HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 27 - Agreement to Prepare a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee StudyPublic Works Agency
https://www.santa-ana.org/pw
Item # 27
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701
Staff Report
November 7, 2023
TOPIC: Agreement with Revenue & Cost Specialists, LLC for a Comprehensive
Development Impact Fee Study
AGENDA TITLE
Award an Agreement to Revenue & Cost Specialists, LLC for Comprehensive Impact
Fee Study Consulting Services Not to Exceed $115,150 (General Fund)
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Authorize the City Manager to execute a consulting services agreement with Revenue &
Cost Specialists, LLC for a two-year term beginning November 7, 2023, and ending
November 6, 2025 for the preparation of a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee
Study, for a total amount not to exceed $115,150, subject to non -substantive changes
approved by the City Manager and City Attorney (Agreement No. 2023-XXX).
GOVERNMENT CODE §84308 APPLIES: Yes
DISCUSSION
The City imposes impact fees on land development projects to mitigate general impacts
to City infrastructure, such as parks, library, transportation, sewer, and storm drainage
systems. The primary objective of a development impact fee program is to ensure that
new development pays the capital costs associated with growth. Impact fees must
comply with the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act (Act) contained in California
Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.
The City periodically analyzes and updates the development impact fee rates to ensure
compliance with the Act and ensure future developers pay their share to mitigate
impacts. The study will include rates for existing fees, possible fee adjustments, as well
as consideration of new fees that may become necessary with continued development
within the City. When complete, Staff will present the study recommendations to Council
for adoption and inclusion in the City's miscellaneous fee schedule.
Staff published a Request for Proposals (RFP) and received two proposals from firms
specializing in local government financial analysis. A selection committee comprised of
staff from the Public Works Agency, Park Services and the Planning and Building
Agency, reviewed both proposals and rated each firm based on a number of criteria
such as demonstrated knowledge and capabilities, experience, proposed approach,
Agreement to Prepare a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study
November 7, 2023
Page 2
project rates, and fees. Both of the firms were interviewed by the selection committee
with the results as follows:
Rank
Firm
Average Score
1
Revenue & Cost Specialists, LLC
90
2
David Taussig and Associates
81
Based on rating, cost, and proposal (Exhibit 1), Staff recommends that Revenue & Cost
Specialists, LLC be awarded the agreement for an amount not to exceed $115,150 to
develop the Development Impact Fee Study (Exhibit 2).
FISCAL IMPACT
Development fees that are charged to developers to mitigate development project
impacts are utilized for Street Improvements projects, public utility improvements and
Park improvements. The study will enhance the process and set clear criteria for impact
fees charged to developers.
Funding is available in the FY 23-24 budget. The following table summarizes the funds
budgeted and available for expenditure to deliver agreement services.
Fiscal
Accounting Unit
Fund
Accounting Unit —
Amount
Year
— Account No.
Description
Account No.
Description
General
PWA — Service
FY 23-24
01117017-62300
Fund
Enhancement, Contract
$115,150
Services - Professional
Total
$115,150
EXHIBIT(S)
1. Revenue & Cost Specialist's Proposal
2. Agreement with Revenue & Cost Specialists, LLC
Submitted By: Nabil Saba, P.E., Executive Director — Public Works Agency
Approved By: Steven Mendoza, Acting City Manager
l'
i
Jim
I --
A,
1519 E Chapman Ave
Suite C
Fullerton, CA 92831
(714) 992-9020
www.revenuecost.com
i IN=-
TABLE OF CONTENTS September 25, 2023
Tableof Contents.........................................................................................................................................................2
TransmittalLetter......................................................................................................................................................3
OrganizationQualifications.................................................................................................................................5
ProjectManager.......................................................................................................................................................... 7
Scopeof Work.............................................................................................................................................................11
ProjectSchedule.......................................................................................................................................................14
References....................................................................................................................................................................15
ProposedBudget......................................................................................................................................................19
DOWNTOWN
ORANGE COUNTY „,
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 2
September 25, 2023
City of Santa Ana
Attn: Ehab Elias, Associate Engineer
20 Civic Center Plaza, M-93
Santa Ana, CA 92701
Proposal for City of Santa Ana - Development Impact Fee Study
Revenue & Cost Specialists, LLC (RCS) appreciates the opportunity to provide you with this
Development Impact Fee Study proposal. RCS has provided such studies and other fee -
costing services since 1980, making us the first and foremost authority in costing services
for California. Our combined 100 years of experience and knowledge in this industry will
ensure a successful project that's on time and under budget.
Our impact fee study process is straightforward, imposes minimal impact on staff, and
provides proper information, allowing staff, City Council, and other stakeholders to make the
best policy decisions for Santa Ana. We strive to ensure confidence in the information and
recommendations of the final Report.
The results of our study will allow the City to identify and recover, with certainty, the
maximum financial impact from future development. The terms of this proposal will be
honored for 90 calendar days from the date of submission. Please contact Scott at (714) 992-
9026 or scott@revenuecost.com with any questions.
Sincerely,
GREGORY BROWN
Vice President
SCOTT THORP
Principal
Revenue & Cost Specialists
1519 E. Chapman • Suite C • Fullerton, CA • 92831
0
RCS Contacts
Revenue & Cost Specialists
1519 E Chapman Ave, Ste C
Fullerton, CA 92831
www.revenuecost.com
Scott Thorpe
Principal
714-992-9026
Scott@ revenue cost. com
Gregory Brown
Vice President
714-992-9022
Gregory@revenuecost.com
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 4
ORGANIZATION QUALIFICATIONS
ABOUT RCS
RCS (Taxpayer ID No. 330787781) was founded in 1980 by
two former City Managers and a Finance Director who, after
the passage of Propositions 13 and 4, discovered that user
fees were a legal option to recover lost municipal revenues.
Forty-two years later, Revenue & Cost Specialists continues
its focus on cost allocation and user fee calculation services.
After the passage of AB 1600 in 1988, our company added
impact fee calculation services to help municipalities finance CALIFORN
public facility expansion.
In 2000, RCS created Government Software Systems to develop robust Im
costing software that serves fee calculation needs better than
spreadsheets. Our company has provided additional services to municipalities, including
long-range financial planning, accounting procedures, and utility rate studies.
To this day, RCS continues to thrive through repeat business, referrals, and references. As a
small business, RCS takes only a handful of new clients each year, allowing us to dedicate the
appropriate number of resources to them. What's unique about RCS is the work longevity of
our team members. Client cities from 20 years ago still call and speak with the RCS Partner
about their project back then.
For 2023, RCS is celebrating our 43rd year in business and looking forward to another 40-
plus years of partnering with municipalities.
QUALIFICATIONS
RCS's five principals comprise the Limited Liability Company. RCS principals have over 100
years of combined experience in cost allocation plans and fee studies and served over 250
municipalities. We have provided these services to a wide array of public agencies, from the
smallest special district to larger and more complex cities and counties. While based in
Orange County, we engage in projects throughout the State of California.
RCS principals are municipal cost and revenue consultants specializing in the following:
• User Fee Studies
• Cost Allocation Plans
• Development Impact Fee Studies
• Special studies and reports supporting municipal financing management
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 5
0
These specializations allow RCS to focus on every aspect of municipal fees and be the best at
what we do. We are confident in our project time estimates and do not respond to RFPs when
the project workload exceeds our capacity. We have suggested new fees that are not common
practice throughout the state and have challenged and removed municipal fees that were not
defensible. We have assisted municipalities in streamlining their fee -based processes.
All RCS principals are knowledgeable in fund accounting, department structures, and
municipal services. We stay current on pending financial and legal issues that challenge
municipalities. All principals are comfortable speaking with city staff at all levels, drafting
reports and resolutions, and presenting to the public, stakeholders, and City Council
members.
RCS principals perform all studies in a professional and expedient manner and do not rely
on junior staff to perform these vital tasks with our clients. We also don't rely on status
memos because we will often be at City Hall to tell you how the project is going in person.
Rick Kermer, a Partner, was one of the founders of RCS. Rick used his CPA and audit
experience to build cost allocation, user fee spreadsheets, and software that passes rigorous
analysis and reporting accounting standards. Rick's work is the foundation of all the fee
study work offered today. He is now semi -retired, taking only a handful of projects each year.
Eric Johnson, the President, has streamlined and perfected the process of CAP and User Fee
Study engagements. With over 30 years and hundreds of completed studies, Eric has created
a superior process that demands little city staff time while obtaining maximum results. Eric
quickly understands complex city services and how to calculate fees for them. He relates well
with elected officials because he responds with candor and brevity. If you speak to any of
Eric's prior or current clients, they will tell you how easy the process was.
Scott Thorpe, a Principal, joined RCS in 1985. Before that, he spent 13 years in the cities of
Chula Vista, Covina, Anaheim, and Brea, serving in various roles within the city manager's
offices. Scott performed user fee studies for several years, transitioning to development
impact fees when AB 1600 was enacted. He has written articles laying out the fundamentals
of impact fees, and his work has generated tens of millions in fee revenues for cities.
Chu Thai, Vice President, joined RCS after 22 years of municipal experience. As a budget
manager and finance director, Chu has successfully coordinated user fee increases, impact
fee increases, utility rate increases, and tax ballot measures. His experience helps clients
avoid the unseen perils that jeopardize municipal projects. After project completion, Chu
leaves behind well -documented reports and spreadsheets for City staff. His career has
focused on improving cities' financial stability and implementing operational effectiveness
and efficiencies in local government.
Gregory Brown, a Vice President, is the newest team member of RCS. However, he has
already performed development impact fee studies for a dozen different cities and districts.
Gregory spent 20 years working in small business before joining the RCS team. He was
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 6
0
trained by Scott Thorpe in development impact fee and applies the same methodology Scott
Thorpe developed over 35 years while also incorporating his experience in managing small
businesses with a focus on efficiency.
RCS PROJECT MANAGER FOR SANTA ANA
Scott Thorpe, Principal, and Greg Brown, Vice President, will work together on the
Development Impact Fee Study.
RCS may assign additional specialists to the project to help maintain the proposed schedule
and ensure product quality. We thoroughly understand and will be involved in every phase
of the impact fee study, advising City staff when necessary. Resumes for the RCS project team
are included in this proposal on the following pages.
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 7
0
EDUCATION
Bachelor of Arts in Public
Administration - San Diego
State University
Master of Public
Administration - California
State University Fullerton
AFFILIATIONS
California Society of
Municipal Finance Officers
Scott Ian Thorpe
Principal
Mr. Thorpe has been with RCS since 1985 and built his career
and reputation on the proper establishment of development
impact fees. His early publications helped shape the
foundation of calculating and implementing impact fees. Scott
has produced studies for projects ranging from small, single -
use developments to large, master -planned communities
throughout California. He is actively involved in all aspects of
the projects, from kick-off, through Council adoption and
beyond fee collection and reporting.
Municipal Experience
Government Finance Officers City of Brea - Management & Budget Manager
Association Developed budget preparation and management information
reporting systems. Established personal computer
operations, including acquisition, placement, and
maintenance of all equipment to initial and ongoing employee
training. Created a comprehensive legislative program for
reviewing all federal, state and local legislation.
City of Anaheim - Budget Analyst/Management
Operations Auditor
Assisted in the preparation of a $350,000,000 annual budget.
Provided centralized management support and assistance of
line departments with a variety of services including work
measurement and management techniques program
development, productivity improvement, internal
management audits, budget review/analysis, revenue
forecasting and auditing, and data processing systems
development. Specialized in management assistance to public
safety, stadium, convention center and golf operations.
Responsible for fiscal, work -unit measurement and
management training sessions required of all city
management staff.
City of Covina - Administrative Assistant to the City
Manager
Performed general program development with significant
emphasis on the improvement of the budget process,
legislative, public information, and agenda process systems.
Conducted a major annexation study and effort.
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 8
Scott Ian Thorpe
Principal
Municipal Experience
(continued)
City of Chula Vista - Administrative Aide
Entry level job which involved completion of a City-wide
Policy and Procedure Manual, operation reviews of long-term
fire vehicle equipment purchases and of the municipal bus
system stop locations.
Publications
"Financing Capital Improvements", Journal American Water
Works Association, August, 1991, pages 50-52
"Impact Fees: Practical Guide for Calculation and
Implementation", Journal of Urban Planning and
Development, Vol. 18, No. 3, September, 1992, pages 106-
118
"The Missing Ingredient in State -Mandated General Plans",
Public Management, International City Management
Association", March 2014. Pages 21-22.
Other Accomplishments
Charter Oak Unified School District Facility Closure
Committee -Board Appointee
Guest Lecturer on various municipal
government/management topics at two universities
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 9
0
Gregory Ross Brown
Vice President
EDUCATION Professional Experience
Bachelor of Arts in History - Revenue & Cost Specialists - Vice President
Cal Poly Pomona (2022- Present) Assisting in meetings, gathering data,
building fee structures, analyzing, and writing reports.
Revenue & Cost Specialists - Associate
(2020 - 2022) Assist in working meetings, data gathering,
analysis, and input. Write and/or edit text for completed
Development Impact Fee cost calculations.
Simple Health Acupuncture and Wellness Center Inc.
Long Beach, CA - Clinic Director
(2012 - 2022) Oversaw all operations of a continuing
multiple -modality health clinic involving seventeen
employees.
Project Experience
Development Impact Fees
Apple Valley Fire Protection District, CA
City of Highland, CA
City of Shafter, CA (In Progress)
City of Gardena, CA (In Progress)
City of West Covina, CA (In Progress)
City of Hercules, CA (In Progress)
City of Corning, CA (In Progress)
City of El Segundo, CA
City of Farmersville, CA
City of Livingston, CA
City of Loma Linda, CA
City of Morro Bay, CA
City of Hawthorne, CA (In Progress)
Cost of Services Studies
City of Hawthorne, CA
City of Laguna Beach, CA
City of Santa Maria, CA
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 10
SCOPE OF WORK
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
To make certain the City of Santa Ana continues to provide basic municipal services as the
City grows, RCS proposes to undertake the calculation and textual support of a new
Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report. RCS staff will perform the following
to complete the Development Impact Fee (DIF) calculation and quantify the costs generated
by new development in terms of an Impact Fee Schedule for city land uses.
Based on our preliminary review of the reports and documentation available by the City, we
propose development impact fees for the following infrastructures.
1. Law Enforcement, Vehicles, and Equipment
2. Fire Suppression/Medic Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment
3. Transportation System Improvement Area
4. Transit Zoning Code Traffic Impact Mitigation Fair Share
5. Harbor Specific Plan Mitigation Fair Share
6. Drainage Assessment Fee
7. Park Acquisition and Development Fee
8. Sewer Connection Fee
9. Water Connection Fee
10. Library Fee
11. General Facilities Development Fee
12. Community Centers Development Fee
RCS has the experience and determination to research and identify the maximum financial
impact of future developments in Santa Ana. With this information, staff can realize the city's
best funding and implementation policies.
We plan to use a series of direct, focused meetings between RCS experts and knowledgeable
City staff to produce an accurate, logical, and defensible final product. RCS' objective is to
ensure that City staff feels confident about the data and the report and, therefore, confident
in supporting the results at public hearings.
The fee recommendations included in RCS' final Development Impact Fee Calculation and
Nexus Report will be legally defensible, easy to understand, and supported by City staff. Our
years of experience in impact fees and working with local government finance officers
ensures this project will be completed successfully and on time.
To provide the basis for the Development Impact Fees, the following steps would be taken
by the Revenue & Cost Specialist staff, working with City staff and other consultants where
necessary and appropriate:
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 11
0
Task 1: Preliminary Research
Prior to any meetings, RCS will perform a field "windshield" survey to become
acquainted with the physical characteristics and general improvement needs and
standards of the City. We will request and review all City maps, land -use documents,
and available master plans, especially the Comprehensive General Plan, before the
kick-off meeting. We will review the City's history of impact fee schedules,
resolutions, ordinances, and Annual and Five -Year Reports per Government Code
Sections 66006 and 66001. RCS will review recent Operating Budgets, CIP Budgets,
Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports, and fixed asset reports.
RCS will meet and discuss the City's planning, capital financing process, and
community development standards with the City Engineer, City Planner, and other
executive staff to determine the improvements that most likely will evolve from the
project planning documents and be needed to support and give validity to the City's
Comprehensive General Plan.
Task 2: Series of Working Meetings
RCS will meet with City staff responsible for each infrastructure to help identify all
projects needed through theoretical build -out via the use of master plans, specific
plans, and other service requirement studies. The more supporting documents we
can find, the better the Study will be. The greatest support would be an engineer -
prepared Master Plan. RCS will endeavor to increase the validity of available
information if such a document is unavailable. RCS will request from the City all
reports, master plans, specific plans, and other related reports identifying needed
infrastructure. If needed, RCS can assist the City with developing project lists and
supporting data. RCS will review project cost estimates and textual explanations for
accuracy and completeness.
RCS will identify and analyze the demand drivers specific to each infrastructure or
service area. The drivers are the factors of nexus demand related to each land use
and would be based on the project plans or City productivity records. These demand
drivers will help determine the distribution of the benefits of nexus for, and impact of
each group of projects on each of the above categories of land use. The proportional
analysis is necessary to identify what burdens would be placed upon the existing and
future infrastructure would be undertaken.
Task 3: Draft Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report
Since the Report is based on information and estimates provided by City staff, it is
important that all participants are comfortable with the methodology and data
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 12
0
presented. RCS will prepare a draft report consisting of the fee structures and the
necessary relevant nexus text and report with recommended fees. This meeting will
include discussions on policy issues, implementation strategies, and revenue
collection procedures. RCS will provide the draft report for staff consideration and
distribution.
Task 4: Presentation of Proposed Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus
Report to the City Council
RCS will attend the City Council meeting to discuss the report methodology and
present findings, provide a formal presentation, and answer questions about those
findings. RCS will have the necessary supporting documentation for the meeting and
will be the primary contact to answer all questions, following up with any City Council
direction with the assistance of City staff.
CLIENT INPUT
RCS will make every effort to advise, seek input from and, in general, explain the work as it
is being performed. We depend on dedicated and engaged staff participation for a project to
be completed successfully. Most of the staff participation is to attend working meetings with
RCS.
The City should also designate a Project Coordinator for the fee study who will:
1) Identify key City staff and coordinate the kick-off meeting(s)
2) Assist in obtaining the requested information
3) Coordinate the review of draft reports, and
4) Provide project direction if needed
ONSITE MEETINGS AND VIDEO CONFERENCING MEETINGS
For the project kick-off and working meetings on the same day, the City may choose to have
RCS onsite or conduct the meetings through a video conferencing account.
All working meetings will be through our Zoom account or a video conferencing software of
the City's choice. Our experience has determined that video conferencing is more flexible in
scheduling meetings, lets City staff quickly access reports and files on their computers, and
allows everyone to view and discuss the same documents at the same time.
RCS plans to participate in the City Council meetings onsite at the City of Santa Ana.
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 13
PROJECT SCHEDULE
RCS' references will attest that our timelines are ideal for impact fee studies. This schedule,
of course, will require the cooperative participation of City staff. We will be having meetings
with staff every two to three weeks and provide them with updates. Department meetings
will be 30 minutes to two hours each.
RCS will comply with local, county, and state protocols for safely conducting meetings as the
COVID-19 pandemic evolves.
Development Impact Fee Study 0� Nov I Dec I Jan Feb Mar Apr
2023 2023 1 2024 1 2024 2024 1 2024
Land -use Database Compilation
Determine Infrastructure LOS
Discuss Desired Projects w. Staff
Review Project Costs & Descriptions
Review Demand Drivers (Nexus)
Apply Nexus Distribution Factors
Review Draft DIF Report with Staff
Prepare Final DIF Report
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 14
REFERENCES
REFERENCES — DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE STUDY
We have recently completed similar Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report
projects for the following jurisdictions. We encourage you to contact any RCS client
regarding our understanding of the nature of municipalities and working relationship with
city staff. Copies of recent impact fee reports can be provided upon your request.
Jurisdiction Reference Contact
City of Loma Linda Jarb Thaipejr, City Manager
(909) 799-2800 Lorena Matarrita, Community Development, Senior Planner
Completed an update to a prior RCS -conducted DIF Report and Master Facilities Plan. RCS'
Nexus Report update will raise approximately $333 million in Development Impact Fees
for the City.
City of El Segundo Nick Liguori, Director of Finance
(909) 334-3414
Completed the City's DIF Calculation and Nexus Report in 2022. RCS' Nexus Report will
raise approximately $300 million in Development Impact Fees for the City.
City of Farmersville Steve Huntley, Director of Finance & Administration
(559) 747-0458
RCS was selected in September 2020 to update the City's Cost Allocation Plan, User Fees,
and Impact Fees.
City of Ontario Derrick Womble, Administrative Officer
(909) 395-2000
Ontario is also a long-term RCS client, with RCS conducting its first full -infrastructure DIF
Nexus Report and two major updates. The City DIF Calculation and Nexus Report supports
the doubling of the size and population of the City within the Ontario Ranch Specific Plan
area boosting the City's housing by 59,000 dwelling units (150% increase) and its business
square feet by 100,000,000 (71% increase).
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 15
0
CLIENTS SERVED
USER FEE STUDY/COST
USER FEE STUDY/COST
USER FEE STUDY/COST
ALLOCATION PLAN
ALLOCATION PLAN (continued)
ALLOCATION PLAN (continued)
Carpentaria-Summerland Fire
City of La Palma
City of Rocklin
District
City of La Puente
City of Salinas
Chino Valley Independent Fire
City of Lake Elsinore
City of San Clemente
District
City of Lake Forest
City of San Gabriel
City of Alhambra
City of Lakewood
City of San Juan Capistrano
City of Antioch
City of Lancaster
City of San Marino
City of Arcadia
City of Lathrop
City of San Rafael
City of Atascadero
City of Lawndale
City of Sanger
City of Azusa
City of Lemoore
City of Santa Clarita
City of Banning
City of Lincoln
City of Santa Monica
City of Barstow
City of Lindsay
City of Santa Paula
City of Bend, OR
City of Loma Linda
City of Scotts Valley
City of Beverly Hills
City of Long Beach
City of Seal Beach
City of Big Bear Lake
City of Los Altos
City of Seaside
City of Brea
City of Lynwood
City of Selma
City of Buena Park
City of Mammoth Lakes
City of Shafter
City of Carlsbad
City of Manhattan Beach
City of Sierra Madre
City of Carmel -by -the -Sea
City of Marina
City of Simi Valley
City of Carpentaria
City of Menifee
City of Solana Beach
City of Carson
City of Merced
City of South Gate
City of Ceres
City of Milpitas
City of South Lake Tahoe
City of Chino
City of Monrovia
City of South Pasadena
City of Claremont
City of Monterey
City of Springville, UT
City of Coachella
City of Moreno Valley
City of Stockton
City of Concord
City of Morgan Hill
City of Suisun City
City of Corona
City of Morro Bay
City of Taft
City of Cotati
City of Needles
City of Thousand Oaks
City of Cudahy
City of Norwalk
City of Tracy
City of Desert Hot Springs
City of Oakdale
City of Tulare
City of Diamond Bar
City of Oceanside
City of Turlock
City of Dinuba
City of Ontario
City of Upland
City of Dublin, Ohio
City of Oroville
City of Villa Park
City of El Cajon
City of Oxnard
City of Vista
City of El Segundo
City of Palm Desert
City of West Covina
City of Elk Grove
City of Palm Springs
City of West Jordan, UT
City of Eureka
City of Palmdale
City of Westminster
City of Folsom
City of Pasadena
City of Yuba City
City of Fontana
City of Peoria, AZ
City or Rancho Mirage
City of Foster City
City of Pico Rivera
Coachella Valley Assoc of Gov't
City of Fountain Valley
City of Pismo Beach
Contra Costa County
City of Fullerton
City of Pittsburg
County of Cobb, GA
City of Glendale
City of Pomona
County of Contra Costa
City of Glendora
City of Port Hueneme
County of San Bernardino
City of Goodyear, Arizona
City of Porterville
County of Tulare
City of Hemet
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Imperial County
City of Hermosa Beach
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Oceanside Harbor District
City of Hesperia
City of Red Bluff
Orange County Fire Authority
City of Highland
City of Redlands
Orange County Vector Control
City of Huntington Beach
City of Rialto
District
City of Kennewick, WA
City of Richmond
Placer County Water Agency
City of La Canada- Flintridge
City of Ridgecrest
Riverside County Transport.
City of La Habra Heights
City of Riverside
Comm.
City of La Mirada
San Bernardino Assoc. Gov't
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 16
Ec-
USER FEE STUDY/COST
IMPACT FEE STUDY (continued)
CASH MANAGEMENT
ALLOCATION PLAN (continued)
City of Rancho Cordova
City of Buena Park
South Jordan City, UT
City of Reedley
City of Commerce
Town of Apple Valley
City of Rialto
City of Compton
Town of Los Gatos
City of Riverside
City of Palmdale
Town of Mammoth Lakes
City of San Bernardino
La Mirada Civic Theater
Town of Truckee
City of Santa Paula
Ventura County Fire District
City of Scotts Valley
DATA PROCESSING
City of Sedona, AZ
IMPACT FEE STUDY
City of Selma
City of La Palma
City of Sierra Madre
City of Palmdale
Antelope Valley Fire District
City of Thousand Oaks
City of San Clemente
Apple Valley Fire District
City of Tracy
City of South Gate
Barstow Fire District
City of Tulare
City of Villa Park
Bridgeport Fire District
City of Wheatland
Ontario -Montclair School District
Brigham City Corporation, UT
City of Whittier
Carpentaria-Summerland Fire
County of Monterey Sheriff s
LONG RANGE FINANCIAL PLAN
District
Department
Chalfant Public Services (Fire)
County of San Bernardino
City of Chino
Protection District
Feather River Recreation and
City of Cudahy
City of Alhambra
Park District
City of Hesperia
City of Anaheim
June Lake Fire District
City of Lake Elsinore
City of Atascadero
Lake Havasu City, AZ
City of South Gate
City of Baldwin Park
Long Valley Fire District
City of Turlock
City of Barstow
North Central Fire District
City of Big Bear Lake
SANBAG
MASTER FACILITIES
City of Calimesa
South Jordan City, UT
PLANS/CIPs
City of Chino
South Ogden City, UT
City of Coachella
Town of Apple Valley
Apple Valley Fire District
City of Colton
Town of Mammoth Lakes
Barstow Fire District
City of Corona
Town of Paradise
Bridgeport Fire District
City of Desert Hot Springs
Town of Truckee
Brigham City Corporation, UT
City of Folsom
Washington Terrace City, UT
Carpentaria-Summerland Fire
City of Gilroy
West Jordan City, UT
District
City of Glendale
Wheeler Crest Fire District
Chalfant Public Services (Fire)
City of Gonzales
Protection District
City of Grand Terrace
ACCOUNTING PROCEDURES
City of Anaheim
City of Greenfield
City of Atascadero
City of Hemet
City of Buena Park
City of Barstow
City of Highland
City of Compton
City of Big Bear Lake
City of Huntington Beach
City of La Habra
City of Calimesa
City of Jurupa Valley
City of La Palma
City of Carpentaria
City of King City
City of Morgan Hill
City of Chino
City of Laguna Hills
City of Palmdale
City of Corona
City of Lemoore
Commerce Redevelopment City
City of Desert Hot Springs
City of Loma Linda
South Gate Housing Authority
City of Folsom
City of Menifee
City of Gonzales
City of Monterey Park
ASSISTANCE TO CITY
City of Grand Terrace
City of Morgan Hill
ATTORNEYS (confidential)
City of Greenfield
City of Murrieta
City of Highland
City of Needles
Cohen and Berliner - Litigation
City of Huntington Beach
City of Newport Beach
Assistance
City of Jurupa valley
City of North Ogden, UT
Rutan and Tucker - Litigation
City of King City
City of Oceanside
Assistance
City of Lancaster
City of Ontario
San Diego City - Building & Safety
City of Loma Linda
City of Orange
Fee Litigation Assistance
City of Menifee
City of Oroville
San Diego County Counsel - DIF
City of Murrieta
City of Paso Robles
Use Litigation Assistance
City of Needles
City of Petaluma
City of Newport Beach
City of Pismo Beach
City of Norco
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 17
0
MASTER FACILITIES
UTILITY RATE STUDY
PLANS/CIPs (continued)
City of Brea
City of Ontario
City of Chino
City of Orange
City of El Segundo
City of Oroville
City of Paso Robles
MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS
City of Rancho Cordova
City of Riverside
Brigham City Corporation, UT -
City of San Bernardino
Closed Indian School Use
City of Santa Paula
Conversion
City of Sedona, AZ
City of Azusa - Plan
City of Selma
Check/Inspection Process
City of Tracy
Review
City of Wheatland
City of Beverly Hills - Rent
City of Whittier
Stabilization Fee
June Lake Fire District
City of Colton - Electric Utilities
Lake Havasu City, AZ
Collection Procedural Manual
Long Valley Fire District
City of Corona - Communications
North Central Fire District
Repeater Cost Financing
North Ogden City, UT
City of Corona - Interstate 15
South Jordan City, UT
Area Public Safety Facility
South Ogden City, UT
Financing
Town of Apple Valley
City of Fontana - General &
Town of Mammoth Lakes
Departmental Overhead Plan
Town of Paradise
City of Garden Grove - Internal
Town of Truckee
Service Fund Balance Study
Wheeler Crest Fire District
City of Hemet - Supplemental DIF,
Public Peril Report
ORGANIZATIONAL AND
City of Los Altos - Existing DIF
MANAGEMENT
Review
City of Milpitas - Business License
City of La Mirada
Ordinance Review
City of South Gate
City of Needles - Development
City of Vista
Agreement Assistance
Ontario -Montclair School District
City of Pico Rivera - Business
License Ordinance Review
City of Port Hueneme - Revenue
Search Report
City of Redlands - Street
Sweeping Rate Study
City of San Bernardino -
Verdemont Area Financing
Analysis
MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS
(continued)
City of San Clemente - Business
License Review
City of Santa Paula - General Plan
Element
City of Seaside - Hayes Housing
Development Service Demands
City of South Lake Tahoe -
Transfer of Custody Cost
Verification
City of Westminster -
Productivity Measurement
Module
Lake Havasu City, AZ - Capital
Financing Plan
Los Angeles Fire/Police
Retirement System - Fiscal
Review
San Bernardino County - Special
District Office Finance Review
South Jordan City, UT - Business
Regulation Costing
Town of Windsor - Long Range
Capital Financing Plan
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 18
PROPOSED BUDGET
Revenue & Cost Specialists proposes the following project costs, which will NOT TO EXCEED
AMOUNT OF $115,150.
Preliminary Research 78
lWentify Land -Use Build O��kand Use Database K50
Identify Current/Future Needs Schedule of Capital Costs 150
Wathematical Nexus Calculation 04!Spreadsheets of Calculations ,W
Textual Nexus Draft & Final DIF Reports 130
'Public Meeting presentations (2) M
13,650
17,500
26,250
30,625
22,750
4,375
The above costs are based on a charge of $175 per hour. The billing rate for any additional
work not covered by this proposal would be $200 per hour. Our proposal covers all costs
except for the following additional costs that the City may incur:
• Report reproduction beyond one physical master copy of the final Report.
• Excessive public meeting attendance.
• Excessive revisions to the report once the draft report has been approved by City
staff.
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 19
EXHIBIT 2
CONSULTANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY OF SANTA ANA AND REVENUE & COST SPECIALISTS, LLC
TO PREPARE A DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE STUDY
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 7`h day of November, 2023 by and between
Revenue & Cost Specialists, LLC, ("Consultant"), and the City of Santa Ana, a charter city and
municipal corporation organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of
California ("City").
RECITALS
A. The City desires to retain a consultant having special skill and knowledge to develop a
Development Impact Fee Study.
B. Consultant represents that Consultant is able and willing to provide such services to the
City.
C. In undertaking the performance of this Agreement, Consultant represents that it is
knowledgeable in its field and that any services performed by Consultant under this
Agreement will be performed in compliance with such standards as may reasonably be
expected from a professional consulting firm in the field.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual and respective promises, and subject to the
terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, the parties agree as follows:
1. SCOPE OF SERVICES
Consultant shall perform during the term of this Agreement, the tasks and obligations
including all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidental customary work required to fully
and adequately complete the services described and set forth in Scope of Services - Exhibit A,
attached hereto and incorporated by reference.
2. COMPENSATION
a. City agrees to pay, and Consultant agrees to accept as total payment for its services for
City, the rates and charges identified in Compensation - Exhibit B. The total amount
to be expended under this Agreement shall not exceed $115,150 during the term of this
Agreement, including any extension periods exercised under Section 3.
b. Payment by City shall be made within 45 days (forty-five) days following receipt of
proper invoice evidencing work performed, subject to City accounting procedures.
Payment need not be made for work which fails to meet the standards of performance
set forth in the Recitals which may reasonably be expected by City.
3. TERM
This Agreement shall commence on the date first written above for a two (2) year term,
unless terminated earlier in accordance with Section 16, below.
4. PREVAILING WAGES
Consultant is aware of the requirements of California Labor Code Section 1720, et seq.,
and 1770, et seq., as well as California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 16000, et seq.,
("Prevailing Wage Laws"), which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the
performance of other requirements on "public works" and "maintenance" projects. If the services
being performed are part of an applicable "public works" or "maintenance" project, as defined by
the Prevailing Wage Laws, and the total compensation is $1,000 or more, Consultant agrees to
fully comply with such Prevailing Wage Laws. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the
City, its elected officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any claim or
liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws.
5. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
Consultant shall, during the entire term of this Agreement, be construed to be an
independent contractor and not an employee of the City. This Agreement is not intended nor shall
it be construed to create an employer -employee relationship, a joint venture relationship, or to
allow the City to exercise discretion or control over the professional manner in which Consultant
performs the services which are the subject matter of this Agreement; however, the services to be
provided by Consultant shall be provided in a manner consistent with all applicable standards and
regulations governing such services. Consultant shall pay all salaries and wages, employer's social
security taxes, unemployment insurance and similar taxes relating to employees and shall be
responsible for all applicable withholding taxes.
6. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS
This Agreement creates a non-exclusive and perpetual license for City to copy, use,
modify, reuse, or sublicense any and all copyrights, designs, and other intellectual property
embodied in plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, and other documents or works of
authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, including but not limited to, physical
drawings or data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer diskettes, which are prepared or
caused to be prepared by Consultant under this Agreement ("Documents & Data"). Consultant
shall require all subcontractors to agree in writing that City is granted a non-exclusive and
perpetual license for any Documents & Data the subcontractor prepares under this Agreement.
Consultant represents and warrants that Consultant has the legal right to license any and all
Documents & Data. Consultant makes no such representation and warranty in regard to
Documents & Data which were provided to Consultant by the City. City shall not be limited in
any way in its use of the Documents and Data at any time, provided that any such use not within
the purposes intended by this Agreement shall be at City's sole risk.
7. INSURANCE
Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for
injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the
performance of the work hereunder and the results of that work by the Consultant, his agents,
representatives, employees or subcontractors.
2
MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMIT OF INSURANCE
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
• Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Office Form CG 00 01 covering
CGL on an "occurrence" basis, including products and completed operations, property
damage, bodily injury and personal & advertising injury with limits no less than $1,000,000
per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregatelimit shall apply
separately to this project/location (ISO CG 25 03 or 25 04) or the generalaggregate limit shall
be twice the required occurrence limit.
• Automobile Liability: ISO Form Number CA 00 01 covering any auto (Code 1), or if
Consultant has no owned autos, hired, (Code 8) and non -owned autos (Code 9), with limitno
less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
• Workers' Compensation: as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and
Employer's Liability Insurance with limit of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily
injury or disease.
• Professional Liability applicable to the work being performed, with a limit no less than
$1,000,000 per claim or occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate per policy period of one year.
If the Consultant maintains broader coverage and/or higher limits than the minimums shown
above, the City requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage and/or the higher limits
maintained by the contractor. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified
minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City.
Other Insurance Provisions
The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
Additional Insured Status
The City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds
on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on
behalf of the Consultant including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connectionwith such
work or operations. General liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to
the Consultant's insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10 1185 or if notavailable, through
the addition of both CG 20 10, CG 20 26, CG 20 33, or CG 20 38; and CG 2037 if a later edition
is used).
Primary Coverage
For any claims related to this contract, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary
coverage at least as broad as ISO CG 20 01 04 13 as respects the City, its officers, officials,
employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers,
officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not
contribute with it.
Notice of Cancellation
Each insurance policy required above shall provide that coverage shall not be canceled, except
with notice to the City.
3
Waiver of Subrogation
Consultant hereby grants to City a waiver of any right to subrogation which any insurer of said
Consultant may acquire against the City by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance.
Consultant agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of
subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the City has received a waiver
of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.
Self -Insured Retentions
Self -insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. The City may require the
Consultant to purchase coverage with a lower retention or provide proof of ability to pay losses
and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses within the retention. The
policy language shall provide, or be endorsed to provide, that the self -insured retention may be
satisfied by either the named insured or City.
Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers authorized to conduct business in the state with a current
A.M. Best's rating of no less than ANII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City.
Claims Made Policies (note — should be applicable only to professional liability, see below)
If any of the required policies provide claims -made coverage:
1. The Retroactive Date must be shown, and must be before the date of the contract or the
beginning of contract work.
2. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least
five (S) years after completion of the contract of work.
3. If coverage is canceled or non -renewed, and not replaced with another claims -made
policy form with a Retroactive Date prior to the contract effective date, the Consultant
must purchase "extended reporting" coverage for a minimum of five (S) years after
completion of work.
Verification of Coverage
Consultant shall furnish the City with original Certificates of Insurance including all required
amendatory endorsements (or copies of the applicable policy language effecting coverage required
by this clause) and a copy of the Declarations and Endorsement Page of the CGL policy listing all
policy endorsements to City before work begins. However, failure to obtain the required
documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive the Consultant's obligation to provide them.
The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies,
including endorsements required by these specifications, at any time.
Special Risks or Circumstances
City reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the
risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.
n
8. INDEMNIFICATION
Consultant agrees to defend, and shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers,
agents, employees, contractors, special counsel, and representatives from liability: (1) for personal
injury, damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief arising out of claims for
personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage, which may arise from the
negligent operations of the Consultant, its subcontractors, agents, employees, or other persons
acting on its behalf which relates to the services described in section 1 of this Agreement; and (2)
from any claim that personal injury, damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable
relief is due by reason of the terms of or effects arising from this Agreement. This indemnity and
hold harmless agreement applies to all claims for damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial
or equitable relief suffered, or alleged to have been suffered, by reason of the events referred to in
this Section or by reason of the terms of, or effects, arising from this Agreement. The Consultant
further agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and pay all costs for the defense of the City, including
fees and costs for special counsel to be selected by the City, regarding any action by a third party
challenging the validity of this Agreement, or asserting that personal injury, damages, just
compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief due to personal or property rights arises by
reason of the terms of, or effects arising from this Agreement. City may make all reasonable
decisions with respect to its representation in any legal proceeding. Notwithstanding the foregoing,
to the extent Consultant's services are subject to Civil Code Section 2782.8, the above indemnity
shall be limited, to the extent required by Civil Code Section 2782.8, to claims that arise out of,
pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Consultant.
9. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INDEMNIFICATION
Consultant shall defend and indemnify the City, its officers, agents, representatives, and
employees against any and all liability, including costs, for infringement of any United States'
letters patent, trademark, or copyright infringement, including costs, contained in the work product
or documents provided by Consultant to the City pursuant to this Agreement.
10. RECORDS
Consultant shall keep records and invoices in connection with the work to be performed
under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to
the costs incurred under this Agreement and any services, expenditures, and disbursements
charged to the City for a minimum period of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by
law, from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement. All such records and
invoices shall be clearly identifiable. Consultant shall allow a representative of the City to
examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of such records and any other documents created
pursuant to this Agreement during regular business hours. Consultant shall allow inspection of all
work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to this Agreement for a period of three
(3) years from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement.
5
11. CONFIDENTIALITY
If Consultant receives from the City information which due to the nature of such
information is reasonably understood to be confidential and/or proprietary, Consultant agrees that
it shall not use or disclose such information except in the performance of this Agreement, and
further agrees to exercise the same degree of care it uses to protect its own information of like
importance, but in no event less than reasonable care. "Confidential Information' shall include all
nonpublic information. Confidential information includes not only written information, but also
information transferred orally, visually, electronically, or by other means. Confidential
information disclosed to either party by any subsidiary and/or agent of the other party is covered
by this Agreement. The foregoing obligations of non-use and nondisclosure shall not apply to any
information that (a) has been disclosed in publicly available sources; (b) is, through no fault of the
Consultant disclosed in a publicly available source; (c) is in rightful possession of the Consultant
without an obligation of confidentiality; (d) is required to be disclosed by operation of law; or (e)
is independently developed by the Consultant without reference to information disclosed by the
City.
12. CONFLICT OF INTEREST CLAUSE
Consultant covenants that it presently has no interests and shall not have interests, direct
or indirect, which would conflict in any manner with performance of services.
13. NON-DISCRIMINATION
Consultant shall not discriminate because of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status,
sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, gender, medical conditions, genetic
information, or military and veteran status, age, national origin, ancestry, or disability, as defined
and prohibited by applicable law, in the recruitment, selection, teaching, training, utilization,
promotion, termination or other employment related activities or any services provided under this
Agreement. Consultant affirms that it is an equal opportunity employer and shall comply with all
applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations.
14. EXCLUSIVITY AND AMENDMENT
This Agreement represents the complete and exclusive statement between the City and
Consultant, and supersedes any and all other agreements, oral or written, between the parties. In
the event of a conflict between the terms of this Agreement and any attachments hereto, the terms
of this Agreement shall prevail. This Agreement may not be modified except by written instrument
signed by the City and by an authorized representative of Consultant. The parties agree that any
terms or conditions of any purchase order or other instrument that are inconsistent with, or in
addition to, the terms and conditions hereof, shall not bind or obligate Consultant or the City. Each
party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises or
agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any
party, which is not embodied herein.
P.
15. ASSIGNMENT
Inasmuch as this Agreement is intended to secure the specialized services of Consultant,
Consultant may not assign, transfer, delegate, or subcontract any interest herein without the prior
written consent of the City and any such assignment, transfer, delegation or subcontract without
the City's prior written consent shall be considered null and void. Nothing in this Agreement shall
be construed to limit the City's ability to have any of the services which are the subject to this
Agreement performed by City personnel or by other consultants retained by City.
16. TERMINATION
This Agreement may be terminated by the City upon thirty (30) days written notice of
termination. In such event, Consultant shall be entitled to receive and the City shall pay Consultant
compensation for all services performed by Consultant prior to receipt of such notice of
termination, subject to the following conditions:
a. As a condition of such payment, the Executive Director may require Consultant to
deliver to the City all work product(s) completed as of such date, and in such case
such work product shall be the property of the City unless prohibited by law, and
Consultant consents to the City's use thereof for such purposes as the City deems
appropriate.
b. Payment need not be made for work which fails to meet the standard of
performance specified in the Recitals of this Agreement.
17. WAIVER
No waiver of breach, failure of any condition, or any right or remedy contained in or granted by
the provisions of this Agreement shall be effective unless it is in writing and signed by the party
waiving the breach, failure, right or remedy. No waiver of any breach, failure or right, or remedy
shall be deemed a waiver of any other breach, failure, right or remedy, whether or not similar, nor
shall any waiver constitute a continuing waiver unless the writing so specifies.
18. JURISDICTION - VENUE
This Agreement has been executed and delivered in the State of California and the
validity, interpretation, performance, and enforcement of any of the clauses of this Agreement
shall be determined and governed by the laws of the State of California. Both parties further agree
that Orange County, California, shall be the venue for any action or proceeding that may be brought
or arise out of, in connection with or by reason of this Agreement.
19. PROFESSIONAL LICENSES
Consultant shall, throughout the term of this Agreement, maintain all necessary licenses,
permits, approvals, waivers, and exemptions necessary for the provision of the services hereunder
and required by the laws and regulations of the United States, the State of California, the City of
Santa Ana and all other governmental agencies. Consultant shall notify the City immediately and
7
in writing of its inability to obtain or maintain such permits, licenses, approvals, waivers, and
exemptions. Said inability shall be cause for termination of this Agreement.
20. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
a. Each undersigned represents and warrants that its signature herein below has the
power, authority and right to bind their respective parties to each of the terms of
this Agreement, and shall indemnify City fully, including reasonable costs and
attorney's fees, for any injuries or damages to City in the event that such authority
or power is not, in fact, held by the signatory or is withdrawn.
b. The Agreement is the final and complete agreement and any prior or
contemporaneous agreements for similar services between the parties is superseded
by this Agreement. This clause shall not apply where the Parties are currently
engaged and Consultant is providing services not contemplated by this Agreement.
C. All Exhibits referenced herein and attached hereto shall be incorporated as if fully
set forth in the body of this Agreement.
21. NOTICE
Any notice, tender, demand, delivery, or other communication pursuant to this Agreement
shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be properly given if delivered in person or mailed by
first class or certified mail, postage prepaid, or sent by fax or other telegraphic communication in
the manner provided in this Section, to the following persons:
To City:
Clerk of the City Council
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza (M-30)
P.O. Box 1988
Santa Ana, CA 92702-1988
Fax: 714- 647-6956
With courtesy copies to:
Nabil Saba
Executive Director, Public Works Agency
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza (M-21)
P.O. Box 1988
Santa Ana, California 92702
To Consultant:
Gregory Brown
Vice President
Revenue & Cost Specialists, LLC
1519 E Chapman Avenue, Suite C
Fullerton, CA 92831
A party may change its address by giving notice in writing to the other party. Thereafter,
any communication shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. If sent by mail,
communication shall be effective or deemed to have been given three (3) days after it has been
deposited in the United States mail, duly registered or certified, with postage prepaid, and
addressed as set forth above. If sent by fax, communication shall be effective or deemed to have
been given twenty-four (24) hours after the time set forth on the transmission report issued by the
transmitting facsimile machine, addressed as set forth above. For purposes of calculating these
time frames, weekends, federal, state, County or City holidays shall be excluded.
[This space is intentionally left blank]
[Signature page to follow]
E
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the date and year first
above written.
ATTEST:
Jennifer L. Hall
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
SONIA R. CARVALHO
City Attorney
By:
Jose Montoya
Assistant City Attorney
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:
Nabil Saba
Executive Director
Public Works Agency
CITY OF SANTA ANA
Steven A. Mendoza
Assistant City Manager
CONSULTANT:
Gregory Brown
Vice President
10
EXHIBIT A
l'
i
Jim
I --
A,
1519 E Chapman Ave
Suite C
Fullerton, CA 92831
(714) 992-9020
www.revenuecost.com
i IN=-
TABLE OF CONTENTS September 25, 2023
Tableof Contents.........................................................................................................................................................2
TransmittalLetter......................................................................................................................................................3
OrganizationQualifications.................................................................................................................................5
ProjectManager.......................................................................................................................................................... 7
Scopeof Work.............................................................................................................................................................11
ProjectSchedule.......................................................................................................................................................14
References....................................................................................................................................................................15
ProposedBudget......................................................................................................................................................19
DOWNTOWN
ORANGE COUNTY „,
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 2
September 25, 2023
City of Santa Ana
Attn: Ehab Elias, Associate Engineer
20 Civic Center Plaza, M-93
Santa Ana, CA 92701
Proposal for City of Santa Ana - Development Impact Fee Study
Revenue & Cost Specialists, LLC (RCS) appreciates the opportunity to provide you with this
Development Impact Fee Study proposal. RCS has provided such studies and other fee -
costing services since 1980, making us the first and foremost authority in costing services
for California. Our combined 100 years of experience and knowledge in this industry will
ensure a successful project that's on time and under budget.
Our impact fee study process is straightforward, imposes minimal impact on staff, and
provides proper information, allowing staff, City Council, and other stakeholders to make the
best policy decisions for Santa Ana. We strive to ensure confidence in the information and
recommendations of the final Report.
The results of our study will allow the City to identify and recover, with certainty, the
maximum financial impact from future development. The terms of this proposal will be
honored for 90 calendar days from the date of submission. Please contact Scott at (714) 992-
9026 or scott@revenuecost.com with any questions.
Sincerely,
GREGORY BROWN
Vice President
SCOTT THORP
Principal
Revenue & Cost Specialists
1519 E. Chapman • Suite C • Fullerton, CA • 92831
0
RCS Contacts
Revenue & Cost Specialists
1519 E Chapman Ave, Ste C
Fullerton, CA 92831
www.revenuecost.com
Scott Thorpe
Principal
714-992-9026
Scott@ revenue cost. com
Gregory Brown
Vice President
714-992-9022
Gregory@revenuecost.com
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 4
ORGANIZATION QUALIFICATIONS
ABOUT RCS
RCS (Taxpayer ID No. 330787781) was founded in 1980 by
two former City Managers and a Finance Director who, after
the passage of Propositions 13 and 4, discovered that user
fees were a legal option to recover lost municipal revenues.
Forty-two years later, Revenue & Cost Specialists continues
its focus on cost allocation and user fee calculation services.
After the passage of AB 1600 in 1988, our company added
impact fee calculation services to help municipalities finance CALIFORN
public facility expansion.
In 2000, RCS created Government Software Systems to develop robust Im
costing software that serves fee calculation needs better than
spreadsheets. Our company has provided additional services to municipalities, including
long-range financial planning, accounting procedures, and utility rate studies.
To this day, RCS continues to thrive through repeat business, referrals, and references. As a
small business, RCS takes only a handful of new clients each year, allowing us to dedicate the
appropriate number of resources to them. What's unique about RCS is the work longevity of
our team members. Client cities from 20 years ago still call and speak with the RCS Partner
about their project back then.
For 2023, RCS is celebrating our 43rd year in business and looking forward to another 40-
plus years of partnering with municipalities.
QUALIFICATIONS
RCS's five principals comprise the Limited Liability Company. RCS principals have over 100
years of combined experience in cost allocation plans and fee studies and served over 250
municipalities. We have provided these services to a wide array of public agencies, from the
smallest special district to larger and more complex cities and counties. While based in
Orange County, we engage in projects throughout the State of California.
RCS principals are municipal cost and revenue consultants specializing in the following:
• User Fee Studies
• Cost Allocation Plans
• Development Impact Fee Studies
• Special studies and reports supporting municipal financing management
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 5
0
These specializations allow RCS to focus on every aspect of municipal fees and be the best at
what we do. We are confident in our project time estimates and do not respond to RFPs when
the project workload exceeds our capacity. We have suggested new fees that are not common
practice throughout the state and have challenged and removed municipal fees that were not
defensible. We have assisted municipalities in streamlining their fee -based processes.
All RCS principals are knowledgeable in fund accounting, department structures, and
municipal services. We stay current on pending financial and legal issues that challenge
municipalities. All principals are comfortable speaking with city staff at all levels, drafting
reports and resolutions, and presenting to the public, stakeholders, and City Council
members.
RCS principals perform all studies in a professional and expedient manner and do not rely
on junior staff to perform these vital tasks with our clients. We also don't rely on status
memos because we will often be at City Hall to tell you how the project is going in person.
Rick Kermer, a Partner, was one of the founders of RCS. Rick used his CPA and audit
experience to build cost allocation, user fee spreadsheets, and software that passes rigorous
analysis and reporting accounting standards. Rick's work is the foundation of all the fee
study work offered today. He is now semi -retired, taking only a handful of projects each year.
Eric Johnson, the President, has streamlined and perfected the process of CAP and User Fee
Study engagements. With over 30 years and hundreds of completed studies, Eric has created
a superior process that demands little city staff time while obtaining maximum results. Eric
quickly understands complex city services and how to calculate fees for them. He relates well
with elected officials because he responds with candor and brevity. If you speak to any of
Eric's prior or current clients, they will tell you how easy the process was.
Scott Thorpe, a Principal, joined RCS in 1985. Before that, he spent 13 years in the cities of
Chula Vista, Covina, Anaheim, and Brea, serving in various roles within the city manager's
offices. Scott performed user fee studies for several years, transitioning to development
impact fees when AB 1600 was enacted. He has written articles laying out the fundamentals
of impact fees, and his work has generated tens of millions in fee revenues for cities.
Chu Thai, Vice President, joined RCS after 22 years of municipal experience. As a budget
manager and finance director, Chu has successfully coordinated user fee increases, impact
fee increases, utility rate increases, and tax ballot measures. His experience helps clients
avoid the unseen perils that jeopardize municipal projects. After project completion, Chu
leaves behind well -documented reports and spreadsheets for City staff. His career has
focused on improving cities' financial stability and implementing operational effectiveness
and efficiencies in local government.
Gregory Brown, a Vice President, is the newest team member of RCS. However, he has
already performed development impact fee studies for a dozen different cities and districts.
Gregory spent 20 years working in small business before joining the RCS team. He was
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 6
0
trained by Scott Thorpe in development impact fee and applies the same methodology Scott
Thorpe developed over 35 years while also incorporating his experience in managing small
businesses with a focus on efficiency.
RCS PROJECT MANAGER FOR SANTA ANA
Scott Thorpe, Principal, and Greg Brown, Vice President, will work together on the
Development Impact Fee Study.
RCS may assign additional specialists to the project to help maintain the proposed schedule
and ensure product quality. We thoroughly understand and will be involved in every phase
of the impact fee study, advising City staff when necessary. Resumes for the RCS project team
are included in this proposal on the following pages.
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 7
0
EDUCATION
Bachelor of Arts in Public
Administration - San Diego
State University
Master of Public
Administration - California
State University Fullerton
AFFILIATIONS
California Society of
Municipal Finance Officers
Scott Ian Thorpe
Principal
Mr. Thorpe has been with RCS since 1985 and built his career
and reputation on the proper establishment of development
impact fees. His early publications helped shape the
foundation of calculating and implementing impact fees. Scott
has produced studies for projects ranging from small, single -
use developments to large, master -planned communities
throughout California. He is actively involved in all aspects of
the projects, from kick-off, through Council adoption and
beyond fee collection and reporting.
Municipal Experience
Government Finance Officers City of Brea - Management & Budget Manager
Association Developed budget preparation and management information
reporting systems. Established personal computer
operations, including acquisition, placement, and
maintenance of all equipment to initial and ongoing employee
training. Created a comprehensive legislative program for
reviewing all federal, state and local legislation.
City of Anaheim - Budget Analyst/Management
Operations Auditor
Assisted in the preparation of a $350,000,000 annual budget.
Provided centralized management support and assistance of
line departments with a variety of services including work
measurement and management techniques program
development, productivity improvement, internal
management audits, budget review/analysis, revenue
forecasting and auditing, and data processing systems
development. Specialized in management assistance to public
safety, stadium, convention center and golf operations.
Responsible for fiscal, work -unit measurement and
management training sessions required of all city
management staff.
City of Covina - Administrative Assistant to the City
Manager
Performed general program development with significant
emphasis on the improvement of the budget process,
legislative, public information, and agenda process systems.
Conducted a major annexation study and effort.
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 8
Scott Ian Thorpe
Principal
Municipal Experience
(continued)
City of Chula Vista - Administrative Aide
Entry level job which involved completion of a City-wide
Policy and Procedure Manual, operation reviews of long-term
fire vehicle equipment purchases and of the municipal bus
system stop locations.
Publications
"Financing Capital Improvements", Journal American Water
Works Association, August, 1991, pages 50-52
"Impact Fees: Practical Guide for Calculation and
Implementation", Journal of Urban Planning and
Development, Vol. 18, No. 3, September, 1992, pages 106-
118
"The Missing Ingredient in State -Mandated General Plans",
Public Management, International City Management
Association", March 2014. Pages 21-22.
Other Accomplishments
Charter Oak Unified School District Facility Closure
Committee -Board Appointee
Guest Lecturer on various municipal
government/management topics at two universities
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 9
0
Gregory Ross Brown
Vice President
EDUCATION Professional Experience
Bachelor of Arts in History - Revenue & Cost Specialists - Vice President
Cal Poly Pomona (2022- Present) Assisting in meetings, gathering data,
building fee structures, analyzing, and writing reports.
Revenue & Cost Specialists - Associate
(2020 - 2022) Assist in working meetings, data gathering,
analysis, and input. Write and/or edit text for completed
Development Impact Fee cost calculations.
Simple Health Acupuncture and Wellness Center Inc.
Long Beach, CA - Clinic Director
(2012 - 2022) Oversaw all operations of a continuing
multiple -modality health clinic involving seventeen
employees.
Project Experience
Development Impact Fees
Apple Valley Fire Protection District, CA
City of Highland, CA
City of Shafter, CA (In Progress)
City of Gardena, CA (In Progress)
City of West Covina, CA (In Progress)
City of Hercules, CA (In Progress)
City of Corning, CA (In Progress)
City of El Segundo, CA
City of Farmersville, CA
City of Livingston, CA
City of Loma Linda, CA
City of Morro Bay, CA
City of Hawthorne, CA (In Progress)
Cost of Services Studies
City of Hawthorne, CA
City of Laguna Beach, CA
City of Santa Maria, CA
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 10
SCOPE OF WORK
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
To make certain the City of Santa Ana continues to provide basic municipal services as the
City grows, RCS proposes to undertake the calculation and textual support of a new
Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report. RCS staff will perform the following
to complete the Development Impact Fee (DIF) calculation and quantify the costs generated
by new development in terms of an Impact Fee Schedule for city land uses.
Based on our preliminary review of the reports and documentation available by the City, we
propose development impact fees for the following infrastructures.
1. Law Enforcement, Vehicles, and Equipment
2. Fire Suppression/Medic Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment
3. Transportation System Improvement Area
4. Transit Zoning Code Traffic Impact Mitigation Fair Share
5. Harbor Specific Plan Mitigation Fair Share
6. Drainage Assessment Fee
7. Park Acquisition and Development Fee
8. Sewer Connection Fee
9. Water Connection Fee
10. Library Fee
11. General Facilities Development Fee
12. Community Centers Development Fee
RCS has the experience and determination to research and identify the maximum financial
impact of future developments in Santa Ana. With this information, staff can realize the city's
best funding and implementation policies.
We plan to use a series of direct, focused meetings between RCS experts and knowledgeable
City staff to produce an accurate, logical, and defensible final product. RCS' objective is to
ensure that City staff feels confident about the data and the report and, therefore, confident
in supporting the results at public hearings.
The fee recommendations included in RCS' final Development Impact Fee Calculation and
Nexus Report will be legally defensible, easy to understand, and supported by City staff. Our
years of experience in impact fees and working with local government finance officers
ensures this project will be completed successfully and on time.
To provide the basis for the Development Impact Fees, the following steps would be taken
by the Revenue & Cost Specialist staff, working with City staff and other consultants where
necessary and appropriate:
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 11
0
Task 1: Preliminary Research
Prior to any meetings, RCS will perform a field "windshield" survey to become
acquainted with the physical characteristics and general improvement needs and
standards of the City. We will request and review all City maps, land -use documents,
and available master plans, especially the Comprehensive General Plan, before the
kick-off meeting. We will review the City's history of impact fee schedules,
resolutions, ordinances, and Annual and Five -Year Reports per Government Code
Sections 66006 and 66001. RCS will review recent Operating Budgets, CIP Budgets,
Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports, and fixed asset reports.
RCS will meet and discuss the City's planning, capital financing process, and
community development standards with the City Engineer, City Planner, and other
executive staff to determine the improvements that most likely will evolve from the
project planning documents and be needed to support and give validity to the City's
Comprehensive General Plan.
Task 2: Series of Working Meetings
RCS will meet with City staff responsible for each infrastructure to help identify all
projects needed through theoretical build -out via the use of master plans, specific
plans, and other service requirement studies. The more supporting documents we
can find, the better the Study will be. The greatest support would be an engineer -
prepared Master Plan. RCS will endeavor to increase the validity of available
information if such a document is unavailable. RCS will request from the City all
reports, master plans, specific plans, and other related reports identifying needed
infrastructure. If needed, RCS can assist the City with developing project lists and
supporting data. RCS will review project cost estimates and textual explanations for
accuracy and completeness.
RCS will identify and analyze the demand drivers specific to each infrastructure or
service area. The drivers are the factors of nexus demand related to each land use
and would be based on the project plans or City productivity records. These demand
drivers will help determine the distribution of the benefits of nexus for, and impact of
each group of projects on each of the above categories of land use. The proportional
analysis is necessary to identify what burdens would be placed upon the existing and
future infrastructure would be undertaken.
Task 3: Draft Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report
Since the Report is based on information and estimates provided by City staff, it is
important that all participants are comfortable with the methodology and data
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 12
0
presented. RCS will prepare a draft report consisting of the fee structures and the
necessary relevant nexus text and report with recommended fees. This meeting will
include discussions on policy issues, implementation strategies, and revenue
collection procedures. RCS will provide the draft report for staff consideration and
distribution.
Task 4: Presentation of Proposed Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus
Report to the City Council
RCS will attend the City Council meeting to discuss the report methodology and
present findings, provide a formal presentation, and answer questions about those
findings. RCS will have the necessary supporting documentation for the meeting and
will be the primary contact to answer all questions, following up with any City Council
direction with the assistance of City staff.
CLIENT INPUT
RCS will make every effort to advise, seek input from and, in general, explain the work as it
is being performed. We depend on dedicated and engaged staff participation for a project to
be completed successfully. Most of the staff participation is to attend working meetings with
RCS.
The City should also designate a Project Coordinator for the fee study who will:
1) Identify key City staff and coordinate the kick-off meeting(s)
2) Assist in obtaining the requested information
3) Coordinate the review of draft reports, and
4) Provide project direction if needed
ONSITE MEETINGS AND VIDEO CONFERENCING MEETINGS
For the project kick-off and working meetings on the same day, the City may choose to have
RCS onsite or conduct the meetings through a video conferencing account.
All working meetings will be through our Zoom account or a video conferencing software of
the City's choice. Our experience has determined that video conferencing is more flexible in
scheduling meetings, lets City staff quickly access reports and files on their computers, and
allows everyone to view and discuss the same documents at the same time.
RCS plans to participate in the City Council meetings onsite at the City of Santa Ana.
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 13
PROJECT SCHEDULE
RCS' references will attest that our timelines are ideal for impact fee studies. This schedule,
of course, will require the cooperative participation of City staff. We will be having meetings
with staff every two to three weeks and provide them with updates. Department meetings
will be 30 minutes to two hours each.
RCS will comply with local, county, and state protocols for safely conducting meetings as the
COVID-19 pandemic evolves.
Development Impact Fee Study 0� Nov I Dec I Jan Feb Mar Apr
2023 2023 1 2024 1 2024 2024 1 2024
Land -use Database Compilation
Determine Infrastructure LOS
Discuss Desired Projects w. Staff
Review Project Costs & Descriptions
Review Demand Drivers (Nexus)
Apply Nexus Distribution Factors
Review Draft DIF Report with Staff
Prepare Final DIF Report
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 14
EXHIBIT B
12
PROPOSED BUDGET
Revenue & Cost Specialists proposes the following project costs, which will NOT TO EXCEED
AMOUNT OF $115,150.
Preliminary Research 78
lWentify Land -Use Build O��kand Use Database K50
Identify Current/Future Needs Schedule of Capital Costs 150
Wathematical Nexus Calculation 04!Spreadsheets of Calculations ,W
Textual Nexus Draft & Final DIF Reports 130
'Public Meeting presentations (2) M
13,650
17,500
26,250
30,625
22,750
4,375
The above costs are based on a charge of $175 per hour. The billing rate for any additional
work not covered by this proposal would be $200 per hour. Our proposal covers all costs
except for the following additional costs that the City may incur:
• Report reproduction beyond one physical master copy of the final Report.
• Excessive public meeting attendance.
• Excessive revisions to the report once the draft report has been approved by City
staff.
Proposal for the City of Santa Ana, CA
Page 19