San Luis Obispo City Council
May 17, 2022

■ Delegate departmental purchasing authority.
■ Approve departmental Purchase Requests and award
departmental contracts as specified in Section 202.
■ Purchase, receive and pay for goods and services in
accordance with City and departmental guidelines.
■ Approve invoices or payment requests for departmental purchases.
■ Notify obtainpotential suppliers/contractors of City Business License requirement
■ Maintain required purchasing records.
■ Manage departmental inventories.

Department Heads
Authorized Employees
201-4
201-5
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Commented [CD25]: Should we discuss AP in the
process?
Authorized employees do not pay for the goods they only receive them, AP pays?
Procedure for ‘receiving your Purchase Order?
Receiving of PO’s by Departments has been challenging – requesters do not receive their PO’s, receive incorrect amounts, etc.

Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Commented [CD26]:

Commented [HM27]: Can we delete this? I’m thinking
that all purchasing records are now kept in Oracle and now that is something that happens automatically during the purchasing process.

Commented [CD28R27]: Yes – I’d delete
Commented [HM29]: Can we delete this as well? Some
items are reasonable to have an inventory on hand and some are not. I’m concerned this may weaken our arguments
when we need to make an emergency purchase.

Section 202

PURCHASING TYPES AND APPROVAL AUTHORITY THRESHOLDS

PURCHASING PROCESS PURCHASING PROCESS
Under the policy framework outlined in Chapter 3.24 of the Municipal Code, City purchases and contracts (including those for rentals and leases, but excluding those for real property) will be made according to these guidelines.

Competitive bidding categories, approval authorization limits, and contract award procedures are based on total purchase cost, a n d approval authority apply thresholds apply to both a single transaction purchase total, and/or a cumulative series of purchases over the fiscal year.

Staging of purchases to avoid these competitive bidding procedures or authorization limits is prohibited.

The City has three types of purchases:
• General Goods & Services Contracts and purchases for supplies and equipment, including IT equipment, operating and maintenance services, including IT maintenance services. • Consultant Services. Professional work provided to the City by specially trained and experienced individuals or firms regarding economic, financial, engineering, planning, architectural, environmental, legal, or administrative matters. • Public Projects and Job Order Contracts. Construction, reconstruction, erection, alteration, renovation, improvement, demolition, painting, repainting, and repair work involving any publicly owned, leased or operated facility (Public Contract Code 22002c).

The type of purchase and its cost determine the approval authority levels. Exhibit 202A and 203A summarize the authority levels and the approval process flows within the City’s Oracle ERP system.

Formatted: Normal
Commented [CD30]: Remove category – IT systems is an
initial ‘Goods’ purchase usually followed by a contract of ‘Services’ purchases;
Combine Goods and Services into one – many times a goods purchase has both components – someone fixes something, and installs, parts, etc. Most City’s in benchmark research do not separate General Goods vs. General Services and set differing price approval tiers. It leads to staff confusion.

Commented [CD31]: Add JOC?
Commented [CD32]: Job Order Contracts purchase types
are not in Oracle
Formatted: Normal, Indent: Left: 0.25", No bullets or
numbering
Commented [CD33]: @Horn, Matt@Elke,
Brigitte@Stanwyck, Shelly@Bell Jr., Charles
The ‘fiscal officer’ does not approve purchases in Public Works in Oracle flow like other departments; we either need to change the policy to allow for division manager approval, or configure Oralce to have designated fiscal officers
approve purchase requistions and remove the division
managers as level 1 approvers of their own purchase
requests.

Exhibit 202-A
General Goods and Services Purchases
Tier Price Approval Authority and workflow in Oracle ERP System 0 Under $100 • No purchase order required
• *if you plan to make a series of purchases over the fiscal year over this amount contact the City’s Purchasing Division to discuss open purchase order options
1 $101 - $9999 • No Bidding Process Required
• Requisition approved by Fiscal Officer*
• Purchase order approved by Purchasing Division
2 $10,000 - $24,999 • Three quotes (if possible)
• If only one quote? A sole source memo is required for the purchase • Requisition approved by Fiscal Officer and Department Head* • Purchase order approved by Purchasing Analyst
3 $25,000 - $49,999 • Formal bidding process (RFP – RFB) • Requisition approved by Fiscal Officer and Department Head • Purchase order approved by Purchasing Analyst
4 $50,000 - $149,999 • Formal bidding process (RFP – RFB) • City Manager approval through City Manager Report
• Requisition approved by Fiscal Officer *
• Purchase order approved by Purchasing Analyst
5 $150,000 or more • Council approval through Council Agenda Report • Formal bidding process (RFP – RFB)
• Requisition approved by Fiscal Officer
• Purchase Order approved by Purchasing Analyst
Commented [CD34]: Propose merging general goods and
general services into one category from the current two Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Space Before: 6 pt, After: 6 pt
Formatted Table
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 +
Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Commented [CD35]: @Elke, Brigitte@Horn, Matt
Proposing an allowable non-PO amount under $500 possibly slightly higher but not much, which will mirror the low value amounts on the credit cards. This is in line with other City’s in benchmark research
The staff costs to process from requisition to approval to po to receipt to AP match under this level outweigh the value of the data.

We can get the data in other ways than the PO.

1. Pull data from 3 sources and combine for analysis (PO, credit card, and invoices (by charge account)

2. With that date identify volume contract opportunities (prining, off-contract landscaping, off-contract electrician services, etc.)
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 +
Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 +
Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 +
Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 +
Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Font: 10 pt

Exhibit 202-A
Consulting Services
Tier Price Approval Authority and workflow in Oracle ERP System 0 Under $500 • No purchase order required
• *if you plan to make a series of purchases over the fiscal year over this amount contact the City’s Purchasing Division to discuss open purchase order options
1 $1000 - $7499 • No Bidding Process Required
• Requisition approved by Fiscal Officer*
• Purchase order approved by Purchasing Division
2 $7500 - $14,999 • Three quotes (if possible)
• If only one quote? A sole source memo is required for the purchase • Requisition approved by Fiscal Officer and Department HEad* • Purchase order approved by Purchasing Analyst
3 $15,000 - $39,999 • Formal bidding process (RFP – RFB) • Requisition approved by Fiscal Officer and Department Head • Purchase order approved by Purchasing Analyst
4 $40,000 - $99,999 • Formal bidding process (RFP – RFB) • City Manager approval through City Manager Report
• Requisition approved by Fiscal Officer *
• Purchase order approved by Purchasing Analyst
5 $100,000 or more • Council approval through Council Agenda Report • Formal bidding process (RFP – RFB)
• Requisition approved by Fiscal Officer
• Purchase Order approved by Purchasing Analyst
SECTION 203
Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 +
Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Commented [CD36]: $15,000 is low value for RFP trigger
compared to benchmark Cities. Consider upping this limit to $25,000
And re-evaluating the Tier 3-4 thresholds

PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS, CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS, AND JOB ORDER

CONTRACTS
The City awards construction contracts following the Uniform Public Construction Cost Account Act.

Construction contracts bid procedures are managed by the City’s Public Works Department with Finance and City Attorney oversight.

The City’s Public Works Department CIP Design Manual Guide governs policies and procedures for entering into Construction Contracts, Construction Change Orders and Job Order Contracts.

See CIP Manual at:
https://slocitycloud.sharepoint.com/:w:/s/SLOHub/PublicWorks/cipengineering/EXkv0X4GWbRPtKA_2LaCJnQBIKIos0X4LltyHTJHAg2uXQ?e=dN1aqR Exhibit 203-A
Public Projects
Tier Price Approval Authority and workflow in Oracle ERP System 1 Under $15,000 • No bidding process required
• Requisition approved by Fiscal Officer
• Purchase order approved by Purchasing Division
2 $15,001 - $59,999 • Three quotes (if possible)
• If only one quote? A sole source memo is required for the purchase • Requisition approved by Fiscal Officer*
• Purchase order approved by Purchasing Analyst
3 $60,000 - $199,999 • Formal bidding process (RFP – RFB) • City Manager approval through City Manager Report
• Requisition approved by Fiscal Officer *
• Purchase order approved by Purchasing Analyst
4 $200,000 or more • Council approval through Council Agenda Report • Formal bidding process (RFP – RFB)
• Requisition approved by Fiscal Officer
• Purchase Order approved by Purchasing Analyst
*The purchase thresholds identified in the above section would not apply to purchase orders under $60,000 for on-call consultants if the on-call consultants were selected from and RFP/RFQ. The reason is Council authorized the Finance Director to execute contracts up to the project budget (i.e. budget per the Financial Plan) Commented [BJC37]: Always recommend writing out
definition before making it an acronym.

Commented [BJC38]: Where is this guide located? Nice
to help staff know where to find a document.

Exhibit 203-A

JOB ORDER CONTRACTS
Tier Price Approval Authority and workflow in Oracle ERP System 1 Under $45,000 • Requisition approved by City Engineer • Purchase order approved by Purchasing Analyst
2 $45,001 - $200,000 • If only one quote? A sole source memo is required for the purchase • Requisition approved by Fiscal Officer & Department Head • Purchase order approved by Purchasing Analyst
3 $175,000 or more within
annual limit
• City Manager approval through City Manager Report
• Requisition approved by Fiscal Officer *
• Purchase order approved by Purchasing Analyst
4 $175,000 or more within
annual limit
• Council approval through Council Agenda Report
• Requisition approved by City Engineer
• Purchase Order approved by Purchasing Analyst
Construction Contract Change Orders
When the City awards a construction contract, the need for contract change orders (CCO) is not unusual. A CCO is required whenever the scope of work changes from the original contract or an unknown condition requires a change in the scope of work.

Usually a contingency amount is established when the project is authorized for advertisement or award to accommodate limited CCO’s. The purpose of this policy is to establish limits of authority for approving construction project CCO.

GOALS
• Ensure appropriate authority and accountability in the approval of change orders. • Minimize the time needed to approve a CCO to avoid project delays. • Establish a system at the organizational level at which the approval is commensurate with the size of CCO and the project.
• Eliminate the potential for approval of a CCO when contingency funds are insufficient.

Commented [CD39]: @Horn, Matt@Nelson, Brian
In Oracle we don’t even have JOC’s as a purchase type. Not sure why, these tier grapsh were supposed to mirror approval flows in Oracle.

Should we even have a JOC tier graph at all?
Delete?
Commented [HM40R39]: I think we still need it or it
would fall into a public projects purchasing process. I will add recommended dollar amount adjustments.

Commented [CD41R39]: We classify JOC’s as a public
purchase in Oracle because we have not other type to assign it.

Commented [HM42]: 60k
Commented [HM43]: 200k
Commented [HM44]: This should be deleted
Commented [CD45]: @Horn, Matt@Nelson, Brian Tier 3
and 4 do not make sense in current policy? Both are same $ amounts with different approval procedures?
Can we discuss?
Commented [NB46R45]: @Clancy, Daniel I Tier 4
should say "outside annual limit", which implies we would be asking Council for additional budget to support the work Commented [CD47]:

Commented [HM48]: If we are going back to council we
should update by reference so we don’t get stuck with old limits. Current limits are:

Tier 2: 60k
Tier 3: 200k
I think we should also consider raise tier 1 up as well. 15k sounds about right to me, but we should chat to find out if everyone is comfortable with that.

Commented [NB49R48]: Agree Tier 1 should be
increased to allow greater flexibility for minor work. Not much can be accomplished for less than $7,500 these days. I think an $10k increase is reasonable for a limit UP TO (not under) $17,500.

Commented [HM50]: JOC have an existing contract in
place. Tier 2 indicates that are getting three quotes. We typically only have one contractor under contract for a specific type of JOC. It doesn’t make sense to get quotes for ...

Commented [CD51R50]: @Horn, Matt@Nelson, Brian
In Oracle we don’t even have JOC’s as a purchase type. Not ...

Commented [HM52R50]: @Clancy, Daniel When the
system was first implemented, there was a JOC workflow
process. Something changed and I believe the Jesus is
...

Commented [CD53R50]: @Horn, Matt Thanks. There
was a flow on paper in the policy but never configured in Oracle – so we have been coding JOC’s as public project ...

Formatted: Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" +
Indent at: 0.5"

POLICIES
Conditions for Approval of CCO's by Staff
• Sufficient contingency funds are budgeted and available for the Public Works Director or City Manager (approved designees) to approve a CCO.
• The nature of work in the CCO is not significantly different from that in the contract. • Authorization limits are based on an individual CCO amount, not the aggregate amount of all CCO.
• Authorization limits apply to CCO for increases in contract amounts only. • Work will not be broken up into multiple CCO to circumvent this policy. • All CCO must be in writing and approved by the appropriate contract parties consistent with the authorized limits established in this policy.

Construction Change Orders
• A copy of each approved CCO will be transmitted to the Finance Department with monthly progress payments.
• The Purchasing Authority may approve CCO over $199,999 under the following circumstances (all three factors must be present):
o Immediate approval of the CCO is necessary to avoid delay. o The CCO is an integral and mandatory component of the project. o The costs associated with the delay of the project would be excessive. The Project Manager is responsible for carrying out this policy.
• The Purchasing Authority is also authorized to approve CCO over $199,999 related to Job Order Contract Task Orders.

Authorization Limits
Public Works Director/ Designee
• Not to exceed $60,000
Purchasing Authority (City Manager/Designee)
• Not to exceed $200,000
City Council*
• Greater than contract or $200,000
________________________________________________________________________________ * See circumstances above where the Purchasing Authority may approve CCO’s in excess of $175,000.

Originally Approved by the Council on August 3, 1993; Revised by the Council on April 15, 2003 and June 2, 2015.

Formatted: Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" +
Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" +
Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" +
Indent at: 0.5"
Commented [CD54]: Tier 4 approval in Oracle is
redundant process – purchase already approved by City
Manager Report there’s no need to have a 7 layer approval flow in Oracle – the purchase was already approved by City Manager Report

SECTION 204

PURCHASING METHODS
There are two three purchase methods for departments to use to acquire goods and services:
1) Purchase Requisition/Purchase Order
2) City Credit Card (Purchasing or P-Card)
2) Emergency Purchases
3)
The City’s preferred method for securing the majority of its purchases is by purchase order.

For a guide to purchase order types see the City’s Purchasing SharePoint document “what type of purchase order do I need?”
https://slocitycloud.sharepoint.com/sites/SLOHub/Finance/purch/SitePages/Home.aspx For low value, small or recurring purchaseone-time, unforeseen maintenance, emergency, travel, and education-related purchases, s, the City encourages authorized employees to use the use of the City credit card P-Card (See Section 275).

Summary Guide to Purchase Types:

Purchase Type Dollar Threshold Requirements
Purchase
Requisition/Purchase
Order
$500 – Unlimited Must obtain approvals required in section 202; Exhibit 202-A
CreditP- Card $0 – $5,000 (one-month
cumulative maximum)
City credit cards may be used for low value (under $500), one-time, unforeseen maintenance*, emergency, travel,
and education-related purchases.

Purchases between $501-$2500 generally should be done
by purchase requisition and purchase order.

Purchases that exceed the single transaction purchase
limit of $2500 must-have approval before purchasing on
the card.P-Card may be used for small or recurring or
emergency purchases. P-Card may not be bused for Not
Permitted for purchases in excess of limits. large
purchases, purchases for services, cCapital iItems
Emergency Purchase NA ONLY if there is an immediate and serious need for equipment, supplies, or services that cannot be met
through normal purchasing procedures and where the
lack of such equipment, supplies or services would
seriously threaten the functioning of City government,
the preservation of property, or the health or safety of any person;
* Single transaction purchases over $2500 must-have approval before being made on the City Credit Card Commented [CG55]: I too think it would be helpful to
have the same tier threshold for goods and services. In mantenance and operation, it's very rare to to contract only services, there is uausally a good (parts) included the contract.

Commented [CD56R55]: @Cruce, Greg I agree with you.

I’d like to see 3 purchase types (goods/services; consultant; public projects)
Commented [HM57]: What do you think about setting a
lower limit that does not require approval? If I have a credit card I can buy small dollar amounts without fiscal officer or other approvals. If I process an invoice for the same amount or try to get a PO for that same dollar amount, I need
concurrence of others and likely multiple vendor proposals.

Commented [CD58R57]: @Horn, Matt I talked with
Brigitte this week about this topic – I agree there should be an allowable non-PO limit – that perhaps also matched the credit card ‘single transaction limit’
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", No bullets or numbering
Formatted: Font: Bold, Italic
Formatted: Font: Bold, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Bold, Italic
Commented [HM59]: The credit card section isn’t in this document. We should double check that section to ensure that it matches the purchasing process. My recollection (which is foggy) is credit cards are only to be used for emergencies in section 275.

Commented [CD60R59]: It’s merged into it now. The
current CC policy is vague on defined purchase levels and does not align with the purchasing process.

Formatted Table
Commented [HM61]: We should consider revising the
lower limit. Every department violates the PR/PO process by completing a PR after the cost has been incurred.

Commented [CD62R61]: @Horn, Matt@Elke, Brigitte
I’m open to this. But at what dollar limit?
Departments are violating some are violating at a much
higher % than others.

The underlying premise should not change that there should be fiscal officer approval of all purchases
...

Commented [HM63]: Deleted these items because “large”
is a subjective term. Deleted services since that will likely lead to violations (if I take a chainsaw to noble saw to have it ...

Commented [CD64R63]: We are going to define more
clearly
Commented [CD65]: Delete chart – define in words

* Maintenance divisions small value purchase limits are set a higher low-value limit to allow for operational flexibility * Monthly spend limits can Limit can be raised with Department Head approval – generally only for Department Cards.. * See Section 275 – Credit Card Policy

PURCHASE REQUISITIONS AND PURCHASE ORDERS
Purchase Requisitions
PRP-Card or Emergency PurchasesPPurchase rRequisitions are entered into the City’s Oracle ERP system.. A Ppurchase Rrequisition is a ‘request’ to purchases goods and services and accomplishes n internal document (electronic formthe following:
■• Initiates ana purchase order request;by one or more departments; ■• Identifies the equipment, materials, supplies, goods or services required; ■• Identifies the specific funds (account codes) that will be used to pay for the order; ■• If known, identifies recommended or potential suppliers, or leaves supplier selection up to Purchasing;
• Is approved by appropriate City representatives to grant budget authority to make the purchase; ■• See eExhibit 202A; 203A; which shows the approval process and the designated City representative that will approve the requisition in the City’s Oracle ERP system; ■• Upon approval, allocates or pre-encumbers funds to support the purchase.

All purchase requisitions are entered into the Oracle ERP financial system by the purchase requestor.

The requestor is responsible for entering and validating the accuracy of the following:
1) Item/services description, quantity, amount
1)2) If requesting Fiscal Year Open PO, a or if price is not known, budgeted or estimated amount*
2)3) NIGP Commodity Code *see NIGP code description document for more detail* 3)4) Account code
4)5) Supplier (if known)
5) List all other required information
6) Attached Supporting Documents (attach all applicable):
a. Quotes/Proposals
b. Quote Summaries/Comparisons
c. Agreement (Standard Agreement, On-Call Agreement, Cooperative Agreement) d. JOC Task Order
e. RFP/RFB package
f. Sole Source Approvals
g. Council Action Report for Council approval
Purchase Requisition Process
Departments must submit requisitions in the ERP system. Purchase Request approval levels are determined by tier a specific purchase falls into, which is determined by the purchase type and value.

See Exhibit 202-A for purchase tier thresholds.

Formatted: Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" +
Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" +
Indent at: 0.5"
Commented [CD66]: @Horn, Matt@Elke,
Brigitte@Stanwyck, Shelly
@Bell Jr., Charles
The ‘fiscal officer’ does not approve purchases in Public Works in Oracle like other departments; we either need to change the policy to allow for division manager approval, or configure Oralce to have designated fiscal officers approve purchase requistions and remove the division managers as level 1 approvers of their own purchase requests.

Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt

Purchase Requisition Approvals & Solicitation Requirements Tier Solicitation
Required
Level 1
Approver
Level 2
Approve
r
Level 3
Approver
Level 4
Approver
Purchasing Involvement
1 None Fiscal
Officer
None None None None
2 Informal
Quotes*
Fiscal
Officer
Depart
ment
Head
None None Assist with Quotes when
requested
3 Formal
Bidding*
Fiscal
Officer
Depart
ment
Head
None None Assist with RFP/RFB
package when requested
4 Formal
Bidding*
Fiscal
Officer
Depart
ment
Head
Budget
Manager
City Manager Assist with RFP/RFB
package when requested
5 Formal
Bidding*
Fiscal
Officer**
None None None Assist with RFP/RFB
package when requested
* Quotes and bidding processes are not required for purchases made pursuant to Section 204 of this Manual. ** All other approvals will be applied in the external Council Agenda Report process.

Note: The Level 1 Approver is an authorized employee in each department such as a Fiscal Officer.

Purchase Orders
A purchase order is a document that formalizes encumber funds and a purchase transaction with a supplier. It sets forth the supplier’s obligations and the City’s responsibilities and requirements.

Purchase Orders are issued after all required policies and procedures are met. A supplier’s acceptance of a Purchase Order constitutes a contract.

Purchase Orders allow the City to communicate its intentions to suppliers and its terms and conditions protect the City from risk. When staff purchase outside of a purchase order and bypass the City purchasing policy, the City and its taxpayers to face undue risk..

Purchase orders may include:
1) Price
2) Description of the requested item(s) or services
3) Delivery terms and transportation mode
4) Terms and conditions,
5) and allAll supporting documentation submitted by the requisitioner other agreements pertinent to the purchase and its execution by the supplier
Commented [CD67]: Delete Chart
The chart is redundant of the approval thresholds graphic Purchasing’s involvement does not mirror what is on the chart
Formatted: Font: 9 pt
Formatted: Font: 9 pt
Formatted: Font: 9 pt
Formatted Table
Formatted: Font: 9 pt
Formatted: Font: 9 pt
Formatted Table
Formatted: Font: 9 pt
Formatted: Font: Not Bold, No underline
Formatted: Font: Not Bold, No underline
Formatted: Font: Not Bold, No underline

a. Quotes/Proposals
b. Quote Summaries/Comparisons
c. Agreement (Standard Agreement, On-Call Agreement, Cooperative Agreement) d. JOC Task Order
e. RFP/RFB package
f. Sole Source Approvals
g. Council Action Report for Council approval
a. Attached Supporting Documents
b. Incorporated Agreements (City Agreements, Cooperative Agreements) c. Incorporated Quotes/Proposals
d. Council Action Report (if Council approval is required for award of a contract/purchase order)
A supplier’s acceptance of a Purchase Order constitutes a contract. Purchase Orders shall be issued by the Purchasing Division after all required procedures for selection are met.

There are three types of Purchase Orders:

There are three main purchase order types utilized by the City. 1) Standard Regular Purchase Order
- aA one-time PO nonrecurring order, to a written to a supplier for a definite quantity, price, and delivery schedule.
1)• of identified item(s) or cost. It is the most appropriate for one-off purchases of goods and services when you know know the price, quantity, and delivery date. method used for purchase of supplies and services.
2) Open Fiscal Year Not-to-Exceed Blanket Purchase Order A purchase order not tied to a formal contract that allows for multiple purchases in a fiscal year (more than 12 times per fiscal year)
– a Purchase order which authorizes repetitive purchases of goods and services from a specific supplier up to a maximum, not-to-exceed dollar amount. It is valid from date of issuance until the end of a fiscal year or specific date (unless funds are depleted sooner). • Ideal for ongoing services purchases
• PO is an estimated budget amount, not a guarantee the City will purchase the full amount • Staff must close fiscal year open POs at the end of each fiscal year and choose whether or not to re-open in next Fiscal YearY.
3) Open Contract Purchase Order – tied to a multi-year City Contract Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", No bullets or numbering
Formatted: List Paragraph, Numbered + Level: 2 +
Numbering Style: a, b, c, … + Start at: 1 + Alignment:

Left + Aligned at: 0.75" + Indent at: 1"
Commented [BJC68]: Repetitive.

Commented [CD69R68]: @Bell Jr., Charles I inserted
this language in because staff submit requisitions after the purchase is already made. These purchases violate the
policy.

We’ve communicated to the analysts the violations, they still happen, and this is not uncommon across other City’s I’ve reached out to other procurement directors about it.

For tier 1 purchases (lowest value) we don’t challenge every purchase – but for any tier 2 purchase – (higher value) – if the requisition is done after the fact – it’s immediately challenged – department staff I believe don’t always
understand the risks in not having a PO# in place for higher priced purchases.

Commented [CD70]: Matt Horn note: List what
requirements you are looking for or reference if documented in policy
Commented [CD71R70]: @Horn, Matt – The
requirements are described above in both the requisition and purchase order
Formatted: Font: Bold
Formatted: Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.5" +
Indent at: 0.75"
Formatted: Normal, No bullets or numbering
Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 +
Aligned at: 0.5" + Indent at: 0.75"

A purchase order tied to a formal contract that allows for multiple purchases for one fiscal year, and/or over multiple fiscal years.
• Upon execution of a contract for a fixed dollar amount – an open PO can be issued for that fixed amount
• Contract open PO’s can carry over multiple ffiscal yyears until the end of the contract Contract Purchase Order – a Purchase order with an underlying Agreement that is set up for encumbrance purposes only. This is used when all work descriptions, costs and terms are incorporated in a City Agreement and the Contract PO is not distributed to the contractor.

NON-PURCHASE ORDER EXCEPTIONS
Below is a list of categories that can be paid without a purchase order • Bank fees
• Filing fees: used for filing city and county permits
• Training
• Postage
• Travel Reimbursements and Advances
• Tax payments; property taxes
• Instructor and Artist services related to programs offered through Parks & Recreation community programs for art, instructors, tutors, referees, etc. • PPE (Personal Protective Boot Allowance) – Takken’s and Boot Barn reimbursements • Dues and memberships in trade or professional organizations, fees for trade or career fairs, fees for job-related seminars and training
• Subscriptions, periodicals, newspapers, books and library materials, electronic subscriptions, media maps, or similar publications in printed or electronic form • Water, sewer, telecommunications, electrical, or other utility services • Revenue refund or reimbursement payments
Payments related to fringe benefits (dental, vision, life insurance, employee assistance, CalPERS
•
202-4
202-
5 Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 +
Aligned at: 0.5" + Indent at: 0.75"
Commented [CD72]: Contract PO’s do not exist in
Oracle.

Commented [HM73R72]: Should we take the Contract
Purchase Order language and include it under Standard
Purchase Orders then?
Commented [CD74R72]:

Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 +
Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold

Purchasing Thresholds Exhibit 202-A

Purchasing Thresholds Exhibit 202-A

Purchasing Thresholds Exhibit 202-A

Section 203

BIDDING PROCESS
For purchases exceeding the City’s orthresholds listed in Exhibit 202-A which do not fall within the exceptions listed in Section 220 of this Manual, City staff must engage in competitive bidding in some form, as required by the Municipal Code. Departments should work with the Purchasing Division for competitive bidding processes.

TYPES OF SOLICITATIONS
Requests for Bids (RFB)
An RFB is a request to suppliers to submit an offer or quote for specific, defined goods or products.

An RFB should be used when seeking a fixed price for goods with known specifications (e.g. Dell XPS 13 laptops). RFBs are used for Construction of Public Project and when setting up a Job Order Contract (discussed in Section 250 of this Manual). RFBs must be posted on the City’s designated solicitation site.

Requests for Proposals (RFP)
An RFP is a request to suppliers or consultants to submit a proposal for goods or services for which the exact specifications or methodology of providing the desired goods or services is not defined. An RFP is generally used for more complex goods or services purchases. RFPs allow for consideration of factors other than price, including the qualifications of the supplier and the supplier’s ability to perform. RFPs must be posted on the City’s designated solicitation site.

Requests for Qualifications (RFQ)
An RFQ is a request for a statement of qualifications for a certain class of suppliers or consultants.

RFQs are used to develop On-call or Master Agreements. RFQs must be posted on the City’s designated solicitation site.

Informal Quotes/Quick Quotes
When formal bidding is not required by the City’s purchasing policy (see Section 202 of this Manual), staff may seek informal quotes either by posting a Quick Quote request on the City’s online solicitation program or by seeking quotes by verbal or written request. An informal or quick quote is a simple request for pricing on simple, low-cost goods or services. If quotes are sought by verbal or written request, staff must create a quote summary to record the quotations received. 203-1
Formatted: Normal
Commented [CD75]: Move to Section 250 - Delete all of
203
Commented [CD76]: Public Projects are considered
complex which mostly go out as RFB this ancillary sentence is not needed.

Commented [CD77]: We don’t have a quick quote online
solicitation program, not sure we need it? I’d consider removing this sentence and just leaving the seeking quotes by verbal or written request
Commented [HM78R77]: Works for me

BIDDING CRITERIA
RFB RFPs RFQ Quick Quotes
Formal Solicitation Yes Yes Yes No
Goal Lowest Price that provides the best
proposal to complete the
workLowest
Responsible Bidder
Most Qualified Bidder Lowest Price
Public Opening
Requirements
Opened publicly and
read aloud
Opened publicly and
pricing read aloud
Not opened publicly -
List of suppliers who
submit Qualifications
made publicly available
Not opened publicly
Response Evaluated By Department with
Purchasing assistance
Department project
team
Formal Evaluation
Committee with
numerous participants
Department with
Purchasing
assistance
Specific Evaluation
Process
Determine whether Bid
is responsive, then
select lowest responsive
Bid. No scoring of
specification response is
involved.

Responses reviewed to
determine responsibility
of proposals.

Responsible proposals
are reviewed for factors
listed in Section

3.24.210 of the
Municipal Code
Statement of
qualifications evaluated
and a score assigned.

Some specification
responses can be
pass/fail only with no
associated score.

Determine whether
Quote is responsive,
then select lowest
responsive Quote.

No scoring of
specification
response is
involved.

Cost Evaluation Process Costs for responsive
bids are compared to
each other to identify
lowest cost
Cost for responsible
bids are compared to
each other to identify
lowest cost
If applicable, costs of
labor or services are
scored
Costs for responsive
quotes are compared
to each other to
identify lowest cost
Negotiation Allowed
after Selection
No, unless all bidders
are asked for a Best and
Final Offer (BAFO)
Yes Yes No, unless all
bidders are asked for
a Best and Final
Offer (BAFO)
Award Basis Lowest responsible
bidder wins
Lowest responsible
proposal wins
Evaluation Committee
Recommendation
Lowest responsive
quote wins

BIDDING PROCESSES
RFB Process
The following process shall be employed when releasing an RFB:

Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Commented [CD79]: Brigitte, is there language you’d like to to include regarding Municipal Code requirements to
accept lowest bid for RFB?
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Commented [CD80]: DELETE
The City generally only goes out for RFB on construction and public projects – consider removing the non-construction RFB
Further, the City should not RFB goods and then consider only lowest price. For example: The City issues an RFB for paper products – the winning bid company is from Asia – half-way around the world – the City needs to consider other factors – (local, environmentally preferable product criteria, shipping distances, etc., the City should issue RFPs in most all non-public works circumstances. Government purchasing does not solely consider pricing – social policy,
environmental policy, etc. are all factors.

Commented [CD81]:

DELETE THE PROCESS FLOW CHART
The left side of the flow appears to be describing approval flow outside of Oracle and depending on Tier level should involve budget approvals if necessary, or involve budget generally. The 1st question should be ‘do we have budget and approval to draft RFB/RFP?
This is not how workflow currently proceeds Citywide.

There are dual procedures – one outside and one inside of Oracle.

This RFB flow will be different depending on the Tier levels For Public Works – purchasing should be or at present
...

RFB Package
The City’s template “RFB Package” must be used to create the RFB document provided to prospective suppliers (See Section 250 of this Manual). When posting the RFB, the following should also be included:
1) A precise description of the desired goods;
2) The time and place of public opening of sealed Bids; 3) The location and deadline for submission of Bids;
4) The deadline for submission of questions (if applicable).

RFB Submission and Opening
All RFB submissions (bids) must be sealed (whether in a sealed, unopened envelope for paper bids or with electronic encryption for electronic bids) and must be opened publicly at a designated location, date and time.

Bids or proposals which are received after the date and time specified or in a different format than that requested in the solicitation may not be considered.

RFB Evaluation/Bid Tabulation
Departments, in cooperation with Purchasing, must determine if the submitted bids are responsive (i.e.: did the bid provide quotes for the specified goods, as requested). Then, the lowest responsive bid must be selected for award.

RFB Award
Bidders should be notified when a bid has been selected for award and that award has been approved (see procedure for approval of contracts/Purchase Orders in Section 202 of this Manual). If the City is unable to agree to contract terms with the selected supplier after a good faith effort, the award may be given to the next lowest, responsive bid.

Non-Construction RFP Process
The following process shall be employed when releasing an RFP:
203-3
Commented [CD82]: Purchasing has little to no
involvement in whether bids are responsive and awarded
aside from ensuring the City is in compliance with the
Policy. Award determinations are made by department
project teams; purchasing functions more on coordinating the process and ensuring compliance to policy
Commented [CD83]: There is no procedure written in the
current policy manual
Commented [CD84]: DELETE
Procedureal Flow
See RFB notes – same comments

Non-Construction RFP Package
The City’s template “Regular RFP Package” must be used to create the RFP document provided to prospective suppliers (See Section 203 of this Manual). When posting the RFP, the following should also be included:
1) A general description of the desired goods or services to be purchased; 2) The desired qualifications of proposers;
3) The information or documentation required for submission of proposals; 4) The date, time and location of public opening of sealed Proposals; 5) The location and deadline for submission of Proposals; 6) The deadline for submission of questions (if applicable); 7) The date, time and location of the pre-bid conference (if applicable).

Non-Construction RFP Submission and Opening
All RFP submissions (proposals) must be sealed (whether in a sealed, unopened envelope for paper bids or with electronic encryption for electronic bids) and must be opened publicly at a designated location, date and time.

Proposals which are received after the date and time specified or in a different format than that requested in the solicitation may not be considered.

Non-Construction RFP Evaluation/Bid Tabulation
The department in cooperation with Purchasing will first determine whether proposals are responsive to the RFP. Then, a designated evaluation team (subject matter experts, department stakeholders) will review responsive proposals using the criteria listed in Section 3.24.210 of the Municipal Code.

The lowest responsible proposal will then be recommended for award.

For professional services related to project management, construction management, design, engineering, surveying, mapping, landscape architecture, or architectural related services are to be evaluated based on demonstrated competence and qualifications for the type of professional services 203-4
Commented [CD85]: If a qualified supplier misses the
electronic submission – should we automatically disqualify the bidders? I’d argue no. Deadlines are at times missed due to circumstances – The City should not miss out on the
potential value of the most qualified proposal and should consider submissions submitted via email perhaps by 5pm the same day the bid ends (our set time for bid endings is 3 pm.

Commented [CD86]: Purchasing has little to no
involvement in whether bids are responsive and awarded
aside from ensuring the City is in compliance with the
Policy.

Award determinations are made by department project
teams; purchasing functions more on coordinating the
process and ensuring compliance to policy
Commented [CD87]: RFP’s are not awarded by lowest
bid – consider removing this entire sentence

desired. As such, price shall not be used as a criterion in the evaluation and ranking/selection of the most highly qualified firm.

Non-Construction RFP Award
Proposers should be notified when a proposal has been selected for award and that award has been approved (see procedure for approval of contracts/Purchase Orders in Section 202 of this Manual).

If the City is unable to agree to contract terms with the selected supplier after a good faith effort, the award may be given to the next highest scored, responsive bid.

Construction/Public Project RFB
The following process should be employed when releasing an RFP related to construction or public projects:

Public Project RFB Package
The City’s template “Public Project RFB Package” must be used to create the RFB document provided to prospective bidders (See Section 250 of this Manual). When posting the RFB, the following should also be included:
1) A general description of the desired work, goods, or services to be purchased; 2) The desired qualifications of proposers, including licensing requirements; 3) The information or documentation required for submission of proposals, including bid bonds requirements;
4) Information regarding applicable prevailing wage laws; 5) The date, time and location of public opening of sealed Proposals; 6) The location and deadline for submission of Proposals; 7) The deadline for submission of questions (if applicable); 8) The date, time and location of the pre-bid conference (if applicable).

Public Project RFB Submission and Opening
All RFB submissions (bids) must be sealed (whether in a sealed, unopened envelope for paper bids or with electronic encryption for electronic bids) and must be opened publicly at a designated location, date and time.

Commented [CD88]: There is no procedure for approval
in the manual
Commented [CD89]: The City generally only goes out for
RFB on construction and public projects – consider
removing the non-construction RFB
Further, the City should not RFB goods and then consider only lowest price. For example: The City issues an RFB for paper products – the winning bid company is from Asia – half-way around the world – the City needs to consider other factors – (local, environmentally preferable product criteria, etc., the City should issue RFPs in most all non-public works circumstances. Government purchasing does not solely
consider pricing – social policy, environmental policy, etc. are all factors.

Commented [HM90R89]: Dan – Based on your
understanding of how we process construction related RFBs, does this flow chart follow our practice. I’m thinking that PW doesn’t follow this flow, but do others?
Commented [CD91R89]: The flow should be taken out of
the policy. This is internal procedure and we should refer to the CIP design manual for PW RFP public construction
projects.

Bidders which are received after the date and time specified or in a different format than that requested in the solicitation may not be considered.

Public Project RFB Evaluation/Bid Tabulation
The department will first determine whether proposals are responsive to the RFB. All responsive bids will be tabulate and bid pricing compared. The lowest cost responsive bid will then be recommended for award.

Public Project RFB Award
Bidders should be notified when a bid is recommended for award and that award has been approved (see procedure for approval of contracts/Purchase Orders in Section 202 of this Manual).

RFQ Process
The following process shall be employed when releasing an RFQ for On-Call or Master Agreements:
203-6
Commented [CD92]: No procedure in manual
Commented [CD93]: The CIP design manual goes into
much more detail on this flow chart – consider removing and referring to the CIP design manual.

The City can follow this process for non-public works
contractors – I’ve had discussions with IT regarding how to incorporate their services contractors into this flow. Needs more clarification.

RFQ Package
The City’s template “RFQ Package” must be used to create the RFQ document provided to prospective suppliers (See Section 250 of this Manual). When posting the RFQ, the following should also be included:
1) A general description of the type of services to be included in the On-Call Contract or Master Agreement;
2) The desired qualifications of proposers;
3) The information or documentation required for submission of qualifications; 4) The date, time and location of public opening of sealed Qualifications; 5) The location and deadline for submission of Qualifications; 6) The deadline for submission of questions (if applicable).

RFQ Submission and Opening
RFQ submissions (qualifications) do not need to be before opening. City Staff shall make the list of suppliers who submit Qualifications in response to an RFQ available to the public upon request.

Qualifications which are received after the date and time specified or in a different format than that requested in the solicitation may not be considered.

RFQ Evaluation
The department will score the Qualifications submitted in response to the RFQ. The supplier(s) deemed most qualified will then be recommended for award.

RFP Award
Suppliers who submit Qualifications should be notified when an award has been approved (see procedure for approval of contracts/Purchase Orders in Section 202 of this Manual). Resulting OnCall Contracts and Master Agreements must be re-bid every 5 years.

Quick Quote (Informal Quote) Process
Tier 2 purchases may be made utilizing an informal quotation process. Staff should seek at least three quotes either in writing, by phone or utilizing the City’s electronic solicitation system. Staff must then select the lowest responsive quote. NO BID PURCHASING Municipal Code Chapter 3.24.060 sets forth guidelines for when bidding procedures are not required.

TIER 0 and 1 LOW COST PPURCHASING
Section 3.24.060 A – When the purchase amounts are less than the bid requirements. All Tier 1 purchases all within this category. do not require a competitive bidding process (see Exhibit 202A; 203A) Section 202 for thresholds) for Tier 1 purchases). However, City staff should seek cost comparisons whenever practical.

Commented [CD94]: The City does not have an electronic
solicitation system for Tier 1 and 2 purchases.

Remove? Selecting the lowest quote depends on the type of purchase. If a simple goods lowest price is fine, but if it’s services, consultants, factors other than lowest price are to be considered.

Section 295 also specified that staff should write sole source memos for this level if they could not get more than one quote. Given the smaller market size of SLO this
requirement warrants further discussion. I’d recommend
moving sole source memos to Tier 3-5 levels (individual purchase and cumulative)

EMERGENCY PURCHASING
Section 3.24.060 B – an emergency purchase is made to address a situation that creates an immediate and serious need for equipment, supplies, or services that cannot be met through normal purchasing procedures and where the lack of such equipment, supplies or services would seriously threaten the functioning of city government, the preservation of property, public peace, or the health or safety of any person.

City staff must not use the emergency purchase process to circumvent the general purchasing policy or supplier licensing requirements. City staff should seek quotes and determine the reasonableness of pricing when making an emergency purchase whenever possible. Contracts for frequent as-needed emergency services should be established with competitive bidding procedures.

Emergency purchases must be justified in sufficient detail to explain the basis for suspending the usual competitive procurement process. Whenever possible, City staff in need of an emergency purchase should receive prior approval from the Purchasing Division by submitting the City’s Emergency Purchase Justification Form (located in the Purchasing SharePoint page). https://slocitycloud.sharepoint.com/sites/SLOHub/Finance/purch/SitePages/Home.aspx If prior approval is not feasible, City staff should submit the Emergency Purchase Justification Form to the Purchasing Analyst as soon as possible and at least within 24 hours after the purchase has been made.

Unless a City credit card is used for the purchase, City staff must enter a Purchasing Requisition for the emergency purchase as soon as possible and should attach the justification backup to the requisition.

SOLE SOURCE PURCHASING
Section 3.24.060 (C) General Rules
Generally, it is the policy of the City to solicit quotations or bids for purchases of commodities or services for specified dollar amounts and to select suppliers on a competitive basis. However, pursuant to San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 3.24.060 (C), certain acquisitions in which the products or services can be purchased may only be obtained from a single “sole-source” may be purchased without engaging in bidding procedures..

Examples of legitimate sole source purchases include the following:
• Only one known source exists for the goods or services as determined by documented research and there is no reasonable alternative source that meets the City’s needs • When only one source meets the City’s business needs and avoids high switching costs (e.g., compatibility with existing systems, unique features that serve the desired goals of the City, etc.)
• Purchases of proprietary items which only the manufacturer, owner, or designated re-seller is the permitted seller (this includes purchases in which purchasing from a non-designated seller would result in nullification of manufacturer warranties) • Purchases of services from a contractor with specific and unique knowledge of existing City systems, procedures or historical data that is critical to the project or city goals where the use of another contractor would result in high switching costs or project delays due to lack of such Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Space After: 0 pt
Formatted: Normal, Space After: 12 pt
Commented [CD95]:

Consider adding to the CIP guide. And, also Purchasing can try to make sure to follow up on emergencies follow up and make sure requisitions happen in a timely fashion.

knowledge.

Examples of non-legitimate sole source purchases include:
• Purchases of proprietary goods or services that may be sold by more than one source (i.e., multiple resellers may sell one proprietary piece of software) • Brand name preferences: exception: If a specific line of products was previously chosen through a proper process and has been adopted citywide (e.g.: Dell computer products) A “sole source” purchase may be entered into without a competitive process because only one known source for the desired goods or services exists, only a single provider can fulfill the requirements to meet the City’s needs, or the purchase constitutes an upgrade to an existing system adopted by the City. In such circumstances, competition is not feasible and, therefore, the competitive process is waived.Staff must draft a “Sole-Source” memorandum to justify the purchase. The City’s Sole Source Memorandum template is located in the Purchasing SharePoint page. https://slocitycloud.sharepoint.com/sites/SLOHub/Finance/purch/SitePages/Home.aspx Sole Source memos explain the basis for suspending the competitive procurement process and provide enough detail so that a person from the public, who has no experience, or info on a purchase, could read the memo and understand the basis for the sole-sourcing of the purchase.

Sole Source memos are public record, and answers to the questions should be accurate, so if the City ended up in litigation, the department staff who drafted the request, and the purchasing analyst, can assert the answers are accurate in a court of law.

The Purchasing Analyst must approve the sole-source before the purchase. Approved Sole Source Justifications should be attached to requisitions when submitted for a purchase order. An approved sole source is effective for the term of the contract, or if no contract, for three years.

Some examples of legitimate sole source purchases include the following:
■ Purchases in which only one known source exists for the goods or services as determined by documented research
■ Purchases in which there is no reasonable alternative source that meets the City’s needs ■ Purchases in which only one source meets the City’s business needs (e.g., compatibility with existing systems, unique features that serve the desired goals of the City, etc.). ■ Purchases of proprietary items which only the manufacturer, owner, or designated reseller is permitted sell (this includes purchases in which purchasing from a nondesignated seller would result in nullification of manufacturer warranties) ■ Upgrades to existing systems where purchasing a different solution or product would result in significant additional costs (e.g., data conversion, re-training of staff, new system implementation costs)
■ Purchases of services from a contractor with specific and unique knowledge of existing Commented [CD96]: @Elke, Brigitte I’m not sure the
non-legitimate examples add clarity or value? But open to keeping in.

Commented [BJC97]: Random thought. Any benefit in
having a definitions section in the manual? One place to go and not have to find definition in the document.

Commented [CD98R97]: Yes. I have one drafted for the
credit card section but will expand to the full
policy
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Space After: 0 pt
Formatted: Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" +
Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Space Before: 0 pt, After: 12 pt, Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"

City systems, procedures or historical data that is critical to the project or city goals where use of another contractor would result in significant costs or project delays due to lack of such knowledge.

COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT PURCHASING
Section 3.24.060 (E) - City staff may use established cooperative agreements for purchases without a competitive bidding process. Cooperative agreements take advantage of already negotiated competitively bid RFP contracts. , if those cooperative agreements were competitively bid. City staff in coordination with the Purchasing Division are is responsible for researching cooperative agreements to einsure the bidding process complies with City competitive bidding rules.

City staff should research the pricing for the goods or services being sought and compare the pricing set forth in the cooperative agreement is reasonable. If the pricing set forth in a cooperative agreement is not reasonable, City staff should initiate a competitive bidding process rather than leveraging the cooperative agreement.

For more detail on cooperative agreements, why the City uses them, and a current list of suppliers with cooperative agreements the City can purchase from, refer to the purchasing SharePoint site https://slocitycloud.sharepoint.com/sites/SLOHub/Finance/purch/SitePages/Home.aspx Local Dealers
Local Preference
If a local dealer, as defined in Municipal Code 3.24.060 (E) as being a supplier within City limits can provide the same brand, model and configuration of any item in a cooperative purchase agreement at or below the cooperative agreement supplier’s cost with the same terms and conditions, City staff may use the local dealer without initiating a separate competitive bidding process.

SECTION 205

ETHICAL CONDUCT
The purpose of this policy is to set forth the ethical standards of professional behavior expected of all officials and employees conducting purchasing activities on behalf of the City.

STANDARDS OF CONDUCT
Every employee or official engaging in purchasing activities on behalf of the City is required to employ the following standards of conduct:

Consider, first, the interests of the City in all transactions. • Carry-out the established policies of the City.
• Purchase without prejudice, seeking to obtain the maximum value for each expenditure of public funds.
• Subscribe to and work for honesty and truth in buying and selling, and to denounce all forms Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Space After: 0 pt
Formatted: Font: Bold, Italic, Underline
Commented [CD99]: Section 205 was not included in
5/1/18 Council Approved Update
Commented [BJC100R99]: Good add. Just consider
updating the formatting before finalization so all part of on document.
i.e. Section ___Ethical Standards of Conduct
Commented [HM101]: Note there could many different
perspectives on this. One staff member may think that
buying the lowest cost widget is in the best interest of the City, some may think a widget of higher quality or a widget that can be procurded faster is in the best interest of the City.

Commented [CD102R101]: @Horn, Matt
The premise of this is geared towards examples of using a supplier who may be their salesperson friend, and that
supplier is inflating their pricing by a large margin over their competition, the manager knows this, but still keeps using their salesperson friend.
*note this particular example I’ve described has happened this past year, and discovered through the ERP data.

It’s hard to include every scenario with Ethics policy.

This ethics policy language is from the 2015 Policy – I haven’t changed or edited the language in this update.

and manifestations of commercial bribery.
• Cooperate with all organizations and individuals engaged in activities designed to enhance the development of purchasing practices.
• Respect obligations to others, and require the same respect from others for their obligations.

PROHIBITED PRACTICES
The following practices are prohibited in performing purchasing activities on behalf of the City:
• Having a financial or personal beneficial interest (directly or indirectly) in any contract or purchase order for supplies, equipment, services, or projects furnished to the City. • Accepting or receiving (directly or indirectly) from any person, firm, or corporation to whom any contract or purchase order may be awarded (by rebate, gift or otherwise) any money or anything of value, or any promise, obligation or contract for future reward or compensation.

Inexpensive advertising items bearing the name of the firm—such as pens, pencils, paperweights or calendars—are not considered articles of value or gifts with this policy. • Using information available to officials and employees, solely because of their City position, for personal profit, gain or advantage.
• Directly or indirectly furnishing services or information not available to all prospective bidders to any person or firm bidding on, or who may reasonably be expected to bid on, a contract with the City.
• Providing confidential information to persons to whom issuance of such information has not been authorized.
• Using a position or status in the City to solicit (directly or indirectly) business of any kind; or to purchase products at special discounts or upon special concessions for personal private use from any person or firm who sells or solicits sales to the City. • Serving the interests of any organization (either as an officer, employee, member of the board of directors, or in any capacity for consideration) which transacts or attempts to transact business with the City for profit when such employee holds a City position of review or control—even though remote—over such business transactions.

RESPONSIBILITY
• Employees. Each employee is responsible for following these practices. Violation of this policy may result in disciplinary action, termination of employment or criminal prosecution. • Department Heads. Department heads are responsible for ensuring that all employees of their department who conduct purchasing activities possess a thorough understanding of these standards of ethical conduct and prohibited practices.

Section 215

BUSINESS LICENSE AND TAX-FORM REQUIREMENT

BUSINESS LICENSES
The City requires entities that execute contracts with and do business within or transacting with the City to obtain a business license and tax certificate, according to Chapter 5.01 of the Municipal Code.

Businesses that have a place of business within City limits must have a business license. City staff may not transact with such businesses who have failed to maintain a business license.

Consultants and services suppliers who execute contracts with the City for ongoing services, whether or not they travel into the City to perform the services, must have a Business License.

Services providers, who have a business address outside of City limits, and travel into City limits and perform services within the City must have a business license.

Whenever possible, City staff should direct purchases to suppliers who have a valid business license.

A current listing of businesses who have valid business licenses is located in the Purchasing SharePoint page.with the City’s Revenue Division.

No purchases may be made from any supplier that does not have a valid business license, unless specifically exempted from that requirement, as specified below.

EXCEPTIONS
The following types of suppliers are exempt from the business license requirement:(exempted by the Finance Director, according to the adjustment powers outlined in Section 5.01.501) • Business A business that are owned and operated solely by minors under the age of 18; • Charitable, religious and nonprofit organizations;
• Any business for which requiring a business license would violated Federal or State laws or contractual agreements;
• Out-of-state and on-line businesses whose only business conducted is a purchase initiated by the City to supply goods over a cumulative amount of $100,000 (See South Dakota v. Wayfair 585 US (2018) The Court held that out of state sellers were required to collect and remit sales tax if they sold more than $100,000 of goods or services or engaged in 200 or more transactions) Commented [HM103]: We should have HR review this
section for concurrence.

Commented [BJC104]: Same comment as with Ethics
section.

Commented [HM105]: PW Commonly purchase printing
for plans and specification which is completed off-site. I just want to make sure that we are still allowed to complete this type of purchase without going through finance.

Commented [CD106R105]: This entire section should be
deleted in my opinion; this is old policy language from 2015 policy. Yes, you can still purchase printing for plans, etc.

But we may in the future have contracts in place that govern the pricing for your purchases
Commented [HM107]: What does this term mean?
Commented [CD108R107]: I don’t know. I think we
should delete this entire section; it’s from 2015; and it is not followed
Commented [BJC109]: Consider adding when this should
not be done. Leaving it wide open can lead to abuse.

Commented [BJC110]: Consider updating the Terms and
Conditions Template section since right now it makes it appear that all contracts require a business license. Maybe something like license required unless prior authorization received from Purchasing that an exception to the license apples.

Commented [CD111]: No language on Tax Certificate.

Business License and Tax Certificate are together on same application
The Finance Director has the power to waive License only but not Tax (per Municipal Code disconnect)
Commented [CD112]: Coordinate with revenue? Provide
an active link of current business license businesses? Not everyone in the City has access to HDL. – I’m concerned about this language since renewals happen all year, but mostly in June.

Commented [HM113]: We should include a link to this
document. I’m thinking that folks would actually look at this more often if it didn’t require reaching out to other staff located in another work area to determine.

Commented [CD114]: The City needs a stronger
definition of “Nexus” to enforce.

Superme Court decision defines Nexus as out-of-state
...

Commented [BJC115R114]: Where is the memo located?
Commented [CD116R114]: @Bell Jr., Charles
https://slocitycloud.sharepoint.com/:w:/s/SLOHub/Finance/E ZpeRRJKq8FNhjg-4cfdVIIBodYsvAzCQOvHK- ...

Commented [CD117]: Examples? What scenarios violate
State or Federal Law?
Commented [CD118]: I’m using federal law criteria, I
realize the City can make this $$ figure what it wants it to be, but must balance it against costs of enforcement.
...

Section 225

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CHANGE ORDERS
OVERVIEWin accordance with the Uniform Public Construction Cost Account Act.

When the City awards a construction contract, the need for contract change orders (CCO) is not unusual. CCO are required whenever the scope of work changes from that in the original contract or an unknown condition of the site requires a change in the scope of work. Usually a contingency amount is established when the project is authorized for advertisement or award budget is finalized upon contract award to accommodate limited CCO’s. The purpose of this policy is to establish limits of authority for approving construction project CCO.

GOALS
■ Ensure appropriate authority and accountability in the approval of change orders. ■ Minimize the time needed to approve a CCO in order to avoid project delays. ■ Establish a system under which the organizational level at which approval is given is commensurate with the size of CCO and size of project.
■ Eliminate the potential for approval of a CCO when contingency funds are insufficient.

POLICIES
Conditions for Approval of CCO's by Staff
■ Sufficient contingency funds are budgeted and available in order for the Public Works Director or City Manager (approved designees) to approve a CCO. ■ The nature of work in the CCO is not significantly different from that in the contract. ■ Authorization limits are based on an individual CCO amount, not the aggregate amount of all CCO.
■ Authorization limits apply to CCO for increases in contract amounts only. ■ When the aggregate amount of CCO reaches 75% of the contingency, the awarding authority shall be informed of the status of the project and the sufficiency of funding to complete the project.
■ Work will not be broken up into multiple CCO in order to circumvent this policy. ■ All CCO must be in writing and approved by the appropriate contract parties consistent with the authorized limits established in this policy.

Construction Change Orders
■ A copy of each approved CCO will be transmitted promptly to the Finance Department with monthly progress paymentsDivision.
■ The Purchasing Authority may grant approval of CCO in excess of $175,000 under the Commented [BJC119]: Always recommend writing out
definition before making it an acronym.

Commented [BJC120]: Where is this guide located? Nice
to help staff know where to find a document.

Commented [HM121]: If we are going back to council
we should update by reference so we don’t get stuck with old limits. Current limits are:

Tier 2: 60k
Tier 3: 200k
I think we should also consider raise tier 1 up as well. 15k sounds about right to me, but we should chat to find out if everyone is comfortable with that.

Commented [NB122R121]: Agree Tier 1 should be
increased to allow greater flexibility for minor work. Not much can be accomplished for less than $7,500 these days. I think an $10k increase is reasonable for a limit UP TO (not under) $17,500.

Commented [HM123]: JOC have an existing contract in
place. Tier 2 indicates that are getting three quotes. We typically only have one contractor under contract for a specific type of JOC. It doesn’t make sense to get quotes for a JOC purchase.

following circumstances (all three factors must be present):
o Immediate approval of the CCO is necessary to avoid delay. o The CCO is an integral and mandatory component of the project. o The costs associated with delay of the project would be excessive. The Project Manager is responsible for carrying out this policy.
■ The Purchasing Authority is also authorized to approve CCO in excess of $175,000 related to Job Order Contract Task Orders.

Authorization Limits
■ Public Works Director/ Designee Not to exceed $6045,000 ■ Purchasing Authority (City Manager/Designee) Not to exceed $200175,000 ■ City Council* Greater than contract or $200175,000
________________________________________________________________________________ * See circumstances above where the Purchasing Authority may approve CCO’s in excess of $175,000.

Originally Approved by the Council on August 3, 1993; Revised by the Council on April 15, 2003 and June 2, 2015.

SECTION 250

COMPETITIVE BIDDING CRITERIA AND STANDARD BID DOCUMENTS

BIDDING TYPES AND AWARD CRITERIA
RFB RFPs RFQ Quotes
Yes Yes Yes No
Goal Lowest responsive bid
submitted by
responsible bidder
Most qualified
bidder that
provides the
best proposal
Most qualified bidder Lowest price of most
qualified bidder
Public Opening
Requirements
Opened publicly and
read aloud if public or
bidders are in
attendance
Opened
publicly and
pricing read
aloud if public
or bidders are
in attendance
Not opened publicly - List
of suppliers who submit
qualifications made
publicly available
Not opened publicly
Response Evaluated
By
Department project
team
Department
project team
Department project team Department with
purchasing assistance
Specific Evaluation
Process
Determine whether bid
is responsive, then
select lowest
responsive bid
submitted by
responsible bidder.

No scoring of
specification response
is involved.

Responses
reviewed to
determine most
qualified bidder
Responsible
proposals are
reviewed for
factors listed in
Section

3.24.210 of the
Municipal Code
Statement of qualifications
evaluated and a score
assigned. Some
specification responses can
be pass/fail only with no
associated score.

Determine whether quote
is responsive, then select
lowest, most
qualifiedresponsive
quote. No scoring of
specification response is
involved.

Cost Evaluation
Process
Costs for responsive
bids are compared to
each other to identify
lowest cost
Cost for
responsible bids
are compared to
each other to
identify most
qualified lowest
cost bidder
If applicable, costs of labor
or services are scored
Costs for responsive
quotes are compared to
each other to identify
lowest, most
qualifiedcost
Negotiation
Allowed after
Selection
No, unless all bidders
are asked for a best
and final Offer
(BAFO)
Yes Yes No, unless all bidders are
asked for a best and final
Offer
Award Basis Lowest responsible
bidder wins
Lowest most
qualified
responsible
proposal wins
Evaluation Committee
Recommendation
Lowest most qualified
responsive quote wins

BID DOCUMENT TEMPLATES
With the assistance of the City Attorney, the Purchasing Division maintains the City’s contract Commented [BJC124]: @Just noting for clean up when
doc ready for final. Make title same as other sections.

Formatted Table
Commented [NB125]: Check table formatting

agreement templates on the Purchasing SharePoint site. The templates contain the City’s standard terms and conditions which are not negotiable unless approved by the City Attorney.

The City advertises its competitive bids electronically via BidSync www.bidsync.com. The preferable method for bid submission is in electronic format (paperless), unless the bid is submitted for Public Work CIP bids.

The advantage of standard templates is to reduce the amount of time required for preparation and administrative review; unless deviations are highlighted, reviewing staff will assume departments have faithfully used the standard documents, and will not review them in detail. (Bid documents for construction projects are excluded, since Public Works manage all construction projects, and they are responsible for maintaining standard bid documents for construction projects.) Additionally, these standard specifications can be used for the more price-sensitive Invitation for Bid process (IFB) as well as the Request for Proposal (RFP) process where criteria other than price may be significant factors in making the purchasing decision.

For detailed procedures and descriptions on how to draft RFP’s from the standard templates refer to the City Purchasing SharePoint site at “procedures for competitive bidding advertising and BidSync procedures”

Section 255

CONTRACTS, CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION, CONTRACT AMENDMENTS The City enters into numerous types of contractual agreements with suppliers throughout the fiscal year. This procedure document is written for employees who have responsibility for entering into contracts with suppliers to provide goods and services for their departments.

A contract is a legal instrument that protects the City’s interests by clearly establishing the responsibility of all parties and establishes the terms and conditions under which a service is to be performed.

The City’s contract templates can be found on the purchasing SharePoint site..

Examples of City contracts may include, but are not limited to:

1. Professional Services Agreements

2. Professional Services Agreements resulting from an RFP/RFQ

3. Bid Contracts (IFB)

4. Purchase Orders

5. Amendments

6. Parks & Recreation Instructor Agreements

7. Grant Agreements

8. Cooperative Agreements

1.9.Leases
For Public Works Construction Contracts – routing procedures, and contract administration are outlined in the CIP design manual on the Public Works SharePoint site.

The manual is located on the Public Works SharePoint site. https://slocitycloud.sharepoint.com/:w:/s/SLOHub/PublicWorks/cipengineering/EXkv0X4GWbRPtKA_2LaCJnQBIKIos0X4LltyHTJHAg2uXQ?e=dN1aqR For Goods and Services, Consulting, RFQ on-call contracts, software agreements, instructor agreements, and leases, the following procedure should be followed.

Contact the purchasing department to obtain the City’s standard contract template or refer to the purchasing SharePoint site to download the City’s contract template at https://slocitycloud.sharepoint.com/sites/SLOHub/Finance/purch/SitePages/Home.aspx • If staff receive a contract from a supplier not in the City’s standard format contact the City Attorney’s office to determine whether the City’s standard contract template should apply. \
Formatted: Font color: Auto, Not Expanded by /
Condensed by
Formatted: Normal, Space Before: 0 pt

• FOR IT / Software contracts staff should notify the City’s IT department for their review and approval.

Draft the contract incorporating the supplier's scope of work and proposal and send a Word draft version to the Legal Department for review
• Determine with the City’s Risk Managerment department pthe required insurance coverage. • If the contract is from an RFP/RFQ/RFB staff should have contacted the Risk Managerment to determine the appropriate insurance coverages before issuing the RFP • The required insurance coverage will be an exhibit in the RFP; verify the coverages are what the City asked for in the RFP.
• The City’s has boilerplate insurance templates on the Ppurchasing SharePoint site; but you should still check with Risk Management for appropriate coverage for your scenario. https://slocitycloud.sharepoint.com/sites/SLOHub/Finance/purch/SitePages/Home.aspx • After review by the City Attorney’s office; and upon obtaining the supplier's proof of insurance, forward the contract to purchasing or your administrative assistant for electronic signature routing via Docu-Sign, the City’s electronic signature software for contracts.

Docu-Sign is the City’s mandatory routing software, contracts shall not be routed for wet signatures.
• If the department routes a contract through its Administrative Assistant, the department must cc: the City purchasing department on all contract routings.

Contract Records Management
Departments and Project Managers should be aware of their contract terms and scope of work and be aware of renewal dates. For more detail on contract routing procedures refer to the Purchasing SharePoint site.

Amendments to Agreements – Non-Construction Agreements
Commented [BJC126]: Risk Management is not a
separate department.

Commented [BJC127]: @Clancy, Daniel Maybe a
statement that DocuSign is the City mandatory system for document execution.

CONTRACT AMENDMENTS SCOPE
After contract award—whether by, purchase order or formal contract—amendments may be needed to reflect changes in the scope of goods or services to be provided. The following summarizes what is required to authorize and document contract changes.

The City’s contract amendment templates are in the Purchasing SharePoint site. Attached is a sample “Amendment to Agreement” that can be used in approving contract changes.

Amendments should be numbered.

AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT CHANGES
Construction Contracts
Authorization levels for approving construction contract change orders are set forthoutlined in Section 203 of this manual.

General Goods and Services
The specific authority for approving contract amendments is usually set forthoutlined in the agreement itself (Section 5 of the standard agreement template).

General Policy. Staff Staff has the authority to amend agreements to the cumulative amended contract amount (original price of the contract plus the price of any amendments) that they are otherwise authorized to award contracts. In those cases where the original contract was awarded by a higher purchasing authoritya higher purchasing authority awarded the original contract, then they have the authority to amend those contracts by a cumulative amendment amount (price of only the amendment itself) that they are otherwise authorized to award contracts.

Budget Constraints. In all cases, however, staff authorization to increase contract amounts is subject to existing budget availability.

Staging of Contract Costs and Amendments. Using the amendment process in order to avoid competitive bidding or higher authorization levels at the contract award stage is prohibited.

The following provides general guidelines for authorization levels in approving changes to purchase orders and agreements.

Commented [CD128]: Thanks! Much more clear

Goods and Services & Consultant Contract / Purchase Order Amendments For contract and purchase orders purchases at Tier 1 level: (See section 202-A) A contract or purchase order awarded initially as a Tier 1 amount requires Fiscal Officer approval to a maximum amount of:For a contract originally awarded as a Tier 1 purchase:
• $10,000 for Goods and Services
• $7500 for Consulting
The Fiscal Officer has the authority to amend at Tier 1 approval authority:

The Fiscal Officer has the authority to amend the cumulative amended contract price authority to amend the cumulative amended contract price or purchase order by an amount not to exceed the maximum cumulative amount of: amount of the maximum by a Tier 1 price of:not to exceed amount of the maximum Tier 1 price of:
■• Goods: $10,000 for Goods and Services
• $7500 for Consulting IT Systems,
Amendments or change orders that cumulatively add to the original contract or purchase order to Tier 2 & 3:
• $10,000 - $49,999 for Goods and Services
• $7500 - $39,999 for Consulting
• Requires Fiscal Officer and Department Head Approval
• Tier 3 levels if not competitively bid through an RFP/RFQ or purchased off a cooperative contract the contract or purchase order requires a sole-source memorandum at this amount •
• $15,000 for Public Projects
If the cumulative amended contract amount exceeds a Tier 1 pIf amendments beyond these limits are needed, i.e. exceed a Tier 1 purchase price, it will require the approval of a higher purchasing authority according to thresholds set forth in section 202, exhibit 202-A. Amendments or change orders that cumulatively add to the original contract or purchase order to Tier 4:
• $50,000-$149,999 Goods and Services
• $40,000 - $99,999 Consultant
• Requires City Manager Report
• If not competitively bid through an RFP/RFQ or purchased off a cooperative contract, the contract or purchase order requires a sole-source memorandum at this amount Amendments of change orders that cumulatively add to the original contract or purchase order to Tier 5:

Commented [JM129]: Link to, or include the tiers in this policy
Commented [CD130R129]:

Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 +
Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Commented [VM131]: amount
Commented [VM132]: amount? For consistency in terms
Commented [JM133R132]: Agreed. Dan, let us know
whether you’d like to use “price” or “amount” and please update accordingly throughout.

Commented [CD134R132]: Amount? Or delete price
Commented [VM135]: By an amount not to exceed?
Commented [JM136R135]: Agreed. Updated
accordingly.

Commented [VM137]: not to exceed a cumulative
amended contract amount (original contract price + price of amendment(s)) of the maximum Tier 1 price of:

Commented [JM138R137]: Yes, agreed. We need to
define “cumulative amended contract amount” in the body of the text either as a parenthetical like you suggest, or simply saying, “which is defined to mean…”
Formatted: Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" +
Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 +
Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Font:

Formatted: Normal, No bullets or numbering, Tab
stops: 1.28", Left
Commented [VM139]: amounts don’t line up perfectly
with flow chart
Commented [JM140R139]: Agreed. Dan, are there
updated tier amounts we should be referring to? Also, I’d suggest listing the types of contracts first in each bullet and then : the price.

Commented [CD141R139]: The amounts are for the
proposed updated thresholds – I’m proposing merging goods and services together – raising some thresholds
Commented [VM142]: If the cumulative amended
contract amount exceeds a Tier 1 purchase price, …
Commented [VM143]: Use the tier that the Cumulative
Amendment Amount falls into, UNLESS the Cumulative
Amendment Amount causes the Cumulative Amended
Contract Amount to fall into a higher tier than it was
approved for, in which case approval from the higher tier is needed.

Commented [VM144R143]: If the Amendment does not
push the contract into a new tier, then use the tier the amendment price falls into.

If the Amendment pushes the contract price into a higher tier, then get approval from the higher tier.

• Over $150,000 Goods and Services
• Over $100,000 Consultant
• Require Council Approval
• If not competitively bid through an RFP/RFQ or purchased off a cooperative contract, the contract or purchase order requires a sole-source memorandum (** PROPOSED LANGUAGE**)
Formatted: Font: Italic
Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 +
Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"

For contract and purchase orders purchases at at Tier 2 & 3 levels For a A contract or purchase order originally awarded as a Tier 2 purchase amount requires Fiscal Officer and Department Head approval – maximum amounts:
• $10,000 - $24,999 for Goods and Services
• $7500 - $14,999 for Consulting
A contract or purchase order originally awarded as a Tier 3 purchase amount requires Fiscal Officer and Department Head approval – maximum amounts:
• $10,000 - $24,999 for Goods and Services
• $7500 - $14,999 for Consulting
Tier 3 must be competitively bid through RFP/RFQ, or purchased off a cooperative agreement; or requires a sole-source
The Fiscal Officer has the authority to amend at Tier 1 approval authoritythe contract or purchase order by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed their tier 1 authority of: maximum Tier 1 • $10,000 for Goods and Services
• $7500 for Consulting
The Fiscal Officer and Department Head have the authority to amend the contract or purchase order by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed their tier 2 & 3 authority of:
• $10,000 - $49,999 for Goods and Services
• $7500 - $39,999 for Consulting
price.

Amendments or change orders that cumulatively add to the original contract or purchase order to Tier 4:
• $50,000-$149,999 Goods and Services
• $40,000 - $99,999 Consultant
• Requires City Manager Report
• If not competitively bid through an RFP/RFQ or purchased off a cooperative contract, the contract or purchase order requires a sole-source memorandum at this amount Amendments or change orders that cumulatively add to the original contract or purchase order to Tier 5:
• Over $150,000 Goods and Services
• Over $100,000 Consultant
• Require Council Approval
• If not competitively bid through an RFP/RFQ or purchased off a cooperative contract, the contract or purchase order requires a sole-source memorandum Formatted: Font: Italic
Formatted: Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" +
Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Font: Bold, Italic
Formatted: Normal, No bullets or numbering
Formatted: Font: Bold, Italic
Formatted: Font: Bold, Italic
Formatted: Font: Italic
Commented [JM145]: I think we should be more explicit
about the process, even if it seems like overkill. I’d suggest saying something like: “The Fiscal Officer has the authority to amend if the amendment cost is within Tier 1…”
Formatted: Font:

Formatted: Normal, No bullets or numbering
Formatted: Font:

Formatted: Font:

Formatted: Font:

Formatted: Font:

Formatted: Font: Not Italic
Formatted: Font: Not Italic
Formatted: Font: Not Italic
Formatted: Font: Not Italic
Formatted: Font:

Formatted: Font:

Formatted: List Paragraph, Indent: Left: 0.5"

Formatted: Font:

The Fiscal Officer and Department Head have the authority to amend the contract by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed the maximum Tier 2 price.to amend at Tier 2 approval authority.

The Fiscal Officer and Department Head have authority to amend the cumulative amended contract price by a not to exceed amount of the maximum Tier 2 price of:
• Goods and Services : $25,000
• Consulting:
• Public Projects $60,000
If the cumulative amended contract price exceeds a Tier 2 purchase priceIf amendments beyond these limits are needed, i.e. exceed a Tier 2 purchase price, it will require the approval of a higher purchasing authority according to thresholds set forth in section 202, exhibit 202-A. (** PROPOSED LANGUAGE**)
■
■ IT Systems: $24,999
■ Consulting: $14,999
For contract purchases at Tier 3 level
For a contract originally awarded as a Tier 3 purchase:

The Fiscal Officer has the authority to amend the contract by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed the maximum Tier 1 price.

The Fiscal Officer and Department Head have the authority to amend the contract by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed the maximum Tier 2 price.

The Fiscal Officer has the authority to amend at Tier 1 approval authority The Fiscal Officer and Department Head have the authority to amend at Tier 2 approval authority.

The Fiscal Officer and Department Head have the authority to amend the contract by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed the maximum Tier 3 price. at Tier 3 approval authority.

The Fiscal Officer and Department Head have authority to amend the cumulative amended contract price by a not to exceed amount of the maximum Tier 3 price of:
• Goods and Services : $50,000
• Consulting: 40,000
• Public Projects $200,000
If the cumulative amended contract price exceeds a Tier 3 purchase price, If amendments beyond these limits are needed, i.e. exceed a Tier 3 purchase price, it will require the approval of a higher purchasing authority according to thresholds set forth in section 202, exhibit 202-A. (** PROPOSED LANGUAGE**)
For contract purchases at Tier 4 level
Commented [JM146]: Are these essentially saying the
same thing? If so, let’s condense. If not, I’d appreciate an explanation as to how they differ. Thanks!
Formatted: Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" +
Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Normal
Commented [JM147]: Similar edit to the tier 2 section
above. I think we need to be really clear about how we work down in terms of authority if the original contract required a higher approval authority and the amendment cost falls into a lower tier
Commented [CD148]: @Bell Jr., Charles@Elke, Brigitte
This is older policy language it’s hard to follow
If we enter into a contract at $7500 – it’s Tier 1. We amend it one month later to $15,000– now it’s Tier 2. As the current policy reads, we’d treat the amendment approval as a Tier 1 approval flow even thought the value of the contract went above into Tier 2 approval authority.

I think we need it to say, if the amendment triggers the total value of the contract to go into the next Tier level it triggers that Tier levels approval authority flows.

The second scenario is when a a higher approval authority enters a contract at for example Tier 2 at $15,000. We
amend it by $1000 (a Tier 1 level), only the Fiscal Officer needs to approve that amendment, which is OK since the
cumulative Tier level did not change.
*See proposed new language to Tier 1
*See older language for Tiers 2-5

A contract or purchase order originally awarded as a Tier 4 purchase amount requires a City Manager Report – maximum amounts:
• $50,000-$149,999 for Goods and Services
• $40,000-$99,999 for Consultants
Tier 4 must be competitively bid through RFP/RFQ, or purchased off a cooperative agreement; or requires a sole-source
The Fiscal Officer has the authority to amend the contract or purchase order by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed their tier 1 authority of:
• $10,000 for Goods and Services
• $7500 for Consulting
The Fiscal Officer and Department Head have the authority to amend the contract or purchase order by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed their tier 2 & 3 authority of:
• $10,000 - $49,999 for Goods and Services
• $7500 - $39,999 for Consulting
City Manager Report is required to amend the contract or purchase order by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed tier 4 authority of:
• $50,000 - $149,999 for Goods and Services
• $40,000 - $99,999 for Consulting
Amendments or change orders that cumulatively add to the original contract or purchase order to Tier 5:
• Over $150,000 Goods and Services
• Over $100,000 Consultant
• Require Council Approval
• If not competitively bid through an RFP/RFQ or purchased off a cooperative contract, the contract or purchase order requires a sole-source memorandum Formatted: Font:

For a contract originally awarded as a Tier 4 purchase:

The Fiscal Officer has the authority to amend the contract by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed the maximum Tier 1 price.

The Fiscal Officer and Department Head have the authority to amend the contract by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed the maximum Tier 2 price.

The Fiscal Officer and Department Head have the authority to amend the contract by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed the maximum Tier 3 price.

The The Fiscal Officer has the authority to amend at Tier 1 approval authority The Fiscal Officer and Department Head have the authority to amend at Tier 2 approval authority.

The Fiscal Officer and Department Head have the authority to amend at Tier 3 approval authority.

City Manager Report approval has the authority to amend the contract by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed the maximum Tier 4 price.is required to amend at a Tier 4 approval authority.

The Fiscal Officer, Department Head, and/or City Manager Report approval have authority to amend the cumulative amended contract price by a not to exceed amount of the maximum Tier 4 price of:
• Goods and Services : $150,000
• Consulting: $100,000
• Public Projects $200,000
If the cumulative amended contract price exceeds a Tier 4 purchase price,If amendments beyond these limits are needed, i.e. exceed a Tier 4 purchase price, it will require the approval of a higher purchasing authority according to thresholds set forth in section 202, exhibit 202-A. (** PROPOSED LANGUAGE**)
For contract purchases at Tier 5 level
For contract purchases at Tier 5 level
A contract or purchase order awarded initially as a Tier 5 purchase amount requires Council approval:
• Over $150,000 for Goods and Services
• Over $100,000 for Consultants
Tier 5 must be competitively bid through RFP/RFQ, or purchased off a cooperative agreement; or requires a sole-source
The Fiscal Officer has the authority to amend the contract or purchase order by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed their tier 1 authority of:
• $10,000 for Goods and Services
• $7500 for Consulting
The Fiscal Officer and Department Head have the authority to amend the contract or purchase order by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed their tier 2 & 3 authority of:
• $10,000 - $49,999 for Goods and Services
• $7500 - $39,999 for Consulting
Commented [JM149]: Similar edit to the tier 2 section
above. I think we need to be really clear about how we work down in terms of authority if the original contract required a higher approval authority and the amendment cost falls into a lower tier
Commented [JM150]: Same comments as above
regarding working down. We should use the term
“cumulative amendment cost” to help explain this.

Commented [CD151]: @Bell Jr., Charles@Elke, Brigitte
If we enter into a contract at $7500 – it’s Tier 1. We amend it $15,000– it’s Tier 2. As the current policy reads, we’d treat the amendment approval as a Tier 1 approval flow even
though the cumulative value of the contract went into Tier 2 approval authority.

If the amendment triggers the cumulative value of the
contract to go into the next Tier it triggers that Tier level approval authority flows.

The second scenario
A higher approval authority enters a contract at for example Tier 2 at $15,000. We amend it by $1000 (a Tier 1 level), only the Fiscal Officer needs to approve that amendment because the cumulative Tier level did not change.

City Manager Report is required to amend the contract or purchase order by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed tier 4 authority of:
• $50,000 - $149,999 for Goods and Services
• $40,000 - $99,999 for Consulting
Amendments of change orders that cumulatively add to the original contract or purchase order to Tier 5:
• Over $150,000 Goods and Services
• Over $100,000 Consultant
• Require Council Approval
• If not competitively bid through an RFP/RFQ or purchased off a cooperative contract, the contract or purchase order requires a sole-source memorandum

PUBLIC PROJECTS CONTRACT AMENDMENTS AND CHANGE ORDERS
[FILL]

JOB ORDER CONTRACT AMENDMENTS AND CHANGE ORDERS
[FILL]
For a contract originally awarded as a Tier 5 purchase:

The Fiscal Officer has the authority to amend the contract by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed the maximum Tier 1 price.

The Fiscal Officer and Department Head have the authority to amend the contract by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed the maximum Tier 2 price.

The Fiscal Officer and Department Head have the authority to amend the contract by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed the maximum Tier 3 price.

The City Manager Report approval has the authority to amend the contract by a cumulative amendment amount not to exceed the maximum Tier 4 price.The Fiscal Officer has the authority to amend at Tier 1 approval authority
The Fiscal Officer and Department Head have the authority to amend at Tier 2 approval authority.

The Fiscal Officer and Department Head have the authority to amend at Tier 3 approval authority.

City Manager Report approval is required to amend at a Tier 4 approval authority.

Council has the approval authority to amend the cumulative amended contract price at:
• Goods and Services: $150,000 or more
• Consulting: $100,000 or more
Formatted: Font: Bold
Formatted: Normal, No bullets or numbering
Commented [JM152]: Similar edit to the tier 2 section
above. I think we need to be really clear about how we work down in terms of authority if the original contract required a higher approval authority and the amendment cost falls into a lower tier
Commented [JM153]: Same comments as above.

Commented [JM154]: Let’s be sure to include all types of contracts represented on the most updated tier chart

Examples of Amendments
WeExample 1:
• The City enters into a $6,500 consulting contract requiring Tier 1 approval by Fiscal Officer (see Section 202, exhibit 202-A, “Consulting Services” bracket). • WeThe City wants to extend the contract out six months and decides to amend the contract adding $12,500 to the contract cost.
• The cumulative amended contract price is now $20,000, which requires meaning wethe City must get Tier 2 approval from Fiscal Officer and Department Head to amend the contract.

Example 2:
• A higher approval authority The City enters into a goods and services purchase order contract atfor $15,000, requiring Tier 2 approval by the Fiscal Officer and Department Head (see Section 202-A)
• , exhibit 202-A, “Goods and Services” bracket). The CityWe wishes to amend itthe purchase order agreement by $1,000. The amendment value required Fiscal Officer approval; does not push the cumulative amended amountcontract price (now $16,000) (original purchase + amendment) into the neis still Tier 2 – only Fiscal Officer approval is required. xt tier, Tier 3, and the amendment value itself is only Tier 1 (i.e., cumulative amendment cost), meaning only the Fiscal Officer needs to approve the amendment.The Fiscal Officer can amend up to a cumulative amount of $24,999.

Exceptions
If a If greater discretionary authority at the Department Head or Purchasing Authority level is desired than indicated abovgreater discretionary authority at the Department Head or Purchasing Authority level is desired than indicated above. In that case, this should be clearly identified in the City Manager or Council Agenda Report approving the bid/RFP documents or awarding the contract.

DOCUMENTATION
Amendment requests (such as the City Manager or Council Agenda Report) should include a cost summary of the original contract amount, any amendments to-date, the proposed amendmentmendments to date, the proposed amendment, and the revised contract total. ________________________________________________________________________________ Revised September 2, 2003, to reflect changes in the City’s Purchasing Guidelines approved by the Council on April 15, 2003, and again on June 2, 2015
Formatted: Font: Not Italic
Formatted: Font: Not Italic
Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 +
Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Font:

Formatted: Font:

Formatted: Font: Not Bold, Not Italic
Formatted: List Paragraph, Indent: Left: 0.5"
Commented [VM155]: Insert purchasing policy flow
chart, amounts need to line up (chart itself needs update?)

AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO.

THIS AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT is made and entered in the City of San Luis Obispo on [date], by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, herein after referred to as City, and [CONTRACTOR NAME], hereinafter referred to as Contractor.

WITNESSETH:

WHEREAS, on [date] the City entered into an Agreement with Contractor for [generally describe the original agreement workscope] per Specification No. [xxxxxx]; and WHEREAS, the City desires to amend the scope of services to include [generally describe the proposed change in the workscope] and Contractor has submitted a proposal for this purpose that is acceptable to the City.

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations and covenants hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:

1. The scope of services and related compensation is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto. [Attach proposal letter or other itemization of proposed work and agreed upon compensation referencing the Amendment Number]

2. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day and year first written above.

ATTEST: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
By:

City Clerk Purchasing Authority (City Manager/Designee) APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONTRACTOR
City Attorney By:______________________________________ Commented [CD156]: Remove template
This is a template form that will change over time this is procedure not policy

275

CREDIT CARD POLICY

OVERVIEW
To provide secure payment options for employees who travel or at times have to make emergency purchases, the City issues credit cards registered to individuals under the City umbrella.

In this context, it is important to understand the fiduciary responsibility of utilizing a City credit card and the required control over purchases. This policy outlines the use, accounting, and reporting obligations that come with this fiduciary responsibility.

Employees assigned a City credit card will be bound to the criteria outlined in this policy that outlines not only the obligations but also the ramifications of violating the policy. Individual user agreements will be signed to ensure that a contract between the City and the credit card holder exists for reference.

This policy establishes the City's allowable uses, the fiduciary responsibility, the procedures, and reporting obligations when using City credit cards in making emergency purchases or paying for travel and training related expenses. Refer to the City’s Municipal Code for the definition of an emergency purchase @ Muni Code
This policy cannot cover every issue, exception, or contingency that may arise in using City credit cards. Accordingly, the primary standard that should always prevail is to use common sense and good judgment in the use and stewardship of City resources.

POLICIES AND PROCEDURES AT-A-GLANCE
A summary document of primary cardholder responsibilities has been made available for easier reference. See policies & procedures At-A-Glance @ At a Glance A procedure handbook for how to request a card; due dates for reconciliations; how to Oracle guides for expense report submission; and compliance auditing can be found @ Credit Card Procedure Handbook
The Oracle ‘how-to’ guide for submitting expense reports can be found @ Expense Report 'How To' Guide

GENERAL GUIDELINES
Charges can originate in-store, on-line, or by phone. Transactions are audited internally by finance and externally by the City's outside accounting firm.

The primary responsibility for ensuring the appropriate use of credit cards lies with each employee.

Acceptance of a City credit card indicates an employee’s agreement to follow all policies and procedures, laws, and regulations.

TRAINING
Cardholders are required to attend training on their role and responsibilities outlined in this policy.

The City’s training module is located on Oracle @[_______].

Once training is completed and the user agreement has been signed, the program administrator will activate the card. This same process is followed for department cards.

TYPES OF CITY CREDIT CARDS
Standard Credit Card – a card issued to individual City employees similar to a consumer credit card but is paid in full at the end of each month. The card can be used for acquiring goods and services when the purchase requisition process cannot meet the operational needs required. The card does not replace the purchasing guidelines set in section 202 of the Purchasing Policy. The card may also be used for travel and meeting-related expenses, as explained in the Travel & Meeting Policy of the Financial Management Manual Section 350.

Department Card – A multi-user card issued to a division. A department card is issued to a specific employee recognized as the Card Coordinator or Reconciler. A Department card will have the name of the specific department or workgroup that it is assigned to.

LIMITS AND INCREASE REQUESTS
Department Heads and managers have two options for spending limits for employees:

Option 1 - Monthly limit of $5000 with a single purchase limit of $2500 Option 2 - Monthly limit of $2500 with a single purchase limit of $1000.

Managers are more appropriate for option 1. Employees under a manager's responsibility are more appropriate for option 2. Purchase limits can be increased but must be approved by Finance.

Cardholders should send an email requesting the increase to their Department Head, the Program Administrator, and Financial Analyst - Purchasing and include the following:
• Amount requested for the single purchase, or monthly limit and business reason for the increase
• Supplier name for whom the single purchase is requested If a single purchase, or monthly limit exceeds the amounts outlined, you must obtain approval before making the purchase or use the purchase order process.

COMPETITIVE BIDDING THRESHOLDS
City employees must not piecemeal credit card purchases to circumvent the allotted maximum credit card limit. If the cost of a purchase exceeds the limit and the purchase order process doesn’t meet the operational needs required staff must request a limit increase as outlined in this policy.

Commented [CD157]: Need to create live PPT training
guide and load it to Oracle under ‘on-boarding’ section or training section
Commented [CD158]: New spend limits; open for
discussion

TRAVEL EXPENSES
The City credit card must be used in paying for travel expenses. However, the City’s travel and meeting expenses policy applies to all such credit card payments, including the use of travel authorizations and per diem meal allowances.

PERSONAL USE OF CITY CREDIT CARDS
Employees must not use personal credit cards for City purchases and must not use City credit cards for personal expenses even if the intent is to reimburse the City later. Charging personal expenses on City credit cards is a misuse of City funds and a breach of the City’s ethics policy.

FRAUD
Employees are responsible for ensuring that City-issued credit cards are protected from unwarranted use or loss and for ensuring that all purchases are made in accordance with the City’s policies. Failure to follow policies and procedures regarding the use of credit cards is no different from failure to follow policies and procedures in any other aspect of an employee’s job.

LOST OR STOLEN CARDS
Cardholders are responsible for ensuring that the issuing bank and the Department of Finance are notified immediately if the card is lost or stolen. The cardholder has been set up to directly contact the issuing bank (using the bank’s customer service number) to report a lost or stolen card. Failure to do so may result in making the cardholder responsible for any fraudulent use of the card.

DISPUTED CHARGES
Cardholders are responsible for ensuring that the vendor and issuing bank are notified immediately of any of the charges that are disputed. The City pays the statement in full, including any disputed amounts, to avoid finance charges and late fees; when resolved, the amount will be credited to the account on the next monthly statement. Any charge that has not been validated and accepted in Oracle Expense Management within a month is deemed a disputed charge and it is the responsibility of the department to have the dispute resolved before the next billing cycle.

CREDIT CARD FEES
If there is a processing fee or a charge from the issuing bank, this charge, if any, is the department’s cost responsibility.

Commented [WS159]: Should we include that food
CANNOT be purchased on City credit cards? @Clancy,
Daniel

RETURN OF CARD UPON REQUEST OR TERMINATION
Cardholders will immediately surrender their card upon request of their department head.

Departments are responsible for retrieving the credit card when an employee separates from the City and returning the card to the Finance Department for cancellation and destruction. The use of the credit card for any purpose after its surrender is prohibited.

DISCIPLINARY ACTION
Conduct in conflict of any of the above standards is a breach of these policies and will result in disciplinary action, up to and including removal of the City credit card and termination of employment. Finance in collaboration with Department Heads and Human Resources are responsible for all disciplinary action surrounding misuse of cards, including cancellation of card privileges.

MERCHANT CATEGORY CODES
The City of San Luis Obispo’s Credit Card Program allows for the blocking of ‘Merchant Category Classification’ (MCC Codes). MCC Codes are numeric, 4-digit codes assigned by banks to vendors.

The code identifies the vendor’s primary product or service. Some of the examples of blocked MCC codes include, liquor stores, cocktail lounges and nightclubs, spas and massage parlors, and gambling casinos.

The Finance Director has the authority to designate any MCC code as restricted.

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES DEFINITIONS
Credit Card Holder – Employee given responsibility for a City credit card to use for a purchasing role in their job-function
Credit Card Reconciler or Group Reconciler – Cardholder or employee designated to perform the transaction reconciliation process in Oracle for an individual account or a group in a division. If an employee is reconciling more than one account, they are known as a 'Group Reconciler' Credit Card Approver – The manager responsible for the approval process of charges to an individual card. This process includes not only the physical action of approving the reconciled charge, but also the charge itself. An employee acting as a reconciler for charges cannot be the approver of those charges. A charge must be approved by someone other than the Credit Card Reconciler.

Department Credit Card Coordinator/Reconciler – The individual responsible for a Department Card is called the Department Card Coordinator. The employee is responsible for securing the card and tracking the use/users of the card. The reconciler is responsible for reconciling the transactions in Oracle. The coordinator and reconciler may be two different people.

Internal Credit Card Compliance Auditor – The employee responsible for monitoring credit card transactions, and policy compliance. For the City of San Luis Obispo, this is performed by the Program Administrator & Financial Analyst - Purchasing with oversight from the Finance Director.

Outside Accounting Auditor – External Accounting Auditors or Auditing Firm employed by the City of San Luis Obispo to complete an audit of the City Accounting functions.

Department Head - Department Heads determine the type of card the employee will carry and are responsible for ensuring that their staff are aware of their responsibilities, and for implementing review and payment procedures within their department.

Financial Analyst Purchasing - Manager of the Purchasing Division responsible for internal audit of credit card transactions, compliance to policy, and training Program Administrator – The designated City employee who serves as the point of contact between the City and the bank. This position has authority over the program in Policy and Procedures with the Financial Analyst – Purchasing and is generally the first stop for any issues pertaining to the credit card program.

Finance Director - The Finance Director is responsible for administering the review of credit card statements to ensure that the proper documentation and purchase approvals have been provided.

SECTION 276

ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERABLE PURCHASING (EPP)
Municipal Code 3.24.075
It is the intent of the city council that the City of San Luis Obispo take a leadership role not only in recycling its waste products but also in the purchase of recycled products for use in the delivery of city services. It is the purpose of this section to provide direction to the city administrative officer in the procurement and use of recycled products. For the purpose of this section, “recycled materials” are defined as any materials (e.g., glass, paper, plastic, etc.) that are separated by type, reprocessed by industrial methods, and used as raw materials for the manufacture of new products.

It is the policy of the City of San Luis Obispo to purchase and use recycled products whenever possible to the extent that such use does not negatively impact health, safety, or operational efficiency.

It is the policy of the City of San Luis Obispo to encourage the purchase of products which can be recycled or reused.

The City will purchase and use recycled paper for masthead stationery, envelopes and printing purposes. In addition, recycled paper shall be purchased and used in all copy machines which will accept it. City staff will encourage the copier industry to develop high-speed copiers which will accept recycled paper.

City departments shall examine their purchasing specifications and, where feasible, purchase equipment, supplies, and services that result in less harm to the natural environment. This involves the purchase of equipment, supplies, and services in a manner that uses less harmful materials, employs recycled or recovered materials (where appropriate and available), and utilizes techniques intended to result in less impact on the environment than other available methods.

It is the policy of the City of San Luis Obispo that city funds shall not be used to purchase single-use plastic bottled beverages of less than twenty-one ounces or single-use plastic drink containers or single-use plastic beverage containers, as provided in Chapter 8.07.

A ten percent preference, not to exceed one thousand dollars per contract, may be given to recycled products. The fitness and quality of the recycled product must be at least equal to unrecycled products as determined by the City. The preference percentage shall be based on the lowest bid or price quoted by the supplier or suppliers offering nonrecycled products.

Price preferences may be offered in excess of the ten percent ceiling established in this section, if it can be shown that purchase of a recycled product or material will result in greater long-term savings to the City. Award of a bid in excess of the ceiling, however, requires the approval of the city administrative officer or city council as established in the City’s purchasing manual. (Ord. 1644 § 2, 2018: Ord. 1618 § 1 (Exh. A (part)), 2015: Ord. 1178 § 1, 1990) Ord. No. 1178 added § 3.24.080, which the editor has renumbered § 3.24.075 since the chapter already contained a § 3.24.080.

Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: 8 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: Italic
Formatted: Font: Italic
Formatted: Font: Italic
Formatted: Font: Italic
Formatted: Font: Italic
Formatted: Font: Italic
Formatted: Font: Italic
Formatted: Font: 8 pt

ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERABLE PURCHASING (EPP)
The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to efficient use of resources and other sustainable actions.

The purpose of the provisions of this section are to promote the procurement of environmentally preferable products or services throughout all city departments in order to foster the practice of sustainable purchasing choices that reduce impacts on the public health and the environment and support markets for environmentally preferable products or services.

If fitness and quality are equal, and use does not negatively affect health, safety, or operational efficiency, City Departments shall procure environmentally preferable products and services taking into consideration that:
• EPP products or services are available at the same or lesser total cost than competing products or services that serve the same purpose; A ten percent preference, not to exceed one thousand dollars per contract, may be given to recycled products per Municipal Code 3.24.075 • The life-cycle cost of the product or service is determined to be less when taking into consideration quality, performance, range of activities, from the extraction of raw materials from the Earth and the production and distribution of energy, through the use, and reuse, and final disposal of a product.

City Departments should require, when feasible, its janitorial contractors to use third-party greencertified janitorial cleaning products, in particular, Green Seal, or EcoLogo certified cleaning products. (See Green Seal standard GS37 for industrial and institutional cleaners, and Standard GS-8 for general-purpose, bathroom, glass, and carpet cleaners used for household purposes) and EcoLogo (Standard UL 2759; 2777 for hard surface cleaners, and hard floor care products) https://www.greenseal.org/standards/standards-list/; https://industries.ul.com/environment/certificationvalidation-marks/ecologo-productcertification City Departments, when feasible, shall designate environmentally preferable products or services from contractors or consultants and, if applicable shall require contractors or consultants to specify the minimum percentage of recycled content in the products offered.

City Departments shall require the use of 30% post-consumer recycled paper and/or GreenSeal certified paper on all outside print jobs
To reduce transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions, stimulate the local economy, and support environmentally friendly business practices, all City Departments shall make an effort to procure goods and services from local contractors or consultants – defined in the Municipal Code as businesses within City limits. All City Departments should consider whether its suppliers are engaged in environmentally friendly business practices and/or that demonstrate a high level of environmental, social and governance responsibility (ESG) by:
• Assisting the City in documenting and reporting its environmental and social benefits for the products it sells to the City
• Assisting the City with end of useful life management through free or low cost take back services
Formatted: Font: 10 pt, Italic
Formatted: Font: Italic
Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt,
Not Bold, Font color: Auto
Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt,
Not Bold, Font color: Auto
Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt,
Not Bold, Font color: Auto
Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt,
Not Bold, Font color: Auto
Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt,
Not Bold, Font color: Auto
Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt,
Not Bold, Font color: Auto
Commented [CG160]: I don't see the cleaning products
identified in MC 3.24.075, where did this info come from? Commented [CD161R160]: @cruce It’s a proposed
update to the policy –
The Code states “City departments shall…purchase..
products that result in ‘less harm to the natural
environment’it defines recycled products, but not janitorial products, the EPP policy is proposed to incorporate this category and define it further and bring SLO in line with other municipalities across the state and the USA.

The key term is ‘when feasible’ it allows for flexibility for staff but encourages more environmentally responsible
products and puts a definition on them.

Formatted: Font: 8 pt, Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Font: 8 pt, Bold, Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 8 pt,
Bold, Italic, No underline
Formatted: Font: 8 pt, Bold, Italic, No underline,
Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 8 pt,
Bold, Italic, No underline
Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 8 pt,
Bold, Italic, Pattern: Clear
Field Code Changed
Formatted: Font: 8 pt, Bold
Formatted: Font: Bold
Formatted: Font: 8 pt, Bold

References
Sustainable Purchasing Leadership Council. Programs Overview at https://www.sustainablepurchasing.org/programs/ Keating, Michael, Socially responsible and environmentally sustainable purchasing at https://www.americancityandcounty.com/2019/04/10/sociallyresponsible-and-environmentally-sustainable-purchasing/ Responsible Purchasing Network, The Buck Starts Here: Sustainable Procurement Playbook for Cities http://www.responsiblepurchasing.org/purchasing_guides/playbook_for_cities/index.php City of Santa Monica “Purchasing Decisions Made Easy” Guide to making decisions that bring the greatest value while reducing the negative impacts on our environment. https://www.smgov.net/Departments/OSE/easyguide/ City of Portland, Oregon. Sustainable Procurement Policies at https://www.portlandoregon.gov/brfs/37755 Buying Green Guide. California Department of General Services at https://www.dgs.ca.gov/PD/Resources/Find-EPP-Goods-and-Services Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Program. California Department of General Services at https://www.dgs.ca.gov/PD/About/Page-Content/PDBranch-Intro-Accordion-List/Engineering/Environmentally-Preferable-Purchasing-Program City of Portland, Oregon. Bureau of Revenue and Financial Services. Sustainable Procurement at https://www.portlandoregon.gov/brfs/37732 Formatted: Indent: Left: 0"

Diversity / MWBE / ESG
For the City to adopt a purchasing preference policy to Minority Women Business Enterprise (MWBE) and/or Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE), the City must first conduct a ‘disparity analysis’ study as per US Supreme Court precedent. City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson, Co., 488 US 469 (1989) at https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/488/469/ In addition, MWBE/DBE businesses must be certified by either the City itself, and/or a third-party agency – it’s not enough to simply ask for a supplier to state they are a MWBE; criteria must be met to be certified.

Disparity analysis studies must be carefully designed – and would likely require consultant support.

Court’s have struck down MWBE polices based on flawed studies.

Local Business Community
The SLO Chamber of Commerce as of June, 11, 2020, does not classify SLO County businesses by MWBE/DBE.

The City can engage in outreach and collaboration efforts with the Mission Community Services Corporation (MCSC) at https://www.mcscorp.org/.

MSCS’s mission is “dedicated to enhancing opportunities for potential entrepreneurs and small business owners to become self-sustaining, successful contributors to their communities, with special assistance for women, low-income, minority, veterans, and non-profit businesses in San Luis Obispo, Kern, and Monterey Counties.”
Example of Cities with MWBE policies are below which are generally passed by Ordinance – see example below of the specificity.

City of Ft. Myers, Florida
MBE policy in place in the form of an ordinance since May 19, 2003.

A business whose primary place of business is within Lee County, and who has been certified as a DBE by the Florida Office of Supplier Diversity is considered an MBE and receives a 7% (in dollars) preference on solicitations between $3,000 and $25,000 and 6% on solicitations over $25,000.

Staff adds those percentages to the lowest responsive responsible bidders' bid and then if the MBE's bid falls within that dollar amount, and depending whether the total dollars meet the threshold for going before City Council for approval, the MBE is either awarded the contract, or, the recommendation to award to the MBE goes before City Council as an agenda item.

The Purchasing and Contracts Administrator and Division Manager doubles as the City's MBE Coordinator. The MBE Coordinator, as well as staff members are always available and reach out to the local community to teach business owners, or those who would like to be business owners, how

to do business with the City.

Staff participates in the Small Business Development Center events that are held in conjunction with Florida Gulf Coast University, and at workshops held locally in Lee County's South West Florida Enterprise Center.

The City also has a 15% MBE subcontractor goal in its formal bid solicitations.

The City has a Local Vendor Preference policy, in the form of an ordinance. a 5% preference (or $25,000, whichever is less) is given to City of Fort Myers businesses, and a 3 % (or $25,000, whichever is less) preference is given to Lee County businesses.

ESG
The City is considering an Environmental, Social, Governance, (ESG) approach to its investment policies.

The City is already leading by example with many ESG type initiatives, Climate Action, Affordable Housing, Energy Efficiency, Open Space, etc.

What can procurement add to ESG?
ENVIRONMENTAL - How a company limits its environmental impact and carbon footprint What can purchasing do?
• Expand EPP policies to be cleaner in spend (janitorial contracts; paper) • Consider the supply chain impacts of its purchases – shipping distances • Consider companies ESG scores and do business with only good ESG ranked suppliers

1. Sustainalytics https://www.sustainalytics.com/

2. EcoVadis https://ecovadis.com/plans-pricing/

3. TruCost https://www.trucost.com/

4. Carbon Disclosure Project - CDP https://www.cdp.net/en • Direct spend to ‘B Corps” like SLO local business - Ten Over Studies https://bcorporation.net/
*Risks* - Greenwashing – ESG is a marketing strategy – Exxon Mobil publishes an ESG report; Wal-Mart scores very high in “E” but is well known for paying it’s employees very low wages (low “S” and “G”).

SOCIAL How a company treats its employees, customers, community, and other companies with which it interacts
What can purchasing do?
• Encourage spend to companies and organizations scoring high on ‘social’ metrics in ESG reports
• Develop a MWBE/DBE policy
GOVERNANCE – How a company is led, including executive pay and any internal controls • Encourage spend to companies and organizations scoring high on ‘social’ metrics in ESG reports
• Internally measure diversity - Human Resources – hiring policies, data on employee

diversity, etc.

References
State and Local Governments Eye ESG Investing Strategies for Returns and Impact at https://www.plansponsor.com/state-local-governments-eyeesg-investing-strategies-returns-impact/ PFM Presentation
https://slocitycloud.sharepoint.com/sites/SLOHub/Finance/Shared%20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx?originalPath=aHR0cHM6Ly9zbG9jaXR5Y2 xvdWQuc2hhcmVwb2ludC5jb20vOmY6L3MvU0xPSHViL0ZpbmFuY2UvRXZIWGIwX2pUeDlJaVJSWENOMGpWSzRCRW9VWTRZZFBoZ2k4d0hL MU9rUC05UT9ydGltZT01M1o5bTRVTzJFZw&viewid=d6296557%2Dd8d4%2D42f7%2Db145%2D988093e7d8be&id=%2Fsites%2FSLOHub%2 FFinance%2FShared%20Documents%2FPurchasing%2FPolicy%20Update%20%2D%20Master

SECTION 277

NIGP CODES
Guide to the City of San Luis Obispo Purchasing Classification System The NIGP Commodity/Services Code classifies products and services in public procurement. The codes are the standard taxonomy for classifying commodities and services for 1000’s of government entities across the USA and the world.

The codes are used to track data within strategic sourcing and spend to detail where the money is spent and what kinds of items are purchased most. The City uses these codes to track purchasing activity and expense report purchases for budgeting and management reporting; for tracking capital assets and inventory; and for classifying suppliers by the types of products they provide.

The codes allow the City to look at suppliers spend across all departments and also compare spend across peer governments. Is Utilities paying the same price as Public Works? Is a peer government getting a better rate?
The codes are classified by digit categories, the longer the digits, the more detailed the classification.

The City uses the NIGP 5 Digit code structure to classify its spend.

Structure Sample Code Description
3 Digit (Class) Code 918 Consulting Services
5 Digit (Class-Item) 918-43 Consulting Services – Environmental There are over 98,000 codes and subcodes to choose from. The City does not purchase all 98,000 codes.

To increase operational efficiencies and simplify the process for staff choosing amongst the 1000’s of NIGP codes, the City has developed a smaller standardized list.

The City’s most common NIGP codes are in the below link:
• SLO NIGP Code Master List
Formatted: Font: 12 pt, Bold
Formatted: Font: Bold
Formatted: Font: 12 pt, Bold
Formatted: Font: 12 pt, Bold, Underline
Formatted: Font: 12 pt
Formatted: Font: 12 pt
Formatted: Font: 12 pt
Formatted: Font: 12 pt

Section 277
PROCURE TO PAY PROCESS (P2P)
The procure to pay (P2P) process begins with the requisition of goods or services by a requesting department and ends with payment to the supplier.

Between these two points, common practices and procedures must be followed.

A flowchart, as shown in Exhibit 1 “Procure to Pay Process” (P2P) diagrams the procedures.

The flowchart shows the role each department function plays in the process.

Delivery of goods/services to the City does not constitute acceptance for payment.

Final acceptance for payment shall be given only after delivery and inspection by department requesters that the good/service meets the purchase order conditions.

Final acceptance for payment is verified by departments ‘receiving’ the invoice in Oracle; ensuring the PO# is on the invoice; and sending the validated final received invoice to Finance for payment.

The following activities and department responsibilities form the P2P process.

Department Responsibility
RequestingDepartment • Determine need
• Prepare requisition in Oracle
• Attach to the requisition a detailed specification, quote, specification, sole-source, CMR, contract, etc.

Budget • Budget approval will auto-approve in Oracle
Purchasing • Receive and review purchase requests with
attached backup documentation, scope, quote,
contract, etc.
• Ensure policy requirements are met by requesters
• Review terms and conditions with legal for contract
agreements and route contracts for departments
• Ensure the price is fair and competitive
• Coordinate RFP/RFB process with departments and
manage public bids on the City’s public bid platform
• Work with departments to assess the type of purchase

CityCouncil • Approve purchase request in Tier 5 thresholds (see Exhibit 2) Supplier • Ship supplies to departments or performs service • Submit the invoice to [email protected] for payment
RequestingDepartment • Accept and inspect supplies or service for compliance • Resolve non-compliant purchases
• Receive purchase in Oracle
Finance Department • Enter invoice for payment into Oracle • Match PO, receiving, and invoice for payment
Commented [CD162]:

For open discussion?
Should department requesters get the invoice 1st?
I think yes. We have a de-centralized organization –
requesters send their own PO’s so invoice receiving should be mirror that organizational structure.

City of Apsen, CO. Implemented Oracle before SLO – tried sending inovices to AP direct per GFOA recommendation – it didn’t work there, and they changed course.

Technology led fix via OCR will not fix the issue of
duplicates, lack of receiving, etc.

Certain departments like Park I’ve had talks with and they instructed suppliers to send them invoices first not AP. Their department is consistently current on the majority of its outstanding invoices.

Responsibilities
Finance Department – It shall be the responsibility of the Finance Department to develop and implement procedures for the following:

1. Notifying departments of improper invoicing within 10 days of receipt of the invoice in AP;

2. Date stamping of all invoices and all other documents forpayment;

3. Providing prompt payment of invoices within 30 days of receipt by the Finance department;

4. Entering invoices, credit memos, etc. required for payment into the Oracle accounts payable system;

5. Providing payment processing procedures to be followed by all City departments.

Requesting Departments – It shall be the responsibility of the departments to develop and implement procedures for the following:

1. Entering requisition information (with appropriate charge account), price, and descriptions of what is being purchased into the Oracle system;

2. Ensuring that all purchases, except for non-PO exceptions have purchase order numbers;

3. Entering receiving information into Oracle;

4. Identifying and resolving receiving issues;

5. Cooperating with Finance to resolve payment disputes and issues.

General - The following applies to all external procurement of goods or services for the City:

1. All invoices must be sent to _________.

2. Accounts Payable will pay after delivery and receiving of the goods/services by the departments and matching the supplier’s invoice with the purchase order (3-waymatch)

3. If an invoice is sent directly to the department – the department shall send the invoice to Accounts Payable for date stamping and loading into Oracle.

4. The invoice shall contain:
- Name of the supplier
- Date of invoice
- Invoice number
- The authorizing City purchase order number
- The correct quantity, price, and total cost
- Manufacturer name and item number of the goods
- Address to which payment should be made

5. After date stamping of invoices invoice reports will be sent to departments for final receiving/approval for payment.

6. Invoices sent back to Accounts Payable must have the purchase order number and receipt number stamped on the invoice.

7. It is the responsibility of the Finance Department (AP) to conduct the 3-way match – match purchase order, receipt, and vendor invoice for final payment.

Commented [CD163]: Open to changing course send
invoices direct to department requesters

Exhibiti1t
Q te Re
ce Processe P rc se Or er
ce De vere rc se
ece ve Or c e G rvice Re ere

DEFINITIONS
Formatted: Font: Bold
Formatted: Font: 12 pt
Formatted: Centered
Formatted: Font: 12 pt

City of San Luis Obispo, Council Memorandum
City of San Luis Obispo
Council Agenda Correspondence
DATE: May 17, 2022
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Rebecca Bernstorff, Business Services and Administrative Manager VIA: Derek Johnson, City Manager
SUBJECT: ITEM 6c - INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADD CHAPTER 8.10 (SHOPPING

CARTS), REQUIRING THE PRIVATE MANAGEMENT OF SHOPPING

CARTS AND RETRIEVAL OF CARTS FROM PUBLIC SPACES
Staff received the following questions, regarding the shopping cart ordinance. The questions are below with staff’s response shown in italics:
1) We must not be the only ones dealing with this problem. What do other jurisdictions do? Did we model our ordinance after anything/anyone?
Numerous municipalities throughout the state have adopted similar ordinances to address this growing health, safety and environmental issues, including several that we used in our Citywide Compensation Study set, to name a few:
 City of Ventura
 City of Santa Barbara
 City of Santa Maria
 City of Pleasanton
 City of Salinas
 City of Santa Paula
We conducted a plethora of research and did model our ordinance in accordance with other cities, which all had very similar outlines and information. The goal of these ordinances, including this proposed one, is solely directed to abandoned shopping carts and incentivizing containment of them on business premises consistent with Chapter 19 of the California Business and Professions Code. 2) Where did the timeframes come from in the draft ordinance (30 days, 60 days, 3 days, 6 months)?
The timeframes were drafted in similarity to our research with other cities’ ordinances. If any of the timeframes in our research weren’t feasible (i.e. Santa Barbara requires a 24-hour turnaround time to retrieve abandoned shopping carts), we took that into consideration and ensured a reasonable response time. The aim

Item 6c – Staff Agenda Correspondence Page 2
for this ordinance is not a punishment, but a partnership with businesses, understanding and respecting challenges and constraints, to provide realistic expectations.
3) Would it be the prerogative of council to tweak those if desired or are they grounded in some other policy or ordinance that makes that possibility difficult for staff?
The timeframes are not grounded in another policy or ordinance existing within the City, however some of them are guided by the California Business and Professions Code. Additionally, they were crafted in partnership with our City Attorney’s Office to provide for a fair response from businesses and in balance with the urgency of upholding public health, safety and welfare of the community and the aesthetic qualities of the City.

Item 6c
Department: Public Works
Cost Center: 5001
For Agenda of: 5/17/2022
Placement: Public Hearing
Estimated Time: 30 Minutes
FROM: Shelly Stanwyck, Assistant City Manager
Prepared By: Matt Horn, Public Works Director
Greg Cruce, Deputy Director – Maintenance Operations
Rebecca Bernstorff, Business Services and Administrative Manager Brendan Pringle, Administrative Analyst
SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADD CHAPTER 8.10 (SHOPPING

CARTS), REQUIRING THE PRIVATE MANAGEMENT OF SHOPPING

CARTS AND RETRIEVAL OF CARTS FROM PUBLIC SPACES

RECOMMENDATION
Introduce an Ordinance entitled, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending Title 8, Health and Safety, of the Municipal Code to add Chapter 8.10 pertaining to the unauthorized removal of shopping carts from retail establishments and to facilitate retrieval of abandoned shopping carts.”

DISCUSSION
Background
On April 13, 2021, two ordinances were introduced to the City Council – the first related to the unauthorized removal of shopping carts from business premises and the second to clarify language about tents and similar structures that are prohibited encroachments in City parks. The Council discussed both recommendations at length and made modifications to the shopping cart ordinance for a second reading on May 4, 2021. On May 3, 2021, staff and Council received a demand letter on behalf of Unhoused Clients from California Rural Legal Assistance (CRLA) Public Interest Law Project (PILP) which threatened litigation against the City related to the adoption of the Ordinance Amendments. In response, on May 4, prior to the City Council meeting, the City Attorney’s office recommended that the Council continue the final adoption of both Ordinance Amendments to a date uncertain. Following this action, staff met with business owners and updated the shopping cart ordinance to encourage greater accountability on the part of shopping cart owners and focused the ordinance following review of best practices from other municipalities.

Item 6c
Public Nuisance and Landfill Impact of Abandoned or Unattended Shopping Carts The City has a substantial interest in promoting the public health, safety, and welfare of its residents, visitors, and businesses, and the aesthetic qualities of the City. Abandoned or unattended shopping carts off the premises of retail establishments can interfere with pedestrian and vehicle traffic and the use of public streets, sidewalks, public areas, and public rights-of-way for their intended purposes, and can create dangerous conditions for users of those public spaces. Since no City ordinance currently exists (there is State law guidance on this topic in the Business and Professions Code that permits implementing an ordinance at the local level), shopping cart owners do not actively retrieve carts, leaving the City to remove dozens of abandoned shopping carts every week from public spaces. They can also constitute a hazard to streams, riparian areas, and other natural spaces, and contribute substantially to litter, clutter, and visual blight. In some instances, they are returned, in other instances the owner picks them up, and in most cases, they are delivered to the landfill because of the significant time and effort that takes away from other core city services.

Chapter 19 of the California Business and Professions Code (Sections 22435 to 22435.13) permits cities to develop an ordinance with regulations to eliminate the accumulation of abandoned shopping carts within city limits, and it has guided the content of this ordinance.

The proposed ordinance would deem abandoned or unattended shopping carts found off the premises of retail establishments, on either public or private property, to be a public nuisance, subject to abatement by the City if the private retail owners of the shopping carts do not fulfill their obligations to maintain their carts on site or retrieve those that have migrated offsite.

The intent of the ordinance is to:
1) Provide for pedestrian and vehicle safety;
2) Ensure that the flow of pedestrian or vehicle traffic is not unreasonably interfered with, including ingress into or egress from any residence, place of business, street, sidewalk, public area, public right-of-way, or any legally parked or stopped vehicle;
3) Protect streams, riparian areas, and other natural areas; and 4) Reduce litter, clutter and visual blight associated with abandoned or unattended shopping carts.
5) Divert cart waste from the landfill; and
6) Balance the rights and interests of the owners of shopping carts with the rights and interests of those who do not own shopping carts but are negatively impacted by shopping carts on private and public property.

The objective of the ordinance is to provide a mechanism to place primary responsibility for managing carts with retailers who provide shopping carts to their customers and to set requirements for the prompt retrieval of carts that have been taken off business premises.

Item 6c
Staff in the Community Development Department’s Code Enforcement Division will track the occurrence of abandoned carts to define and measure the effectiveness of the ordinance and establish a follow-up process to identify businesses with the most abandoned carts, with the goal of improving cart security and reducing their share of abandoned carts.

Summary of Ordinance
This proposed ordinance adds Chapter 8.10 to the City’s Municipal Code to facilitate the retrieval of abandoned shopping carts in the City of San Luis Obispo and defines “abandoned or unattended shopping cart” as a cart that is “left unattended, discarded or abandoned upon any public or private property other than the premises from which the shopping cart was removed, regardless of whether such shopping cart was removed from the premises with the authorization or consent of the cart’s owner.” The ordinance encourages responsibility of retrieval by the shopping cart owner. It also establishes requirements for cart containment and retrieval by cart owners, procedures for impoundment of abandoned carts by the City, and recovery from the cart owner of fines and costs incurred by the City.

Partnership with Local Businesses and Abandoned Shopping Cart Prevention and Retrieval Plan
The benefits of the proposed ordinance (Attachment A) will be achieved through the establishment of best practices by businesses as follows:
1) Cart Identification
a) Application of signage to each cart identifying the owner with their contact information;
2) Community Outreach
a) Placement of signage at parking areas warning that the removal of carts from premises could result in a fine;
3) Loss Prevention Measures
a) Measures to secure carts during off hours and the impoundment of the carts found off premises; and
b) The development and approval of an Abandoned Shopping Cart Prevention and Retrieval Plan (Attachment B), for all businesses who provide or intend to provide twenty-five (25) or more shopping carts to customers, defining:
i) Loss prevention measures (e.g. electronic or other disabling devices, use of courtesy clerks, use of security personnel, or a security deposit system); ii) Inspection, testing and repair of all abandoned carts returned to the owner prior to making the returned carts available for use;
iii) Ongoing employee training program, designed to prevent carts from being taken off premises; and
iv) A plan for retrieval of abandoned shopping carts within three (3) business days after knowing of a cart’s removal from the owner’s premises or after receiving notice from the City that the shopping cart has been abandoned.

Item 6c
Owners of shopping carts who provide less than twenty-five (25) carts can self-certify and are not required to submit an abandoned shopping cart prevention and retrieval plan.

Owners of over 25 shopping carts must submit Abandoned Shopping Cart Prevention and Retrieval Plans to the City within 60 days of the Ordinance becoming effective or alternatively, if a business opens after that date, then within 30 days after a business that uses shopping carts commences operations.

Since an Abandoned Shopping Cart Prevention and Retrieval Plan is required, any owner who fails to provide the abandoned shopping cart prevention and retrieval plan would be required to pay the City $100 for each calendar month the plan is not provided, as a penalty for noncompliance.

Outreach on Shopping Cart Security Systems and City Incentive Offering Last year, the Police Department and Public Works Department reached out to many of the large retail establishments regarding the businesses’ practices regarding shopping cart retrieval. All of the store managers contacted wanted to partner with the City in finding a solution to shopping carts being taken off-premises. However, they indicated that they do not have the resources nor want the liability of having current staff retrieve the carts.

There are technology-based options, in addition to personnel and signage, to secure and retain shopping carts. One is for individual carts to have geographic technologies, similar to geofencing, installed on them to prevent them from being removed from properties and avoid retrieval costs. While such security systems can be costly to implement, some retail establishments have already installed wheel-lock devices on their carts, and the City has set aside $60,000 in economic development grant funds to be awarded to shopping cart owners toward the installation of disabling devices or other security measures, following submittal and approval of their Abandoned Shopping Cart Prevention and Retrieval Plan.

Owners may choose which method of cart containment will work best for their particular store. The proposed ordinance allows designated staff in the Community Development Department’s Code Enforcement Division to review the plans for compliance and to make necessary corrections to plans before approval.

Outline of Penalties and Violations for Shopping Cart Retrieval The ordinance outlines penalties for violations and noncompliance, as limited by the California Business and Professions Code. Any owner who fails to retrieve the owner’s shopping cart or shopping carts within three business days from the date of being given notice of the cart’s or carts’ discovery and location, or impoundment, by the City, may be levied with an administrative fine of fifty dollars ($50) for each occurrence in excess of three during the six-month period starting January 1 and ending on June 30 or the sixmonth period starting July 1 and ending December 31 of each calendar year.

Item 6c
Additionally, the owner would pay the City’s actual costs for retrieving and storing the owner’s shopping cart or carts except when the owner, or their authorized agent, reclaims their cart or carts within three business days from being given notice of the cart’s or carts’ discovery and location, or impoundment, by the City. The cost to retrieve an impounded cart will be based upon the City’s actual costs provided for in the Comprehensive Fee Schedule. If the owner takes action within three business days, all fines, costs and fees would be waived.

Policy Context
Enacted in 1997, Chapter 19 of the California Business and Professions Code (Sections 22435 to 22435.13) known as the “California State Shopping Cart and Laundry Cart Law,” guides shopping cart abatement and impoundment. The California Business and Professions Code permits cities to develop an ordinance with regulations to eliminate the accumulation of abandoned shopping carts within city limits so long as it does not conflict with State law. However, those regulations only apply to a shopping cart that has a sign affixed to it. Since the cited provisions do not require shopping cart owners to affix the signs, many cities in California have adopted local ordinances to require signs and to further expand upon the provisions for management of shopping carts within their jurisdictions. The proposed ordinance is consistent with State law, which makes it unlawful to remove a shopping cart from business premises or to possess it after it has been removed and following all notification and impoundment guidelines.

The proposed Ordinance does not add any additional penalties against individuals for unlawfully removing a shopping cart. Individuals can already be cited under State law for this violation. The focus of the proposed ordinance is cart recovery and management by shopping cart owners. Staff believes that the implementation of the proposed additional language provides a clear, cost-effective and responsible approach to address the matter through proper responsible parties.

Public Engagement
The focus of public engagement has been to inform, educate, and listen to concerns. The public engagement on the topic of shopping carts has included business community outreach to businesses with shopping carts, the San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce and Downtown SLO. Last year, the Police Department and others met with managers of large stores that have shopping carts to explore options to manage and retrieve errant carts. Additionally, in March and prior to consideration of this ordinance, staff have sent a follow up letter to all stores that have 25 or more shopping carts, making them aware of this proposed ordinance.

CONCURRENCE
This report reflects a multi-departmental effort with the City Attorney, Administration, Police, Fire, and Community Services Group, including Community Development, Parks and Recreation and Public Works, all in concurrence with the above-described approach and recommendation.

Item 6c

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed Municipal Code Amendment regarding the security of shopping carts will have any effect on the environment (General Rule Exemption CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15061(b)(3)).

Additionally, the proposed ordinance would be exempt per CEQA Section 15301 Existing Facilities, as there would be negligible or no expansion of use; CEQA Section 15308 Actions by Regulatory Agencies for the Protection of the Environment, as the proposed ordinance is intended to assure the maintenance and protection of the environment; and 15311 Accessory Structures, regarding potential placement on-premise signage needed for public notification associated with the proposed ordinance.

FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: Yes Budget Year: FY 2021-22
Funding Identified: N/A
Fiscal Analysis:

Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund $0 $0 $0 $0
State
Federal
Fees
Other:

Total $0 $0 $0 $0
There are no direct fiscal impacts associated with this action, although significant staff time is being expended to deal with abandoned shopping carts. While this cost is covered through the annual budget appropriation for the various programs that are affected, this ordinance would allow staff to concentrate on service and program delivery to the community.

Additionally, the incentive program referenced above will utilize $60,000 in economic development grant funds that have been set aside for this purpose.

Item 6c

ALTERNATIVES
While staff believe the ordinance presented is complete work, Council may want to pursue the following:

1. Modify the ordinance as proposed.

2. Do not adopt the ordinance as proposed. This action is not recommended by staff as cart retrieval has become a significant effort, diverting important resources and City staff to the removal efforts instead of to the City’s core programs and services.

3. Provide further direction to staff regarding the ordinance.

ATTACHMENTS
A – Draft Ordinance adopting Chapter 8.10 (Shopping Carts) B – Draft Abandoned Shopping Cart Prevention and Retrieval Plan Template

O _____
ORDINANCE NO. ______ (2022 SERIES)

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 8, HEALTH AND SAFETY, OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADD CHAPTER 8.10 PERTAINING TO

THE UNAUTHORIZED REMOVAL OF SHOPPING CARTS FROM

RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS AND TO FACILITATE RETRIEVAL OF

ABANDONED SHOPPING CARTS
WHEREAS, The City has a substantial interest in promoting the public health, safety and welfare of its residents, visitors and businesses, and the aesthetic qualities of the City; and
WHEREAS, Abandoned or unattended shopping carts off the premises of retail establishments can interfere with pedestrian and vehicle traffic and the use of public streets, sidewalks, public areas, and public rights-of-way, can constitute a hazard to streams, riparian areas and other natural areas, and contribute substantially to litter, clutter and visual blight; and
WHEREAS, The purpose of this ordinance is to promote the public health, safety and welfare, and the aesthetic qualities of the City by regulating and prohibiting the removal of shopping carts from the premises of retail establishments, including designated parking areas, without the authorization or consent of the cart’s owner, and to regulate the retrieval and disposition of abandoned or unattended shopping carts that are found off the premises of retail establishments so as to:

1. Provide for pedestrian and vehicle safety;

2. Ensure that the flow of pedestrian or vehicle traffic, including ingress into or egress from any residence, place of business, street, sidewalk, public area, public right-of-way, or any legally parked or stopped vehicle, is not unreasonably interfered with;

3. Help protect streams, creeks, riparian areas, and other natural areas within the City;

4. Reduce litter, clutter, and visual blight associated with abandoned or unattended shopping carts;

5. Divert cart waste from the landfill; and

6. Balance the rights and interests of those engaged in commercial activities that provide shopping carts for use by customers with the rights and interests of those who do not want to be disturbed by abandoned or unattended shopping carts on private and public property.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:

Ordinance No. _______ (2022 Series) Page 2
O ______
SECTION 1. Findings. The Council hereby finds and declares the following:

1. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.

2. The presence of abandoned or unattended carts, or parts thereof, on private or public property is found to create a condition tending to reduce the value of private property, to create blight and deterioration, interfere with pedestrian and vehicular traffic, to be injurious to health, safety, and general welfare, and contributes to landfill waste. The presence of abandoned or unattended carts, or parts thereof, on private or public property, except as expressly hereinafter permitted, is declared a public nuisance which may be abated as such in accordance with the provision of this chapter.

3. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed Municipal Code Amendment regarding the security of shopping carts will have any effect on the environment (General Rule Exemption CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15061(b)(3)) and the proposed ordinance would be exempt per CEQA Section 15301 Existing Facilities, as there would be negligible or no expansion of use; CEQA Section 15308 Actions by Regulatory Agencies for the Protection of the Environment, as the proposed ordinance is intended to assure the maintenance and protection of the environment; and 15311 Accessory Structures, regarding potential placement on-premise signage needed for public notification associated with the proposed ordinance.

SECTION 2. Chapter 8.10 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code is hereby added to read as follows:

8.10.010. Authority and Purpose
This Chapter is adopted pursuant to Business and Professions Code Sections 22435 through 22435.8 and the City’s general police powers for the purpose of regulating and prohibiting the removal of shopping carts from the premises of retail establishments, including designated parking areas, without the authorization or consent of the shopping cart’s owner, and to regulate the retrieval and disposition of abandoned or unattended shopping carts that are found off the premises of retail establishments.

8.10.020. Applicability
This Chapter applies to all businesses located in the City that provide shopping carts for customer use and to all shopping carts on and off the premises of businesses within the City.

8.10.030. Administration
The Director is authorized to administer this chapter which includes, without limitation, the ability to promulgate administrative policies and procedures to interpret, implement and enforce this chapter.

Ordinance No. _______ (2022 Series) Page 3
O ______

8.10.040. Definitions
“Abandoned or unattended shopping cart” means any shopping cart which is left unattended, discarded or abandoned upon any public property other than the premises from which the shopping cart was removed, without the authorization or consent of the cart’s owner.
"Abandoned shopping cart prevention and retrieval plan," shall mean a document required to be submitted by the responsible business owner, pursuant to this chapter.
“Agent” means the person or persons designated by the owner of a shopping cart authorized to perform or provide retrieval services on behalf of the owner. The agent may be the owner, store manager, employee or a private cart retrieval company.
“Director” shall mean the Assistant City Manager, or Director of Utilities or Director of Public Works, or the Director of Community Development for the City of San Luis Obispo, or such other Director, as designated by the City Manager, to administer the appropriate sections of this chapter.
“Occurrence” means the retrieval or impoundment by the City pursuant to this chapter of all shopping carts of an owner in a one-day period. “Owner” means a person who owns or provides shopping carts for use by customers in connection with the operation of a business. “Person” includes, without limitation, individuals, corporations, partnerships, and all other legal entities, and officers, employees, and authorized agents of an owner. “Premises” means the entire area owned and utilized by a retail establishment that provides shopping carts for use by customers, including any parking lot or other off-street area provided by an owner, or shared with other retail establishments, for use by customers for parking automobiles or other vehicles. “Public property” means the outdoor common area of any building, business premises, apartment building or complex, or other premises or portion thereof which is adjacent to public property, open to the public, and which contains a shopping cart or shopping carts visible at street or ground level from the adjacent public property.
“Retail establishment,” with regard to shopping carts, means any business located in the City of San Luis Obispo which offers or provides shopping carts for the use by customers of such business regardless of whether such business is advertised or operated as a retail or wholesale business, and regardless of whether such business is open to the general public, is a private club or business, or is a membership store.
“Shopping cart” means a basket mounted on wheels or a similar device generally used by a customer for the purpose of transporting goods of any kind within a retail establishment or designated parking or loading area of that business establishment.

Ordinance No. _______ (2022 Series) Page 4
O ______

8.10.050. Required Signs and Identification
A. Cart identification and removal warning signs required.

Pursuant to Section 22435.1 of the Business and Professions Code, every shopping cart owned or provided by an owner shall have a sign permanently affixed to the shopping cart that includes the following information:

1. The owner’s name, business address and phone number.

2. Notice of the procedure to be utilized for authorized removal of the shopping cart from the premises.

3. Notice that unauthorized removal of the shopping cart from the premises or parking area of a retail establishment, or the unauthorized possession of the shopping cart, is a violation of state law and this chapter.

8.10.060. Prohibitions
A. Unauthorized removal unlawful.

It shall be unlawful for any person, either temporarily or permanently, to remove a shopping cart from a business premises or be in possession of a shopping cart with a permanently affixed sign as provided in Section 8.10.050, that has been removed from a premises without written consent of the owner authorized by this chapter or for the purpose of repair, maintenance, or disposal authorized by this chapter.

An owner may permit customer off-premises use of a shopping cart for transportation of purchased items. The authorization must be in writing with date(s) and time(s) of authorized use. Any shopping cart taken off premises must be returned to the owner’s premises within seventy-two (72) hours.

B. Abandonment prohibited.

It shall be unlawful and a public nuisance for any person to cause or permit any shopping cart to be abandoned or remain unattended on or upon any sidewalk, street, alley or other public area, other than the premises of the owner of such shopping cart.

8.10.070 Cart Containment and Retrieval by Owners
A. Mandatory Secure Containment of Shopping Carts After Hours.

Every shopping cart owner must lock or otherwise securely contain all shopping carts of the owner after business hours in a manner that prevents theft or removal from the premises. All shopping carts located on the premises of a retail establishment, other than an establishment open for business twenty-four hours per day, must be collected at the end of each business day by the owner, employees, or authorized agents of the retail establishment and be collectively confined in a secured manner in a designated cart confinement area on the premises until the commencement of the next business day.

Ordinance No. _______ (2022 Series) Page 5
O ______
All shopping carts located on the premises of any retail establishment open for business twenty-four hours per day, other than carts then currently in use by a customer, must be collected by the owner, employees, or authorized agents of the retail establishment and returned to a designated cart confinement area on the premises at least twice per calendar day between the hours of twelve p.m. (noon) and twelve a.m. (midnight) on each day the retail establishment is open for business. This section does not apply to:

1. Shopping carts located within an enclosed building.

2. Shopping carts removed from the premises of a retail establishment for purposes of repair or maintenance that are in the possession or custody of the party to whom removal has been authorized in writing by the shopping cart owner.

3. Shopping carts being transported by the owner, or an officer, employee, or authorized agent of the owner, to or from a business location of the owner.

B. Mandatory Retrieval of Carts.

All abandoned shopping carts of a retail establishment that are found off the premises of the retail establishment must be retrieved as soon as practicable by the owner, or an authorized agent of the owner, including a cart retrieval service retained by the owner. The City shall notify the owner of an abandoned shopping cart when such shopping cart is located in a place that can be accessed safely by the owner. Such notice may given be by telephone, email or text message to the owner or owner’s agent designated in the abandoned shopping cart prevention and retrieval plan, if an approved plan is in place, and shall include the cart’s location. Within three (3) business days from the date the owner of the cart is provided with notice by the City that an abandoned shopping cart of the owner has been located, the owner or agent shall cause the identified shopping cart(s) to be retrieved.

C. Retrieval Services.

Persons retained to perform shopping cart retrieval services must carry written authorization from the owner to be presented upon request by the Director or designee. Vehicles used by retrieval services must bear conspicuous signs identifying the name of the cart retrieval service.

8.10.080. Impoundment and Retrieval of Abandoned Shopping Carts A. The Director or designee may immediately retrieve and impound any shopping cart, in accordance with the provisions outlined in Business and Professions Code Section 22435.7.

B. Impoundment Following Three-Day Notice.

A shopping cart that has a sign affixed to it in accordance with the provisions of this chapter and Business and Professions Code Section 22435.1 may be impounded by the City provided both of the following conditions are met:

Ordinance No. _______ (2022 Series) Page 6
O ______

1. The shopping cart is located outside the premises or parking area of a retail establishment; and

2. Except as provided in the Impoundment Without Three-Day Notice section of this chapter, the shopping cart is not retrieved within three business days from the date the owner of the shopping cart, or his or her agent, receives actual notice from the City of the shopping cart’s discovery and location.

C. Impoundment Without Three-Day Notice.

1. The City may retrieve and impound any abandoned shopping cart without first giving three-days’ notice provided:
a. The Director or designee provides actual notice to the owner, or his or her agent, of the impoundment of the shopping cart within twenty-four (24) hours following the impound;
b. The notice informs the owner, or his or her agent, of the location where the shopping cart may be claimed;
c. Any shopping cart reclaimed by the owner, or his or her agent, within three (3) business days after the date of actual notice to the owner, or his or her agent, of the impound, must be released and surrendered to the owner, or his or her agent, at no charge, including the waiver of any impound and storage fees or fines which otherwise would be applicable; and
d. The shopping cart is held at a location that is both:
i. Reasonably convenient to the owner of the shopping cart; and
ii. Open for business at least six (6) hours of each business day.

D. Immediate Retrieval and Impoundment by City for Impeding Emergency Services.

The Director or designee may immediately retrieve and impound any shopping cart from public or private property if the location of the shopping cart impedes emergency services.

E. Any cart reclaimed by the owner or their agent within three (3) business days from the date the owner of the shopping cart, or their agent, is given actual notice by the City of the shopping cart’s discovery and location, or impoundment, shall not be deemed an occurrence for purposes of this chapter.

F. The owner of any shopping cart that is not reclaimed within three (3) business days after the date the owner has been given actual notice by the City of the shopping cart’ s discovery and location, or impoundment, is subject to prosecution or the imposition of administrative costs, fees, fines, interest and other penalties applicable under this chapter commencing four (4) business days after the date of notice.

Ordinance No. _______ (2022 Series) Page 7
O ______

8.10.090. Abandoned Shopping Cart Prevention and Retrieval Plan A. Abandoned Shopping Cart Prevention and Retrieval Plan Required. Every owner who provides or intends to provide twenty-five (25) or more shopping carts to customers shall develop, implement and comply with the terms and conditions of an approved abandoned shopping cart prevention and retrieval plan to prevent the unauthorized removal of shopping carts from a premises and, if removed, to retrieve the shopping cart within three (3) business days after knowing of the cart’s removal from the premises or after receiving notice from the City that the shopping cart has been abandoned. Owners of shopping carts who provide less than twenty-five (25) carts can self-certify and are not required to submit an abandoned shopping cart prevention and retrieval plan.

To be effective, an abandoned shopping cart prevention and retrieval plan must be approved by the Director. To be eligible for approval, an abandoned shopping cart prevention and retrieval plan shall include the following elements:

1. Name. The name of the owner and the business name, the physical address where the business is conducted, name, address and phone number(s) of the on-site and off-site owner, if different.

2. Inventory of Carts. A complete list of all shopping carts maintained on or in the premises.

3. Community Outreach. A description of a community outreach process under which the owner shall cause notice to be provided to customers that the removal of shopping carts from the premises is prohibited and is a violation of state and City ordinance. This notice may include, but is not limited to, flyers distributed at the premises, warnings on shopping bags, signs posted in prominent places near door and parking lot exits, direct mail, announcements using intercom systems at the premises, web site or other means demonstrated to be effective to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director.

4. Cart Identification. Signs and shopping cart identification requirements which conform to state law. Owners shall attach an example of the proposed shopping cart ownership identification sign which shall conform to California Business and Professions Code Section 22345.1.

5. Languages. The information required above must be provided in English and Spanish or in such other language the Director may reasonably require.

6. Loss Prevention Measures. A description of the specific measures that the owner shall implement to prevent shopping cart removal from the owner’s premises. These measures may include, but are not limited to, electronic or other disabling devices on the shopping carts so they cannot be removed from the premises, effective management practices, use of courtesy clerks to accompany customers and return the shopping carts to the store, use of security personnel to prevent removal, security deposit for use of shopping cart, or other demonstrable measures acceptable to the Director that are likely to prevent shopping cart removal from the premises. Cart owners shall conduct regular maintenance to ensure disabling devices and/or security

Ordinance No. _______ (2022 Series) Page 8
O ______
deposit systems are working properly. If at any time, a cart owner determines the disabling device installed on a cart is not working properly, the cart shall be pulled from circulation until it is repaired. The cart owner shall inspect, test, and repair all abandoned carts returned to the owner prior to making the returned carts available for use.

7. Employee Training. A description of an ongoing employee training program that shall be implemented by the owner and that shall be designed to educate new and existing employees on the abandoned shopping cart prevention plan and conditions contained therein at least annually.

8. Mandatory Cart Retrieval. A plan for retrieval of abandoned shopping carts by the owner within three (3) business days after knowing of a cart’s removal from the owner’s premises or after receiving notice from the City that the shopping cart has been abandoned.

B. Failure to Submit Plan. The plan must be submitted to the City within sixty (60) days after the ordinance that implements this chapter becomes effective or alternatively, if a business opens after the date the ordinance that implements this chapter becomes effective, then within thirty (30) days after a business that uses carts commences operations. Any owner who fails to provide the abandoned shopping cart prevention and retrieval plan shall be required to pay the City $100 for each calendar month the plan is not provided, as a penalty for not complying with this Section 8.10.090.

8.10.100. Recovery of Fines and Costs by City
A. Pursuant to Business and Professions Code Section 22435.7(f), any owner that fails to retrieve the owner’s shopping cart or shopping carts within three (3) business days from the date of being given notice of the cart’s or carts’ discovery and location, or impoundment, by the City, is guilty of a violation of this chapter and may be punished with an administrative fine of fifty dollars ($50) for each occurrence in excess of three (3) during the six-month period starting January 1 and ending on June 30 or the six-month period starting July 1 and ending December 31 of each calendar year.

B. In addition to the fines imposed above, the owner shall pay the City’s actual costs for retrieving and storing the owner’ s shopping cart or carts except when the owner, or their authorized agent, reclaims their cart or carts within three (3) business days from being given notice of the cart’s or carts’ discovery and location, or impoundment, by the City, in which case, all fines, costs and fees shall be waived.

Ordinance No. _______ (2022 Series) Page 9
O ______

8.10.110. Disposal of Abandoned Shopping Carts
The City may sell or otherwise dispose of any shopping cart:

1. That is not reclaimed from the City within thirty (30) days of receipt by the owner, or the owner’s agent, of actual notice from the City of the cart’s discovery and location, or impoundment.

2. If the owner of the cart cannot be determined.

3. If the cart is rendered unusable (e.g., mangled, destroyed).

8.10.120. Violation – Penalties
Any person who violates any provision of this Chapter is guilty of an infraction and is subject to punishment as provided in Chapter 1.12 (General Penalty) or as provided under Chapter 1.24 (Administrative Code Enforcement Procedures).

Ordinance No. _______ (2022 Series) Page 10
O ______
SECTION 3. Publication. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The New Times, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage.

INTRODUCED on the_______ day of _____, 2022, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the______ day of______, 2022, on the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:
__________________________
Mayor Erica A. Stewart
ATTEST:
________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, on ______________________. __________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk

City of San Luis Obispo
Abandoned Shopping Cart
Prevention and Retrieval Plan
Instructions
Unless otherwise indicated, please complete all sections of this form, and attach any necessary documentation. Plan (with documentation) must be mailed to the City of San Luis Obispo (919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401) or sent via email by August 6, 2022, or alternatively, if your business opened after that date, then within 30 days after your business commences operations. This form is mandatory if your grocery store or retail establishment has 25 or more carts.

Penalty for Failure to Submit:

Failure to submit this plan will result in a noncompliance penalty of $100 per calendar month.

General Information
Business Name:

Business Owner:

Physical Address
of Business:

Business Registration
Certificate Number:

Expiration Date:

Business Hours/Days:

On-Site Manager’s Name:

Daytime Phone: Email:

Exemptions
Any business owner may request an exemption from the requirements of this chapter if the owner provides written documentation and demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City that the business has less than 25 carts on the premises or has otherwise received approval for exemption from the Public Works Director.

Explanation of Request for Exemption:
□ My store has less than 25 carts on the premises □ Other (note below):
____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________

Cart Information & Identification
Please indicate the total number of carts on the premises for public use: __________________ Every cart owned or provided by any business owner must have a sign permanently affixed to the cart that contains the following information in English and Spanish, in compliance with California Business and Professions Code Section 22345.1:

1. The owner’s name, business address and phone number.

2. Notice of the procedure to be utilized for authorized removal of the shopping cart from the premises.

3. Notice that unauthorized removal of the shopping cart from the premises or parking area of a retail establishment, or the unauthorized possession of the shopping cart, is a violation of state law and Chapter 8.10 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code.
>DOCUMENTATION: Please provide samples or photos of signs and other cart identification.

Signage
Every business that owns or provides carts for the use of its customers within the City shall post conspicuous signs at or near each entrance to its parking lot and the public entrance doors to its store notifying its customers that removal of carts from the premises is prohibited. Signs and shopping cart identification requirements must conform to state law and comply with applicable provisions of Chapter 8.10 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. >DOCUMENTATION: Attach an example of both the signage and shopping cart owner identification noted above to this document.

Containment System Installation
Has a physical or electronic containment system for the purpose of preventing shopping carts from leaving the property been installed? □ Yes □ No
If yes, is the system currently operational? □ Yes □ No Please provide specific details on the type of system installed and/or attach any vendor documentation that will assist us in determining the sufficiency of the method used to contain carts. Also, please attach photos as an addendum to this document. If the system is not currently operational, please explain why not:
____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________

Community Outreach, Loss Prevention, Employee Training and Retrieval Community Outreach: Please provide a description of the community outreach process under which the owner shall cause notice to be provided to customers that the removal of carts from the premises is prohibited, and a violation of state and City ordinance. This may include, but is not limited to, flyers distributed on the premises, warnings on shopping bags, signs posted in prominent places near door and parking lot exits, direct mail, announcements using intercom systems on the premises, website or other means demonstrated to be effective to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director. Any posting of signs must comply with applicable provisions of Chapter 8.10 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ Loss Prevention: Please provide a description of the specific measures used to prevent cart removal from the premises. These measures may include, but are not limited to, electronic or other disabling devices on the carts so that they cannot be removed from the premises, security deposit systems, modifications to the carts and/or the retail location, use of courtesy clerks to accompany customers and return carts to the store, use of security personnel to prevent removal, or other demonstrably effective measures acceptable to the City, likely to prevent cart removal from the premises:
____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________

Employee Training: Please provide a description of an ongoing employee training program that shall be implemented by the owner and that shall be designed to educate new and existing employees on the Abandoned Shopping Cart Prevention and Retrieval Plan and conditions contained therein at least annually.
____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ Cart Retrieval: Please provide a plan for retrieval of abandoned carts by the owner within three (3) business days after knowing of a cart’s removal from the owner’s premises or after receiving notice from the City that the shopping cart has been abandoned, or a copy of a contract with a business registered to operate in San Luis Obispo and approved retrieval service. All contracts for retrieval must include language prohibiting limits on daily loads and/or limits on daily or weekly drop-off of abandoned carts.

Note: Persons retained to perform shopping cart retrieval services must carry written authorization from the owner to be presented upon request by the Director or designee.

Vehicles used by retrieval services must bear conspicuous signs identifying the name of the cart retrieval service.
____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ Other Attachments:

Please attach any supplemental photos or documents noted in the sections above to this plan prior to submission.
 Clear photos of cart containment system
 Vendor documentation for cart containment system (optional)  Clear photos of required signage
 Clear photos of cart identification

Item 6d
Department: Administration
Cost Center: 1010
For Agenda of: 5/17/2022
Placement: Business
Estimated Time: 10 Minutes
FROM: Derek Johnson, City Manager
Prepared By: Beya Makekau, DEI Manager
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE A MOU BETWEEN THE CITY & CAL POLY TO ESTABLISH

COLLABORATIVE EFFORTS TO ADVANCE DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND

INCLUSION INITIATIVES WITHIN THE CITY

RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the Mayor to execute a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) between Cal Poly Office of University Diversity and Inclusion and the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the establishment of collaborative efforts to advance Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives within the city.

DISCUSSION
Background
In 2020, City Council passed a resolution approving the creation of the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Task Force (DEI-TF) which included in its charge to provide insight on advancing DEI in San Luis Obispo and the support and implementation of $150,000 in DEI high impact grants. Council accepted the DEI-TF recommendations on January 12, 2021, which included the recommendation to leverage partnerships with Cal Poly to enhance DEI programs in the community at large. The City also adopted a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) major city goal with its 2021-23 Financial Plan which included a robust workplan, the creation of a DEI office, and an inaugural DEI Manager position for the City. The workplan includes expanded collaboration with Cal Poly’s Office of University Diversity and Inclusion regarding the intersections of community and student experiences in the City and on campus.

Additionally, Cal Poly adopted a diversity statement that includes the following: “we encourage our students, faculty, and staff to seek out opportunities to engage with others who are both similar and different from them, thereby increasing their capacity for knowledge, empathy, and conscious participation in local and global communities”. In 2019, Cal Poly’s CPX data also resulted in a recommendation to engage with the San Luis Obispo community and identify three to five top strategies to create a more inclusive experience on campus and in the SLO community.

Item 6d
The proposed MOU establishes the partnership between Cal Poly’s Office of University Diversity and Inclusion and the City of San Luis Obispo to contribute to programs and initiatives that foster a San Luis Obispo that is welcoming, inclusive, and equitable. Efforts will be made to lay the groundwork to include Cuesta college in this effort in the future.

More specifically the MOU commits both the City to collaborate, coordinate and work on a variety of programs and projects that will address structural inequities and advance welcoming and belonging for all residents and students both on and off campus.

Previous Council or Advisory Body Action
Council accepted the DEI Task Force recommendation on January 12, 2021, which included specific recommendations for expanding partnerships with Cal Poly on DEI initiatives. Council also approved the FY22-23 DEI Major City Goal which includes work plan section 2.6 that specifically requires the implementation of several items listed in the memorandum of understanding.

Public Engagement
This item is scheduled for the May 17, 2022 City Council meeting and will follow all required postings and notifications. The public may provide comment on this item at or before the meeting.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to the recommended action in this report, because the action does not constitute a “Project” under CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15378.

FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: Yes Budget Year: 2021-22
Funding Identified: Yes
Fiscal Analysis:

Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund $ N/A $ $ $
State
Federal
Fees
Other:

Total $ $ $ $

Item 6d
Because no additional staff work is anticipated as a result of this memorandum, no new fiscal impact will be incurred. Funding for projects that will be in collaboration with Cal Poly outlined in the memorandum have been allocated for in the current budget due to DEI Major City Goal. Annual appropriation for the DEI program will be included in the City’s budgetary process and adoption.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Council could decide not to approve the MOU between Cal Poly and the City.

This action is not recommended by staff because intentional collaboration with Cal Poly has been outlined in the major city goal workplan and is reflective of a collective need for more intentional efforts to advance DEI in our community.

2. Council could direct staff to amend the “MOU” to more accurately reflect the Council’s position on the issue.

ATTACHMENT
A - Draft MOU between the City and Cal Poly Office of University Diversity and Inclusion.

Memorandum of Understanding between
The City of San Luis Obispo and
Office of University Diversity & Inclusion,
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is entered into on _________________________ by and between the Office of University Diversity and Inclusion (OUDI) at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo (Cal Poly) and the City of San Luis Obispo (City). This memorandum is made for the purpose of memorializing the intent of the parties to engage in a relationship to foster Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) partnerships and initiatives for members of the Cal Poly campus and San Luis Obispo communities.

Recitals
WHEREAS, in 2020 City Council passed a resolution approving the creation of the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Task Force (DEI-TF) which included in its charge to provide insight on advancing DEI in San Luis Obispo and the support and implementation of $150,000 in DEI highimpact grants. Council accepted the DEI-TF recommendations on January 12, 2021, which included the recommendation to leverage partnerships with Cal Poly to enhance DEI programs in the community at large, and;
WHEREAS, the City adopted a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion major city goal for fiscal years 2021-2023 which included a robust workplan, the creation of a DEI office, and an inaugural DEI manager position for the City. The workplan includes expanded collaboration with OUDI regarding the intersections of community and staff, faculty, and student experiences in the city of San Luis Obispo and on campus, and;
WHEREAS, Cal Poly adopted a diversity statement that includes the following statement: “we encourage our students, faculty, and staff to seek out opportunities to engage with others who are both similar and different from them, thereby increasing their capacity for knowledge, empathy, and conscious participation in local and global communities,” and; WHEREAS, Cal Poly conducted a study of the Cal Poly Experience (“CPX”). The CPX report, issued in 2019, included a recommendation to engage with the San Luis Obispo community and identify three to five top strategies to create a more inclusive experience on campus and in the San Luis Obispo community, and;
WHEREAS, this MOU expands the partnership between OUDI and the City to contribute to programs and initiatives that foster a San Luis Obispo that is welcoming, inclusive, and equitable, and;
WHEREAS, the goal of the City and OUDI is to work towards options to achieve the vision that residents, students, and workers in San Luis Obispo have access to educational and leadership opportunities that foster a sense of belonging and success for all;

NOW, THEREFORE, OUDI AND THE CITY SEEK TO PURSUE THE FOLLOWING:

1. The City will seek to:

1.1. Coordinate quarterly leadership meetings between the City DEI director and OUDI representative to develop and discuss current DEI initiatives.

1.2. Provide the use of City facilities at a donated or reduced fee to Cal Poly when Cal Poly offers educational programs on topics related to DEI which are open to the community.

1.3. Fund leadership opportunities for Cal Poly students to be engaged in City process and DEI initiatives via programs like the Community Academy and Sparks Fellow program.

1.4. Discuss the sharing of anonymized, aggregate data as it pertains the diverse experiences of the local community and major DEI-centered City goals.

2. OUDI will seek to:

2.1. Assign an OUDI student intern to engage with the City’s Diversity Office on collaborative projects.

2.2. Collaborate on opportunities for the City to engage in critical DEI programs, workshops, and education offered through Cal Poly.

2.3. Assist in increasing the footprint of cultural art on campus and in the city of San Luis Obispo.

2.4. Discuss the sharing of anonymized, aggregate data as it pertains to the experiences of marginalized and/or underrepresented students, staff, and faculty in the San Luis Obispo community.

This MOU is not a legally binding agreement and may not be construed as a commitment to perform by the City, Cal Poly, or OUDI. Either Party may, at any time, unilaterally terminate all participation in the matters stated herein and withdraw its acknowledgment and support of this MOU without any liability whatsoever to the other Party. Each Party is and will be solely liable for all its own fees, costs, and other expenses incurred in connection with this MOU and the matters encompassed herein.

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CALIFORNIA POLYTECHNIC
STATE UNIVERSITY, San Luis Obispo
________________________________ ____________________________________ Mayor Erica A. Stewart Dr. Denise Isom, Interim Vice President of Diversity and Inclusion and Chief Diversity
Officer
ATTEST
________________________________
Teresa Purrington, City Clerk