HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2015-04-13 #A AGENDA STAFF REPORT
"' .1,
DATE: April 13, 2015
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: Jill R. Ingram, City Manager
FROM: Sean P. Crumby, PE, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS APPROVAL BY THE
CITY COUNCIL
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
That the City Council provide direction relating to Requests for Proposals being
brought to the City Council for approval prior to issuance to vendors.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS:
The Public Works Department procures professional services for a variety of
technical and non-technical services. Procurement of outside sources for these
services allows the City to keep internal staffing as low as possible and have
access to a variety of expertise regarding technical issues. The method by which
those services are procured has changed throughout the years, but complies
with the requirements of the California Government Code.
There has been a request to present Requests for Proposals (RFP) to the City
Council prior to issuance. This memo outlines the history by which professional
services have been procured, outlines legal requirements, and provides a
recommendation going forward.
History
The Public Works Department historically procured technical consultants and
negotiated fees. In the mid 1990's the department issued a series of RFP's for
on-call services. On-call contracts were executed as follows:
• Coastal Engineering: Moffatt and Nichol, and Han Padron Associates
• Transportation Engineering: Zimmerman Engineering
• Utility Engineering: AKM Consulting Engineers
• Construction Management: Jacobs Engineering
On-call professional services agreements for a term of three to five years were
approved by the City Council and executed with these firms. Individual projects
Agenda Item A
within the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) were generally delivered with
services through these companies via task order authorizations by staff. The
RFP's were generated for the on-call service contracts and not on individual
projects. RFP's for individual projects were only utilized when the project
required expertise not available through the on call vendors. The expenditures
were authorized when the budget was approved.
In 2006, the Public Works Department stopped utilizing on-call contracts and
began soliciting individual contracts for every project. The process for procuring
professional services is done per the requirements of the California Government
Code. An RFP is drafted with the intent of delivering the project as approved by
the City Council within the Capital Improvement Program in the adopted City
budget. Typically, between four and eight qualified firms are invited to submit
proposals. The proposals are evaluated by a team of City staff and the most
qualified firm is selected. A cost proposal is submitted with the RFP and is
opened after determination of which firm is most qualified. The fee is compared
to the appropriate cost determined by staff and then negotiated, as necessary.
At this point, a professional services agreement with a scope of service is
presented to the City Council for award of contract.
In 2008, the department began bringing the RFP's to the City Council for
approval prior to distribution to the qualified firms. RFP's were approved by the
City Council in this fashion until the end of 2010. A history of the number of
Public Works City Council agenda reports is as follows:
Year Number of Public Works Agenda Reports
2006 51
2007 60
2008 107
2009 84
2010 101
2011 77
2012 60
2013 51
2014 61
The expenditures for capital improvements and the number of capital
improvement projects remained constant throughout this period. The current
Capital Improvement Program has 50 active projects within various stages of
completion. These projects are all presented during the City's annual CIP
Budget Study Session and approved by the City Council with adoption of the
annual budget. It is estimated that bringing every RFP to the City Council for
approval could add approximately 40 Public Works staff reports to the Council
agenda per year. Additional staff reports will also be necessary for Community
Development, Finance, Parks and Recreation, Police, and Marine Safety.
Page 2
Approval of RFP's by the City Council represents an increase in workload for
staff and increased timeline for completion of each project. Staff reports typically
consume approximately 20 hours of staff time per report. This includes staff time
to generate the report and review time from management and executive staff.
Having the RFP's presented to the City Council also increases the timeline for
each project by approximately four to six weeks. This increase in time includes
agenda report writing and review, and noticing for City Council meetings.
RFP documents do not represent any progress on the individual projects. The
professional services agreements executed by the City Council begin the service.
No actual design (architects, engineers, etc.) has occurred when the RFP is
d rafted.
Recommended Actions Movina Forward
All RFP's are available for review. It is recommended that a list of the RFP's be
periodically provided to the City Council. The RFP's will be listed prior to sending
to qualified vendors. If a City Councilperson desires, the RFP will be made
available for review in the City Clerk's office prior to sending to vendors.
Construction documents (plans and specifications) are also available for review.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
The process of advertising Requests for Proposals is not a project within the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA").
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
No legal review is required for this item.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The requested action does not require expenditure of funds within the
FY 2014-15 Budget.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council provide direction relating to Requests for Proposals being
brought to the City Council for approval prior to issuance to vendors.
SUBMITTED BY;
NOTED AND APPROVED:
Sean P. Crumby, P.E. Jill R. Ingram, City Manager
Director of Public Works
Page 3