Professional Services Agreement with Matrix Consulting Group, Ltd

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
[Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Development Services - RFP No. 24-25.011 THIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is made at orange,Califomia,onthis-duyof-,2024(the..EffectiveDate,,)by and between the CITY OF ORANGE, a municipal corporation C'City'), and MATRIX CONSULTING GROUP, LTD, a Califomia corporation ("Contractor"), who agree as follows:

1. Services. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Contractor shall provide to the reasonable satisfaction of City the services set forth in Exhibit "A," which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. As a material inducement to City to enter into this Agreement, Contractor represents and warrants that it has thoroughly investigated and considered the scope of services and fully understands the difficulties and reskictions in performing the work. The services which are the subject of this Agreement are not in the usual course of City's business and City relies on Contactor's representation that it is independently engaged in the business of providing such services and is experienced in performing the work.

Contractor shall perform all services in a manner reasonably satisfactory to City and in a manner in conformance with the standards of quality normally observed by an entity providing such services to a municipal agency. All services provided shall conlorm to all federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations and to the best professional standards and practices. The terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement shall conkol over any terms and conditions in Exhibit "A" to the contrary.
a, Contactor's total compensation for all services performed under this Agreement, shall not exceed FIFTY-EIGHT THOUSAND FIVE HTINDRED DOLLARS and 00/100 ($58,500.00) without the prior written authorization of City. b. The above compensation shall include all costs, including, but not limited to, all clerical, administrative, overhead, insurance, reproduction, telephone, travel, auto rental, subsistence and all related expenses.

3. Pavment.
a. As scheduled services are completed, Contractor shall submit to City an invoice for the services completed, authorized expenses and authorized extra work actually performed or incurred.
b. All such invoices shall state the basis for the amount invoiced, including services completed, the number ofhours spent and any extra work performed. c. City will pay Contractor the amount invoiced within thirty (30) days after the approval ofthe invoice.
2, Comnensation and Fees.
d. Payment shall constitute payment in full for all services, authorized costs and authorized extra work covered by that invoice.
4, Chanse Orders. No payment for extra services caused by a change in the scope or complexity of work, or for any other reason, shall be made unless and until such extra services and a price therefor have been previously authorized in writing and approved by City as an amendment to this Agreement. City's Project Manager is authorized to approve a reduction in the services to be performed and compensation therefor. All amendments shall set forth the changes ofwork, extension of time, and/or adjustment ofthe compensation to be paid by City to Contractor and shall be signed by the City's Project Manager, City Manager or City Council, as applicable.

5. Licenses. Contractor represents that it and any subcontractors it may engage, possess any and all licenses which are required under state or federal law to perform the work contemplated by this Agreement and that Contactor and its subcontractors shall maintain all appropriate licenses, including a City of Orange business license, at its cost, during the performance of this Agreement.

6. Independent Contractor. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall be an independent contractor and not an employee of City. City shall have the right to control Contractor only insofar as the result of Contractor's services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. City shall not have the right to control the means by which Contractor accomplishes services rendered pusuant to this Agreement. Contractor shall, at its sole cost and expense, furnish all facilities, materials and equipment which may be required for fumishing services pursuant to this Agreement. Contractor shall be solely responsible for, and shall indemnify, defend and save City harmless from all matters relating to the payment of its subcontractors, agents and employees, including compliance with social security withholding and all other wages, salaries, benefits, taxes, exactions, and regulations of any nature whatsoever.

Contractor acknowledges that it and any subcontractors, agents or employees employed by Contractor shall not, under any circumstances, be considered employees of City, and that they shall not be entitled to any ofthe benefits or rights afforded employees of City, including, but not limited to, sick leave, vacation leave, holiday pay, Public Employees Retirement System benefits, or health, life, dental, long-term disability or workers' compensation insurance benefits.

7. Contractor Not Agent. Except as City may specifu in writing, Contractor shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Contractor shall have no authority, express or implied, to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.

8. Desisnated Persons. Only those qualified persons authorized by City's Project Manager, or as designated in Exhibit "A," shall perform work provided for under this Agreement.

It is understood by the parties that clerical and other nonprofessional work may be performed by persons other than those designated.

9. Assi ment or Subcontractin . No assignment or subcontracting by Contractor ofany part ofthis Agreement or offunds to be received under this Agreement shall be ofany force or effect unless the assignment has the prior written approval of City. City may terminate this 2 Agreement rather than accept any proposed assignment or subcontracting. Such assignment or subcontracting may be approved by the City Manager or his/her designee.

10. Time of Completion. Except as otherwise specified in Exhibit "A," Contractor shall commence the work provided for in this Agreement within five (5) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement and diligently prosecute completion ofthe work.

11. Time Is ofthe Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement. Contractor shall do all things necessary and incidental to the prosecution of Contractor's work.

12. Rcservcd.
13, Delavs and Extensions of Time. Contractor's sole remedy for delays outside its control, other than those delays caused by City, shall be an extension of time. No matter what the cause ofthe delay, Contractor must document any delay and request an extension of time in writing at the time of the delay to the satisfaction of City. Any extensions granted shall be limited to the length of the delay outside Contractor's control. If Contractor believes that delays caused by City will cause it to incur additional costs, it must specify, in writing, why the delay has caused additional costs to be incurred and the exact amount of such cost at the time the delay occurs. No additional costs can be paid that exceed the not to exceed amount stated in Section 2.a, above, absent a written amendment to this Agreement.

14. Products of Contractor. The documents, studies, evaluations, assessments, reports, plans, citations, materials, manuals, technical data, logs, files, designs and other products produced or provided by Contractor for this Agreement shall become the prope(y of City upon receipt. Contractor shall deliver all such products to City prior to payment for same. City may use, reuse or otherwise utilize such products without restriction.

15. Eoual Emolovment Onnortunitv . During the performance of this Agreement, Contractor agrees as follows:
a. Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because ofrace, color, religion, sex, national origin, mental or physical disability, or any other basis prohibited by applicable law. Contractor shall ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, national origin, mental or physical disability, or any other basis prohibited by applicable law.

Such actions shall include, but not be limited to the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoffor termination, rates ofpay or other forms of compensation and selection for training, including apprenticeship. Contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, a notice setting forth provisions of this non-discrimination clause.
b. Contractor shall, in all solicitations and advertisements for employees placed by, or on behalf of Contractor, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, mental or physical disability, or any other basis prohibited by applicable law. c. Contractor shall cause the foregoing paragraphs (a) and (b) to be inserted in all subcontracts for any work covered by this Agreement, provided that the foregoing provisions shall not apply to subcontracts for standard commercial supplies or raw materials.

16. Conflicts of Interest. Contractor agrees that it shall not make, participate in the making, or in any way attempt to use its position as a consultant to influence any decision of City in which Contractor knows or has reason to know that Contractor, its officers, partners, or employees have a financial interest as defined in Section 87103 of the Govemment Code. a, To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor agrees to indemnifu, defend and hold City, its City Council and each member thereof, and the officers, officials, agents and employees of City (collectively the "lndemnitees") entirely harmless from all liability arising out of:
(i) Any and all claims under workers' compensation acts and other employee benefit acts with respect to Contractor's employees or Contactor's subcontractor's employees arising out of Contractor's work under this Agreement, including any and all claims under any law pertaining to Contractor or its employees' status as an independent contractor and any and all claims under Labor Code section 1720 related to the payment ofprevailing wages for public works projects; and
b. To the fullest extent permitted by [aw, and as limited by Califomia Civil Code 2782.8, Contractor agrees to indemnifu and hold Indemnitees harmless from all liability arising out of any claim, loss, injury to or death of persons or damage to property to the extent caused by its negligent professional act or omission in the performance of professional services pursuant to this Agreement.
c. Except for the lndemnitees, the indemnifications provided in this Agreement shall not be construed to extend any third party indemnification rights of any kind to any person or entity which is not a signatory to this Agreement. 1 17. Indemnitv.
(2) Any claim, loss, injury to or death ofpersons or damage to property caused by any act, neglect, default, or omission of Contractor, or person, firm or corporation employed by Contractor, either directly or by independent contract, including all damages due to loss or theft sustained by any person, firm or corporation including the Indemnitees, or any of them, arising out of, or in any way connected with the work or services which are the subject of this Agreement, including injury or damage either on or off City's property; but not for any loss, injury, death or damage caused by the active negligence or willful misconduct of City. Contractor, at its own expense! cost and risk, shall indemnifu any and all claims, actions, suits or other proceedings that may be brought or instituted against the Indemnitees on any such claim or liability covered by this subparagraph, and shall pay or satisfu anyjudgment that may be rendered against the Indemnitees, or any of them, in any action, suit or other proceedings as a result of coverage under this subparagraph.
d. The indemnities set forth in this section shall survive any closing, rescission, or termination ofthis Agreement, and shall continue to be binding and in full lorce and effect in perpetuity with respect to Contractor and its successors.

18. Insurance
a. Contractor shall carry workers' compensation insurance as required by law for the protection of its employees during the progress of the work. Contractor understands that it is an independent contractor and not entitled to any workers' compensation benefits under any City program.
b. Contractor shall maintain during the lile of this Agreement the following minimum amount of comprehensive general liability insurance or commercial general liability insurance: the greater of (l) One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence; or (2) all the insurance coverage and./or limits carried by or available to Contractor. Said insurance shall cover bodily injury, death and properry damage and be written on an occurrence basis. c. Any insurance proceeds in excess ofor broader than the minimum required coverage and,/or minimum required limits which are applicable to a given loss shall be available to City. No representation is made that the minimum insurance requirements of this Agreement are sufficient to cover the obligations of Contractor under this Agreement. d. Each policy of general liability and automotive liability shall provide that City, its officers, officials, agents, and employees are declared to be additional insureds under the terms of the policy, but only with respect to the work performed by Contractor under this Agreement. A policy endorsement to that effect shall be provided to City along with the certificate of insurance. In lieu ofan endorsement, City will accept a copy ofthe policy(ies) which evidences that City is an additional insured as a contracting party. The minimum coverage required by Subsection l8.b and c, above, shall apply to City as an additional insured. Any umbrella liability insurance that is provided as part of the general or automobile liability minimums set forth herein shall be maintained for the duration ofthe Agreement.
e. Contractor shall maintain during the life of this Agreement professional liability insurance covering errors and omissions arising out of the performance ofthis Agreement with a minimum limit of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per claim. Contractor agrees to keep such policy in force and effect for at least five (5) years from the date of completion of this Agreement.
f. The insurance policies maintained by Contractor shall be primary insurance and no insurance held or owned by City shall be called upon to cover any loss under the policy.

Contractor will determine its own needs in procurement ofinsurance to cover liabilities other than as stated above.
g. Before Contractor performs any work or prepares or delivers any materials, Contractor shall furnish certificates of insurance and endorsements, as required by City, 5 evidencing the aforementioned minimum insurance coverages on forms acceptable to City, which shall provide that the insurance in force will not be canceled or allowed to lapse without at least ten (10) days' prior written notice to City.
i. Contractor shall immediately notifu City ifany required insurance lapses or is otherwise modified and cease performance ofthis Agreement unless otherwise directed by City.

In such a case, City may procure insurance or self-insure the risk and charge Contractor for such costs and any and all damages resulting therefrom, by way of set-off from any sums owed Contractor.
j. Contractor agrees that in the event ofloss due to any ofthe perils for which it has agreed to provide insurance, Contractor shall look solely to its insurance for recovery.

Contractor hereby grants to City, on behalfofany insurer providing insurance to either Contractor or City with respect to the services ofContractor herein, a waiver ofany right to subrogation which any such insurer may acquire against City by virtr-re of the payment of 4ny loss under such insurance.
k. Contractor shall include all subcontractors, if any, as insureds under its policies or shall fumish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor to City for review and approval. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein.

19. Termination. City may for any reason terminate this Agreement by giving Contractor not less than five (5) days' written notice of intent to terminate. Upon receipt of such notice, Contractor shall immediately cease work, unless the notice from City provides otherwise.

Upon the termination of this Agreement, City shall pay Contractor for services satisfactorily provided and all allowable reimbursements incurred to the date of termination in compliance with this Agreement, unless termination by City shall be for cause, in which event City may withhold any disputed compensation. City shall not be liable for any claim of lost profits. 6 h. Except for professional liability insurance coverage that may be required by this Agreement, all insurance maintained by Contractor shall be issued by companies admitted to conduct the pertinent line of insurance business in California and having a rating of Grade A or better and Class VII or better by the latest edition of Best Key Rating Guide. In the case of professional liability insurance coverage, such coverage shall be issued by companies either licensed or admitted to conduct business in Califomia so long as such insurer possesses the aforementioned Best rating.

20. Maintenance and Insnection ofRecords. In accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, Contractor and its subcontractors shall maintain reasonably full and complete books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other information (collectively, the "records") pertaining to the costs of and completion of services performed under this Agreement.

City and its authorized representatives shall have access to and the right to audit and reproduce any ofContractor's records regarding the services provided under this Agreement. Contractor shall maintain all such records for a period ofat least three (3) years after termination or completion of this Agreement. Contractor agrees to make available all such records for inspection or audit at its offlces during normal business hours and upon three (3) days' notice from City, and copies thereof shall be fumished if requested.

21. Compliance with all Laws/Immigration Laws.
^.

Contractor shall be knowledgeable ofand comply with all local, state and federal laws which may apply to the performance of this Agreement. b. Ifthe work provided for in this Agreement constitutes a "public works," as that term is defined in Section 1720 ofthe Califomia Labor Code, for which prevailing wages must be paid, to the extent Contractor's employees will perform any work that falls within any of the classifications for which the Department of Labor Relations of the State of Califomia promulgates prevailing wage determinations, Contractor hereby agrees that it, and any subcontractor under it, shall pay not less than the specified prevailing rates of wages to all such workers. The general prevailing wage determinations for crafts can be located on the website of the Department of Industrial Relations (www.dir.ca.eov/Dl-SR). Additionally, to perform work under this Contract, Contractor must meet all State registration requirements and criteria, including project compliance monitoring.

Contractor represents and warrants that itc
( I ) Has complied and shall at all times during the term of this Agreement comply, in all respects, with all immigration laws, regulations, statutes, rules, codes, and orders, including, without limitation, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA); and
(2) Has not and will not knowingly employ any individual to perform services under this Agreement who is ineligible to work in the United States or under the terms of this Agreement; and
(3) Has properly maintained, and shall at all times during the term of this Agreement properly maintain, all related employment documentation records including. without limitation, the completion and maintenance of the Form I-9 for each of Contractor's employees; and
(4) Has responded, and shall at all times during the term of this Agreement respond, in a timely fashion to any government inspection requests relating to immigration law compliance and/or Form I-9 compliance and/or worksite enforcement by the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Labor, or the Social Security Administration.
d. Contractor shall require all subcontractors or subconsultants to make the same representations and warranties as set forth in Subsection 21.c. e. Contractor shall, upon request of City, provide a list of all employees working under this Agreement and shall provide, to the reasonable satisfaction ofCity, verification 1 that all such employees are eligible to work in the United States. All costs associated with such verification shall be bome by Contractor. Once such request has been made, Contractor may not change employees working under this Agreement without written notice to City, accompanied by the verification required herein for such employees.
f. Contractor shall require all subconffactors or sub-consultants to make the same verification as set forth in Subsection 21.e.
g. If Contractor or subcontractor knowingly employs an employee providing work under this Agreement who is not authorized to work in the United States, and/or fails to follow federal laws to determine the status ofsuch employee, that shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement and may be cause for immediate termination of this Agreement by City. h. Contractor agrees to indemnifu and hold City, its officers, officials, agents and employees harmless for, ofand from any loss, including but not limited to fines, penalties and corrective measures City may sustain by reason of Contractor's failure to comply with said laws, rules and regulations in connection with the performance of this Agreement.

22. Governins Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California and Contractor agrees to submit to the jurisdiction of Califomia courts. Venue for any dispute arising under this Agreement shall be in Orange Counff, California.

23. Integration. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties. No other agreement, oral or written, pertaining to the work to be performed under this Agreement shall be ofany force or effect unless it is in writing and signed by both parties. Any work performed which is inconsistent with or in violation of the provisions of this Agreement shall not be compensated.

24. Notice. Except as otherwise provided herein, all notices required under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered personally, by e-mail, or by first class U.S. mail, postage prepaid, to each party at the address listed below. Either party may change the notice address by notirying the other party in writing. Notices shall be deemed received upon receipt of same or within three (3) days of deposit in the U.S. Mail, whichever is earlier. Notices sent by e- mail shall be deemed received on the date of the e-mail transmission. ..CONTRACTOR" ..CITY"
Matrix Consulting Group, LTD
1650 S. Amphlett Blvd, Suite 213
San Mateo, CA 94402
Attn.: Richard Brady, President
Telephone: (650) 858-0507
E-Mail: [email protected]
City of Orange
300 E. Chapman Avenue
Orange, CA 92866-1591
Attn.: Trang Nguyen
Telephone: (714) 7 M-2235
E-Mail: [email protected]
E

EXHlI]Il "A"

SCOPE OF SERVICES
[Beneath this sheet.]

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study ORANGE, CALIFORNIA July 25, 2024

Table of Contents A Cover Letter i B Company Data 1 C Certificate of Insurance 3 D Validity of Proposal 4 E Certification of Understanding 5 F Statement of Compliance/Terms and Conditions 6 G Resumes and Qualifications of Personnel 7 H Work Plan 12 I Fees 24 J Related Experience and References 26 K Sample Report 32 L Resources to be Provided by the City 33 M Certificate of Non-Collusion 34 Appendices 36 July 25, 2024
Wanda Alvarez, Purchasing Officer
City of Orange
300 E. Chapman Avenue
Orange, CA 92866
Dear Ms. Alvarez:

The Matrix Consulting Group is pleased to submit our proposal to develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study for the City of Orange. The importance of establishing documented and defensible plans that facilitate the recovery of direct and indirect costs.

We understand the importance of establishing documented and defensible studies to recover direct and indirect costs. We have conducted over 300 cost of service studies, mostly in California, and have been providing this service to our client for over 21 years.

Our experience in providing similar services and understanding of the impact and implementation issues faced by jurisdictions in Southern California comes from recent work with the following clients: Chula Vista, Glendale, Menifee, Manhattan Beach, Pasadena, Pomona, San Bernardino, South Pasadena, and Walnut . Additionally, we previously worked with the City on its user fee study in 2018 and can utilize that familiarity to ensure timely completion of work products.

At Matrix Consulting Group, we distinguish ourselves from our competitors through our commitment to delivering unparalleled value. Our staff possess a deep understanding of service and process assumptions behind the cost of service. This dual expertise allows us to provide comprehensive insights and solutions that optimize eﬃciency and maximize our clients' value. Additionally, having a local oﬃce in Irvine will help facilitate the data collection, staff interviews, and any presentations.

I am the ﬁrm’s President and authorized to contractually bind the ﬁrm. Courtney Ramos, a vice president, can provide clariﬁcation regarding this proposal. We can be reached at the letterhead locations or via email at [email protected] and [email protected] Richard Brady, President
Matrix Consulting Group, Ltd.
matrix
consulting group

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA Matrix Consulting Group 1

B Company Data
Q1. State the company's oﬃcial name and address and the names and titles of its principal oﬃcers; indicate what type of entity, such as corporation, partnership, joint venture, sole proprietorship, etc. and indicate if the ﬁrm is incorporated.

Our ﬁrm’s oﬃcial name is the Matrix Consulting Group, Ltd. Our headquarter location is in San Mateo at the address below, and we have regional oﬃces in Irvine (CA), Edwardsville (IL), Charlotte and Cary (NC), the Dallas Metroplex (TX), Portland (OR), and the Tampa (FL) area.

Matrix Consulting Group, Ltd.
1650 S. Amphlett Blvd., Suite 213
San Mateo, CA 94402
We are a corporation, incorporated in the State of California in 2003. The names and titles of our seven principal owners are:
• Richard Brady, President
• Alan Pennington, Senior Vice President and Chief Talent Oﬃcer • Courtney Ramos, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Oﬃcer • Ian Brady, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Oﬃcer • Aaron Baggarly, Vice President
• Jen Winter, Vice President
• Khushboo Ingle, Vice President
Q2. Provide the ﬁrm's Federal Employer I. D. Number.
05-0545979
Q3. Provide the name and address of the person to receive notices who is authorized to make decisions and represents the company. Specify in what capacity the person shall be representing the entity and any limitations to their authority.

Richard Brady, President of the ﬁrm, is authorized to make decisions on behalf of the company. He will be the City’s main contact regarding contract negotiation.

Courtney Ramos, a senior vice president and ﬁnancial services practice leader, can clarify information in this proposal. They can be reached at the address above.

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 2

Q4. Furnish the complete ﬁrm's address for any mailed funds. Matrix Consulting Group, Ltd. 1650 S. Amphlett Blvd., Suite 213 San Mateo, CA 94402 Q5. State any failures or refusals to complete any contracts and a complete explanation. Our ﬁrm has never failed or refused to complete a contract. Q6. Indicate the number of years in business under the present business name. We have been in business under our current name for 21 years. Q7. Indicate the number of years of the ﬁrm's experience in providing required, equivalent or related products and services. The Matrix Consulting Group has been providing analytical services to local governments equivalent to those requested by the City of Orange since 2003. Q8. Submit a detailed statement indicating whether the Responder is totally or partially owned by another business organization or individual that will be providing the services to meet the requirements of the Proposal. Our ﬁrm is not totally nor partially owned by another business or individual. Q9. Submit a detailed statement indicating whether the Responder totally or partially owns any other business organization that will be providing the services to meet the requirements of the Proposal. Our ﬁrm has a wholly owned Canadian subsidiary, MCG Consulting Solutions. However, services to meet the requirements of the City’s RFP will be performed by full-time employees of the Matrix Consulting Group.

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 3

C Certiﬁcate of Insurance We conﬁrm our ability to provide a current certiﬁcate of insurance within ten calendar days of notiﬁcation of selection for award.

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 4

D Validity of Proposal Our proposal is valid for 120 calendar days from date of submittal.

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 5

E Certiﬁcation of Understanding We agree to the terms outlined in Section III.E of the City’s RFP .

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 6

F Statement of Compliance with Agreement’s Articles/Terms and Conditions This proposal is in compliance with said Request for Proposal information, except for those proposed exceptions listed in a separate attachment hereto. (RFP Section III, F.1.b) Please refer to the Appendices section at the end of this proposal for details.

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 7

G Resumes and Qualiﬁcations of Personnel The team is comprised of full-time employees of the ﬁrm and organized as follows:

The following table provides experience summaries for our proposed project team, including types and years of experience, recent clients, and project roles.

Coordination of data collection, support City staff in data development, and populate models.

Responsible for leading interviews, financial analysis, policy discussion and development.

Primary contact for the project, providing expertise in reviewing drafts and presenting results.

Project oversight and overall project approval.City of Orange Courtney RamosPrincipal-in-Charge
Khushboo IngleProject Manager
Madison DixsonAnalystAbnash MinhasAnalystAnna BarnettAnalyst

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 8

Courtney Ramos Sr. Vice President Experience: 19 years Ms. Ramos is a Senior Vice President and our Financial Services Practice Leader who oversees cost allocation plan, user fee, development impact fee, and cost of service engagements. Her tenure with the firm has also included participation in operational audit engagements focusing on reviewing organizational and staffing structures to enhance services. Courtney’s relevant experience include the completion of over 300 cost of service studies; analysis focuses on development and documentation of direct and indirect costs, fair and equitable allocation methodologies; and expertise in the development of fiscal policies and procedures relating to cost of service and cost recovery. She was the Principal-In-Charge on the previous City of Orange cost-of-service studies as well. In addition to the City of Orange, recent Southern California clients include Burbank, Glendale, Manhattan Beach, Menifee, Pasadena, Redlands, Riverside, San Bernardino, South Pasadena, and Walnut. Courtney received an A.A. degree in Administration of Justice, as well as an A.A. degree in Sociology from Santa Barbara City College. Her certifications include Revenue Enhancement Best Practices. Her role on this project would be to serve as the Principal-in-Charge, ensuring timely project deliverables, quality control, and presentation to stakeholders. Khushboo Ingle Vice President Experience: 12 years Ms. Ingle is a Vice President who manages cost allocation plan, user fee, development impact fee, and cost of service engagements. Her experience with the ﬁrm also includes participation in operational audit engagements focusing on organization, staﬃng, and internal processes. Khushboo has completed over 200 cost of service studies. Recent Southern California clients include Adelanto, Burbank, Glendale, Manhattan Beach, Menifee, Pasadena, Redlands, Riverside, San Bernardino, South Pasadena, and Walnut. She was also the Project Manager who completed previous cost-of-service studies for the City of Orange. Khushboo received a B.A. in International Economics and an M.A. in International Affairs from the University of California – San Diego and is certiﬁed in OMB Cost Allocation Best Practices. Her role on this project will be Project Manager, involved in leading meetings, developing draft results, and reviewing results.

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 9

Madison Dixson Senior Consultant Experience: 3 years
Ms. Dixson is an analyst who assists our senior staff on cost allocation plan, user fee, development impact fee, and cost of service engagements. During her time with the ﬁrm, Ms. Dixson has served as a project analyst for several Southern California clients including Glendale, Burbank, Pasadena, Menifee, Redlands, Walnut, and San Bernadino. Madison has a B.A. in Anthropology from the University of California – Irvine. She is also certiﬁed in OMB Cost Allocation Best Practices. Her role on this project would be to serve as an Analyst, involved in attending meetings, data input, and developing models. Abnash Minhas Consultant Experience: 2 years Ms. Minhas is an analyst who has recently joined our ﬁrm to assist our staff on cost-of-service engagements including cost allocation plan, user fee, and development impact fee studies. She has recently assisted on projects for Southern California clients including Pomona, Redlands, Glendale, Menifee, and Chula Vista. Abnash received a B.A. in Economics from the University of California – San Diego. Her certiﬁcations include Revenue Enhancement Best Practices. Her role on this project would be to serve as an Analyst, involved in attending meetings, data input, and model development. Anna Barnett Consultant Experience: 1 year Ms. Barnett is an analyst who has recently joined our ﬁrm to assist our staff on cost-of-service engagements including cost allocation plan, user fee, and development impact fee studies. She has recently assisted for projects on Norman (OK), Lewis County (WA), and Santa Clara County (CA). Anna has a B.A. in Mathematics with concentration in Data Science, and a B.S. in Economics from Wofford College in Spartanburg, South Carolina. Her certiﬁcations include Revenue Enhancement Best Practices. Her role on this project would be to serve as an Analyst, involved in attending meetings, data input, and model development. Detailed resumes for Courtney Ramos and Khushboo Ingle begin on the following page.

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 10

COURTNEY RAMOS SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT / CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER Ms. Ramos is our Financial Services Practice Leader, who oversees cost allocation plan, user fee, development impact fee, and cost of service engagements. Her tenure with the firm has also included participation in operational audit engagements focusing on reviewing organizational and staffing structures to enhance services. Courtney’s relevant experience include: • Completed over 250 cost of service studies for clients across the United States. • Analysis focuses on development and documentation of direct and indirect costs, fair and equitable allocation methodologies, and defensible results. • Expertise also includes development of fiscal policies and procedures relating to cost of service and cost recovery. Experience Highlights Manhattan Beach, CA: Courtney served as the project executive and project manager on this engagement which determined the overhead allocation and full cost of providing city fee-based services. Key analysis included: • Identifying services provided by City staff, including documenting services, and service levels. • Ensuring fair and equitable allocations of support services. • Recommending capital project allocation through direct engineering charges. • Repeat client who engaged us for the same study 4 years later. Riverside, CA: This study reviewed the City’s overhead review practices. Key analysis included: • Ensuring all central services are appropriately accounted for in the plan. • Identifying best practices for cost allocation. Role on This Engagement: As Principal-in-Charge, Courtney will provide expertise in reviewing drafts and presenting results.

Relevant CA Clients: Citrus Heights Cupertino Dixon Elk Grove Fairfield Glendale Humboldt County Livermore Long Beach Manhattan Beach Orange Pacific Grove Redwood City San Bernardino County San Pablo San Mateo Santa Clara Santa Clara County Sonoma County South San Francisco Stanislaus County Sunnyvale Vacaville Winters Willits Years of Experience: 19 Education: A.A. Administration of Justice, A.A. Sociology Santa Barbara City College (CA). Professional Association / Certification: Government Finance Officers Association California Society of Municipal Finance Officers Revenue Enhancement Best Practices

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 11

KHUSHBOO INGLE VICE PRESIDENT Ms. Ingle is a Vice President who manages cost allocation plan, user fee, development impact fee, and cost of service engagements. Her experience with the firm also includes participation in operational audit engagements focusing on reviewing organizational, staffing, and internal processes to enhance services. Khushboo’s relevant experience include: • Completed over 150 cost of service studies for clients across the United States. • Analysis focuses on verifying and reviewing cost of service assumptions and ensuring compliance with best practices. • Expertise also includes impact fee studies and development fee-studies. Experience Highlights Orange, CA: Khushboo served as the Project Manager on this engagement which looked at conducting a citywide fee study and development impact fee analysis. Key analysis includes: • Streamlining land use categories for Fire impact fees to represent the current types of use. • Identifying growth projections and appropriate nexus considerations for impact fees. Downey, CA: Khushboo served as the project manager on this engagement which looked and developing a citywide cost plan, comprehensive user fee study, and Development Impact Fees. Key analysis included: • Review of current administrative functions, and ensuring all appropriate functions were included in the plan. • Incorporating updated metrics to account for each service area. • Calculation of Indirect costs. Role on This Engagement: Khushboo will serve as the Project Manager on this engagement, leading interviews and coordinating necessary data collection for the financial analysis, policy discussions, and working with the Data Analyst to compile and analyze data.

Relevant CA Clients: Berkeley Citrus Heights Cupertino Dixon Elk Grove Fairfield Humboldt County Livermore Long Beach Manhattan Beach Orange Pacific Grove Redwood City San Bernardino County San Pablo San Mateo Santa Clara Santa Clara County Sonoma County South San Francisco Stanislaus County Sunnyvale Vacaville Winters Years of Experience: 12 Education: B.A., University of California – San Diego, International Economics M.A., University of California – San Diego, International Affairs Professional Association / Certification: California Society of Municipal Finance Officers Revenue Enhancement Best Practices

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 12

H Work Plan This section of our proposal demonstrates our project understanding and provides an overview of our approach and proposed work plan, including task deliverables and overall project schedule. Project Understanding The City of Orange is requesting a Full Cost Allocation Plan and a User Fee Study. The City last conducted these studies in 2017 and 2018, respectively. Consistent with best Practices, the City is interested in engaging with an external consultant to conduct an update. It is important to review and update the Full Cost Allocation Plan to capture any organizational changes that have occurred in the last 6 years, as well as shifts in the types of services. The results of this analysis can be used by the General Fund to justify transfers from non-general fund sources, as well as be incorporated in the user fee study. The previous user fee study was conducted in 2018 and included all areas of service including facility rentals, building fees, and EMS fees. As part of the previous analysis, we worked with the City to convert their valuation-based fee schedule to one more based on scope of services – occupancy and square footage. Additionally, at the end of that study, we provided staff with excel-based models for annual updates and changes. The scope of the updated user fee study will be to utilize that prior information and any in-house updates, but also ensure that all new services are being captured and any feedback / input regarding use and implementation of current fee structures are incorporated. Through this process we will reevaluate all fees for service and ensure that it capture updated services and updated direct and indirect costs. Methodology and Approach The Matrix Consulting Group works with clients of all sizes in over 45 states across the U.S. and Canada. Every project is unique but is managed according to the following essential project approach:

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 13

These approaches allow us to provide services to our clients that not only meet their needs and adhere to state and local guidelines but also educate staff about fees' uses and applications and provide guidance for future updates or increases. Work Plan The following outlines our detailed task plan to conduct the study. These scopes of work can be conducted concurrently. Project-wide Tasks There are three key tasks that would span all three scopes and then the tasks would vary based on each scope of work. The following tasks would be conducted for all scopes. Task 1 Data Collection Prior to any initial meetings, we will provide the City with a list of data requirements. This will allow our project team to review this information thoroughly in preparation for initial discussions with staff. A common list of data collection items include: • Budgeted Expenditures per Fund and Department. • Staﬃng per Fund and Department. • List of current fees to be included in the scope. • Copy of any previous studies / analyses. • List of comparable jurisdictions for the comparative analysis. These items will allow our project team to familiarize themselves with the City’s structure. Deliverable List of basic data requirements for the Study Understanding City-specific financial data. Working collaboratively wtih City staff through meetings and workshops.Applying industry standards, best management practices, and technical expertise for cost allocation and user fee application. Calculating defensible results with buy-in from internal and external stakeholders.Providing recommendations and transferring knowledge and work products to City staff for successful implementation.

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 14

Task 2 Study Objectives and Project Schedule Once the data has been collected, the project team will then meet with City staff to discuss any issues identiﬁed by the project team, as well as to clarify any existing issues or concerns held regarding the current cost allocation and user fee study methodology. Discussions will include: • Review of the City’s speciﬁc needs and critical issues surrounding development and implementation of the cost allocation and user fee study. • Opportunities for improvement and restructuring of previous cost allocation and fee analyses. • Discussion of cost recovery goals. At the culmination of the meeting, the project team and the designated City staff will leave with a greater understanding of the overall approach and methodology that will be taken by the project team to conduct the cost allocation and user fee study. Deliverable Project Schedule Task 3 Excel-Based Model and Training The City wishes to have the ability to update the ﬁnal version of the cost allocation and fee studies, including the ability to add, revise or remove costs or service types, as well as update assumptions regarding any fee changes. Our technical models would provide the ability for the City to adapt and continuously update each study annually. We have previously provided our fee-based model(s) to the City for annual updates. We have updated our model(s) since the previous analysis, but many of the components are same. While the models are structured in Excel, the technical models are proprietary and for internal use by City staff only. By having our model based in Excel, the requirements for software training, new software, updates, licensing, or other support, are minimized. After the ﬁnal draft of the cost allocation plan and user fee study is approved, the project team would meet with, and train designated City employees on use of requested models. Staff will be provided with training that includes: a User’s Manual which explains key concepts, deﬁnes basic terms, includes a customized updated checklist of data that needs to be entered, and discusses different scenario options (e.g., adding new central services, removing receivers, etc.), as well as instruction tabs for the Fee Models.

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 15

Deliverable Excel Model and Backup Documentation Cost Allocation Plan Tasks The City of Orange is requesting the development of a Cost Allocation Plan to capture the indirect costs associated with direct programs and services. The City last conducted this study in 2017 and would like to update it to ensure that all indirect costs associated with operations are captured. The tasks to be conducted are described below. Task 1 Interview Staff and Gather Allocation Metrics The project team would review the City’s previous cost allocation plan, as well as current ﬁnancial structure to identify City departments and services to be allocated. To structure a custom cost allocation model, our project team would perform the following: • Review and discuss the accounting (fund and organizational levels) structure of the City based on budgeted expenditures to identify any anomalies. • Identify and meet speciﬁc central services departments to develop allocation bases and ensure that the plan reﬂects the following aspects: - All current services provided by the Department are identiﬁed and documented within the Cost Allocation Plan. - Allocation bases discussed to be utilized are reﬂective of the current level of effort and most relatable to the service being performed. The following is a sample ﬂowchart visually representing discussion outcome, the ﬁrst level is the central services department, the second level is the identiﬁed service category, and the third level is the basis by which costs will be allocated:
• Discuss alternative allocations, including outcomes and potential impacts.

Finance
Payroll
# of Employees per Division
Accounts Payable
# of Invoices per Division
Financial Reporting
Actual Expenses per Division

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 16

The points above provide examples of the types of detailed and in-depth discussions that the project team will have with City departments involved in the cost allocation process. At this point in the process, the project team would reach out to each department and ask for speciﬁc allocation metrics such as purchase orders, invoices, sq. ft. per facility, etc. Deliverable Allocation Metric Requests from Support Departments Task 2 Review of Draft Cost Allocation Metrics Based on the units of service identiﬁed in Task 1 and the allocation metrics collected, the project team would put together allocation workbooks for review with central service departments. The purpose of these workbooks is to review the initial results of the allocation metrics. The following graphic shows an example of the allocation workbook: Fund Dept Desc # of AR Transactions per Fund/Dept Allocation % 1 10 City Manager 3 0.87% 1 16 Human Resources 30 8.75% 1 20 City Attorney 30 8.75% 1 30 Police 68 19.83% 1 35 Fire 1 0.29% 1 40 Development Services 7 2.04% 1 50 Public Works Streets 5 1.46% 1 51 Public Works Facilities 1 0.29% 1 52 Community Services 185 53.94% 10 Water 1 0.29% 14 Sewer 8 2.33% 29 Self-Insured Liability Fund 4 1.17% TOTAL 343 100.00% In the sample graphic provided, based on the number of AR Transactions per fund/department, the primary support is for Community Services (54%) for all the Parks and Recreation transactions, followed by Police (20%). Based upon the results of this sample, the project team would verify with Finance that the statistics were allocated to the appropriate fund/department and that the resulting percentage is reﬂective of the support being provided by the Accounts Receivable staff and function. This type of detailed review is critical for the development of a defensible cost allocation plan. It also ensures that departmental staff and City staff are comfortable with the use of the allocation metrics and the support that those metrics represent. Deliverable Draft Allocation Workbooks

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 17

Task 3 Structure and Prepare Draft Full Cost Allocation Plan Once the central service departments and administrative functional areas have agreed upon, the appropriate allocation metrics for services, allowable administrative or other indirect costs are allocated to each beneﬁting department, operating unit, or fund. At this point the project team would begin customizing the Cost Plan to ensure methodologies and assumptions comply with Federal regulations (2 CFR 225) by utilizing a double-step down allocation methodology and general accounting principles. During the development of the cost allocation plan, the project team will ensure that any expenses included in the plan are vetted and reviewed with Finance staff, as well as incorporate any direct reimbursements. The results of the draft cost allocation plan will be provided to staff in numerical format in Excel prior to the development of a draft report. Deliverable Draft Cost Allocation (Excel Results) Task 4 Finalize the Cost Allocation Plan Upon review and approval of the draft cost plan by central service departments and the Finance Department, the project team will ﬁnalize the Cost Allocation Plan and report. The ﬁnal deliverables associated with the Cost Allocation Plan will be: • Cost allocation plan report: including all detailed allocation schedules, cost schedules, summary schedules, and narrative information regarding the central services included. • Excel summary schedule: the results of the full cost allocation plan in Excel format for ease of calculations, incorporation into City documents, and review by staff. This type of ﬁnal work product ensures that information is available in a variety of formats for City staff to use. The detailed report serves as backup documentation; whereas the Excel results can be input into budget documents. Deliverable Final Cost Allocation Report Comprehensive User Fee Study Tasks The City of Orange would like to review all of its fees for service. As we worked with the City on its previous fee study, we will utilize that knowledge along with meeting with staff to ensure all services are captured, in compliance with legal regulations, and documented through an updated master fee schedule.. The following tasks provide an overview of the level of detail utilized to conduct the comprehensive fee study.

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 18

Task 1 Develop a Schedule of Current and Potential Fees for Service The project team will work with staff to review their current fee schedules in line-item detail, including any major modiﬁcations that have been made since the previous fee study. This meeting is critical in ensuring staff can incorporate any updates or changes to the fee study based on code, regulation, staﬃng, process, or technological changes. The focus of this meeting will be the following: • Renaming fees: Rewording or renaming fees to identify services more clearly. • Eliminating fees: Removing any outdated services or fees. • Adding new fees: Capturing any new services or breaking out existing fee categories to identify all the services being provided by City staff more clearly and identify potential fees for services that the City would like to provide. • Recategorization of fees: Collapsing or expanding multiple fee ranges to better capture the services provided. For example, eliminate lot ranges or acreages if those do not impact the review amount, but add categories based upon the approval level (i.e., Commission vs. Director level). It is important to note that this meeting occurs ﬁrst to ensure that any signiﬁcant proposed structural changes are captured prior to collecting time estimate information or developing draft fee results. However, there is the ability to make future adjustments. Deliverable Proposed Fee Structure(s) Task 2 Conduct Time Data Gathering Workshops Having worked with the City previously, we do have access to prior time estimation data. Additionally, we understand that City staff have had the ability to update these assumptions annually since the previous fee study. Therefore, the project team will crosswalk the existing fee schedule against available information and conduct workshops to reevaluate existing time estimates and gather any new time estimates needed. Below is an example of the steps involved in permit processing and the time associated with each step.

The project team will conduct multiple time estimate workshop(s) for each department / division included in the study, and the workshop results will be Excel-based workbook(s) IntakePermit Tech: 15 minsRouting Permit Tech: 10 minsInitial Review Plan Checker: 1 hourFinal Review Plan Checker: 30 minsIssue Permit Permit Tech: 15 mins

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 19

that staff can review. Staff will be provided time for any edits or comments on time estimate information. Deliverable Input Estimate Workbook(s) Task 3 Develop Fully Burdened Hourly Rates Based on the City’s staﬃng and budget information, the project team will calculate fully burdened hourly rates, including direct and indirect costs. The following points highlight the cost components and factors included in fully burdened rates: • Direct costs: This component accounts for salary and beneﬁts associated with each employee or position and reﬂects City staﬃng and salary reports. • Indirect costs - Departmental: This component accounts for administrative and management support provided to line-level staff, as well as operational services and supplies that are used in the execution of job duties. This cost component is developed through interviews with staff and an analysis of budgets. • Indirect costs - Citywide: This component accounts for citywide support such as Finance, HR, and Attorney support provided by other departments. This would be calculated based on the full cost allocation plan. Once the cost components have been documented and developed, the project team will review MOUs and talk with departmental staff to determine appropriate productive hour calculations. These reduced available hours will ensure fully burdened hourly rates account for leave accruals (holiday, vacation, and sick) and any meetings or training. Deliverable Fully Burdened Hourly Rates Task 4 Perform Total Cost Analysis The Matrix Consulting Group’s costing model is built based on the City’s operations, budget details, and intended uses for the results. This method is a customized approach speciﬁc to each jurisdiction for cost analysis of user fee services. It is a “bottom-up” approach, the most defensible methodology for calculating user fees. The methodology incorporates the time estimate information and fully burdened hourly rate information. The following graphic shows the cost calculation:

Time EstimateFully Burdened RateFull Cost Fee

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 20

This costing method uses time and annual activity level data to establish the cost of providing services on both a unit and an annual level. Once the time spent for a fee activity is determined for each individual or position, the team uses its fee and rate software to apply the fully burdened hourly rates calculated in the previous task. Resulting costs are presented on a unit and annual level and are compared to the existing fee schedule and revenue reports. The City will obtain detailed information regarding cost recovery surpluses and deﬁcits on both a detailed (per unit) and global (annualized) level, as well as an understanding of cost components for each service. Deliverable Per Unit and Annual Fee Study Results Task 5 Conduct a Market Rate Survey We will work with the City to identify jurisdictions in Orange County, or elsewhere in the Southland, to conduct a comparative survey of fees. This comparative survey activity will include: • Developing fee scenarios for each department included in the study to be compared to other jurisdictions. • Graphing the results of the fee analysis for easy visual comparison purposes. • Collecting contextual information such as population size, budget, staﬃng, last time fee study was done, and last fee schedule update.

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 21

As market surveys do not provide adequate or objective information about the relationship between a jurisdiction’s costs and fees, these steps ensure we provide the City with the most information possible. Deliverable Comparative Graphs (included in Draft Report) Task 6 Review / Revise Fee Study Results Because the analysis of service fees is based on estimates and information provided by City staff, all participants must be comfortable with our methodology and the data they have provided. Once the department agrees that the analysis reﬂects the reasonable costs of providing services, City management can review the results. At this point, the project team will provide City staff with Recommended Fee Workbooks. The Recommended Fee Workbooks will provide departments / divisions with the fee study results in MS Excel. The following shows an example of the workbook: Current - Per Unit Results Fee Title Current Fee Total Cost Surplus/(Deficit) Per Unit Cost Recovery % Lot Line Adjustment $900 $1,557 ($657) 58% Temporary Use Permit $40 $325 ($285) 12% Recommended Fee Fee Title Recommended Fee $ Change to Recommended Fee % Change to Recommended Fee Recommended Fee Cost Recovery % Lot Line Adjustment $1,200 $300 33% 77% Temporary Use Permit $100 $60 150% 31% Recommended Fee Annual Fee Title Workload Revenue at Current Fee Revenue at Recommended Fee Potential Change in Revenue Lot Line Adjustment 4 $3,600 $4,800 $1,200 Temporary Use Permit 60 $2,400 $6,000 $3,600 TOTAL $6,000 $10,800 $4,800 As the graphic indicates, the recommended fee workbook allows the City to input information into the Recommended Fee column and see its impacts, such as the dollar increase, percentage increase, and what percentage of their current costs they will recover. Additionally, the workbook allows the City to calculate potential increases or declines in revenue because of the recommended fees. Deliverable Recommended Fee Workbooks

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 22

Task 7 Prepare a Draft User Fee Study Report Upon conclusion of the fee study, we will prepare a detailed report summarizing the results of each of the previous work tasks described above. This report will include: • A concise executive summary discussing the study, methodology, results, and narrative describing the services included in the study. • A section on proposed modiﬁcations to the current fee schedule, including removal or addition of new fees for service. • A section on per unit and annual results for each fee is included in the analysis, as well as where workload data is available. • A comparative survey section outlining key fees, their comparison to other local jurisdictions, and contextual information regarding budget and staﬃng. The draft report will be provided to City staff for comments. Deliverable Draft Fee Study Report Task 8 Finalize Fee Study Report Any edits or revisions to the draft user fee study report will be incorporated into the ﬁnalized fee study report. This ﬁnalized fee study report will include all elements of the draft fee study report and any additional cost recovery considerations and policy considerations for the City Council’s review. Deliverable Final Fee Study Report Task 9 Master Fee Schedule Once the ﬁnal user fee study report is approved, the project team will help the City update its master fee schedule. This attachment is extremely helpful as part of the staff report provided to the Council upon adoption. Deliverable Master Fee Schedule Task 10 Present the Final Report to Key Stakeholders The presentation of results to City oﬃcials and/or stakeholders is critical to the success of the overall engagement. Because the product from the study is often controversial, the objective of this ﬁnal step is to present a succinct summary that provides decision makers with key information. The Matrix Consulting Group will attend and present the study at up to three (3) Committee or Council meetings, including any fee adoption

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 23

hearings. We believe that these number of meetings is typically suﬃcient to ensure that there is buy-in from the stakeholders. Deliverable Study Presentation Timeline The City has indicated that this project will occur from September – December 31, 2024. With that in mind, we propose the following four-month schedule, shown on a task-by-task basis. Tasks 1 2 3 4 4+ Project Wide Tasks Data Collection Study Objectives/Project Schedule Excel-Based Models/Training Cost Allocation Plan Tasks Interview Staff/Gather Metrics Review Draft Metrics Draft Report Prepare Final Report User Fee Study Tasks Current & Potential Fees Data Workshops Fully Burdened Hourly Rates Total Cost Analysis Comparative Survey Review/Revise Results Draft Fee Study Report Prepare Final Report Update Master Fee Schedule Presentation The above timeline is for completing the analysis, development of implementation options. However, this timeline does result in fee implementation no earlier than March 2025, due to the 60 day waiting period for development-related fees. If the City is interested in implementation by January 1, 2025, that would require completion of the project by October 2024, which would not be feasible, given a start date of September 2024. Presentations and excel-based models and trainings, would be available after project completion.

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 24

I Fees The Matrix Consulting Group proposes to perform the tasks and services associated with the development of a Full Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study for a ﬁxed-price fee of $58,500. The following table shows our proposed cost by estimated hours per task and position. Principal-in-Charge Project Mgr. Analysts (3) Total Cost Project-wide Tasks Data Collection 0 2 4 $1,100 Study Objectives/Project Schedule 2 2 2 $1,400 Excel-Models/Training 2 4 6 $2,500 Subtotal Project-Wide Tasks 4 8 12 $5,000 Cost Allocation Plan Tasks Interview Staff/Gather Metrics 0 4 6 $1,900 Review Draft Metrics 0 6 10 $3,000 Draft Report 2 4 26 $5,500 Prepare Final Report 2 4 10 $3,100 Subtotal CAP Tasks 4 18 52 $13,500 Comprehensive User Fee Tasks Current & Potential Fees 0 4 8 $2,200 Data Workshops 0 6 14 $3,600 Fully Burdened Hourly Rates 0 6 20 $4,500 Total Cost Analysis 0 10 26 $6,400 Comparative Survey 0 4 24 $4,600 Review/Revise Results 0 8 16 $4,400 Draft Fee Study Report 0 10 20 $5,500 Prepare Final Report 2 6 12 $3,900 Develop Master Fee Schedule 0 2 8 $1,700 Presentation 4 8 0 $3,200 Subtotal Comprehensive Fee Study Tasks 6 64 148 $40,000 Total Hours 14 90 212 Hourly Rate $300 $250 $150 Total Professional Fees $4,200 $22,500 $31,800 $58,500 Total Project Cost $58,500 This price is a ﬁxed, not-to-exceed price contract, inclusive of all travel and any other expenses. Our typical practice is to bill for hours worked monthly. If any additional services are required, they will be billed at the hourly rates noted. The Matrix Consulting Group is committed to helping our clients develop accurate and defensible cost-of-service methodologies and ensure that they can implement the results

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 25

of these studies appropriately. Our project team will work with City staff to facilitate an understanding of the results and how to incorporate those results into budget and policy documents, informational handouts, and other City materials. Our client support continues after a ﬁnal report has been issued. We understand that questions can arise well after project completion and are committed to working with our clients to answer any questions about methodologies and applications of results. This support is provided to our clients at no extra cost.

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 26

J Related Experience and References This section contains information about our experience providing services requested by the City or Orange as well as ﬁve project references. Cost Allocation Plan Experience Our ﬁrm has extensive experience developing comprehensive cost allocation plans, as well as indirect cost rate proposals for various municipal organizations across the United States. Regardless of jurisdiction size, our goal is to document and deﬁne the services being provided, and accurately allocate costs to all beneﬁciaries. The following points highlight our experience with developing cost allocation processes and metrics: • Administrative Functions: Our ﬁrm has extensive experience in evaluating processes and functions associated with City Clerk, Finance, Human Resources, and Purchasing. From basic tasks and responsibilities to process improvement and oversight controls, our project teams can: - Identify core service functions, such as payroll, employee beneﬁts, budget preparation, agenda, and commission support. - Review current data metrics, and work with staff to ensure resulting allocations are appropriate, fair, and equitable. - Recognize services that are not in direct support of departments, including business licenses and elections, and ensure they are accurately identiﬁed, but not further allocated. Our project teams understand the core services associated with administrative functions, as well as the time associated with process completion, and are adept at helping staff determine daily, weekly, monthly, or annual time spent on a task. These assumptions form the core basis of a cost allocation plan, and should be defensible not only through documentation, but also by City staff. • Governmental Functions: The Matrix Consulting Group has worked with and been a part of managerial studies relating to City Manager and Legal services. Additionally, we have extensive experience working with, and presenting to various boards, councils, and subcommittees. Our understanding of the various types of services provided allow our project teams to assess what services are best for allocation, including: - Categorizing services and support that beneﬁt the City as an organization, such as contract negotiation, and approval of internal policies.

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 27

- Identifying services that beneﬁt the City economically, such as lobbying, and economic development, which should not be allocated. Our team understands how these costs can and should be treated in an OMB compliant plan, including making staff aware of common practices, as well as aggressive allocation options. • Internal Services: The Matrix Consulting Group has signiﬁcant experience evaluating services and functions associated with facilities maintenance, ﬂeet services, and information technology. While these services can be part of the general fund or internal services, their allocation is important when trying to understand the indirect costs associated with any Fund, Department, or Program. Our project teams work with these departments to: - Review existing allocation processes and metrics to ensure compliance with state and federal regulations. - Determine if newer metrics, or metric alterations could provide more accurate allocations. • Indirect Cost Rate Proposals: Our ﬁrm’s experience with indirect cost rate proposals ranges from developing City-wide proposals to departmental and divisional proposals. We look at all indirect costs related to the service and program area, determine if it is allowable and then set up the indirect cost rate calculation. Based upon the jurisdiction’s rate methodology we are versed in provisional, ﬁxed ﬁnal, and ﬁxed carry forward rates. We work with our clients to review rates, outline appropriate applications, and customize templates based upon cognizant agency guidelines. Our project team members are well versed in Oﬃce of Management and Budget (OMB) guidelines for cost allocation, Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), and best management practices outlined by the Government Finance Oﬃcers Association (GFOA) relating to cost allocation and cost recovery. We are committed to ensuring that all cost centers being allocated comply with state and local laws, use fair and equitable allocation metrics, and are documented and defensible. Recent clients of the Matrix Consulting Group to whom our proposed project team have provided Cost Allocation Plan services are included in the following table:

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 28

Jurisdiction Full Cost OMB Indirect Rates Annual Plan Adelanto, CA X Agoura Hills, CA X Burlingame, CA X X X Calimesa, CA X X X Citrus Heights, CA X X Cupertino, CA X X Daly City, CA X Dixon, CA X X Downey, CA X X Dublin, CA X X X Elk Grove, CA X X X Fairfield, CA X X Hercules, CA X X Livermore, CA X X X Malibu, CA X Manhattan Beach, CA X X X Millbrae, CA X X Pacific Grove, CA X X Pomona, CA X X Port of Long Beach, CA X X Redwood City, CA X X Riverside, CA X X Sacramento Regional Transit, CA X X X San Mateo, CA X X X San Ramon, CA X Santa Clara, CA X X X South San Francisco, CA X X Sunnyvale, CA X X X Details about any project listed above are available upon request. User Fee Study Experience Our ﬁrm has extensive experience conducting comprehensive user fee studies for a variety of municipal organizations and departments. When conducting comprehensive user fee studies, the focus is often on Community Development (building, planning, and engineering) and Parks and Recreation services. The following points highlight our experience in these areas: • Community Development: Our ﬁrm has extensive experience in evaluating development review permitting functions for Building, Planning, Engineering, and Fire Prevention. From the basic process steps for submitting, reviewing, inspecting, and approving applications and permits to development of processes, procedures, and cost recovery goals, our project teams can address topics as:

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 29

- The best metric for assessing fees, such as building valuation, square footage, construction estimate, or number of fixtures. - Appropriate deposit amounts, guidelines, and processes to ensure actual cost recovery is achieved. - Setting fees at levels that both recover costs but are not cost prohibitive. - Cost recovery and implementation options for support services including General Plan Updates, Technology Fees, GIS, etc. Beyond understanding processes and assessing time estimates provided, our project teams are aware of the cross-departmental support associated with application and permit services. These costs are included in the full cost calculation and can be expressed as part of the established fee or a separate fee. • Parks and Recreation: The Matrix Consulting Group has worked with every type of recreation function, including traditional parks and recreation, libraries, and open space preserves. Our experience spans master and strategic planning, park condition assessments, and program staﬃng and cost recovery. Our project teams are well versed in the areas that most impact cost recovery, including: – The best use of a tiered recovery approach, such as resident versus non-resident, or proﬁt versus non-proﬁt. – Setting fees according to the cost recovery pyramid to ensure that premium services have a higher cost recovery. The goal in reviewing parks and recreation costs for service, is to ensure that fees and rates are set at a level that allows the City to continue to serve the community in a manner consistent with current goals and commitments. Our ﬁrm also has extensive experience in calculating cost of services for administrative functions such as Finance and City Clerk, as well as public safety services relating to Police, Fire Prevention, and EMS. All our cost of service and user fee studies are developed in compliance with California State regulations including Propositions 218 and 26, as well as government codes 66014 and 66016 which stipulate that user fees charged by local agencies “…may not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged”. The following table includes a sampling of California clients for whom we have conducted user fee studies, including the types of departments and services reviewed:

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 30

Jurisdiction Planning Fees Building Fees Engineering Fees Fire Fees Admin Fees Utility Fees Police Fees Recreation Fees Adelanto, CA X X X X X Agoura Hills, CA X X X X X Burlingame, CA X X X X X X X X Calimesa, CA X X X X X Capitola, CA X X X X Citrus Heights, CA X X X X X X Cupertino, CA X X X X Dixon, CA X X X X X X Downey, CA X X X X X X X X Dublin, CA X X X X X X X Elk Grove, CA X X X Glendale, CA X X X X X X X X Livermore, CA X X X X Los Altos Hills, CA X X X X Malibu, CA X X X X X Manhattan Beach, CA X X X X X X X X Menifee, CA X X X X X X X Millbrae, CA X X X X X X Mill Valley, CA X X X X X X Montebello, CA X X X X X X X X Orange, CA X X X X X X X X Pacific Grove, CA X X X X X X Redwood City, CA X X X X X X X X San Mateo, CA X X X San Ramon, CA X X X X X X Santa Clara, CA X X X X X X X X South Pasadena, CA X X X X X X X So. San Francisco, CA X X X X X X X X Stockton, CA X X X X Vacaville, CA X X X X X X X Winters, CA X X X X X X X Details about any project listed above are available upon request. References The following table references ﬁve clients for whom similar services were provided and managed by our project executive and project manager. Client Contact Project Type Agoura Hills, CA Ramiro S. Adeva III Assistant City Manager (818) 597-7353 [email protected] Comprehensive Fee Study Overhead Cost Analysis

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 31

Client Contact Project Type Burlingame, CA Helen Yu-Scott Finance Director (650) 558-7222 [email protected] Cost Allocation Plan Comprehensive Fee Study Calimesa, CA Celeste Reid, CPA Finance Director (909) 795-9801 [email protected] Cost Allocation Plan Comprehensive Fee Study Malibu, CA Renee Neerman Finance Manager (310) 456-2489 ext. 222 [email protected] Cost Allocation Plan Comprehensive Fee Study San Ramon, CA J. Kelly Session Administrative Services Director (925) 973-2576 [email protected] Comprehensive Fee Study Overhead Cost Analysis Additional details or references are available upon request.

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 32

K Sample Report The link below provides access to ﬁnal Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan reports our proposed project team recently completed for the City of San Ramon, CA. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1fola6WKWdTHpl_V-NSjYyMDCa5fOS1kl?usp=sharing

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 33

L Resources Provided by the City We envision a close working relationship with the City throughout the project. We place a strong emphasis on transparency and robust communication. To ensure these effective outcomes we will set up bi-weekly (every 2 weeks) updates with the City. These updates can be in the form of a brief meeting or a summary status email which outlines the work completed to date, the current tasks being performed, and any future tasks. These communications allow us to keep the City informed of any hurdles in completing the project, as well as allow staff to provide input on any key ﬁndings from the fee study and cost allocation analysis. Task-Speciﬁc Estimated City Support The table below shows the estimated level of City support needed for tasks described in Section H: Work Plan. Tasks Estimated City Support Project Wide Tasks Data Collection 4-8 hours for staff to collect and distribute information Study Objectives/Project Schedule 1 hour for all involved City departments Excel-Based Models/Training 1-2 hours of virtual training Cost Allocation Plan Tasks Interview Staff/Gather Metrics 1 hour per City support department Review Draft Metrics 1 hour per City support department Draft Report 1 hour for Finance department Prepare Final Report None User Fee Study Tasks Current & Potential Fees 1 hour for all involved City departments Data Workshops 1-4 hours for all involved City departments Fully Burdened Hourly Rates 1 hour for Finance department Total Cost Analysis 1-3 hours for all involved City departments Comparative Survey None Review/Revise Results 1-2 hours per department Draft Fee Study Report 1-2 hours per department to review report Prepare Final Report None Update Master Fee Schedule None Presentation 1-2 hours for presentation review This approach ensures that our joint efforts consistently yield effective results and outcomes that will beneﬁt the City.

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 34

M Certiﬁcate of Non-Collusion A signed Certiﬁcate of Non-Collusion is included on the following page.

Page 30 of 40 ends

SECTION VII: ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT A:

CERTIFICATE OF NON-COLLUSION

[Note: This form must be completed and signed by an authorized representative of each bidder.]

Be it known that ________________________________________________________ (name), being first duly sworn, deposes and testifies that he/she is the ___________________________ (relationship with bidding firm), of ______________________________________(legal name of bidding firm), making the foregoing bid:

1. The bid is not made in the interest of, or on behalf of, any undisclosed person, partnership, company, association, organization, or corporation.

2. The bid is genuine and not collusive or sham. The bidder has not directly or indirectly induced or solicited any other bidder to put in a false or sham bid.

3. The bidder has not directly or indirectly colluded, conspired, connived, or agreed with any bidder or anyone else to put in a sham bid, or to refrain from bidding.

4. The bidder has not in any manner, directly or indirectly, sought by agreement, communication, or conference with anyone to fix the bid price of the bidder or any other bidder, or to fix any overhead, profit, or cost element of the bid price, or of that of any other bidder.

5. All statements contained in the bid are true.

6. The bidder has not, directly or indirectly, submitted his or her bid price or any breakdown thereof, or the contents thereof, or divulged information or data relative thereto, to any corporation, partnership, company association, organization, bid depository, or to any member or agent thereof to effectuate a collusive or sham bid, and has not paid, and will not pay, any person or entity for such purpose.

7. Any person executing this declaration on behalf of a bidder that is a corporation, partnership, joint venture, limited liability company, limited liability partnership, or any other entity, hereby represents that he or she has full power to execute, and does execute, this declaration on behalf of the bidder.

8. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration is executed on _______________ [date], at __________________ [city], ____________ [state].

That all the above statements are true to the best of my knowledge.

______________________________________
Signed

Richard Brady
President
Matrix Consulting Group, Ltd.

San Mateo
July 17, 2024
California

Proposal to Develop a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Orange, CA

Matrix Consulting Group 36

Appendices We have reviewed the City’s Sample of Standard Professional Services Agreement (Attachment B) in its entirety. We are willing and able to comply with all terms and conditions except the insurance requirement regarding coverage for owned automobiles. Our ﬁrm does not own automobiles, as such we cannot provide coverage for this. Our insurance otherwise complies with contract requirements, and we would request an exception on this minor issue. This proposed exception will not impact cost, scheduling or other areas of our proposal. In the following pages are provided the ﬁrst two-pages from the two issued addenda for this project.

Page 1 of 3 ends

Finance Department - Purchasing Division

Addendum No. 1

Date: July 18, 2024

To: All Bidders

Subject: RFP 24-25.01 – Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study

A. The following are answers to questions submitted for the project referenced above.

1. Question: “Is this a specific document that you can provide or are we to include our own cost spreadsheet under that name?”
Answer: Please provide your own sheet.

2. Question: “Item F.1.b on page 11 of the RFP states that we must list exceptions in a separate attachment. Can we add the attachment as an appendix to our main proposal, or would you like it as a completely separate document? Answer: Yes, please append the clearly labeled list of exceptions to the main proposal.

3. Question: “If a separate document, would you like the same number of copies (4; 3 bound, 1 unbound) as the main proposal?”
Answer: Yes.

4. Question: “Can you make available the comprehensive user fee study performed in 2018?”
Answer: Attachment A – A comprehensive user fee study report was not adopted by the City Council. However, attached is the 2018 Draft Report on the Citywide Cost of Services (User Fee) Study presented to the City Council.

B. This is to notify of the clarification to the deadline and submission instructions.

1. The original RFP 24-25.01 stated the proposal due date of July 22, 2024, by 5:00 pm P.T. the new deadline is July 25, 2024, by 5:00 pm P.T..

2. We will be accepting both bound and digital copies of the proposals, giving you the option to submit in either format.

Page 2 of 3 ends

Careful note of the Addendum by all parties of interest is necessary in order that the proper allowances are made in strict accordance with the Addendum, relevant to other official communications if any, and the related specifications. All trades associated shall be fully advised by their Contractor in the performance of all related work, which will be required for the successful implementation of these changes.

Please note all previously posted questions and answers have been included in this addendum.

Bidder shall signify the receipt of this addendum with a signature on page 2 of this Addendum No. 1. Please contact Wanda Alvarez for any questions regarding this addendum at [email protected] or call (714) 744-2266.

Wanda Alvarez
Purchasing Officer
I _____________________, authorized representative for company ______________, hereby acknowledge the receipt of RFP 24-25.01 – Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study - Addendum No. 1 documents from your agency, City of Orange, dated July 18, 2024. ________________________________________
Company Name
________________________________________ _______________ Signature of Authorized Company Representative Date
______________________
Phone number
______________________
Email address
We appreciate your cooperation and promptness regarding the documentation procedure.

Matrix Consulting Group, Ltd.

Richard Brady, President
Matrix Consulting Group, Ltd.

July 22, 2024
650-858-0507
[email protected]

Page 1 of 2 ends

Finance Department - Purchasing Division

Addendum No. 2

Date: July 22, 2024

To: All Bidders

Subject: RFP 24-25.01 – Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study

This is to notify you of clarification to Addendum No. 1 for Proposal packet submittal.

Addendum No. 1 states, “We will be accepting both bound and digital copies of the proposals, giving you the option to submit in either format.”

Digital copies of the Proposal packet shall be submitted by email to Wanda Alvarez, Purchasing Officer at [email protected].

Please note all previously posted questions and answers have been included in this addendum.

Bidder shall signify the receipt of this addendum with a signature on page 2 of this Addendum No. 2. Please contact Wanda Alvarez for any questions regarding this addendum at [email protected] or call (714) 744-2266.

Wanda Alvarez
Purchasing Officer

Page 2 of 2 ends

I, Richard Brady, authorized representative for company Matrix Consulting Group, hereby acknowledge the receipt of RFP 24-25.01 – Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study - Addendum No. 2 documents from your agency, City of Orange, dated July 22, 2024.

Matrix Consulting Group
Company Name
________________________________________ 7-22-24
Signature of Authorized Company Representative Date
650-858-0507
Phone number
[email protected]
Email address
We appreciate your cooperation and promptness regarding the documentation procedure.

Orange City CouncilSeptember 24, 2024

Orange City Council
September 24, 2024