CORRESPONDENCE- 25A - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• Section 5.2(a) —Term for each Site Agreement per 5.1 will be 30 years. (Why would a consulting agreement pre -contemplate terms for separate agreements that pre -commit and binds the city for the next 30 years? Why wouldn't it allow the City the chance to negotiate each agreement? Additionally, the 30 -year agreement(s) is in violation of the City's own Charter that calls for agreements to be no more than 25 years at a time.) • Sections 5.2(b) to (f) — AV's clever ways to say they will deduct each and every costs out of the Site Agreement(s) that the City enters into. • Section 5.2(g) — AV to pay City $50K/digital sign face/year during first 5 years; thereafter increases to $100K/face/year vs. 60% of net Site Agreement revenue (less AV's costs) for city's properties. (This is cleverly written... city's properties can also mean private properties leased by the city. Doesn't have to be actual city's right of ways or city -owned parcels. This is clearly what the city and AV want to do.) Analysis: • The concepts of this proposal are exactly like those that were defeated in Buena Park, Pomona and Fullerton. In each of these cities, staff recommended full approvals for the All Vision agreements, however the city councils at each city upon learning of the overwhelming benefits to All Vision and little to the city, the each council turned down the staff recommendation and rejected the All Vision business model. Buena Park Councilman Fred Smith said from the dais that the AV looks like and smells like a "Don King" contract. • This is a development agreement disguised as a consultant or service agreement. The terms in Section 5 of the agreement pre -commits the city to future "Site Agreement(s)," that has the feel of a development agreement. The agreement terms are like wolves in sheep's clothing! • Is AV a "consultant" or a sign operator? As written, the agreement allows AV to do both! The initial phase is the evaluation period, then it goes to permitting and eventual operation period. The consultant period is only step 1. • Section 5 suggests that AV can/will be the sign developer/operator... therefore is this a conflict of interest? They get to develop the program and then take advantage of the rules they wrote for their advantage. If they want to be a consultant, they should stay a consultant and not be in competition for the same projects they set up. The preamble of the City's RFP specifically disqualifies sign operators to be part of the RFP. • Important to re-emphasize that this is not a 1 -year agreement. Within 1 year, if AV brings back a "Strategic Plan" and the city council approves it ... then AV will get a minimum of 30 -year term for each site identified in the Strategic Plan. The term of the