Laserfiche WebLink
Agreement with Urban Futures, Inc. for Financial Advisory and Dissemination Agent Services <br />July 7, 2020 <br />Page 2 <br />o Assist with finalizing recommendations for the unfunded pension liability <br />o Feasibility studies related to city assets <br />o Evaluate City's existing financial policies <br />Dissemination Agent Services <br />As noted, the City bond covenants requires annual filing to a regulatory database referred to as <br />Electronic Municipal Market Access (EMMA). Specifically the reports filed via the EMMA <br />database disclose the following: <br />o City's financial statement audit and/or budget information <br />o Revenues and/or expenditures related to the specific debt issuance <br />o Interim reports disclosing significant events material to the City's existing debt <br />issuance <br />Request for Proposal Process (RFP) <br />On February 19, 2020, FMSA issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 20-002 seeking a <br />municipal advisor to provide the following services: <br />• Municipal Financial Advisory <br />o Advisory Services (non -bond financing related) <br />o Advisory Services (related to bond financing) <br />• Dissemination Agent Services <br />A summary of the RFPs and offers received is as follows: <br />398 Vendors were notified <br />14 Vendors downloaded the proposal <br />4 Santa Ana vendors notified <br />4 Proposals received <br />Outreach Efforts <br />The Purchasing Division advertised this project on the City's online bid management and <br />publication system, which directly notified four Santa Ana vendors, none of which submitted a <br />proposal for consideration. <br />The City received four (4) responses from firms wishing to provide the above -referenced <br />services. The evaluation committee consisting of staff from FMSA evaluated the proposals <br />based on the following categories: <br />• Firm Qualifications <br />• Staff Qualifications <br />• Proposed Work/Plan Approach <br />• Cost Proposal (reasonableness of cost) <br />The evaluation process consisted of review of each firm's response, interview of the top two (2) <br />firms, and request for supplemental information. After careful consideration of these items, staff <br />selected Urban Futures, Inc. (UFI) as the most responsive proposal. <br />25F-2 <br />