation of the models and preparation of study reports and presentations. The City hired Willdan for the original study, and for two subsequent updates.
City of Monterey, CA — Cost Allocation Plan: Ms. Patel is serving as the financial analyst for the City of Monterey Cost Allocation Plan and updates. In this role she is responsible for obtaining updated information and data, reviewing overhead structure and functions and preparing the updated model and report. The City originally hired Willdan for the creation of the first Cost Allocation Plan, and has hired us for multiple updates since then.
City of Fillmore, CA — Full Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: Ms. Patel helped develop a cost allocation plan and model that fully allocated central overhead costs to appropriate operating departments, funds, and/ or programs. She assisted in the completion of the model and report and worked directly with senior staff to their feedback and revisions.
Rainbow Municipal Water District, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and OMB Compliant Plan: Ms.
Patel provided analytical support to ensure that the District' s Cost Allocation Plan and OMB compliant cost allocation model and plan fairly allocated general and administrative overhead service costs to appropriate activities and departments.
City of Dinuba, CA — Cost Allocation Plan Update and Utility Rate Study: Ms. Patel assisted with a utility rate study and a cost allocation plan update for the City. Duties included reviewing relevant documentation, gathering information related to indirect staffing and functions, assisting in the preparation of a comprehensive draft cost allocation model and plan, and testing and reviewing the model and results with project management staff.
W"W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 13 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Robert Quaid, CPA
QA / Technical Advisor — Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Education With his 35 years of extensive experience in public financing, Mr. Robert Quaid has been selected Bachelor of Science, to provide quality assurance/ quality control in the role of technical advisor. In his position as a University of Southern Principal Consultant at Willdan, Mr. Quaid provides project management, procedural support, California technical support, and quality review for Willdan' s District Administration group, as well as the Financial Services Consulting group specific to cost allocation plans, user fee studies, and special Areas of Expertise financial analysis.
Fiscal Analysis for User
Fees and Rates Prior to 1joiningg Willdan, Mr. Quaid worked in the private P industryry of real estate accountingg and finance. He began his career with the public accounting firm formerly known as Haskins & Sells Cost Allocation Plans ( currently known as " Deloitte & Touche"). His experience includes financial statement analyses, asset administration, computer conversion, and reporting to the Securities and Exchange Acquisition Audit Commission for several public real estate partnerships. In 1979, Mr. Quaid became a licensed Services California CPA.
Statutory Financial Related Experience
Reporting City of Thousand Oaks CA — Cost Allocation Plan: Mr. Quaid served as project manager for Fund Audits
Quality Review of
Community Facilities,
Lighting & Landscaping,
and Assessment
Districts
Affiliations
California Society of
Municipal Finance
Officers
California Society of
CPAs
Certifications/ Licenses
Certified Public
Accountant
35 Years' Experience
the development of an OMB A- 87 compliant cost allocation plan model using fiscal year actual costs as the basis for the allocations. He was responsible for the preparation of the Cost Allocation Plan report and provided cost allocation model training to City staff.
The objective of this project was to determine the appropriate allocation of indirect costs from City General Fund central service departments to the General Fund operating departments/ programs and the non -General Fund departments/ programs. The plan model included 16 allocation bases allocating costs to over 100 departments and divisions. Both full and OMB A- 87 cost allocation models were delivered to the City. Willdan was awarded a four- year contract.
Cities of Fontana, Gardena and Hawthorne, CA — Cost Allocation Plan Projects: For each of these cities, Mr. Quaid served in the role of task manager for the development of an OMB A- 87 compliant cost allocation plan model using Microsoft Excel. He was responsible for the preparation of the cost allocation plan report and trained City staff on how to use the cost allocation model.
City of Rialto, CA — Comprehensive User Fee Study: Project manager for the Comprehensive User Fee Study to develop a user fee model in Microsoft Excel and update fees for Planning, Engineering, Building, Public Works, Recreation, Police, Fire, City Clerk, Treasurer and Finance.
City of Cathedral City, CA — Comprehensive User Fee Study: Mr. Quaid served as project manager for a user fee study that required updating fees for Planning, Engineering, Building, Police, Fire, City Clerk, and Finance.
Mr. Quaid has provided Quality Assurance and Quality Control to multiple clients throughout California. Provided below are a few examples of clients in which services have been provided in the previous three years.
City of Belmont, CA
City of Cerritos, CA
City of Claremont, CA
City of Coalinga, CA
City of El Cerrito, CA
City of Fillmore, CA
City of Galt, CA
City of Hayward, CA
City of Indian Wells, CA
City of Monterey, CA
City of Petaluma, CA
City of Rocklin, CA
City of St. Helena, CA
County of San Benito, CA
City of San Bruno, CA
Sacramento Public Library, CA
City of Salinas, CA
City of Union City, CA
City of Watsonville, CA
City of Yucaipa, CA
W' W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 14 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 James Edison, JD, MPP
Project Manager — Development impact Fee Analysis
Education Mr. James Edison specializes in the nexus between public and private, with expertise in publicJuds Doctorate, private partnerships, and the benefits of economic development to municipalities and state, Boat Hall School of provincial, regional and national governments. He possesses deep expertise in land use Law, University of economics, with a specialty in finance and implementation, including fiscal impact and the public California, Berkeley and private financing of infrastructure and development projects, both in the U. S. and Master of Public internationally. Mr. Edison' s public -sector experience includes local and regional economic impact Policy, Richard and studies; fiscal impact evaluations; new government formation strategies; and the creation of Rhoda Goldman impact fees, assessments, and special taxes to fund infrastructure and public facilities. He has School of Public conducted numerous evaluations of the economic and fiscal impact of specific plans and consulted Policy, University of on a wide variety of land use planning topics related to community revitalization and the economic California, Berkeley and fiscal impacts of development.
Bachelor of Arts, As a former bond attorney, Mr. Edison understands the legal underpinnings and technical magna cum laude, requirements of public financing instruments and has advised both public and private clients on Harvard University the use of individual instruments, and the interaction between those instruments and the needs of Professional developers and project finance.
Registrations Related Experience
Inactive Member of
State Bar, California City of Morgan Hill, CA — Development Impact Fee Update: Mr. Edison managed the update of the City' s existing nexus study, which included general government, fire, police, parks and Licensed Real Estate recreation, library and storm drain fee categories. The project scope included stakeholder Broker, California outreach. The City has once again engaged Willdan to update their impact fees.
City of Santa Clara, CA — Parks Fee Update: Mr. Edison served as principal -in -charge of the Affiliations City' s park impact fee update. This project included a demographic analysis and estimation of the Council of cost of acquiring and improving public park land. Development Finance Agencies City of Alameda, CA — Comprehensive Impact Fee Update: Mr. Edison led the Willdan team updating the impact fee programs of the City of Alameda and creating a separate impact fee CFA Society of program for Alameda Point, the former Alameda Naval Air Station.
San Francisco
County of Tulare, CA — Countywide Impact Fees: Mr. Edison served as project manager for a Congress for the study that involved the creation of an impact fee program for the County. The study includes a New Urbanism range of facilities including public protection, library and parks, as well as a transportation facilities impact fee, with different fees calculated for two zones in the County.
Urban Land Institute
City of Fremont, CA — Comprehensive Impact Fee Update: Mr. Edison led the Willdan team in Seaside Institute the successful update of the impact fee programs for the City of Fremont. The effort included an update of the City's transportation impact fee program and capital improvement program.
International Economic County of Riverside, CA — Comprehensive Impact Fee Update: Mr. Edison led the effort to Development Council establish a comprehensive fee program for the County, including facilities fees for fire, police, parks, criminal justice, libraries and traffic. He prepared the technical and analytical documents 20 Years' Experience necessary to calculate the fee and establish the necessary nexus to collect it, as well as presented the fees during public hearings to the County Board of Supervisors.
City of Manteca, CA — Fire Impact Fee Update: Mr. Edison served in the capacity of project manager for the update of the City's fire services impact fee program.
City of Pacifica, CA — Park Fee Update: Mr. Edison served as the City's project manager to update their park fee to include new costs and to impose fees for home expansion/ remodels, in addition to new development.
Stanislaus County Council of Governments, CA — Regional Transportation Fee Update: Mr.
Edison worked on an update of the County' s transportation impact fee program. Key tasks included a revised capital improvement program and fee model, along with a public participation process that ensures buy in from the communities of Stanislaus County and the County government itself.
W"W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 15 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 County of Imperial, CA — Solar Farm Fiscal and Economic Analysis: Mr. Edison was engaged J. Edison by the County of Imperial to evaluate the fiscal and economic impacts of a series of proposed Resume Continued solar -voltaic facilities ( or " solar farms") on land near the Town of Calipatria, which is within the County. For each, Mr. Edison calculated the tax revenues and service expenditures accruing to the County from development of the project. He also estimated the economic impacts of the project using IMPLAN, including the impact of the construction and ongoing operation of the solar farm, along with the negative impact of the removal of the project site from agricultural production.
City of Foster City, CA — Gilead, Chess Drive, and Mirabella Fiscal Impact Studies: The City of Foster City hired Mr. Edison to provide an evaluation of the fiscal impact of three specific plans in the City. He evaluated the impact on services of each plan, the anticipated new revenues and expenditures, and the necessity for new public facilities to serve the projects.
City of Vallejo, CA — Costco Expansion Urban Decay, Economic and Fiscal Impact Analysis:
In response to the City of Vallejo' s request, Mr. Edison examined the economic impact of a proposed expansion of an existing Costco. The analysis included projections of the impact on sales tax, employment, property tax and the net impact to the City' s budget. Based on the analysis, the City Planning Commission approved the Costco expansion.
City of Vallejo, CA — Service Island Annexation Fiscal Impact Analysis: The City of Vallejo engaged Mr. Edison to provide an analysis of the fiscal impact of the annexation of three unincorporated areas within the boundaries of the City of Vallejo, areas commonly called " service islands." Solano County LAFCO requested the City examine the impact of annexation as part of a larger annexation proposal by the City. He provided an examination of the fiscal implications of the annexation of each area, including population, business activity, and the likely revenues and costs associated with adding each area to the City.
County of Placer, CA — Bohemia Lumber Site, Fiscal Impact and Urban Decay Analysis: The County of Placer engaged Mr. Edison to examine the fiscal impact and potential urban decay effects from the development of the former Bohemia Lumber site into a retail center. Mr. Edison prepared the analysis and presented the results to the County Board of Supervisors.
City of Redding, CA — Oasis Towne Centre Financing and Fiscal/ Economic Impact Analysis:
Hired by the Levenson Development Company ( LDC) to assist with an economic/ fiscal impact study and a financing plan for the Oasis Towne Center, a retail development of approximately one million square feet in Redding, California. Mr. Edison advised LDC on how to structure the financing of the development to provide public benefits for the project and minimize the need for public resources. He prepared an economic and fiscal analysis and negotiated a series of service plans and fiscal mitigation measures with the City of Redding. Mr. Edison also prepared a financing plan for infrastructure needed not only for the immediate project but also for development within the entire Oasis Road Specific Plan area.
YY W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 16 DocuSign Envelope In: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Carlos Villarreal, MPP
Lead Analyst - Development Impact Fee Analysis
Education Mr. Carlos Villarreal is proposed to serve in the role of lead analyst for the City of Lomita' s Master of Public engagement due to his experience documenting nexus findings for development impact fees, Policy, Richard and
Rhoda Goldman preparing capital improvement plans, facilitating stakeholder involvement, and analyzing the School of Public economic impacts of fee programs. He has supported adoption of fee programs funding a variety Policy, University of of facility types, including, but not limited to transportation, parks, library, fire, law enforcement and California, Berkeley utilities.
Bachelor of Arts, Related Experience
Geography, University City of Morgan Hill, CA — Development Impact Fee Update: Mr. Villarreal served as project of California, Los manager for a study to update the City' s existing nexus study, including general government, fire, Angeles; Minor in police, parks and recreation, library and storm drain fee categories. The project scope included Public Policy and stakeholder outreach. The City has once again engaged Willdan and Mr. Villarreal is serving as Urban Planning the project manager on the project.
Areas of Expertise
Fiscal Impact City of Santa Clara, CA — Parks Fee Update: As assistant project manager to Mr. Edison, Mr.
Analyses Villarreal collected the necessary data to update the City' s park impact fee. This project included a demographic analysis and estimation of the cost of acquiring and improving public park land.
Development Impact
Fees City of Upland, CA — Impact Fee Study Update: Conducted a study to update the City' s impact fee program, including general government, regional transportation, water, sewer, storm drain and Public Facilities
park fees. Traffic fees were established within the San Bernardino Associated Governments' Financing Plans SANBAG) guidelines to provide a local funding source for improvements of regional significance.
GIS Analysis
City of Alameda, CA — Development Impact Fee Update: Mr. Villarreal served as the lead 14 Years' Experience project analyst for this engagement to update the City's impact fee program. He coordinated with the City to gather the pertinent data for the project, and was instrumental in preparing the nexus study, in addition to participating in the presentation to stakeholders and the City Council County of Stanislaus, CA — Impact Fee Study Update: Mr. Villarreal served in the role of project manager for a study updating the County' s existing impact fee program. The program includes a range of facilities, like public protection, library, and parks. The study also included a transportation facilities impact fee, with different fees calculated for two zones in the County. Considerable stakeholder outreach was an integral component of this project.
County of San Benito, CA — Comprehensive Impact Fee Study: In the role of project manager, Mr. Villarreal assisted the County of San Benito with the preparation of an updated and expanded impact fee program. The fee programs included: 1) Capital Improvements Impact Fee; 2) Road Equipment Impact Fee; 3) Fire Mitigation Impact Fee; and 4) Park and Recreation Impact Fee.
City of Soledad, CA — Development Impact Fee Study Update: Mr. Villarreal managed the update of the City' s impact fee program, specifically changes in demographics, growth projections, project costs, and facility standards. In particular, the City had to revise its capital facilities needs to accommodate a much lower amount of growth than what was projected before 2007. The resulting fees funded new development' s share of planned facilities, while not overburdening development with unnecessary costs.
County of Los Angeles/ City of Santa Clarita, CA — Law Enforcement Facilities Fee Study:
Mr. Villarreal assisted with the development of an impact fee program to fund law enforcement facilities serving the City of Santa Clarita, and other Antelope Valley jurisdictions within the County of Los Angeles. The analysis involved the comparison of law enforcement facilities serving incorporated and unincorporated areas.
Kern Council of Governments, CA — Regional Alternative Funding Program: Mr. Villarreal served in the role of project manager for the establishment of this program, which consisted of a deficiency analysis and nexus study to fund transportation projects in Kern County.
W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 17 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 City of Long Beach, CA — Park Impact Fee Update: Willdan assisted with an update to the City' s C. Villarreal existing park impact fees, with Mr. Villarreal serving in the role of project manager. The project Resume Continued included updating demographic data and facility planning to properly update park facility standards. He used this information to then calculate impact fees for single family and multi -family residential dwelling units and prepare a nexus study documenting the revised fees and the required legal findings under the Mitigation Fee Act.
Rodeo - Hercules Fire Protection District, CA — Fire Impact Fee Update: Mr. Villarreal served as project manager for the District' s fire impact fees update. The fee will be charged in two jurisdictions, the City of Hercules and the unincorporated community of Rodeo. The fees were adopted by the City Council in September 2009 and were presented to the Board of Supervisors in December 2009. At present, Mr. Villarreal is assisting the District with an update to their fire impact fee.
City of Sierra Madre, CA — Public Facilities Fee Study: Willdan was retained to prepare impact fee documentation for the City of Sierra Madre. The impact fee documentation included several fee categories, including a park facilities fee and a Quimby In -Lieu Fee for parkland dedication.
The analysis documented two separate park -related fees; one based on the Quimby Act and the other based on the Mitigation Fee Act. The City would collect the fee based on a standard of 3. 0 acres per 1, 000 residents if the development was subject to the Quimby Act land dedication requirement. For all other development, the City would collect based on the existing standard through the Mitigation Fee Act. The City would only collect one of the two fees depending on which fee was appropriate.
W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 18 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 References
Below are recent project descriptions, including client contact information, that are similar in nature to those requested by the City of Lomita engagement. We are proud of our reputation for customer service and encourage you to contact these clients regarding our commitment to completing the projects within budget and agreed upon timelines.
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study
City of Lynwood, CA
Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, and User Fee Study Willdan prepared a Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan, and User Fee Study for the City of Lynwood. Willdan developed a cost allocation plan and model that fully allocated central overhead costs to appropriate operating departments, funds, and/ or programs. This portion of the project involved the development of two models: a full Cost Allocation Plan and an OMB compliant Cost Allocation Plan. The OMB compliant Plan was developed using the same model, utilizing a toggle to remove previously flagged costs that would not be allocable under OMB guidelines.
Utilizing the full CAP, Willdan completed the comprehensive user fee study. Willdan completed both studies concurrently, in a manner that fully identifies and takes into account direct and indirect costs, along with changes in staffing, structure, and methods of service delivery.
Since the completion of the original study, Willdan has been selected to complete annual updates of the Cost Allocation Plan and User Fees.
Client Contact: Mr. Jose Ometoetl, City Manager
5275 Orange Avenue, Lynwood CA 90630
Tel #: ( 310) 603- 0220 1 Email: jometeotl( ab_lynwood. ca. us Project Dates: April 2019 — Ongoing
City of Claremont, CA
Comprehensive User Fee Study and Full Cost Allocation Plan Willdan was engaged to prepare for the City of Claremont a Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study. Willdan developed a cost allocation plan and model that fully allocated central overhead costs to appropriate operating departments, funds, and/ or programs. Our primary objective for the cost allocation study was to ensure that general government costs are fairly and equitably allocated to appropriate programs and funds, based on tailored and well thought out allocation factors.
Willdan reviewed and analyzed existing user fee programs, and based upon conversations with staff, made suggestions, as necessary, for fees that may need to be added to the City' s fee schedule for which fees were not currently being charged. Utilizing the full CAP, the comprehensive user fee study phase was completed with full interviews and being conducted on site, and a comprehensive fee model developed.
Client Contact: Mr. Adam Pirrie, Finance Director
207 Harvard Avenue, Claremont CA 91711
Tel. #: ( 909) 399- 5328 1 Email: APirrie( cbci. Claremont. ca. us Project Dates: May 2017 — May 2018
WI LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 19 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC 599-709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 City of Chino Hills, CA Full
Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study The City of Chino Hills engaged Willdan to complete acomprehensive Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study. Willdan staff met with City staff to verify the City's objectives forthe study, independently gathered most of the necessary data for the development of the CAP model and methodology and worked directly with City staff to gather additional detail or clarify information where necessary. We worked City staff to understand the various functions served by indirect staff invarious City departments, and which operating departments orfunds they served. We worked directly with City staff to develop and verify allocation bases and make adjustments through several iterations ofthe CAP model as necessary. We
developed acost of service analysis and model that updated existing fees and incorporated new fees and used it to create an updated comprehensive fee schedule. Client Contact: Ms. Christa Buhagiar, Finance Director 14000
City Center Drive, Chino Hills, CA 91709 Tel. #: (
909) 364- 2642 1 Email: cbuhagiar( cchinohills. org Project Dates: May 2018 — Ongoing Annual Updates Development
Impact Fee Analysis County
of Riverside, CA Comprehensive
Impact Fee Study Willdan
assisted the County of Riverside with an update of its comprehensive impact fee program. The fee categories were broad and diverse including countywide facilities such as jail detention facilities and county parks and trails; unincorporated only facilities such as fire stations and libraries; and County planning area specific facilities including storm drain and traffic improvements. Other facilities needed to be differentiated between the Eastern and Western portions of the County due to separation by distance, as well as varying level of facilities by region.
The
process was lengthy, involving significant efforts to inform staff of methodological differences between the Willdan methodology and the methodology of the previous consultant. Willdan has recently, through competitive bid, been selected toupdate the Development Impact Fees. Client Contact: Ms. Serena Chow, Administrative Services Manager 3403 10th Street, Suite 400, Riverside, CA 92501 Tel #: (
951) 555- 6619 1 Email: schowlu'. rivcoeda. ora Project Dates: January 2013 — Ongoing City
of Garden Grove, CA Development
Impact Fee Study Willdan
completed the City of Garden Grove' s development impact fee study, which involved an update to the existing transportation and park and recreation facilities, and the creation of a storm drain fee. The park and recreation facilities fee included a Quimby Fee Act component charged to development occurring within subdivisions.
The
analysis accounted for a moderate amount of growth within the City through the study' s 2030 planning horizon, with much ofthe projected growth occurring asinfill development. The project also included responses toconcerns raised by the development community. Client
Contact. Mr. Ana Vegara- Neal, Senior Administrative Analyst 11222 Acacia Parkway, Garden Grove, CA 92842 Tel #: (
714) 741- 5176 1 Email: anarAci. garden- grove. ca.us Project Dates: October 2015 — July 2016 tlV
W ILLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 20 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 City of Pismo Beach, CA
Development Impact Fee Study
Willdan assisted the City of Pismo Beach with an update to their impact fee program. The program included the following facilities: police, fire protection, park and recreation improvements, water system improvements, wastewater, traffic and general government/ administrative facilities. This project was warranted due to the amount of time that had elapsed since the prior update, coupled with the adoption of new and revised public facility master plans that complemented the updated impact fees.
Prior to fee program adoption, Willdan held a stakeholder meeting to inform the public about the project, and to solicit feedback from the development community.
Client Contact: Ms. Nadia Feeser, Administrative Services Director 760 Mattie Road, Pismo Beach, CA 93449
Tel #: ( 805) 773- 7010 1 Email: nfeeser( cDpis mobeach.org Project Dates: April 2018 — March 2019 W
I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 21 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599-709B-4543-8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Combined Studies
County of San Benito, CA
Comarehensive Imaact Fee Studv & User Fee Stud
The Willdan prepared a Comprehensive User Fee Study for the County of San Benito. Willdan reviewed existing user fee programs, and based upon conversations with staff, made suggestions, as necessary, for fees that may need to be added to the County' s fee schedule for which fees were not currently being charged. We developed a cost of service analysis and model that updated existing fees and incorporated new fees and that were used to create an updated comprehensive fee schedule.
Willdan has assisted the County of San Benito with their development impact fees since 2007. Most recently, we updated and expanded the impact fees charged by the County on new development. Willdan prepared the study and presented the results at a stakeholder meeting and before the County Board of Supervisors. The fee categories included: 1) Capital Improvements Impact Fee, including the Law Enforcement Fee and the Jail and Juvenile Hall Fee; 2) Road Equipment Impact Fee; 3) Fire Mitigation Impact Fee; and 4) Park and Recreation Impact Fee.
Client Contact: Ms. Dulce Alonso, Management Analyst
481 4th Street, 1st Floor, Hollister, CA 95023
Tel #: ( 831) 636- 4000 1 Email: dalonso( cbcosb. us
Project Dates: May 2015 — October 2017
City of Laguna Hills, CA
Cost Allocation Plan Update, Comprehensive User Fee Study & Park Impact Fee Study The City of Laguna Hills was seeking an outside consultant to complete a review and update of their current cost allocation plan and the preparation of a comprehensive user fee study for the development of its master list of fees.
Our primary objective for the cost allocation study was to ensure that general government costs were fairly and equitably allocated to appropriate programs and funds, which are based on tailored and well thought out allocation factors. For the Fee Study, the primary objective was to ensure that fees for requested services were calculated to account for the full cost of providing the services, and set appropriately, given City policy and financial objectives.
Upon completion of the update to the cost allocation plan, Willdan utilized the final report to complete the comprehensive user fee study.
Willdan also assisted the City of Laguna Hills with the revision and updating of its park impact fee in 2015. The City had two primary goals specific to this engagement. First, the overall program had to be updated to reflect current demographics and park facility costs. Second, the City up to that point had relied exclusively on fees under the Quimby Act, which did not apply to projects subject to the Subdivision Map Act. The City had received proposals for several large apartment complexes that would be exempt from Quimby, and therefore asked Willdan to provide a fee program based on the Mitigation Fee Act.
Willdan updated the City' s demographic data and facility planning in order to properly update the Quimby Fee and implement an MFA impact fee. The project team then calculated the applicable impact fees for single family and multi -family dwelling units and prepared a nexus study that documented the fees and the necessary legal findings under both applicable Acts.
User Fee & CAP Client Contact: Ms. Janice Mateo - Reyes, Finance Manager 24035 El Toro Road, Laguna Hills, CA 92653
Tel #: ( 949) 707- 2623 1 Email: JReyes( @ci. laguna- hills. ca. us Impact Fee Study Client Contact: Mr. David Chantarangsu, AICP Community Development Director
24035 El Toro Road, Laguna Hills, CA 92653
Tel #: ( 949) 707- 2670 1 Email: dchantarangsu( @lagunahillsca. gov Project Dates: May 2015 — July 2016
W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 22 DocuSign Envelope ID. CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Project Approach
Project Understanding
Willdan Financial Services (" Willdan") is confident that we can meet the City of Lomita' s request for services for a Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Analysis. The overall objective of this project will be to develop an updated schedule of fees for City services, that accounts for the true costs of providing those services. Additionally, the City seeks to update its impact fees with the latest available facility costs and demographic data.
The end products will include user-friendly Excel -based models, which City staff will retain, and which can be easily updated to add or remove services and/ or costs, update budgets in future years, determine the proper allocation of expenditures, and on -going full cost of services provided by the City. Most importantly, we will ensure that the results and recommendations are clear and understandable, defensible, and easily implementable.
For these studies, we will meet directly with departmental representatives at the City at the beginning of the project, to discuss the approach and process for the studies. Discussions will include ways to combine tasks and efforts among the cost allocation plan and user fee study components to maximize efficiencies and ensure adherence to specified timelines.
Finally, this study will also include a review and survey of current City business license and development taxes to offer guidance as to local best practices and policies that might be incorporated into the City of Lomita' s approach.
A key building block of the calculation of updated fees is the development of defensible indirect overhead rates that reflect the cost of support services provided by the City's central service departments to the operating groups that provide end -user services to the public and customers of the City.
The completion of a CAP is a key component and first step in the analysis necessary to calculate the cost of providing services. A well thought out CAP ensures that indirect costs associated with central overhead services, such as finance or city clerk, are appropriately allocated to operating departments, and ultimately included as a cost component of fees for services. We will work collaboratively with City staff to identify the overhead support services that are provided to operating departments in Lomita and develop a fair and defensible means of allocating these costs. This CAP will also be compliant with 2 CFR Part 200 Federal regulations related to cost reimbursement and grant funding, formerly known as OMB A- 87 and 2 CFR Part 225 guidelines, which have now been superseded by the Omni Circular. The new circular did not completely overhaul the guidelines, and the intent is still the same, but it did add new limitations to consider and incorporate into a compliant CAP.
Rather than a costly and
inflexible proprietary software,
which can require expensive
licensing fees, Willdan builds
the Models utilizing Excel, from
the ground up, employing the
City' s budget as the gauge.
These Models, which are then
the City' s to retain, gives City
staff the control to make on -the -
fly adjustments and updates.
For the User Fee Study, we will work directly with personnel at the City who provide services and interact directly with residents and customers, to understand the personnel and procedures involved. By carefully examining these processes, we will be able to identify associated costs such as direct staff costs ( salaries and benefits) associated with personnel involved in the activities, and appropriate overhead allocations from both the department and city levels.
For the Development Impact Fee Analysis, Willdan will review the previous work prior to the kick- off meeting to determine what has changed in terms of facilities and needs for the fee categories. We will also communicate with the City in advance of the kickoff to determine whether there is any initial policy direction or guidance on new fees. We will update the demographics, and present the City with the facilities list and discuss the current status for each fee type.
We will work with the City to implement an impact fee program that ensures that new development pays its fair share of infrastructure while being mindful of the overall fee burden on new development.
For a successful and effective engagement, it is important to have a thorough understanding of specific City policies and objectives, the structure and organization of the City, and the relationships between the central and operating departments. We bring years of successful experience working directly with hundreds of cities throughout California.
Willdan possesses the resources, practical experience, creative thinking, and collaborative consulting skills necessary to complete this important project. Key distinct advantages that Willdan brings to the City include the following:
W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 23 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 On -site Data Gathering
Our experience has taught us that working together, via face- to- face discussions, is the most efficient and thorough way to ensure that results are accurate, and that studies are completed in a timely manner, which again, is critical in this proposed engagement.
Consequently, through on -site interviews with your staff, Willdan will collect the majority of required data for studies.
This method is better than the typical " time and motion surveys" that are provided to agency staff when studies like these are conducted. This process ensures that we gather the data we need in one coordinated step, rather than having to go through repeated follow- up and clarification.
This approach and the dedication of our staff will help ensure we meet the City' s timeline and objectives and provide important information to City staff and the Council as soon as possible.
Public Engagement
Our models and project approach are geared toward delivering our work on schedule and presenting our analysis results at public meetings and Council workshops. While we understand that the City Council and local business community may be generally supportive of increasing fees where necessary, it will be important to present recommendations to them in a way that clearly demonstrates the rationale and supporting analysis.
The Willdan Team is experienced at communicating complex analytical results in a manner that is easy to understand by non -finance - oriented individuals and facilitates discussion. Our proposed principal - in -charge for this engagement has coordinated or participated in numerous public and staff workshops regarding fees and cost of service -based charges. As previously mentioned, our objective is to provide useful, detailed information, and present recommendations to the City Council and public in a way that clearly demonstrates the rationale and supporting analysis. Our experience ensures that we can meet this objective.
User-friendly Models and Reports
Willdan prides itself on creating user-friendly Excel -based models that the City can retain and conducting our analysis and developing the models collaboratively with City staff. With City staffs immediate input and collaboration, Willdan will design extremely flexible, intuitive Excel -based models. In the future, as the City assumes new responsibilities, modifies existing processes, and/ or eliminates unnecessary services or programs, the models will be capable of adding or deleting funds, objects, departments, programs, staff positions, and activities. Willdan understands that issues facing the City are unique; consequently, we design our models to match your immediate and desired needs to ensure that end -results exceed staff expectations rather than using an inflexible proprietary software.
These models are then the City' s to retain, after our services are The models will be developed to completed, and allows for the creation of revenue projections, allow the City to run " what -if" highlighting potential new revenues, and levels of subsidy_ scenarios to address possible
A key element of these studies is presenting results and recommendations changes in staffing levels, in a straightforward manner, that allows Council and staff to confidently working hours, etc. make fee setting policy decisions and understand the impacts of those decisions. Rather than using an inflexible proprietary software program, we construct our models from the ground up, as previously discussed, mirroring the City' s budget format wherever possible. As a result, the information contained in our models are easy for City staff to interpret, and the familiar software ensures ease of navigation. As the models are being designed and constructed, we will work together with City staff to determine the best and most effective features to include. After the project is completed, we will provide training, so that staff can independently and efficiently evaluate the effects of changes in certain factors. Created directly from the models, our reports clearly and graphically illustrate the full cost recovery level of fee programs, and provide projections of revenue from fee programs.
Project Methodologies
The following describes our proposed approach, and work plan to prepare a Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study, and Development Impact Fee Analysis.
Cost Allocation Plan Methodology
The purpose of this cost allocation plan engagement is to ensure that the City of Lomita is maximizing the recovery of indirect costs from identified operating departments, as well as enterprise and other chargeable funds and capital projects. Furthermore, a sound cost allocation plan is a foundational element of a user fee study, and the development of internal hourly rates, including CIP billing rates. We will work closely with staff in identifying the proper balance of allocation factors appropriate for the City. To achieve the maximum cost recovery objective, the City must have a tlV W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 24 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 method of identifying and distributing administrative costs that is fair, comprehensive, well documented, and fully defensible. A cost allocation plan coupled with comprehensive overhead rates will enable the City to achieve this goal.
The allocation models utilize an iterative method which is the most accurate allocation methodology. Unlike a direct or step-down" methodology, an iterative method uses the chosen distribution bases and allocates central service costs iteratively until all allocable costs have been distributed.
Using this method, the model can detail the allocation for each central function individually for complete transparency and accountability, while removing bias that might result from the order in which allocations occur in a step- down approach. A direct methodology is essentially a one -iteration methodology, while a step- down method is typically only two iterations and is less precise and unable to accurately track the allocations from start to finish.
Approach for Managing the Project
Willdan' s " hands- on" supervision of Cost Allocation Plan studies, include the following methods:
Effective Project Management — Principal - in -Charge Chris Fisher will manage the entire project with an eye toward high responsiveness, while ensuring that all stakeholders are " on board" with the direction of the project, as well as with the final results. Mr. Fisher will ensure that regular status updates are provided to City staff, conference calls are scheduled, and that in -person meetings are conducted ( as necessary).
Adherence to Time Schedule — Willdan recognizes that the use of "timelines" is highly effective in meeting all required deadlines. To keep the project on schedule, there are several tasks that must be completed in a timely manner. Therefore, we will present a project timeline at the kick- off meeting that should be closely followed.
Although the establishment of an experienced project team and a detailed project timeline work extremely well in general, Willdan understands that outside influences can create uncontainable situations for everyone involved in the project. In rare circumstances like these, our team quickly adapts to changes, and communicates our recommended schedule adjustments to the City.
Approach in Communicating with the City
Willdan staff is accustomed to interfacing with local government councils, boards, staff, community organizations, and the public in general in a friendly and helpful manner; we are always mindful that we represent the public agency.
We are sensitive to the need of delivering a quality product, with the highest level of service and professionalism.
Therefore, as the work on the project progresses, we understand that it will be necessary for our staff to work closely with you and City personnel. To accomplish this, we employ a variety of tools, including monitoring project status and budget costs; and ensuring effective communication through several options that are based on the City' s preferences.
Experience with Development Service Processes
A unique aspect of our firm is our relationship with our Engineering Division. For many agencies throughout California and other Western states, this division provides contracted services in planning, engineering, and building and safety.
When conducting cost recovery studies, we regularly consult with our engineering and land -development staff of experts on development -related issues. By working with our planners, engineers, and building officials, we understand development -related agency service procedures and workflow functions, which often make the entire user fee study process smoother for your staff.
User Fee Study Methodology
To comprehensively update fees, the City should develop a comprehensive user fee schedule that accurately accounts for the true cost of providing services. Once the study is complete, the fee study model must be flexible so that the City can add, delete, and revise fees in the future. To meet this goal, we will bring our expertise and unique perspectives to your fee study by approaching the project with these three principles:
J Defensibility
Our user fee projects have not been legally challenged since the inception of this practice area in our firm. We have accomplished this by closely working with legal counsel familiar with user fee studies, our engineering division and with agency staff. In this way, we can tailor the correct approach to ensure full cost recovery combined with a sound and reasonable basis for each user fee you implement.
While Proposition 218 does not directly apply to non -property -related fees, we employ principles from this important constitutional article to make certain that your user fee and rate schedule is developed with fairness, equity, and proportionate cost recovery principles in mind. With the addition of Proposition 26, Willdan will review each analyzed user fee for compliance and appropriateness to ensure continued defensibility.
W"W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 25 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 2) Project and Staff Time
The City must have a sound and technically defensible fee schedule to ensure costs are appropriately recovered, as applicants approach the City for its services. Our standards and approaches serve to get to the issues of your fee study quickly. Starting with the project kick- off, we will make certain that your staff understands the purpose and scope of the study and its corresponding on -site departmental interview. As Willdan is able to communicate directly with the service providers, this face- to- face interaction provides valuable time estimates. 3) Responsiveness
We take great pride in providing responsive service to our client agencies. Frequent communication is critical to a successful user fee study experience. We will provide a list of data requirements in advance of the project kick- off. Due to this simple step, the introductory meeting can focus on the survey input process, answering questions, determining policy goals, and defining next steps in the project. We will follow up weekly with you at each step in the fee study process to make sure that staff "buys in" to the fee study approach and results.
Approach
Our approach to preparing the user fee study and documentation for Lomita includes:
Close coordination with your staff to devise a consensus approach. Different programs and/or different service delivery methods will necessitate different approaches. We will discuss specific pros and cons with City staff as we determine which methods work best for each fee category; Strict adherence to key legal and policy issues with regard to user fees, including the percent of cost recovery that the City seeks to achieve. A user fee shall not be set higher than the reasonable cost of providing a fee -generating service. Our approach provides you with a fee schedule that achieves maximum legal cost recovery while ensuring that each fee is supported by technically defensible documentation; and Technical analysis necessary to ensure State compliance, and to anticipate and resolve potential policy issues using a combination of industry standards as well as City specific methods.
As described below, there are two basic approaches to calculating user fees:
Approach 1: Case Study Method
This is also sometimes referred to as a cost
build- up approach. Using a time and
materials approach, the " Case Study
Method" examines the tasks, steps and City
staff involved in providing a particular ` unit' of
service, such as a permit review, and then
uses that information to develop estimates of
the actual labor and material costs
associated with providing a unit of service to
a single user. It is often used when a service
is provided on a regular basis, and staff and
other costs associated with the service can
be segregated from available budget data.
A typical case study fee model should
comprise the following three general cost
layers:
1) Central Services Overhead: This
category may involve such costs as labor,
services, and supplies that benefit more than
one department, division, or project. The
exact benefits to specific areas are
impossible to ascribe to a single activity.
Examples are purchasing, human resources,
and liability insurance. As part of the user fee
study, these costs are calculated in the
overhead cost review.
CSerentral
vices
Qwerhead
Departmental
Overhead
W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 26 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599-709B-4543-8ED8-4E216CBB1519 2) Department Overhead: This category may include expenses related to such items as office supplies, outside consultants, and membership dues. It may include management, supervision, and administrative support that are not provided to a direct fee -generating service. Typically, these items are charged, on an item -by -item basis, directly to the department, division, or project.
3) Personnel Costs: This category refers to direct salary and benefit costs of staff hours spent on providing a fee - generating service ( e. g., on -site building inspector).
Approach 2.• A verage Cost Method
This is also sometimes referred to as a programmatic approach, because it looks at costs at a program level, and then allocates them to participants on an occurrence basis. By taking total service costs across a substantial sample period a year) and dividing by the total number of service units delivered over that same period, costs per unit of service is estimated.
This approach is useful when services or programs are provided in a more aggregate manner, where it might be difficult to identify a specific sequence of steps associated with one user or participant; or where it is not feasible to costeffectively segregate costs associated with specific activities.
Development Impact Fee Analysis
Study Objectives
The objective of this project is to review the City' s development impact fees. This will include the categories charged, the legal basis for the current fees, and fees charged in comparable jurisdictions. Willdan will provide a technical memorandum that provides guidance on any changes in fee levels, supporting studies, or new fees that the City should consider.
Public Facilities Financing in California
The changing fiscal landscape in California during the past 40 years has steadily undercut the financial capacity of local governments to fund infrastructure. Four dominant trends stand out:
1. The passage of a string of tax limitation measures starting with Proposition 13 in 1978 and continuing through the passage of Proposition 218 in 1996;
2. Declining popular support for bond measures to finance infrastructure for the next generation of residents and businesses;
3. Steep reductions in Federal and State assistance; and
4. Permanent shifting by the State of local tax resources to the State General Fund to offset deficit spending brought on by recessions.
Faced with these trends, many cities and counties have had to adopt a policy of "growth pays its own way." This policy shifts the burden of funding infrastructure expansion from existing rate and taxpayers onto new development. This funding shift has been accomplished primarily through the imposition of assessments, special taxes, and development impact fees, also known as public facilities fees. Assessments and special taxes require approval of property owners or registered voters and are appropriate when the funded facilities are directly related to the developing property.
Development fees, on the other hand, are an appropriate funding source for facilities that benefit development jurisdiction - wide. Development fees need only a majority vote of the legislative body for adoption.
Summary of Approach
Wilidan will meet with City staff and review documents to understand the current development impact fees and how they are used, as well as understand any capital needs currently unfunded by impact fees that could be added to the City' s fee program. Willdan will also bring the City information for comparable jurisdictions and statewide to understand new fees that could be charged. Finally, Willdan will evaluate the current fee program and its compliance with state law ( AB 1600), especially nexus, proportionality, and reporting requirements ( such as annual reporting and five year reviews).
Flexibility is important so we can tailor our approach to the available data, and the agency' s policy objectives. Our understanding of the technical standards established by statutes and case law suggests that a range of approaches are technically defensible. Consequently, we can address policy objectives related to the fee program, such as economic development and affordable housing.
IWW I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 27 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Related Approach Issues
Funding and Financing Strategies
In our experience, one of the most common problems with impact fee programs and with many CIPs is that the program or plan is not financially constrained to anticipated revenues. The result is a " wish list" of projects that generate community expectations that often cannot be fulfilled. Our approach is to integrate the impact fee program into the local agency' s existing CIPs while encouraging those plans to be financially constrained to available resources. We clearly state the cost of correcting existing deficiencies, if any, to document the relationship between the fee program and the need for additional non -fee funding.
We can also address one of the most significant drawbacks of an impact fee program — the inability to support conventional public debt financing, so projects can be built before all fee revenues have been received. In collaboration with financial advisors and underwriters, we have developed specific underwriting criteria so that fees can be used to pay back borrowing as long as another source of credit exists. Typically, this approach involves the use of Certificates of Participation or revenue bonds that are calibrated so that they can be fully repaid using impact fee revenues.
Economic Development Concerns
The development community often is concerned that fees and other exactions will become too high for development to be financially feasible under current market conditions. Local agencies have a number of strategies to address this concern, including:
Conducting an analysis of the total development exaction burden to see if feasibility may be compromised by the proposed fees;
Gathering similar data on the total fee burden imposed by neighboring or competing jurisdictions; Developing a plan for phasing in the fees over several years to enable the real estate market to adjust; Providing options for developers to finance impact fees through assessment and other types of financing districts; and
Imposing less than the maximum justified fee.
If less than the maximum justified fee is imposed, we will work with staff to identify alternative revenues sources for the CIP. The CIP should remain financially feasible to maintain realistic expectations among developers, policy - makers, and the public.
Our proposed scope will include an analysis of neighboring and comparable jurisdictions.
Stakeholder Participation
Stakeholder participation throughout the study supports a successful adoption process. Our approach is to create consensus first around the need for facilities based on agreed upon facility standards. Second, we seek consensus around a feasible funding strategy for these needs, leading to an appropriate role for impact fees.
Gaining consensus among various groups requires a balanced discussion of both economic development and community service objectives. Often, our approach includes formation of an advisory committee to promote outreach to and input from the development community and other stakeholders. We have extensive experience facilitating meetings to explain the program and gain input. This proposal provides for three stakeholder meetings. Willdan can add additional meetings based upon a time and materials basis if needed.
WW I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 28 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Work Plans
Our proposed work plans, described in detail by task, are provided below. We propose to maximize efficiency and cost-effectiveness by combining meetings and data gathering efforts between the studies wherever possible.
We explain how each task will be accomplished and identify associated meetings and deliverables. We want to ensure our scope provides quality and clarity and is responsive to the City' s needs and specific local circumstances. We will work in concert with the City to adjust scopes as needed during the course of the studies.
Full and OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan
This proposed scope of services addresses the completion of both the full and OMB compliant versions of the Cost Allocation Plan ( CAP). We have noted where activities specific to the OMB compliant plan occur.
Task 1: Initial Document Request
Objective: Initial due diligence.
Description: Prior to the kick- off call, relevant documentation will be obtained and reviewed in order to enhance our understanding of the City' s current cost allocation plan and internal structure of the agency. A written request for specific data will be sent to the City. The data provided in this task will provide the building blocks for later model development.
Our request may include ( but is not limited to):
Detailed budget and accounting data;
Prior year's financial data, salary, position and staffing data; Organizational structure;
Prior cost allocation plan and/or user fee documentation and models; and Data related to various allocation bases that may be incorporated as part of the methodology, i. e.
City Council agenda frequencies by department, AP/AR transactions by department, IT equipment distribution by department, etc.
Deliverables: Willdan: Submit information request to City.
City: Provide requested data to Willdan ( prior to Task 2, Kick-off Call/Refine Scope). We will follow up with the City to confirm in writing the data that we have received, or which is still outstanding.
Task 2: Kick-off Conference Call / Refine Scope
Objective: Confirm project goals and objectives. Identify and discuss policy issues raised by the study and determine appropriate fee categories.
Description: Willdan will identify and discuss policy issues typically raised by these studies and address data gaps in order to gain a full understanding of the City's goals for the cost allocation plan. We will establish effective lines of communication and processes for information gathering and review.
We will also discuss costs that may not be allocable for OMB purposes, and the potential impact on the OMB version of the CAP.
During this call, we will ask that the City assign a project manager to serve as its primary contact. The selected City project manager will ensure that available data is provided to Willdan in a timely manner, thereby maintaining adherence to the project' s schedule.
We will obtain and review the current cost allocation methodology and discuss with City staff. The objective of this review is to determine specific areas of focus as they relate to the City's objectives, and to discuss and evaluate current and potential allocation factors.
Meetings: One ( 1) project kick- off conference call to initiate the project, discuss data needs and methodologies and to address policy issues. We would propose to conduct the user fee study kick-off during this same call, to maximize efficiency and cost effectiveness of staff and Willdan time.
Deliverables: Willdan: If needed, a revised project scope and schedule.
City: Provide further data requirements and select / introduce City' s project manager.
W"'WI LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 29 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Task 3: Gather Staffing Information and Develop Cost Allocation Plan Model Description: This task involves the gathering of specific information, directly from City staff, through interviews and discussion, related to the functions served by indirect staff and the departments served by their activities. This task also focuses on the development of, and/ or adjustment of existing, allocation bases, and the development and testing of a model that will ultimately be used to calculate the proper cost allocations derived from data gathered in prior tasks.
The model will be developed to incorporate any recent changes in the provision of City services, and fully allocate central service costs.
The model will also be developed to allocate only those costs eligible under 2 CFR Part 200. This is accomplished by loading relevant data into the model, identifying which costs are not allocable under the OMB guidelines. The OMB Super Circular compliant model is valuable as the City may receive Federal or State grant funding that mandates compliance with Federal OMB regulations.
We will utilize budget and organizational information, and other required information gathered from City staff to complete the work in this task. Specific discussions will be held to discuss bases, how central overhead services are provided to and utilized by other departments, cost categories and allocation criteria, and how these will factor into the overall cost allocation methodology.
The model and methodology will also produce indirect cost rates. These rates will be suitable for a variety of uses, including incorporation into the User Fee Study' s personnel rates, billing to CIP projects, and in the OMB Super Circular compliant CAP, to Federal grants.
Meetings: Online meetings with staff to understand structure and operations as model and allocation bases are developed. Key staff will be interviewed to best understand central overhead staffing and functions and the departments served.
Deliverables: Willdan: One ( 1) user- friendly model in Microsoft Excel format that provides both a full cost allocation plan and an OMB Super Circular compliant cost allocation plan.
Task 4: Test and Review Cost Allocation Methodology
Objective: Test and review model and results with City.
Description: The draft cost allocation plan model will be reviewed with City staff, and adjusted as necessary, to ensure that preliminary allocations provide an accurate depiction of how the central overhead costs should be borne by the operating programs and funds. Over the past several years, we have successfully integrated online meetings by using WebEx11 as an element to our approach. This allows us to remotely guide staff through the model review and allows you the opportunity to interactively change inputs and test approaches.
Meetings: One ( 1) web meeting and demonstration with City Staff to review the model.
Deliverables: Willdan and City: Draft cost allocation plan model review.
Task 5: Prepare and Present Draft Report
Objective: Prepare the draft cost allocation report.
Description: This task involves the draft report preparation. The cost allocation plan' s background, model methodologies, and results will be discussed; calculations and supporting data will be presented textually and in easily understood tables and provided to the City.
Meetings: One ( 1) web meeting to present the draft report to City Staff.
Deliverables: Willdan: Draft report for City review and input.
City: Review of draft report, with comments, and edits.
Task 6: Discuss and Revise Report
Objective: Review of draft report, cost distribution methods, and model.
Description. An in- depth review of the draft report and model will be conducted to arrive at an optimum allocation method for each expenditure type. Often, through the course of an engagement, comments usually revolve around issues of understandability; appropriate levels of enterprise funds' cost recovery, etc.; WI LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 30 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599-709B-4543-8ED8-4E216CBB1519 ease of calculation; and overhead costs' distribution methods.
Our reports are structured to include both the full and OMB compliant plan, but in the course of review if a separate report is desired for each or just one of the plans, they will be split.
Following a round of comments from City staff concerning the draft report, the final report will be prepared for presentation to the Council.
Meetings: One ( 1) conference call with City staff to review the report with changes and revisions.
Deliverables: Draft report, and revised draft/ final report.
Task 7: Prepare and Present Final Report and Model
Objective: Prepare and present the final report to City Council. Educate City staff on the operation and use of the model for future modifications.
Description: This task is the culmination of the cost allocation plan project. Based on staff comments on the draft report, Willdan will prepare the final report for presentation to City Council.
Meetings: One ( 1) meeting with the City Council to present the final plan if necessary. This meeting would be held in conjunction with the presentation of the user rate study results.
We will also provide staff training on the operation and use of the model.
Deliverables: Willdan: Provide one ( 1) electronic PDF file copy of the final report and models ( full and OMB Super Circular compliant); and two ( 2) bound copies, and one ( 1) unbound copy to the City. Using Microsoft Word and Excel, an updateable electronic copy of the study and models, as well as related schedules, will also be provided on CD/ ROM.
Comprehensive User Fee Study
Task 1: Initial Document Request
Objective: Initial due diligence; obtain study -related data.
Description: Prior to the kick- off meeting, we will obtain and review relevant documentation to further enhance our understanding of the services, fees, and rates to be studied. A written request for data will be sent to the City. Please note that Time Survey data is not part of this request and will be gathered during the on -site interviews described in Task 5.
We will request information and documentation on current fees and fee programs, activity levels, and budget and staffing information ( to the extent not already available) related specifically to programs and activities which have associated fees, and for which the City has this level of detail.
Deliverables: Willdan: Submit information request to City.
City: Provide requested data to Willdan ( prior to Task 3, Kick- off Meeting/ Refine Scope). As with the cost allocation plan, we will follow up with the City to confirm receipt of requested data and information and highlight data elements that are outstanding.
Task 2: Compile Inventory of Current and Potential Fees Objective: Willdan will identify a schedule of fees and methodology for calculating the fees.
Description: Based on the results of the initial document request and independent research, incorporate into our model the existing fees, provided by the City, to comprise the parameters of the fee study.
Meetings: It is possible that a conference call with the City may be necessary to discuss new fees to implement or existing fees that may no longer be required.
Deliverables: Willdan: One ( 1) draft list of current fees based on initial data provided ( to be discussed and finalized during the kick- off call).
City: Review completed fee schedule with comments/ revisions to be discussed during the kick- off meeting.
WWI LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 31 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599-709B-4543-8ED8-4E216CBB1519 Task 3: Kick-off Conference Call / Reflne Scope
Objective: Confirm goals and objectives for the User Fee Study. Identify and resolve policy issues typically raised by a User Fee Study, address gaps in data, and refine appropriate existing or new fee categories based on Task 2).
Description. Verify our understanding of the City's goals, the City' s cost -recovery policy for user fees, and to fill any gaps in data/ information necessary for the project. It is important for the City and Willdan to identify and address any foreseeable problems and maintain open communication throughout the process.
During this call, we will ask that the City identify a project manager who will serve as the primary contact for the project. The project manager shall have responsibility for ensuring that all available data is provided in a timely manner, thereby maintaining adherence to the project' s schedule.
Meetings: One ( 1) project kick-off call to initiate the entire project, discuss data needs, and address policy issues.
This will be held in conjunction with the kick- off for the cost allocation plan. As mentioned in the cost allocation plan work plan, we suggest combining the kick- off calls to increase efficiency.
Deliverables: Wilidan: 1) Revised project scope and schedule ( if needed); and 2) brief summary of policy decisions if needed).
City: 1) Provide further data needs; and 2) determine/ introduce City' s project manager.
Task 4: Develop User Fee Model
Objective: Develop and test model.
Description: This task involves the development of the model ultimately used to calculate the departmental fees, based on data and information gathered in previous tasks and in the Time Survey Interviews described in Task 5. To ensure that City policies are met through the imposition of the calculated fees, the model will be formatted to include appropriate costs.
Key model inputs will include staff and allocated overhead costs per position, and relevant budget data on salaries and benefits. Most of this information will be developed during the cost allocation plan phase of this project and will be incorporated directly into the user fee model. We will request clarification and/ or additional data if necessary.
The model will build upon the cost allocation plan results, to provide an allocation of administrative and overhead costs to fee related activities and departments providing services to customers, so that fees and billable rate schedules incorporate applicable costs. Furthermore, the fees and rates charged to customers will also reflect the cost of the services being provided, to the extent possible given policy and/ or political considerations.
Deliverables: Wilidan: One ( 1) user- friendly model in Microsoft Excel format, which, when finalized, City staff can use to calculate fee changes annually, or as often as deemed appropriate by the City Council.
Task 5: Time Survey Interviews and On -site Information Gathering Objective: Meet with City staff to complete Time Surveys and understand service delivery processes.
Description. In order to assist staff with the completion of the survey worksheets, we will schedule one ( 1) full day of on -site meetings with staff; however, the number of meetings needed may vary depending on the number of staff and departments involved.
The Willdan Team will conduct interviews with supervisors/ managers, as well as other staff, as deemed appropriate and/ or necessary, from each department involved in the user fee study to determine the average time required by City staff to provide each of the services for which a fee is collected.
The fee model is designed so that full cost recovery fees are calculated immediately upon input of staff time. These full costs are also compared to current cost recovery levels. This will allow Willdan and City staff to conclude with a final meeting to review the draft full cost recovery fees and adjust any times as necessary once all information has been compiled and input into the fee model. We will schedule the interviews with staff to minimize any disruption to their normal workflow.
Meetings: Up to two ( 2) business days of web or on -site meetings/ staff interviews. The ability to conduct in person meetings will depend upon any Covid- 19 related health and safety restrictions that may be in place.
Deliverables: Willdan and City: Time surveys and draft full cost recovery fees.
I W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 32 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Task G: Common Fees Comparison
Objective: Examine selected user fees charged by up to five ( 5) comparable cities in Los Angeles County, or jurisdictions that are similar to the City of Lomita.
Description: We will access and use our knowledge of other jurisdictions to benchmark the City' s five ( 5) most common fees or highest yielding fees with comparable jurisdictions agreed.
Fee schedules are rarely readily or directly comparable from agency to agency due to definitional and operational differences. For example, a grading permit in one jurisdiction may include the plan check service, while the same permit in another jurisdiction may not, resulting in similar sounding services with widely varying costs_ For this reason, Willdan takes a selection of the City' s most commonly used and/ or highest yielding fees.
The survey will contain the following, a comparison of common or similar fees and charges used by the City and other jurisdictions; current and proposed fees and charges unique to the City of Lomita; fees and charges used by other public entities not currently used in the City; and If possible, identify characteristics and processes unique to the City that account for significant variances in fees and charges used by other jurisdictions.
Deliverables: Willdan: Recommendations provided in Task 9 will incorporate the data gathered during our examination.
Task 7: Review of Development Tax and Business License Tax Objective: To review current City taxes for Business Licenses and Development/Construction and provide feedback.
Description: We will request City policies/ ordinances/ resolutions, and other documentation as available, related to these mechanisms. We will discuss the taxes with staff to determine whether there are specific questions or areas of concern and whether they are achieving their objectives.
To the extent possible, depending on available information, we will provide feedback based on 3 to 5 similar neighboring cities with similar tax mechanisms; examining those cities' policies, approaches and structures as compared with Lomita.
Deliverables: Willdan: Recommendations provided in Task 9 will incorporate the data gathered during our examination.
Task 8: Data Analysis and Final User Fee Schedule
Objective: Incorporate information obtained from on -site surveys to fully develop model.
Description: We will update the model, based on information received during the on -site surveys, to generate a comprehensive user fee schedule. In addition, it is very common that a supplemental data request may be necessary, based on new fees identified that the City is not currently collecting. Where appropriate, we will suggest and discuss with staff alternate approaches to existing fee programs ( i. e. building fees) and suggest potential areas where fees could be collected where they are not currently.
We will present the full cost recovery level for fees, both current and projected under the new calculated fees, and revenue projections, given certain assumptions about the levels of subsidy for different fees. Current levels of cost recovery will be compared to actual full costs calculated during the course of this study. Cost will be calculated at reasonable activity levels and include all appropriate direct and indirect costs and overhead. We will review fee programs for compliance with Propositions 218 and 26.
in developing the fee schedule, we will make recommendations for new fees where appropriate, based on our experience with other cities. Some areas for new fees may be due to changes in law ( legalized cannabis), or for activities that the City finds itself performing regularly, but for which no fee is collected.
Where possible, we will incorporate discussion of the City' s economic development policies, and where these may intersect with fee programs, for instance setting fees in a manner that encourages certain activities.
The user fee data analysis and model development may take three ( 3) to four ( 4) weeks with frequent correspondence with City staff to discuss current cost recovery amounts, necessary to recover full cost and frequency activity.
W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 33 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Meetings: One ( 1) web or in -person meeting, as necessary, to gather additional input, complete analysis and finalize fee schedule. The ability to conduct in person meetings will depend upon any Covid- 19 related health and safety restrictions that may be in place.
Deliverables: Final user fee model for City Council presentation and discussion.
Task 9: Prepare and Present Draft Report
Objective: Prepare draft report.
Description: This task involves the preparation of the draft report that discusses the study' s background, the methodologies utilized in the study, and the results and presentation to various stakeholder groups.
As noted below, meetings may occur during this or the next task as appropriate. The calculations used to generate the user fee study will be included textually, as well as in easy to understand tables.
Individual fee summaries by department and a comprehensive fee schedule will be included. The draft report will include the following:
Key results and findings;
Basic descriptions of each service;
The full cost of each service and current cost recovery levels; Costs broken down graphically into indirect and direct components, with a graphic display of the level of cost recovery;
Fee recommendations with associate levels of cost recovery; Projections of potential fee revenue;
Assessment of reasonableness of each City' s costs;
Review of reasonableness of current consultant cost structure (for Building Division services); As appropriate, recommend alternative methodologies for building permit fee calculation; and Summary and recommendations.
The objective of the report is to communicate the recommendation of appropriate fees, which include the appropriate subsidy percentage for those fees where full cost recovery may be unrealistic.
Meetings: One ( 1) conference call with City staff, to present draft results address questions and receive feedback.
Deliverables: Willdan: Draft report for City review and comment.
City: Review of draft report, with comments and edits.
Task 10: Revise Draft Report/Determine Cost Recovery Levels for Recommended Adoption Objective: Review of draft report and fee model.
Description: The goal of this task is to conduct an in- depth review of the draft report and model, incorporate feedback and changes as a result of previous discussions, and arrive at an optimum fee structure.
Often through the course of an engagement, City staff will volunteer insightful likes and dislikes regarding the existing fee structure. We listen to this feedback carefully because your staff members know the community best. Comments usually revolve around issues of:
Understandability;
Fairness to applicants;
Ease of calculation;
Appropriate levels of cost recovery; and
Full cost recovery hourly rates.
When adjusting fee recovery levels, we believe it is important to address these concerns.
Following one ( 1) round of comments from City staff on the draft report and feedback from City staff, we will prepare the final report for presentation to the City Council.
Meetings: One ( 1) online demonstration ( WebEx) to review the report and model, with any revisions.
Deliverables: Draft report, revised draft / final report.
Task 11: Prepare and Present Final ReportlTrain Staff on Model W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 34 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599-709B-4543-8ED8-4E216CBB1519 Objective: Prepare and present final report to City Council. Train staff on the operation and use of the model for future modifications.
Description: This task is the culmination of the entire project. Based on staff comments received regarding the draft report, we will prepare the final report for presentation.
Meetings: One ( 1) meeting with City Council to present the results and adopt the updated fee schedule. We will also provide staff training on the operation and use of the model on the same day, during regular business hours.
Deliverables: Provide one ( 1) electronic PDF file copy of the final report and models; and if requested provide three 3) bound copies, and one ( 1) unbound copy to the City. Using Microsoft Word and Excel, an updateable electronic copy of the study and models, as well as related schedules, will also be provided on CD/ ROM.
Development Impact Fee Analysis
Willdan will consider and recommend modifications to the existing program structure, cost components, and fee amounts. In addition to the services for which the City presently charges fees, the study shall identify and recommend other potential impact fees consistent with the City' s goals and objectives.
Task 1: Identify and Resolve Policy Issues
Objective: Identify and resolve policy issues raised by the study.
Description: Review agency documents related to existing capital planning policies and funding programs including existing impact fees. Bring policy issues to City staffs attention, as appropriate, during the project and seek guidance prior to proceeding. Potential policy issues include:
Potential new impact fees for consideration
Adequacy of General Plan and other public facility planning policies ( e.g. level of service standards); impact fee ordinances and resolutions, and prior nexus studies; Availability of existing public facility master plans and CIPs to identify needed facilities; Types of facilities to be funded by each fee;
Land use categories for imposition of fees;
Nexus approach to determining facility standards;
Nexus approach to allocating cost burden among land uses, including need for separate fee zones;
Potential alternative funding sources, if needed;
Funding existing deficiencies, if identified; and
Implementation concerns and strategies.
Deliverables: ( 1) Information requests; ( 2) revised project scope and schedule ( if needed); and ( 3) brief summary of policy decisions ( if needed).
Task 2• Comparison
Objective: Provide a comparison of the current and proposed impact fees to those of comparable/ surrounding jurisdictions.
Description: Typically, this would be neighboring jurisdictions, and a few that are nearby and comparable to the City. Willdan will compare a total of five jurisdictions to be selected by the City. Typically, Willdan prepares an analysis of fees charged to a series of prototype developments ( such as residential, retail, etc.) in order to provide an " apples to apples" comparison, but the exact methodology will be set in consultation with the City. This comparison will be limited to five other jurisdictions.
Tank 3: Prepare Report
Description: Provide a technical memorandum the summarizes Willdan' s findings and outlines a roadmap to future actions to consider ( such as a fee update study, adoption of additional fee categories, etc.).
Deliverables: We will provide up to five ( 5) hard copies of the technical memorandum, one ( 1) unbound copy, and a copy in Microsoft Word.
IWW I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 35 DocuSign Envelope In: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216C661519 Task 4: Meetings
Objective: The project manager or other necessary Willdan staff will attend project meetings. A member of the Impact project team will attend up to two meetings throughout the Impact Fee Analysis portion of the City' s engagement. Phone conferences are not considered meetings for the purposes of this scope.
Additional meetings may be requested for an additional fee based on our hourly billing rates.
City Staff Support
To complete our tasks, we will need the cooperation of City staff. We suggest that the City of Lomita assign a key individual to represent the City as the project manager who can function as our primary contact. We anticipate that the City' s project manager will:
1) Coordinate responses to requests for information;
2) Coordinate review of work products; and
3) Help resolve policy issues.
Willdan will endeavor to minimize the impact on City staff in the completion of this project. We will ask for responses to initial information requests in a timely manner. If there are delays on the part of the City, we will contact the City' s project manager to steer the project back on track. We will keep the City's project manager informed of data or feedback we need to keep the project on schedule.
Willdan will rely on the validity and accuracy of the City' s data and documentation to complete the analysis. Willdan will rely on the data as being accurate without performing an independent verification of accuracy and will not be responsible for any errors that result from inaccurate data provided by the client or a third party.
W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 36 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Project Schedules
Willdan understands time is of the essence for the City of Lomita to begin this engagement. These schedules can only be met with the cooperation of City staff. Delays in responding to our requests for data and review will result in corresponding delays to the project schedule. If that is the case, we will notify the City immediately of the possible impact on the schedule.
Cost Allocation Plan
Legend:
X1: Information Request X5: Draft Report
X2: Revised Project Scope and Schedule ( if needed) X6: Revised Draft ReportiFinal Report X3: User-friendly Model in Microsoft Excel X7: Final Report— Hard and Electronic Copies X4: Draft Cost Allocation Plan Model Review
WI LLDAN Cast Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 37 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 User Fee Study
coin of Services
Project Schedule
3 10 17 24 311. 7 14 21 281 5 12 19 2612 1 9 116123 : 30 Task 1: Initial Document Request Hi
Task 2: Compile Inventory of Current and Potential Fees ma Task 3: Kick- off / Refine Scope ( conference call) 12
Task 4: Develop User Fee Model 7X3
Task 5: Time Survey Interviews and On -site Information Gathering ( meetings) 9 Task 6: Common Fees Comparison 910
Task 7: Review of Development/ Business License Taxes
Task 8: Data Analysis and Final User Fee Schedule ( conference calls) 94 Task 9: Prepare and Present Draft Report ( conference call)$ 5 Task 10: Revise Draft Report/ Determine Cost Recovery Levels ( conference call) 6 Task 11: Prepare and Present Final ReporVTrain Staff on Model mreriri 1 Legend:
X1: Information Request X6: Revised Draft Report/ Final Report X2: Revised Project Scope and Schedule ( if needed) X7: Final Report — Hard and Electronic Copies X3: User-friendly Model in Microsoft Excel X8: Draft List of Current Fees X4: Draft Fee and Rate Model Review X9: Time Surveys and Draft Full Cost Recovery Fees XS: Draft Report X10: Common Fee Comparison
W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 38 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Development Impact Fee Analysis
W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 39 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 7098-4543-8ED8-4E216CBB1519 Schedule of Fees
Not to Exceed Fee
Wilidan Financial Services (" Willdan") proposes a not -to -exceed fixed fee of $49, 170 for the Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study, and Development Impact Fee Analysis engagement. The tables below provide a breakdown of each fee by task and project team member.
Cost Allocation Plan
Based on the corresponding work plan identified within the scope of services, we propose a not -to -exceed fixed fee of $10, 440 to prepare a Full and OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan, Fee Proposal
C. Fisher T. Thrasher P. Patel
Principal - in- Tech Project Analytical
e of Services
1: Initial Document Request
2: Kick-off ]Refine Scope
3: Gather Staffing Information, Develop Cost Allocation Plan Model 4: Test and Review Cost Allocation Methodology
5: Prepare and Present Draft Report
6: Discuss and Revise Report
7: Prepare and Present Final Report/ Train Staff on Model 185
R. Quaid
QA/ Tech
Advisor Total
210 Hours I
1. 0 1. 0 2. 0 $ 310
1. 0 1. 0 2.0 310
1. 0 4. 0 16. 0 21. 0 2, 990
1. 0 3. 0 8. 0 1. 0 13. 0 2, 015
2. 0 2. 0 10. 0 1. 0 15. 0 2, 330
1. 0 2. 0 6. 0 9. 0 1, 370
1. 0 4. 0 1. 0 6. 0 1. 115
User Fee Study
Based on the corresponding work plan identified within the scope of services, we propose a not -to -exceed fixed fee of $24, 780 to prepare a User Fee Study.
Fee Proposal
C. Fisher
Principal -inCharge
250
T. Thrasher P. Patel
Tech Project Analytical
Manager Support
185 $ 125
R. Quaid
QA/ Tech
Advisor
210 Hours
Total
Cost
pe of Services
k 1: Initial Document Request 1. 0 1. 0 125
k 2: Compile Inventory of Current and Potential Fees 1. 0 2. 0 3. 0 435 k 3: Kick- off / Refine Scope 1. 0 1. 0 2. 0 4. 0 685
k 4: Develop User Fee Model 2. 0 12. 0 14. 0 1, 870
k 5: Time Survey Interviews and Information Gathering 1. 0 10. 0 10. 0 21. 0 3, 350 k 6: Common Fees Comparison 1. 0 2. 0 16. 0 19. 0 2, 620 k 7: Review of Development/ Business License Taxes 3. 0 3. 0 5. 0 1. 0 12. 0 2, 140 k 8: Data Analysis and Final Fee and Rate Schedule 1. 0 6. 0 34. 0 2. 0 43. 0 6, 030 k 9: Prepare and Present Draft Report 2. 0 4. 0 12. 0 1. 0 19. 0 2, 950 k 10: Revise Draft/ Determine Cost Recovery Levels 1. 0 8. 0 8. 0 2. 0 19. 0 3, 150 k 11: Prepare and Present Final Report/ Train Staff on Model 1. 0 5. 0 2. 0 8. 0 1, 425 WWI L LDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 40 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599- 709B- 4543- 8ED8- 4E216CBB1519 Development Impact Fee Analysis
Based on the corresponding work plan identified within the scope of services, we propose a not -to -exceed fixed fee of$ 13, 950 prepare a Development Impact Fee Analysis.
Scope of Services
Task 1: Identify and Resolve Policy Issues
Task 2: Comparison
Task 3: Prepare Report
Task 4: Meetings
Fee Proposal
J. Edison C. Villarreal
Project Manager Senior AnaVq
240 165
Total
Hours _ Cost
8. 0 12. 0 20. 0 $ 3, 900
6. 0 10. 0 16. 0 3, 090
8. 0 12. 0, 20. 0 3, 900
10. 0 4. 0 14. 0 3, 060
Development Impact Fee Limitations
Our fees stated in the Development Impact Fee Budget include attendance at a total of two in -person meetings with City staff, stakeholders, and City Council. Attendance at more than two in -person meetings shall be billed at our current hourly rates, provided below.
Comprehensive written responses to resolve conflicts or preparation of more than one set of major revisions to the draft report, will be classified as Additional Services, and may require additional billing at hourly rates stated in the Hourly Rates table listed below. These additional fees shall only take effect once the fixed fee stated above has been exceeded.
Examples of Additional Services include:
Additional analysis based on revised assumptions requested by the City, including possible changes in Facilities needs list, infrastructure costs, populations projections, and related data once preparation of draft administrative report has been approved;
Negotiations with stakeholders once the report has been prepared ( beyond the two meetings included in the proposal); and
Time expended related to obtaining data assigned to City under "City Staff Support", as stated in our work plan.
Notes
Our fee includes all direct expenses associated with the project.
We will invoice the City monthly based on percentage of project completed.
Additional services may be authorized by the City and will be billed at our then -current hourly overhead consulting rates.
City shall reimburse Willdan for any costs Willdan incurs, including without limitation, copying costs, digitizing costs, travel expenses, employee time and attorneys' fees, to respond to the legal process of any governmental agency relating to City or relating to the project. Reimbursement shall be at Willdan ' s rates in effect at the time of such response.
The cost of preparing the Fee Study can be included in the resulting new fee schedule. Therefore, over time, the City can recover the initial outlay of funds that was required to complete the studies.
Willdan will rely on the validity and accuracy of the City' s data and documentation to complete the analysis. Willdan will rely on the data as being accurate without performing an independent verification of accuracy and will not be responsible for any errors that result from inaccurate data provided by the client or a third party.
W I LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 41 DocuSign Envelope ID: CBFCC599-709B-4543- 8ED8-4E216CBB1519 Additional Professional Services
Hourly Fee Schedule
Our current hourly rates are listed below.
Position Team Member Hourly Rate
Group Manager Chris Fisher 250
Managing Principal James Edison 240
Principal Consultant Bob Quaid 210
Senior Project Manager Tony Thrasher 185
Project Manager Carlos Villarreal 165
Senior Project Analyst 135
Senior Analyst Priti Patel 125
Analyst II 110
Analyst 1 100
WI LLDAN Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fee Analysis 42 r
1 —
e
i- - q
i..J
y {
WILLDAN
27368 Via Industria, Suite 200
Temecula, CA 92S90-48S6
S1. S87. 3S00 1800. 7SS. 6864 ( Fax: 9S1. S87.3S10
www. wilidan. com