CHINO VALLEY INDEPENDENT FIRE DISTRICT Standing Committee Meeting Finance

Transcription

1 CHINO VALLEY INDEPENDENT FIRE DISTRICT Standing Committee Meeting Finance 1 Administrative Headquarters Monday, City Center Drive 5:00 p.m. Committee Meeting Chino Hills, CA MINUTES ROLL CALL President Johsz Director Kreeger Fire Chief Shackelford Deputy Chief Atkinson Deputy Chief Ault Deputy Chief Faherty Finance Manager Heide Clerk of the Board Heney Human Resources Manager Kuchwara Administrative Secretary Cisneros INVOCATION Joe McTarsney, Fire District Chaplain. FLAG SALUTE Steve Heide, Finance Manager. MINUTES 1. Minutes of February 1, 2016, Meeting. The Committee agreed to file the minutes, as presented. OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS 2. AWARD OF BID NO , USER FEE STUDY & INDIRECT COST ALLOCATION PLAN. Purpose is to review the bids received for Bid No , User Fee Study & Indirect Cost Allocation Plan, and provide direction to staff. Finance Manger Heide reported that Bid specifications were developed and a Request For Proposals (RFP) was issued on January 20, 2016, for a combined user fee study and indirect cost allocation plan. He also reported that the Notice of Bid No was published in a newspaper of general circulation in the District.

2 Page 2 of 5 Finance Manger Heide reported that for purposes of efficiency and cost effectiveness, the District elected to solicit bids for a combined user fee study and cost allocation plan engagement, a common practice among local governmental agencies. User Fee Study Finance Manger Heide reported that California Health and Safety Code Section provides the legal authority to the District to charge fees to cover the cost of any service which the District provides, or the cost of enforcing any regulation for which a fee is charged. Finance Manager Heide also reported that the user fee schedule allows the District to recover costs for direct services provided to the public without making a profit. He also reported that the user fees apply to activities such as: 1. Weed abatement non-compliance 2. Fire and life safety inspections 3. New construction plan review 4. Occupancy permit reviews and inspections 5. Special use permits 6. False alarms 7. Incident cost recovery Finance Manger Heide reported that the user fee study component of the project will include a comprehensive analysis and update of applicable costs of service for District fees, in order to ensure that fees represent the appropriate rates of cost recovery, as directed by the Board. He also reported that the last full update of the District s user fee schedule was completed in Indirect Cost Allocation Plan Finance Manger Heide reported that Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-87 prescribes regulations and methodologies for calculation of indirect cost allocation rates. He also reported that these rates may be utilized to recover appropriate administrative and other overhead costs associated with administering grants, providing reimbursable fire services to federal and state agencies, and allocating indirect costs to District operations, as applicable. Finance Manager Heide reported that the project component will establish an OMB A-87 compliant indirect cost rate for the District use as outlined above. He also reported that the District currently utilizes an allowable 10% default overhead rate and would anticipate the use of a higher rate for billing purposes upon completion of the indirect cost allocation plan. Bid Evaluation Process Finance Manager Heide reported an optional telephonic pre-bid conference was conducted on February 2, 2016, and four (4) prospective bidders participated on the call. He also reported that the deadline for submission of bids was February 16, Finance Manager Heide reported that a total of four (4) bids received are as follows:

3 Page 3 of 5 Table 1 Bidder Bid Amount ClearSource Financial Consulting $15,000 Matrix Consulting Group $24,500 Capital Accounting Partners, LLC $24,915 NBS $39,325 Finance Manger Heide reported that Bidders were asked to provide detailed project budgets, to include hourly rates and estimated or projected work hours associated with the project. Finance Manager Heide also reported that based on the information provided, the total combined project hours and average or blended hourly rates for the bids received are as follows: Table 2 Bidder Total Project Hours Blended Hourly Rate* ClearSource Financial Consulting 100 $150 Matrix Consulting Group 184 $133 Capital Accounting Partners, LLC 153 $163 NBS 248 $159 *Rounded to the nearest whole dollar. Three of four bidders proposed multiple levels of project staff at varying hourly rates. A blended hourly rate was computed for discussion and analysis purposes. Finance Manger Heide reported that District Finance and Community Risk Reduction staff jointly reviewed and evaluated the bids received as part of a bid evaluation team. He also reported that the evaluation included a thorough operational review of each bidder proposal, multiple reference checks and bidder telephone interviews for each bid provided. Selection criteria for bid award, as specified in the RFP, included the following: 1. Quality, strength and completeness of proposal; 2. Bidder s relevant experience and length of time in business; 3. Qualifications and experience of the individual(s) proposed to be assigned to the project; 4. Reference check feedback; 5. Proposal pricing; 6. Stated ability of the bidder to complete the project in a timely manner; 7. Bidder s reputation and record of performance with the District or similar local governments; 8. Innovative or value-added services or approaches to project completion, as proposed by bidder.

4 Page 4 of 5 Finance Manger Heide reported that based on the aforementioned selection criteria, upon completion of the bid review and evaluation process by the District team, and in consultation with executive management personnel, staff is recommending bid award to NBS, in an amount not-toexceed $39,325. He also reported that while NBS total not-to-exceed project price was the highest of the four bids received, the bidder also proposed to dedicate the most hours to the project. Finance Manager Heide reported that given the complexity of the project, and the length of time since the last full update to the District s fee schedule, the project hours proposed by each bidder were an important factor in the bid selection process. Other important factors in favor of NBS recommended selection include: More than 20 years in business, the longest tenure of the four bidders; The firm s expertise and reputation in having served more than 350 California public agencies to-date, including a solid background and demonstrated know-how in working with fire agencies; An impressive project team with by far the largest staff of experts of any of the bidding companies; A focus on local government revenues and a breadth of expertise unmatched by the other bidders; Headquartered locally, with a local project team presence, as opposed to the other bidding firms with staff and offices exclusively located in northern California. Finance Manger Heide reported that the RFP required a list of clients provided similar services over the last five (5) years to those requested by the District. NBS comparable contract list included the following California local agencies serviced with similar engagements over the last five years: Table 3 American Canyon Fire Protection District California Fire & Rescue Training Authority Association of Bay Area Governments City of Alameda City of Chula Vista City of Dixon City of Napa Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District Sacramento Public Library Authority City of Benicia City of Clearlake City of Culver City City of Fresno City of Half Moon Bay City of Indio City of National City City of Petaluma City of Richmond City of Riverside City of San Carlos City of San Diego, Park and Recreation Department City of Sausalito City of Taft City of Tulare City of Turlock County of Santa Clara, Dept of Environmental Health

5 Page 5 of 5 City of Vallejo City of San Luis Obispo Moraga-Orinda Fire Protection District City of Rocklin Solano Irrigation District Town of Colma Town of Portola Valley Tuolumne Utilities District City of Los Angeles, Dept of Planning City of Belmont City of Camarillo City of Concord City of Fountain Valley City of Huntington Beach City of Lincoln City of Merced City of Moreno Valley City of Palmdale City of Santa Cruz City of Seaside City of Tustin San Francisco MTA San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District City of San Juan Capistrano Escondido Fire Department South San Francisco Fire Dept Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District Finance Manger Heide reported that the total approved budget for the project is $30,000. He also reported that a not-to-exceed bid award to NBS would require the appropriation of up to $9,325 from unassigned fund balance. Finance Manger Heide reported that studies of this nature typically require 90 to 120 days for completion. He also reported that the updates to the District fee schedule would need to be approved by the Board by way of ordinance, which would require first and second readings, and a waiting period thereafter, prior to the effective date of updated fees. Finance Manger Heide reported that should the Board approve staff s recommendation for bid award, District staff and NBS personnel would be prepared to start the project shortly after approval, and work expeditiously to complete the engagement. He also reported that the Board would be informed as the project progresses and would need to approve all updates to District fees through the ordinance process. Finance Manager Heide reported that the public would have the opportunity to participate in the fee update process by way of the ordinance process. Finance Manger Heide reported that in conjunction with bid award, staff would further recommend that the Fire Chief be delegated authority to sign the standard consulting agreement required for this engagement, on behalf of the District. Discussion was held regarding the proposed award of BID NO , User Fee Study & Indirect Cost Allocation Plan. The Finance Committee agreed to move this item to the full Board for approval. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 5:22 p.m.