Council Authorization for Owner's Representative Services for Delivery of Several Capital Improvement Projects OR Reprioritize (i.e. defer delivery) Various Projects and Determine Options for Delivery." Below is a summary of salient comments made:
1. Proposal Valuation per Project Insufficient. A member of the W/WW AC initially expressed concern about the low cost associated with the corresponding proposals. It was explained that the proposed budgets and their corresponding scope exclude Construction Management/Inspection Services, which would be developed and executed as agreement amendments concurrent with the award of projects for construction.
2. Total number of CIP projects too great to manage/deliver. While expressing appreciation and gratitude, there was an acknowledgement that the volume/valuation of projects being administered by the Public Works Department staff was beyond reasonable expectations. Members expressed the need for a prioritization of projects to be developed/delivered in a reasonably timely manner.
Staff expressed the challenge that there are a number of projects that are either tied to timely fiscal obligations (e.g. GO Bond deadline) or regulatory obligations (e.g. Division of Safety of Dams requiring upgrades to the Bell Canyon Intake Tower). As the W/WW AC has formed a subcommittee titled, "Capital Project Prioritization", it is anticipated that W/WW AC and staff will continue to collaborate on project prioritization and delivery.
In summary, without Owner's Representative Services the projects noted above will be deferred/delayed.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Not applicable.
GOAL:
Goal 1: Strengthen Financial Sustainability
Goal 2: Improve Infrastructure & Further Environmental Sustainability Goal 3: Pursue Water Security & Sustainable Management of Water Resources Goal 8: Implement Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) Projects Miscellaneous/Other DOCUMENTS ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 01 - W-WW AC 07.01 - Draft Staff Report Rate Study Attachment 02 - W-WW AC 07.03 - Draft Staff Report Owner's Representative Services Agenda Item #13.1.
Agenda Report to the Water and Wastewater Advisory
Committee
DATE: August 28, 2025
SUBJECT: Consideration of Advancing Water & Wastewater Rate Study to commence in 2025 from the scheduled 2026 timeline.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommend advancing the Water & Wastewater Rate Study to commence in 2025.
STATEMENT OF THE
PURPOSE:
To seek committee direction on whether to initiate an
updated Water and Wastewater Rate Study in 2025, one
year earlier than originally scheduled, and to request
feedback on the draft Request for Proposals (RFP).
FINANCIAL IMPACT: This study is currently unbudgeted in the FY25/26 budget.
BACKGROUND:
The City conducted its most recent water and wastewater rate review and update in 2023, culminating in the adoption of updated rates by the City Council on September 1, 2023.
These rates are currently in effect through July 1, 2027. At the time of adoption, the rate structure was designed to support the City’s ongoing operations, capital needs, and financial policies over a four-year period.
Although the current rate schedule extends through mid-2027, the City is proposing to initiate the next rate study one year earlier than originally planned, with the intention of establishing updated rates that would take effect on July 1, 2026. Advancing the study to commence in 2025 allows for sufficient time to evaluate and adjust rates in alignment with long-range financial planning and capital investment schedules. Recent updates to the City’s five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP), which identifies both funded and unfunded projects, have prompted staff to revisit the timeline for the next rate review. Both the water and wastewater enterprise funds are required to generate sufficient revenue to fully cover the costs of operations and maintenance, capital replacement, and debt service.
DISCUSSION:
The proposed advancement of the rate study to commence in 2025 is intended to proactively align revenue forecasts with the extensive capital improvement plan needs, ensuring that the City’s water and wastewater enterprise funds maintain financial stability while delivering essential infrastructure investments. A key consideration is ensuring that sufficient cash flow and reserve levels are available to support timely delivery of capital projects, avoid deferred maintenance, and minimize reliance on short-term or external financing mechanisms.
Given the scale and timing of upcoming infrastructure investments, a 2025 rate study commencement will allow the City to assess whether the existing rate structure adequately supports future expenditures, and to make any necessary adjustments before the current rates expire. This approach supports prudent fiscal management and positions the City to maintain long-term financial sustainability for both enterprise funds. If the rate study is not initiated in 2025, the City may face limited flexibility in adjusting rates to meet capital and operating demands by July 2027, increasing the risk of cash flow shortfalls, deferred projects, or the need for interim financing, especially in the Wastewater Enterprise Fund.
ATTACHMENT 1
Agenda Item #13.1.
Staff has developed a draft Request for Proposals for consultant services to conduct the 2025 Water and Wastewater Rate Study. The scope of work includes evaluating the current rate structure, assessing revenue sufficiency in light of planned expenditures, and proposing updated rates to take effect on the current timeline of July 1, 2027. The RFP emphasizes compliance with financial policy goals, including reserve targets, debt coverage requirements, and fair and equitable rate design.
Staff is requesting feedback from the Water and Wastewater Advisory Committee on both the proposed timeline adjustment and the draft RFP. Should the committee support the advancement of the study to 2025, staff anticipates issuing the RFP in September 2025 to allow sufficient time for consultant selection, public engagement, and adoption of updated rates prior to their effective date.
1088 College Ave. | St. Helena, CA 94574
(707) 967-2792 | cityofsthelena.gov
ATTACHMENT 1
Agenda Item #13.1.
REQUEST FOR
PROPOSALS:
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Water and Wastewater Rate Study
DATE ISSUED: [Date]
DATE DUE: [Date] @ 4:00 PM
CONTACT: Mandy Kellogg, Administrative Services Director [email protected]
The City is only accepting proposals electronically via email to [email protected]
Only emails sent to [email protected] will be considered as responsive to the request for proposals.
ATTACHMENT 1
Agenda Item #13.1.
Emails sent to other City emails may be considered as
non-responsive and may not be reviewed.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION
II. GENERAL INFORMATION
III. SCOPE OF WORK
IV. SCHEDULE
V. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND FORMAT
PART 1 | COVER LETTER/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PART 2 | FIRM QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
PART 3 | CONSULTANT IDENTIFICATION AND TEAM
PART 4 | SPECIFIC RATE STUDY APPROACH
PART 5 | TOTAL COST AND HOURLY RATES
VI. EVALUATION PROCESS
VII. SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1. EXAMINATION OF PROPOSAL MATERIALS
2. ADDENDA INTERPRETATIONS
3. DESIGNATED CONTACT
4. PUBLIC RECORDS
5. PROPOSAL COSTS
6. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
7. PRODUCT OWNERSHIP
8. ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL CONTENTS
9. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
10. COMPENSATION
11. CAUSES FOR DISQUALIFICATION
EXHIBITS
A. SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES AND EXPENSES
B. SAMPLE CITY OF ST. HELENA PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT CITY OF ST. HELENA | REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS | WATER AND WASTEWATER RATE STUDY PAGE 1
I. INTRODUCTION
ATTACHMENT 1
Agenda Item #13.1.
Napa Valley was the traditional homeland of several thousand indigenous people preceding incorporation. St. Helena, in the heart of the Napa Valley, is a beautifully historical community located sixty-five miles north of San Francisco. The City hosts some of Napa Valley’s oldest wineries, finest shops, and art galleries. St. Helena was incorporated as a City on March 24, 1876, and reincorporated on May 14, 1889. The City is a vibrant and wonderful place to visit, work, and live.
The City, from its inception, has served as a rural agricultural center. Over the years, with the growth and development of the wine industry, the City has become an important business and banking center for the wine industry. The City also receives many visitors as a result of the wine industry and the area’s scenic qualities. The City’s goal is to maintain a small-town atmosphere and to provide quality services to its citizens.
The estimated population of the City of St. Helena as of 2024 is 5,272 (CA Department of Finance), however the population increases daily because of visitation to the numerous hospitality and lodging establishments, and individuals travelling to St. Helena for their occupation.
St. Helena is a full-service city and encompasses an area of five square miles.
The City’s FY 2025/26 General Fund Budget is approximately $22.2 million, excluding transfers. The Water Enterprise fund is comprised of three revenue funds: Water Enterprise Utility fund, Water Capital Projects funds, and Water Impact Fees fund. The Water Enterprise Fund has an adopted budget of $8.8 million, excluding transfers. The Wastewater Enterprise Fund is comprised of three revenue funds: Wastewater Enterprise Utility fund, Wastewater Capital Projects funds, and Wastewater Impact Fees fund. The Wastewater Enterprise Fund has a FY 2024/25 adopted budget of $5.3 million, excluding transfers.
The City also updated its five-year CIP budget, which identifies funded and unfunded capital projects for both utilities.
The City conducted a water and wastewater rate review in 2023 and the City Council adopted its current water and wastewater rates on September 1, 2023. Current rates for both water and wastewater are in effect through July 1, 2027, however the City has proposed conducting the rate study one year earlier in which the study would include new rates effective July 1, 2027.
Both enterprise funds must generate sufficient revenues to cover the costs of system operations and maintenance, replacement of capital improvements, and debt service allocated to the funds. Revenues from development impact fees are to be used for funding future capital improvement and growth-related projects. These revenues cannot be used to cover operating expenses. Both enterprise funds should operate with a balanced budget, maintaining adequate replacement funds, reasonable emergency funds for a major failure or project and maintain 6 – 8 months of annual operating expenditures in cash.
II. GENERAL INFORMATION
The City of St. Helena is requesting proposals from qualified firms for professional services to conduct a cost-of-service rate study for the City’s water and wastewater utility and recommend changes to the rate structures and rate adjustments to fully cover the costs of operating, maintaining, and upgrading the water and wastewater systems.
During the evaluation process, the City reserves the right, where it may serve the City’s best interest, to request additional information or clarifications from proposers, or to allow corrections of errors or omissions. Submission of a ATTACHMENT 1
Agenda Item #13.1.
proposal indicates acceptance by the firm of the conditions contained in this request for proposal, unless clearly and specifically noted in the proposal.
III. SCOPE OF WORK
The scope of services below includes the major tasks required to complete the study. Proposals should include any recommended additional tasks determined necessary to meet the objective defined above and the reason behind such an approach.
Task 1 – Conduct an in-person kick-off meeting with City staff to discuss project priorities, data needs and the project schedule. The consultant will also need to prepare a data requirements list that will be discussed during the meeting.
Task 2 – Develop a 10-year financial plan model for the potable water and wastewater services that determines the revenue requirements based on projected revenues, operating and maintenance expenditures including capital improvements, debt service coverage and reserve funding policies as well as any other policy consideration that the City determines are priorities.
Task 3 – Prepare a cost-of-service analysis and options that fairly and equitably allocates costs to customer classes while adequately funding revenue requirements including operations and maintenance, capital improvements, and debt service. The analysis must ensure that rates and charges are defensible and comply with the requirements of Proposition 218, Proposition 26, and other regulations.
Task 4 – Provide a comparative analysis that illustrates how the City of St.
Helena’s rate structure and costs compare to neighboring utilities. At a minimum, this list should include eight nearby cities of comparable size.
Task 5 – Recommend rate and fee structures/options for potable water, raw water, and sewer utilities that will fairly recover allocated costs and adequately fund reserves. Rate structure recommendations should consider the following: current and future operations and maintenance costs, projected demands, water supply, and capital improvement requirements.
Recommended rate structures should include water conservation pricing and drought surcharges and methodology.
Task 6 – Review impacts of projected new development and redevelopment rates. As part of this review, the consultant should concentrate on capital costs associated with rehabilitation and replacement of existing utilities and not on the improvements required for the expansion of service as a result of new development.
Task 7 – Prepare draft and final reports that summarize the results and recommendations of the study and serve as a document of record in compliance with Proposition 218. Draft and final deliverables shall be made available in Word, Excel, and PDF file formats. Word and Excel formats should be editable by City staff.
Task 8 – Provide “sample bills” for all customer categories illustrating recommended rate increases, which will analyze impacts to the customers.
Task 9 – Conduct minimum of three (3) rate workshops with staff and City Council and three (3) to five (5) community outreach meetings.
Task 10 – In addition to meetings identified in Task 9, Consultant will develop the Proposition 218 notice of public hearing and conduct a minimum of two ATTACHMENT 1
Agenda Item #13.1.
(2) community meetings to inform the public of proposed rate structure prior to the Proposition 218 hearing.
Task 11 – The scope should include any additional meetings or webinars that the consultant deems necessary to ensure that the City is well informed as to the status of the project and to discuss major milestones of the project.
Timeline Requirements
Consultants shall initiate work by early September 2025 with a projected completion date of Spring 2026. This schedule enables the City to conduct a beneficial community engagement process as well as required public hearings for rate increases. If adopted, rate increases would go into effect in the billing cycle following the completion of the required noticing period.
Reporting and Communication
1. The consultant will meet continuously during the on-site field work process with the City Manager, Administrative Services Director, and Public Works Director/Assistant City Manager to discuss issues, concerns, preliminary findings, and recommendations.
2. The consultant will provide regular updates to the City regarding process on the analyses and recommendations and request any additional information or direct need to complete the project on time and within budget.
3. Prior to the issue of their final report, the consultant will meet with the City Manager, Administrative Services Director, and Public Works Director/Assistant City Manager, to review the draft report and recommendations to be presented to the City Council.
IV. SCHEDULE
Responses to the RFP must be submitted to the City of St. Helena as outlined in this section.
Responses are due no later than
FRIDAY, [Date], AT 4:00 PM
Responses received after this date and time will not be considered.
ATTACHMENT 1
Agenda Item #13.1.
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR THE REVIEW AND SELECTION PROCESS
AND DESIRED TIMELINES FOR DELIVERABLES
MILESTONE DATE TIME
Release RFP [Date], 2025 9:00AM
Question submittal deadline [Date], 2025 4:00PM
Questions posted on City website
(cityofsthelena.gov/rfps)
[Date], 2025 5:00PM
Proposal due date [Date], 2025 4:00PM
Review and scoring of submittals Week of [Date], 2025 9:00AM Interviews w/finalists [Date], 2025 TBD
Award of Agreement [Date], 2025 6:00 PM
The schedule may be modified and/or extended if necessary.
V. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND FORMAT
If interested in this RFP, please notify Mandy Kellogg by email at [email protected] so you may be added to the notification list for addendums. Failure to notify people could result in missing important and required information and could result in disqualification.
Format
All submittals must follow the format described in this section. Respondents are encouraged to submit clear and concise responses to the RFP. The City of St. Helena reserves the right to include or exclude any part of the submittals in the final agreement with the selected consultant.
All submittals must be received by 4:00 PM on [Date], 2025 @ 4:00 p.m. via email as follows:
1. Submittals must be e-mailed to: [email protected]
2. Subject line of e-mail must read: RFP – Water and Wastewater Rate Study
3. The submittals shall be in PDF format with search capability to endure readability and compatibility. All submitted material will be retained by the City of St. Helena and considered public information.
It is the sole responsibility of the Proposer to ensure timely delivery. Late proposals shall not be considered. Proposals will not be accepted at any other location other than the address specified above. Faxed or emailed proposals will not be accepted.
Content
The content of your proposal should include the following in summary form:
Part 1: Cover Letter/Executive Summary
Part 2: Firm Qualifications and Experience
Part 3: Consultant Identification and Team
Part 4: Specific Rate Study Approach
Part 5: Total Cost and Hourly Rates
TOTAL: 100 points
PART 1 | COVER LETTER/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In no more than three (3) pages, the Cover Letter and Executive Summary shall include:
ATTACHMENT 1
Agenda Item #13.1.
1. The names of the key members of the consultant team.
2. The mailing address, telephone number, and the name of the main point of contact for the consultant team.
3. A summary of the consultant’s experience and qualifications and the significant advantages of selecting the consultant.
4. An acknowledgement of receiving any addendum(s) to the RFP document sent out by the City.
PART 2 | FIRM QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
The proposal should state the size of the Firm, the size of the Firm’s staff, the location of the office from which the work on this engagement is to be performed.
For the Firm’s office assigned responsibility for the rate study, list the most significant engagements (maximum of 5) performed in the last five (5) years that are similar in organizational type, size and complexity to the engagement described in this request for proposal. These engagements should show experience with local governments preparing a water and wastewater rate study. Indicate the scope of work, date engagement partners, total hours, and the name and telephone number of the principal client contact and, if available, a link to the final published report.
PART 3 | CONSULTANT IDENTIFICATION AND TEAM
The Firm shall identify the principal supervisory and management staff, including engagement partners, managers, other supervisors, and specialists, who would be assigned to the rate study. The Firm should also provide information on direct rate study experience, including the scope of services requested by the City, of each person, and information on relevant continuing professional education for the past three (3) years and membership in professional organizations relevant to the performance of this study.
The Firm should provide as much information as possible, including resumes regarding the number, qualifications, experience, and training of the specific staff to be assigned to this agreement. The Firm should also indicate how the quality of staff over the term of the agreement will be assured.
Engagement partners, managers, other supervisory staff, and specialists may be changed if those personnel leave the Firm, are promoted, or are assigned to another office. These personnel may also be changed for other reasons with the express prior written permission of the City of St. Helena. However, in either case, the City of St. Helena reserves the right to approve or reject replacements. This shall also apply to consultants and firm specialists mentioned in response to this request for proposal.
Other personnel may be changed at the discretion of the Firm provided that replacements have substantially the same or better qualifications or experience,
and there is continuity of key staff to ensure an efficient rate study process.
PART 4 | SPECIFIC RATE STUDY APPROACH
The proposal should set forth a work plan, including an explanation of the rate study methodology to be followed, to perform the services required in Section III of this request for proposal.
PART 5 | TOTAL COST AND HOURLY RATES
The proposal should contain all pricing information relating to performing the rate study as described in this request for proposal. The total all-inclusive maximum cost to be proposed is to contain all direct and indirect costs including all out-of-pocket expenses.
ATTACHMENT 1
Agenda Item #13.1.
The proposal should include a schedule of professional fees and expenses, as presented in the format shown in Exhibit A, which includes the proposed total all-inclusive maximum cost.
VI. EVALUATION PROCESS
The proposals for the City’s rate study will be reviewed by a committee selected by the City Manager and Administrative Services Director. Proposers may be required to make oral presentations as a supplement to their proposals. These presentations would only be held subsequent to the receipt of the proposals and will be part of the evaluation/interview process to determine qualifications of the firm. The City will schedule a time and location for each oral presentation that it requests. Should a proposer refuse to honor the request for a presentation or interview, it may result in the City’s rejection of the proposal.
Evaluation considerations may include, by way of illustration and not by limitation, the following:
a. Responsiveness of the proposal in clearly stating the understanding of the work to be performed and demonstrating the intention and ability to perform the work.
b. Consultant’s experience in conducting rate studies for cities of a similar nature, size, and complexity, and the consultant’s commitment to maintaining technical expertise in the municipal financial environment.
c. Technical experience and professional qualifications of the team. The number of key and supervisory personnel who will directly participate in the rate study.
d. Size and structure of the Firm’s office from which the work is to be done and continuity in staff. The City is looking for a highly qualified team that is able to meet the due dates specified in this document. e. Cost. Although a significant factor, cost will not be the primary factor in the selection of a firm.
VII. SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1. EXAMINATION OF PROPOSAL MATERIALS
The submission of a proposal shall be deemed a representation and warranty by the proponent that investigated all aspects of the RFP, that it is aware of the applicable facts pertaining to the RFP process and its procedures and requirements, and that it has read and understands the RFP. No request for modification of the provisions of the proposal shall be considered after its submission on the grounds that the proponent was not fully informed as to any fact or condition.
2. ADDENDA INTERPRETATIONS
If it becomes necessary to revise any part of this RFP, a written addendum will be provided to each firm that requested to be added to the notification list and said addenda will be uploaded to the City website. The City of St.
ATTACHMENT 1
Agenda Item #13.1.
Helena is not bound by any oral representations, clarifications, or changes made in the RFP by the City or its agents, unless such clarifications or change is provided in written addendum from the City of St. Helena.
3. DESIGNATED CONTACT
For the purposes of this RFP, the Administrative Services Director is designated as the contact person. Any questions concerning the scope of work and the selection process shall be directed to Mandy Kellogg, at [email protected]. All questions and responses concerning this RFP will only be accepted in writing, via email. All questions must be received by [Date], 2025, by 4:00PM.
Responses to questions will be posted on the City’s website, cityofsthelena.gov/rfps, and will become part of the RFP. It is the consultant’s responsibility to check the website for updates.
4. PUBLIC RECORDS
All responses to the RFP shall become the property of the City and a matter of public record. Responders must identify all copyrighted material, trade secrets or other proprietary information that the responder claims are exempt from disclosure by the California Public Records Act. In the event a responder claims such exemption, the responder must state in the response that: “The responder will indemnify the City and hold it harmless from any claim or liability and defend any action brought against the City for its refusal to disclose copyrighted material, trade secrets, or other proprietary information to any person making a request thereof.” Failure to include such a statement shall constitute a waiver of the responder’s right to exemption from disclosure and authority for the City to provide a copy of the proposal or any part thereof to the requestor.
5. PROPOSAL COSTS
All costs associated with the preparation of RFP submittals shall be borne by the respondent. This RFP does not constitute any form of offer to contract.
6. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
The City reserves the right, for any reason, to accept or reject any one or more proposals; to negotiate the terms and specifications of the proposal; to modify any part of the RFP; or issue a new RFP.
7. PRODUCT OWNERSHIP
Any documents resulting from the contract will be the property of the City.
The proposer selected shall not publish or release any of the results of its examinations without the express written permission of the City of St. Helena Administrative Services Director.
8. ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL CONTENTS
After a Firm is selected by the City, the contents of the submitted proposal shall become part of the resulting Professional Services Agreement. The successful bidder proposer will be required to execute a standard Professional Services Agreement with the City, an example of which is attached as Appendix B. Failure of the Firm to agree to include the proposal as part of the contractual agreement may result in cancellation of the award. The City reserves the right to reject those parts of the proposal that do not meet with the approval of the City. If proposer has any objection to or desired change regarding the form of Agreement (“Requested Change”), proposer shall (1) identify each Requested Change, (2) provide a reasonably detailed explanation for the Requested Change, and (3) provide the proposed change the proposer wishes to see made by identifying the specific language proposed to be deleted and the specific language proposed to be added, if any. A proposer’s failure to include a Requested Change with its proposal in the manner set forth above shall be deemed a ATTACHMENT 1
Agenda Item #13.1.
waiver of its right to require the same in connection with the execution of the Professional Services Agreement, and the City will not entertain objections or proposed changes to the language of its standard Professional Services Agreement.
9. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
All Proposers must identify in their proposal any terms and conditions of the sample Professional Service Agreement (Exhibit B) that they wish to negotiate.
Insurance is required as outlined in Section 7 of the sample agreement.
10. COMPENSATION
The City will pay the consultant for the services described in Section III (Scope of Work) that do not exceed the amount contained within the Professional Services Agreement executed between the City and the Firm. For additional services required after the inception of the Agreement, written approval by the City shall be required in advance of such services being rendered. The fee for such services shall be paid based on the consultant’s quoted hourly rates.
Invoices received from the Firm will be approved by the Administrative Services Director and processed within thirty (30) days of receipt.
11. CAUSES FOR DISQUALIFICATION
Any of the following may be considered cause to disqualify a proponent without further consideration:
- Evidence of collusion among proponents;
- Any attempt to improperly influence any member of the evaluation panel;
- A proponent's default in any operation of a professional services agreement which resulted in termination of that agreement; and/or - Existence of any lawsuit, unresolved contractual claim, or dispute between proponent and the City.
APPENDIX A
Schedule of Professional Fees and Expenses to Support the Total AllInclusive Maximum Cost Description Hours Standard
Hourly Rates
Quoted
Hourly Rates Total
Partner $ $ $
Manager $ $ $
Supervisory
Staff $ $ $
Other
(Specify) $ $ $
ATTACHMENT 1
Agenda Item #13.1.
Sub-Total $
Out-ofPocket
Expenses $
All-Inclusive
Maximum
Total Cost $
CITY OF ST. HELENA | REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS | WATER AND WASTEWATER RATE STUDY PAGE 1
ATTACHMENT 1
Agenda Item #13.1.
Agenda Report to the Water and Wastewater Advisory
Committee
DATE: August 28, 2025
SUBJECT: Discussion and Consideration of Either Supporting Staff Seeking Council Authorization for Owner’s Representative Services for Delivery of Several Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) Projects or Reprioritize Various Projects and Discuss Options for Delivery.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: It is recommended that the committee support staff seeking Council authorization for Owner’s Representative services.
STATEMENT OF THE
PURPOSE:
To provide the committee with options for advancing key CIP projects through the engagement of an Owner’s
Representative, or alternatively, to reprioritize projects and determine options for delivery.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The total not-to-exceed amount for engaging Haley & Aldrich, Inc for owner’s representation services is spread among various CIP projects totaling $235,000. Proposed
funding sources related to the respective projects include Water Bonds ($185,000) and GO Bonds ($50,000).
BACKGROUND:
The City is currently managing a significant number of CIP projects within the Water and Wastewater Divisions. These include high-priority projects such as pipeline replacements, pump station upgrades, tank rehabilitation, Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (“SCADA”) improvements, and annual sewer line replacement efforts. Due to the volume and complexity of these projects, existing City staffing levels are insufficient to provide the necessary project management, oversight, and coordination required throughout the design, bidding, and contract award phases.
To address this staffing limitation, Haley & Aldrich, Inc. has submitted a high-level proposal to serve as the City’s Owner’s Representative on a time and materials, not-to-exceed basis.
Their scope would include facilitating the selection of engineering design firms, managing design processes, overseeing bidding and contract award activities, and ensuring compliance with City standards and schedules for the following projects:
W-101: Tank #2 Rehabilitation
W18-113: Water System SCADA Improvements
W24-02: Napa lntertie Pump Station (Rutherford) Replacement W25-01: Napa Intertie Pipeline Replacement
W25-02: Water Treatment Plant Transmission Main Replacement S18-70: Replace 1 % of Sewer Mains Annually
S24-02: High Priority Pipeline (sewer) Replacement
DISCUSSION:
The proposal from Haley & Aldrich presents a strategic solution to current staffing challenges. The firm would augment City resources by taking on essential responsibilities to keep these projects on track, including coordination with stakeholders, regulatory bodies, ATTACHMENT 2
Agenda Item #13.1.
and design consultants. Their involvement would promote schedule adherence, cost control, and alignment with City objectives throughout the pre-construction phases.
If the Committee does not recommend approval of the Owner’s Representative engagement, the City will need to defer some of the listed capital projects due to insufficient staff capacity. Delaying these critical infrastructure improvements may lead to higher costs, scheduling disruptions, and deferred maintenance of vital facilities.
Staff recommend the Committee support the proposed engagement of Haley & Aldrich, Inc. for owner’s representation services to ensure the continued progress of these vital CIP projects.
1088 College Ave. | St. Helena, CA 94574
(707) 967-2792 | cityofsthelena.gov
ATTACHMENT 2
Agenda Item #13.1.
August 20, 2025
Mr. Joseph Leach, PE, Assistant City Manager/Director
City of St. Helena
Public Works Department
1088 College Avenue
St. Helena, CA 94574
Subject: High level proposal for professional engineering services to be performed on a time and materials, not-to-exceed, basis to provide owner’s representation services during selection of design firms, design process, bidding, and contract award for multiple projects as listed below:
Dear Joe,
Haley & Aldrich, Inc. (Haley & Aldrich) submits this preliminary and high level proposal to provide professional engineering services on a time and materials, not-to-exceed, basis as the City’s owner’s representative to provide project ownership and management of the following projects:
CIP Project No. W25-01, Napa Intertie Pipeline Replacement; CIP Project No. W25-02, Water Treatment Plant Transmission Main Replacement; CIP Project No. W24-02, Rutherford Pump Station;
CIP Project No. W101, Tank #2 Rehabilitation.
CIP Project No. W18-113, SCADA;
CIP Project No. S18-70, (1%) Annual Sewer Line Replacement; and, CIP Project No. S24-02 High Priority Sewer Line Replacement.
General Scope- As the Owners’ Representative during the design and project approvals phase, we will serve as the city’s liaison between project stakeholders and all design, engineering, and regulatory teams. Our responsibilities will include facilitating the selection of a qualified engineering design firm, who will be providing professional engineering services and preparing design, bid, and construction documents. Haley & Aldrich will oversee the entire design process, construction bidding and contract award augmenting city staff. Additionally, Haley & Aldrich will coordinate project communications and ensure the city’s vision, budget, and schedule are upheld throughout the project. We will review and comment on all design submittals, verify compliance with city requirements, and advocate for best practices in sustainability, constructability, and value engineering. We will facilitate timely decision-making, track issues and resolutions, and support public agency approvals. Additionally, we will represent ownership in meetings with municipal, county, and state authorities, proactively flagging risks and monitoring progress against milestone dates. Our engagement will ensure stakeholder alignment, transparent reporting, and elevated project outcomes.
CIP Project No. W25-01, Napa Intertie Pipeline Replacement - $2,286,000. Construction Cost ATTACHMENT 2
Agenda Item #13.1.
Time & Material with Not to Exceed budget of $ 31,000.
CIP Project No. W25-02, Water Treatment Plant Transmission Main Replacement - $3,181,000.
Construction Cost
Time & Material with Not to Exceed budget of $96,000.
CIP Project No. W24-02, Rutterford Pump Station - $100,000 Engineering, Construction cost TBD Time & Material with Not to Exceed budget of $10,000.
CIP Project No. W101, Tank #2 Rehabilitation - $940,000. Construction Cost Time & Material with Not to Exceed budget of $18,000.
CIP Project No. W18-113, SCADA - $300,000. Construction Time & Material with Not to Exceed budget of $30,000.
CIP Project No. S18-70, (1%) Annual Sewer Line Replacement - $520,000. Per year Construction Time & Material with Not to Exceed budget of $25,000.
CIP Project No. S24-02 High Priority Sewer Line Replacement - $225,000. Per year Construction Time & Material with Not to Exceed budget of $25,000.
Based on our conversation with Joe on Monday, August 18th, we trust that this high level proposal is acceptable to the city. Please reach out to me on 925.393.3092 cell, 925.433.2321 Teams, or [email protected] with any questions or concerns.
Thank you,
Scott Alman, P.E.
Principal Engineer
ATTACHMENT 2
Agenda Item #13.1.
Water &
Wastewater
Enterprise
Update
City Council
Agenda Item 13.1
SEPTEMBER 9, 2025
J O S E P H L E A C H , P. E .
Agenda Item #13.1.
Seek Direction On:
• Advancing User Rate
Study
• Reviewing Key CIP
Projects
• Retaining Owner’s
Representative Services
Agenda Item #13.1.
Rate Study Update
• Last Updated: 2023
(5-year cycle through FY2027)
• Projected Revenue Shortfalls:
$1.5 FY24, $0.9m FY25 (preliminary)
• CIP needs have expanded beyond 2023
assumptions
• Proposal: To advance new Rate Study to
FY25/26 for implementation July 2026
Agenda Item #13.1.
CIP PRIORITIES
Goal: Connect projects to problems residents experience today • Factors driving timing:
• Regulatory requirements
• Infrastructure condition assessments
• Funding & Bond deadlines
• Operational reliability & water security
Agenda Item #13.1.
HIGH PRIORITY PROJECTS
PROJECT RATIONALE PROJECT
BUDGET
TARGET
TIMELINE
FUNDING
SOURCE
W-101
Tank #2
Rehabilitation
Needed for water
storage reliability;
Construction Dec
2025
$1,045,809
Construction
Scheduled for FY26
Q2-Q3
• 763-Water Capital
Bond
W-109
Bell Canyon Intake
Tower Replacement
Required by Division
of Safety of Dams
(DSOD);
critical to water
supply reliability
$6,535,431
Design completion
anticipated in FY26
Q2; Construction
commence FY27Q2
• 561-Water Rate
Revenues
• 763-Water Capital
Bond
W18-113
SCADA
Improvements
Improves water
system
monitoring/control;
supports efficiency
and response
$937,671
Final systemwide
SCADA integration
expected to be
completed by FY26
Q3/Q4
• 763-Water Capital
Bond
S24-02
High Priority Sewer
Line Replacement
Targets known highrisk pipelines, avoids
costly emergency
repairs
$1,278,000
$120k construction
commence FY26Q2;
Review CCTV Rating
Work by FY26 Q1 to
develop projects
• 421-GO Bonds
• 571-Wastewater
Rate Revenues
Agenda Item #13.1.
MEDIUM PRIORITY PROJECTS
PROJECT RATIONALE PROJECT
BUDGET
TARGET
TIMELINE
FUNDING
SOURCE
W24-02
Napa Intertie Pump
Station Replacement
Ensures water
supply redundancy;
condition-driven
$13,120,000
Design completion
anticipated in
FY26Q4
• 763-Water Capital
Bond
• 763-Water Capital
Grant/
• Interagency Fund
• 999-Unidentified
S18-70
Replace 1% of Sewer
Mains Annually
Reduces sewer
failures, aligns with
Council’s
infrastructure goals
$1,462,527 $820k construction
commence FY26Q2
• 421-GO Bonds
• 571-Wastewater
Rate Revenues
• 742-Storm Drain
Impact Fees
S18-71
Crinella Pump
Station Upgrades
Near completion;
improves wastewater
pumping reliability
$1,566,056
Anticipate
Construction
Completion FY26Q2
• 421-GO Bonds
Agenda Item #13.1.
LOW PRIORITY PROJECTS
PROJECT RATIONALE PROJECT
BUDGET
TARGET
TIMELINE
FUNDING
SOURCE
W25-01
Napa Intertie
Pipeline
Replacement
Coordinated with
Vine Trail $6,538,469
90% design nearing.
Construction
Anticipated to begin
in FY26Q3
• 763-Water Capital
Bond
W25-02
Water Treatment
Plant Transmission
Main Replacement
Major transmission
upgrade $9,100,084 RFP out late 2025, construction 2026+ • 763-Water Capital
Bond
S-52
WWTP Phase 1
Upgrades
Ensuring regulatory
compliance,
environmental
protection, and longterm reliability
$20,028,617
In testing/
demonstration
phase; acceptance
by end of 2025
• 421-GO Bonds
• 571-Wastewater
Rate Revenues
• 773-Wastewater
Capital Debt
• 773-Wastewater
Impact Fees
Agenda Item #13.1.
STAFFING & DELIVERY CHALLENGES
• Departure of Deputy City Manager/Public
Works Ops leaves capacity gap
• Public Works staff managing too many
projects at once
• Projects require engineering & contract
administration expertise
Agenda Item #13.1.
OWNER’S REPRESENTATIVE PROPOSAL
• Haley & Aldrich to provide oversight on key projects
• Projects are:
• W-101 – Tank #2 Rehabilitation
• W18-113 – Water System SCADA Improvements
• W24-02 – Napa Intertie Pump Station (Rutherford) Replacement • W25-01 – Napa Intertie Pipeline Replacement
• W25-02 – Water Treatment Plant Transmission Main Replacement • S18-70 – Replace 1% of Sewer Mains Annually
• S24-02 – High Priority Sewer Line Replacement
• Budget: $235K
(Funding Sources): Water Bonds $185k, GO Bonds $50k)
• Without Owner’s Representation Services Projects will be delayed/deferred
Agenda Item #13.1.
COUNCIL DIRECTION REQUESTED
• Advance 2025/26 Rate Study Update?
OR
Keep original dates for 2026/27?
• Review/Prioritize CIP Projects for Delivery
Disposition
• Approve Owner’s Representative Services?
OR
Reprioritize/Defer Projects?
Agenda Item #13.1.