Loading...
CC - Item 4C - Comprehensive User Fee Study Agreement Approval with Willdan Financial Services E M e _ o5 ° ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL jj : ) STAFF REPORT ii onip TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: GLORIA MOLLEDA, CITY MANAGER . DATE: OCTOBER 27, 2020 SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE USER FEE STUDY AGREEMENT APPROVAL WITH WILLDAN FINANCIAL SERVICES (WFS) SUMMARY The City provides various "individualized" services (i.e., inspections, permits, variances, etc.) that are not of general benefit and is allowed by State law to charge fees. Historically, many of these services have been provided at a city cost greater than the price being charged for them thus, resulting in the subsidies of the remaining costs of service from the general taxpayers. As a matter of routine fee maintenance and to keep pace with increasing costs of individualized services, the fees charged to users' needs to be reviewed on a regular basis, preferably once every three years. The City has not had a Comprehensive User Fee study in over 8 years and no Development Impact Fee Analysis for 5 years. In the interest of being responsive to the service needs of Rosemead residents and businesses, and for the City Council to have all the information available to make an informed decision when staff presents the FY 21-22 Comprehensive User Fee Schedule, staff is recommending that the City of Rosemead use a Cooperative Bidding Procurement Method on a recent competitive bid process that the City of Lomita just concluded with several firms that perform comprehensive user fee and development impact fee studies. The City of Lomita's Scope of Work is very similar to a study the City of Rosemead's would need and WFS is willing to conduct the study for the City of Rosemead at the same lowest competitive rate as they bid with the City of Lomita. STAFF RECOMMENDATION That the City Council: 1) Approve the attached Proposal with Willdan Financial Services to conduct a Comprehensive User Fee and the optional Full Development Impact Fee Study for the City of Rosemead for$64,470. 2) Authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement. AGENDA ITEM 4.0 City Council Meeting October 27,2020 Page 2 of 4 BACKGROUND Comprehensive User Fee and Development Impact Fee Study It is an Industry Best Practice for Cities to periodically review the amount of User Fees and Development Impact Fees they charge for the various municipal services they offer to the public within the strict guidelines as outlined by California Government Code. In the last budget cycle, the City Council has expressed concern with the City's long-term financial outlook. With the financial uncertainties surrounding the COVID-19 emergency and its long term effect on the City's finances, staff is looking at all aspects of the City's finances to ensure the City stays financially fit and can continue to deliver its high quality services and programs to the residents of Rosemead. The last independent user fee study the City conducted was over 8 years ago and the last Development Impact Fee analysis was done a little over 5 years ago. Thus, it is time to review these fees for relevance to today's costs and financial environment. Best practices indicates these reviews should be conducted every three years or so. The City's review of user and development impact fees and charges ensure the City is appropriately recouping its expenses for services provided and the impacts certain projects have on the City's infrastructure. The review will include cost recovery fees charged for development entitlements (planning), code enforcement, parks and recreation, public works (encroachment permits, etc.) and public safety/parking services. Part of the study would also include an examination of the City's development impact fees. Since developing an RFP and doing a formal bidding process can take several months and a tremendous amount of time, staff became aware of a very similar bid process already being conducted by the City of Lomita. The City of Lomita has gone through an extensive competitive bidding process and awarded a contract to the winning firm, Willdan Financial Services on September 1, 2020. After reviewing their RFP, Rosemead staff felt their requirements were very similar to what the City of Rosemead's would have been. At the close of the City of Lomita's RFP submittal date, the City received 7 proposals from qualified firms. The City of Lomita reviewed the bids and the top 3 firms were invited to participate in a teleconference interview which were held the week of July 27, 2020. After the interviews, Willdan Financial Services (WFS) was the highest rated firm by the panel. They showed a strong understanding of working with city staff in the preparation of various components of the study including cost allocation,, user and development impact fees. In addition, their proposed project team had subject matter experts for the major components of the study. The final cost of the Willdan proposal for the City of Lomita was $54,681 after negotiating a price reduction due to a smaller scoped Development Impact Fee analysis. It had only been three City Council Meeting October 27,2020 Page 3 of 4 years since Lomita's last review of their Development Impact Fees and they did not need a full analysis performed. ANALYSIS As described before, after reviewing the Scope of Work in the City of Lomita's RFP and comparing that with the needs of the City of Rosemead, staff concluded, the City of Rosemead could greatly benefit from "piggy-backing" (formally called Cooperative Purchasing) onto the City of Lomita's agreement while satisfying the formal bidding requirement of the City of Rosemead's Purchasing Policy and saving a tremendous amount of Rosemead staff time and the RFP process time. The City of has done the Cooperative Bidding Procurement Method of obtaining goods and services before and this method of procurement is allowed under State Law, the Rosemead Municipal Code and the City's Purchasing Policy (August 21, 2019, Section 9 Procurement Methods). FISCAL IMPACT City staff believes that by using the Cooperative Bidding Procurement Method the City has already saved several thousands of dollars in City Staff time alone by not conducting a duplicative formal bid process for this service. Since staff is recommending WFS to prepare the Comprehensive User Fee Study, City staff has also received a commitment by WFS to honor the exact same cost they negotiated with the City of Lomita of $54,681. The Proposal from Willdan has an Option to perform a more comprehensive full review of the City's Development Impact Fees, greater than the City of Lomita's contract had in it after negotiations. Rosemead Community Development staff would like the City.Council to consider agreeing to this optional Full Development Impact Fee Study which would add an additional $9,789 to the total contract price. As mentioned earlier,the City has not done a study of this kind in a little over 5 years and staff believes the City would greatly benefit from the more comprehensive study. Staff had initially estimated the price of a study to be approximately $72,000 and budgeted for that amount. The actual contract price being recommended to the City Council (including the Optional Full Development Impact Fee Study) is $64,470 or a difference of$7,530 less between the staff estimated price and the actual agreement price. As mentioned, these funds are included in the FY 20-21 budget. STRATEGIC PLAN IMPACT -None PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS City Council Meeting October 27,2020 Page 4 of 4 This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process. Prepared by: Scott G. Miller, PhD, Interim Finance Director/Treasurer Angelica Frausto-Lupo, Community Development Director Attachment A: - Willdan User Fee and Development Impact Fee Study Proposal S M F (T1 '9 :.a „. l CIVIC' PRIDEA, ilikill 1.COAPORATEO 15 ° Attachment A Willdan Financial Services Proposal wi LLDAN 1.:__'�:, ' FINANCIAL SERVICES September 25, 2020 Mr. Scott Miller Finance Director City of Rosemead 8838 East Valley Boulevard Rosemead, California 91770 Re: Proposal to Conduct a Cost Allocation Plan, Comprehensive Fee Study, and Development Impact Fee Study for the City of Rosemead Dear Scott: Following the extended shutdown of much of the economy as a result of the COVID outbreak, now more than ever municipalities throughout California are challenged with doing more with less.As cities are faced with limited financial resources to address numerous competing priorities and objectives,they are always striving to maintain high standards of service to their communities. Considering this, it is critical for the City of Rosemead ("City") to ensure that its fees for requested services have been developed and updated to ensure maximum appropriate cost recovery, so that the revenues generated by fees cover the cost of those services to the greatest extent possible. City Staff, and ultimately the City Council, need a clear understanding of standards, service levels and the associated costs. Recognizing this,the City has responded by soliciting proposals for a Cost Allocation Plan (CAP), Comprehensive Fee Study(User Fee), and Development Impact Fee Study(DIF).The User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan will ensure that the City's fees for requested services have been developed and updated to ensure maximum appropriate cost recovery, so that the revenues generated by fees cover the cost of those services to the greatest extent possible, including the costs of both direct services and indirect overhead support. The Development Impact Fee Study will support the implementation of fees charged to developers that ensure they pay their fair share of facilities impacts generated by their projects, and that these fees are defensible and supported with appropriate assumptions and analysis as required by the Mitigation Fee Act. Following are specific advantages that Willdan brings to the City for these studies: Experience with the City of Rosemead—Willdan successfully partnered with the City of Rosemead on the City's previous Development Impact Fee Study. Through this engagement the City can be assured of the level of commitment, professionalism and expertise that we bring to this project. Where possible, we will leverage our knowledge of your operations and key staff to facilitate and expedite our work; focusing less time on data gathering and more on analysis,allowing City staff to focus their time on direct City operations. Extensive Experience with Similar Work for Southern California Area Cities—Willdan has worked recently with numerous cities in relative proximity to the City of Rosemead on Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee projects,with objectives very similar to those for this study. This local experience enables us to bring valuable perspective and insight from other local cities'approaches to fees and their policies on fee setting and subsidies and will also assist us in conducting meaningful and efficient fee comparisons. Recent studies include Paramount, Signal Hill, Lynwood, Monterey Park, Cerritos, Irvine, Chino Hills, and Claremont, with ongoing studies in Cudahy, Arcadia, West Hollywood, El Monte and Fullerton. Unique Combination of Services and Expertise/Public Engagement—Willdan Financial Services ("Willdan") is a team of nearly 80 professionals who provide essential financial consulting services throughout California, and the United States. Willdan has provided the requested services to municipal clients for two decades; and is the only firm providing these types of consulting services that also has a long history of providing contract staff support to public agencies for the delivery of municipal services. This direct experience as "agency staff' provides us with firsthand understanding of City operations and is uniquely useful in determining the full effort associated with service delivery and in developing a fee schedule that is easy to communicate and implement. We are also one of the only firms who combine Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee and Development Impact Fee expertise and experience under one roof, without the need to team with other consultants-ensuring a seamless coordinated execution of this important project for the City. T 951.587.3500 • 800.755.6864 I F 951.587.3510 • 888.326.6864 127368 Via Industria,Suite 200,Temecula,CA 92590 I www.willdan.com Mr. Scott Miller, Finance Director City of Rosemead Proposal to Conduct a Cost Allocation Plan, Comprehensive User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study September 25, 2020 Page ii Broad Experience with Impact Fee Programs Statewide and Across the Country— To complement our local experience, Willdan has wide experience with the range of impact fees charged in the region and the state, and the typical pros, cons and challenges of each, both in implementation and management. Willdan will be pleased to bring its expertise and range of perspectives to the City's process of considering financial, practical and policy issues in deciding on its future impact fee program. Collaborative Approach and User-friendly Models and Reports—Willdan prides itself on working closely with City staff to develop an approach that is targeted toward your specific objectives and accounts for your reality, and then working together with you to gather first-hand information regarding the processes and tasks required to provide services to those requesting them. This is a distinct advantage we will bring in our approach with the City of Rosemead.A collaborative approach ensures we clearly understand your goals and challenges, and just as importantly, you understand the process and the results. We have included one full day of on-site data gathering and staff interviews to ensure we obtain the information we need efficiently and accurately,with limited need for follow-up. We create user-friendly Excel-based models that the City can retain and conduct our analysis and develop the model collaboratively with City staff. Rather than using an inflexible proprietary software program, we construct our models from the ground up, mirroring the City's budget format wherever possible. As a result, the information contained in our models is easy for City staff to interpret, and the familiar software ensures ease of navigation. This also allows for easy on-the-fly adjustments and updates, inclusion of updated budgets, or changes in organizational structure. Created directly from the models, our reports clearly and graphically illustrate full and recommended levels of cost recovery and projections of revenue for fee programs, break down the costs into direct and indirect overhead categories, and present the fee methodologies. Our models and project approach are geared toward delivering work on schedule and presenting results at public meetings and council workshops. The Willdan Team is experienced at communicating complex analytical results in a manner that is easy to understand by non-finance-oriented individuals and facilitates discussion.We have coordinated or participated in numerous public and staff workshops regarding fees and cost of service-based charges. We are excited about this opportunity to serve the City of Rosemead. To discuss any aspect of our proposal, please contact me; my contact information is provided in the table below. Contact Information Principal-in-Charge " " - Chris Fisher Vice President 27368 Via Industria, Suite 200 Temecula, CA 92590 Tel#: (800) 755-6864 I Email: CFishereWilldan.com As a Vice President of Willdan Financial Services, I am authorized to bind the firm to the terms of this proposal, as well as the subsequent agreement. Sincerely, WILLDAN FINANCIAL SERVICES Chris Fisher Vice President-Group Manager Financial Consulting Services COMPREHENSIVE. INNOVATIVE. TRUSTED. City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study Table of Contents PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND APPROACH 1 Project Understanding 1 Project Methodologies 2 Cost Allocation Plan Methodology 2 Comprehensive User Fee Study Methodology 3 Development Impact Fee Methodology 5 Related Approach Issues 7 Work Plans 9 Full and OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan 9 Comprehensive User Fee Study 11 Development Impact Fee Review 15 Development Impact Fee Study—Optional Full Study Scope 16 City Staff Support 18 Project Schedules 19 Cost Allocation Plan 19 Comprehensive User Fee Study 20 Development Impact Fee Study 21 Project Management and Quality Assurance 22 Quality Assurance/Quality Control Process 23 EXPERIENCE AND EXPERTISE 24 Firm Profile 24 Willdan Financial Services 24 Staff Continuity 25 Project Dedication 25 Professional Expertise 25 Unique Combination of Services and Expertise/Public Engagement 25 Similar Studies 25 References 28 Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study 28 Development Impact Fee 29 Combined Studies 30 Project Manager&Key Staff 31 Project Team 31 Resumes 31 SCHEDULE OF FEES 43 Cost Allocation Plan 43 Comprehensive User Fee Study 43 Development Impact Fee Review 44 Development Impact Fee Study—Optional 44 Notes 45 Additional Professional Services 45 WWILLDAN "' City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study Project Understanding and Approach Project Understanding Willdan Financial Services ("Willdan") is confident that we can meet the City of Rosemead's request for services for a Full and OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan, Comprehensive User Fee Study, and Development Impact Fee Study. The overall objective of this project will be to develop an updated schedule of fees for City services, that accounts for the true costs of providing those services. The end products will include user-friendly Excel-based models, which City staff will retain, and which can be easily updated to add or remove services and/or costs, update budgets in future years, determine the proper allocation of expenditures, and on-going full cost of services provided by the City. Most importantly, we will ensure that the results and recommendations are clear and understandable, defensible, and easily implementable. For these studies,we will meet directly with departmental representatives at the City at the beginning of the project, to discuss the approach and process for the studies. Discussions will include ways to combine tasks and efforts among the cost allocation plan and user fee study components to maximize efficiencies and.ensure adherence to specified timelines. A key building block of the calculation of updated fees is the development of defensible indirect overhead rates that reflect the cost of support services provided by the City's central service departments to the operating groups that provide end-user services to the public and customers of the City. The completion of a CAP is a key component and first step in the analysis necessary to calculate the cost of providing services.A well thought out Rather than a costly and CAP ensures that indirect costs associated with central overhead inflexible proprietary software, services, such as finance or city clerk, are appropriately allocated which can require expensive to operating departments, and ultimately included as a cost licensing fees,Willdan builds component of fees for services. We will work collaboratively with City models utilizing Excel, from the staff to identify operati operating departments overhead Rosemead and developthat a fair and defensible ground up, employing the City's means of allocating these costs. Our unique model allows us to provide budget as the gauge. This a CAP that will also be compliant with 2 CFR Part 200 Federal regulations model, which is then the City's related to cost reimbursement and grant funding,formerly known as OMB to retain, gives City Staff the A-87 and 2 CFR Part 225 guidelines, which have now been superseded control to make on-the-fly by the Omni Circular. The new circular did not completely overhaul the adjustments and updates. guidelines, and the intent is still the same, but it did add new limitations to consider and incorporate into a compliant CAP. For the Comprehensive Fee Study, we will work directly with personnel at the City who provide services and interact directly with residents and customers, to understand the personnel and procedures involved. By carefully examining these processes,we will be able to identify associated costs such as direct staff costs(salaries and benefits)associated with personnel involved in the activities,and appropriate overhead allocations from both the department and city levels. For the Impact Fee Study, Willdan will review the previous work prior to the kick-off meeting to determine what has changed in terms of facilities and needs for the fee categories. We will also communicate with the City in advance of the kickoff to determine whether there is any initial policy direction or guidance on new fees. We will update the demographics and present the City with the facilities list and discuss the current status for each fee type.We will work with the City to implement an impact fee program that ensures that new development pays its fair share of infrastructure while being mindful of the overall fee burden on new development. For a successful and effective engagement, it is important to have a thorough understanding of specific City policies and objectives, the structure and organization of the City, and the relationships between the central and operating departments. We bring years of successful experience working directly with hundreds of cities throughout California. Willdan possesses the resources, practical experience, creative thinking, and collaborative consulting skills necessary to complete thisimportant project. Key distinct advantages that Willdan brings to the City include the following: On-site Data Gathering Our experience has taught us that working together, via face-to-face discussions, is the most efficient and thorough way to ensure that results are accurate, and that studies are completed in a timely manner, which again, is critical in this proposed engagement. r 1i1/; W I LLDAN Al f City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study Consequently, through on-site interviews with your staff, Willdan will collect the majority of required data for studies. This method is better than the typical "time and motion surveys" that are provided to agency staff when studies like these are conducted. This process ensures that we gather the data we need in one coordinated step, rather than having to go through repeated follow-up and clarification. This approach and the dedication of our staff will help ensure we meet the City's timeline and objectives and provide important information to City staff and the Council as soon as possible. Public Engagement Our models and project approach are geared toward delivering our work on schedule and presenting our analysis results at public meetings and Council workshops. While we understand that the City Council and local business community may be generally supportive of increasing fees where necessary, it will be important to present recommendations to them in a way that clearly demonstrates the rationale and supporting analysis. The Willdan Team is experienced at communicating complex analytical results in a manner that is easy to understand by non-finance-oriented individuals and facilitates discussion. Our proposed principal-in-charge for this engagement has coordinated or participated in numerous public and staff workshops regarding fees and cost of service-based charges. As previously mentioned, our objective is to provide useful, detailed information, and present recommendations to the City Council and public in a way that clearly demonstrates the rationale and supporting analysis. Our experience ensures that we can meet this objective. User-friendly Models and Reports Willdan prides itself on creating user-friendly Excel-based models that the City can The model will be retain and conducting our analysis and developing the models collaboratively with City staff. With City staff's immediate input and collaboration, Willdan will developed to allow the design extremely flexible, intuitive Excel-based models. In the future, as the City City to run "what-if" assumes new responsibilities, modifies existing processes, and/or eliminates scenarios to address unnecessary services or programs, the models will be capable of adding or deleting possible changes in funds, objects, departments, programs, staff positions, and activities. Willdan staffing levels, understands that issues facing the City are unique; consequently, we design our working hours, etc. models to match your immediate and desired needs to ensure that end-results exceed staff expectations rather than using an inflexible proprietary software. These models are then the City's to retain, after our services are completed, and allows for the creation of revenue projections, highlighting potential new revenues, and levels of subsidy. A key element of these studies is presenting results and recommendations in a straightforward manner, that allows Council and staff to confidently make fee setting policy decisions and understand the impacts of those decisions. Rather than using an inflexible proprietary software program, we construct our models from the ground up, as previously discussed, mirroring the City's budget format wherever possible. As a result, the information contained in our models are easy for City staff to interpret, and the familiar software ensures ease of navigation.As the models are being designed and constructed,we will work together with City staff to determine the best and most effective features to include.After the project is completed,we will provide training,so that staff can independently and efficiently evaluate the effects of changes in certain factors. Created directly from the models, our reports clearly and graphically illustrate the full cost recovery level of fee programs and provide projections of revenue from fee programs. Project Methodologies The following describes our proposed approach, and work plan to prepare an Cost Allocation Plan, Comprehensive User Fee Study, and Development Impact Fee Study. Cost Allocation Plan Methodology The purpose of this cost allocation plan engagement is to ensure that the City of Rosemead is maximizing the recovery of indirect costs from identified operating departments, as well as enterprise and other chargeable funds and capital projects. Furthermore, a sound cost allocation plan is a foundational element of a user fee study, and the development of internal hourly rates, including CIP billing rates. We will work closely with staff in identifying the proper balance of allocation factors appropriate for the City. To achieve the maximum cost recovery objective, the City must have a method of identifying and distributing administrative costs that is fair, comprehensive,well documented, and fully defensible.A cost allocation plan coupled with comprehensive overhead rates will enable the City to achieve this goal. WWILLDAN 2 City of Rosemead, California ®° Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee.Study : 4 The allocation models utilize an iterative method which is the most accurate allocation methodology..Unlike a direct or "step-down" methodology, an iterative method uses the chosen distribution bases and allocates central service costs iteratively until all allocable costs have been distributed. Using this method, the model can detail the allocation for each central function individually for complete transparency and accountability, while removing bias that might result from the order in which allocations occur in a step-down approach.A direct methodology is essentially a one-iteration methodology,while a step-down method is typically only two iterations and is less precise and unable to accurately track the allocations from start to finish. Approach for Managing the Project Willdan's"hands-on" supervision of Cost Allocation Plan studies, include the following methods: • Effective Project Management— Principal-in-Charge Chris Fisher will manage the entire project with an eye toward high responsiveness, while ensuring that all stakeholders are "on board" with the direction of the project, as well as with the final results. Mr. Fisher will ensure thatregular status updates are provided to City staff, conference calls are scheduled, and that in-person meetings are conducted (as necessary). • Adherence to Time Schedule—Willdan recognizes that the use of"timelines" is highly effective in meeting all required deadlines. To keep the project on schedule, there are several tasks that must be completed in a timely manner. Therefore, we will present a project timeline at the kick-off meeting that should be closely followed. Although the establishment of an experienced project team and a detailed project timeline work extremely well in general, Willdan understands that outside influences can create uncontainable situations for everyone involved in the project. In rare circumstances like these, our team quickly adapts to changes, and communicates our recommended schedule adjustments to the City. Approach in Communicating with the City Willdan staff is accustomed to interfacing with local government councils, boards, staff, community organizations, and the public in general in a friendly and helpful manner;we are always mindful that we represent the public agency. We are sensitive to the need of delivering a quality product, with the highest level of service and professionalism. Therefore, as the work on the project progresses, we understand that it will be necessary for our staff to work closely with you and City personnel. To accomplish this, we employ a variety of tools, including monitoring project status and budget costs; and ensuring effective communication through several options that are based on the City's preferences. Experience with Development Service Processes A unique aspect of our firm is our relationship with our Engineering Division. For many agencies throughout California and other Western states, this division provides contracted services in planning, engineering, and building and safety. When conducting cost recovery studies, we regularly consult with our engineering and land-development staff of experts on development-related issues. By working with our planners, engineers, and building officials,we understand development-related agency service procedures and workflow functions, which often make the entire user fee study process smoother for your staff. Comprehensive User Fee Study Methodology To comprehensively update fees,the City should develop a comprehensive user fee schedule that accurately accounts for the true cost of providing services. Once the study is complete,the fee study model must be flexible so that the City can add, delete, and revise fees in the future. To meet this goal, we will bring our expertise and unique perspectives to your fee study by approaching the project with these three principles: 1)Defensibility Our user fee projects have not been legally challenged since the inception of this practice area in our firm. We have accomplished this by closely working with legal counsel familiar with user fee studies, our engineering division and with agency staff. In this way, we can tailor the correct approach to ensure full cost recovery combined with a sound and reasonable basis for each user fee you implement. While Proposition 218 does not directly apply to non-property-related fees, we employ principles from this important constitutional article to make certain that your user fee and rate schedule is developed with fairness, equity, and proportionate cost recovery principles in mind. With the addition of Proposition 26, Willdan will review each analyzed user fee for compliance and appropriateness to ensure continued defensibility. 2)Project and Staff Time The City must have a sound and technically defensible fee schedule to ensure costs are appropriately recovered, as applicants approach the City for its services. Our standards and approaches serve to get to the issues of your fee study quickly. W W I LLDAN 1 43 City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study Starting with the project kick-off, we will make certain that your staff understands the purpose and scope of the study and its corresponding on-site departmental interview. As Willdan is able to communicate directly with the service providers, this face-to-face interaction provides valuable time estimates. 3)Responsiveness We take great pride in providing responsive service to our client agencies. Frequent communication is critical to a successful user fee study experience. We will provide a list of data requirements in advance of the project kick-off. Due to this simple step, the introductory meeting can focus on the survey input process, answering questions, determining policy goals, and defining next steps in the project. We will follow up weekly with you at each step in the fee study process to make sure that staff"buys in"to the fee study approach and results. Approach Our approach topreparing the user fee study and documentation for Rosemead includes: ■ Close coordination with your staff to devise a consensus approach. Different programs and/or different service delivery methods will necessitate different approaches. We will discuss specific pros and cons with City staff as we determine which methods work best for each fee category; • Strict adherence to key legal and policy issues with regard to user fees, including the percent of cost recovery that the City seeks to achieve.A user fee shall not be set higher than the reasonable cost of providing a fee-generating service. Our approach provides you with a fee schedule that achieves maximum legal cost recovery while ensuring that each fee is supported by technically defensible documentation; and • Technical analysis necessary to ensure State compliance, and to anticipate and resolve potential policy issues using a combination of industry standards as well as City specific methods. As described below, there are two basic approaches to calculating user fees: Approach 1:Case Study Method This is also sometimes referred to as a cost build-up Central approach. Using a time and materials approach, the Services "Case Study Method"examines the tasks, steps and Overhead City staff involved in providing a particular `unit' of service, such as a permit review, and then uses that information to develop estimates of the actual labor and material costs associated with providing a unit of service to a single user. It is often used when a service is provided on a regular basis,and staff and other costs associated with the service can be segregated from available budget data. ( Departmental A typical case studyfee model should comprise the I. Fully-Burdened yp" p Overhead Hourly Rate following three general cost layers: 1) Central Services Overhead: This category may involve such costs as labor, services, and supplies that benefit more than one department, division, or project. The exact benefits to specific areas are impossible to ascribe to a single activity. ------. Examples are purchasing, human resources, and liability insurance.As part of the user fee study,these costs are calculated in the overhead cost review. Personnel Costs 2) Department Overhead: This category may include expenses related to such items as office supplies,outside consultants,and membership dues. It may include management, supervision, and _-_. administrative support that are not provided to a direct fee-generating service. Typically, these items are charged, on an item-by-item basis, directly to the department, division, or project. 3) Personnel Costs: This category refers to direct salary and benefit costs of staff hours spent on providing a fee- generating service(e.g., on-site building inspector). 1IVW I LLDAN .. , '4 :a City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study Approach 2:Average Cost Method This is also sometimes referred to as a programmatic approach, because it looks at costs at a program level, and then allocates them to participants on an occurrence basis. By taking total service costs across a substantial sample period (a year) and dividing by the total number of service units delivered over that same period, costs per unit of service is estimated. This approach is useful when services or programs are provided in a more aggregate manner,where it might be difficult to identify a specific sequence of steps associated with one user or participant; or where it is not feasible to cost- effectively segregate costs associated with specific activities. Development Impact Fee Methodology Study Objectives The objective of this project is to update/establish the City's development impact fees pursuant to State law, which requires an update every five years. It is expected that Willdan will update fees for up to four impact fee categories. During the kickoff discussion we will confirm the categories to be addressed in the study, and then update our scope and fee accordingly. On consultation with the City,Willdan the City may want to consolidate some categories for ease of administration and efficiency in facility financing, but ultimately the structure of the impact fee program will be the City's decision. To accomplish this objective, this study will: ■ Develop technically defensible fee justifications, based on the reasonable relationship and deferential review standards; ■ Review and update facility standards, capital facilities plans and costs and development and growth assumptions; ■ Provide a schedule of maximum justified fees by land use category; and ■ Provide comprehensive documentation of assumptions, methodologies, and results, including findings required by the Mitigation Fee Act. Public Facilities Financing in California The changing fiscal landscape in California during the past 40 years has steadily undercut the financial capacity of local governments to fund infrastructure. Four dominant trends stand out: 1. The passage of a string of tax limitation measures starting with Proposition 13 in 1978 and continuing through the passage of Proposition 218 in 1996; 2. Declining popular support for bond measures to finance infrastructure for the next generation of residents and businesses; 3. Steep reductions in Federal and State assistance; and 4. Permanent shifting by the State of local tax resources to the State General Fund to offset deficit spending brought on by recessions. Faced with these trends, many cities and counties have had to adopt a policy of"growth pays its own way."This policy shifts the burden of funding infrastructure expansion from existing rate and taxpayers onto new development. This funding shift has been accomplished primarily through the imposition of assessments, special taxes, and development impact fees, also known as public facilities fees. Assessments and special taxes require approval of property owners or registered voters and are appropriate when the funded facilities are directly related to the developing property. Development fees, on the other hand, are an appropriate funding source for facilities that benefit development jurisdiction-wide. Development fees need only a majority vote of the legislative body for adoption. Summary of Approach Willdan's methodology for calculating public facilities fees is both simple and flexible. Simplicity is important so that the development community and the public can easily understand the justification for the fee program. At the same time, we use our expertise to reasonably ensure that the program is technically defensible. Flexibility is important so we can tailor our approach to the available data, and the agency's policy objectives. Our understanding of the technical standards established by statutes and case law suggests that a range of approaches are technically defensible. Consequently, we can address policy objectives related to the fee program, such as economic development and affordable housing. Flexibility also enables us to avoid excessive engineering costs associated with detailed facility planning.We calculate the maximum justifiable impact fee and provide flexibility for the agency to adopt fees up to that amount. 1►Y1 WILLDAN !,5 City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study h 3> Development impact fees are calculated to fund the cost of facilities required to accommodate growth. The four steps followed in an impact fee study include: • Estimate existing development and future growth: Identify a base year for existing development and a growth forecast that reflects increased demand for public facilities; • Identify facility standards: Determine the facility standards used to plan for new and expanded facilities; • Determine facilities required to serve new development and their costs: Estimate the total amount and cost of planned facilities, and identify the share required to accommodate new development; and • Calculate fee schedule: Allocate facilities costs per unit of new development to calculate the public facilities fee schedule. We discuss key aspects of our approach to each of these steps in the subsections that follow. Growth Projections In most cases, we recommend use of long-range market-based projections of new development. By"long-range"we suggest 20 to 30 years to: (1) capture the total demand often associated with major public facility investments; and (2) support analysis of debt financing, if needed. In contrast to build out projections, market-based projections provide a more realistic estimate of development across all land uses. Build out projections typically overestimate commercial and industrial development because of the oversupply of these land uses relative to residential development. Facility Standards The key public policy issue in development impact fee studies is the identification of facility standards(step#2, above). Facility standards document a reasonable relationship between new development and the need for new facilities. Standards ensure that new development does not fund deficiencies associated with existing development. Our approach recognizes three separate components of facility standards: 1) Demand standards determine the amount of facilities required to accommodate growth. Examples include park acres per thousand residents, square feet of library space per capita, or gallons of water per day. Demand standards may also reflect a level of service such as the vehicles-to-capacity(V/C) ratio used in traffic planning; 2) Design standards determine how a facility should be designed to meet expected demand, for example park improvement requirements and technology infrastructure for office space. Design standards are typically not explicitly evaluated as part of an impact fee analysis but can have a significant impact on the cost of facilities. Our approach incorporates current facility design standards into the fee program to reflect the increasing construction cost of public facilities; and 3) Cost standards are an alternate method for determining the amount of facilities required to accommodate growth based on facility costs per unit of demand. Cost standards are useful when demand standards were not explicitly developed for the facility planning process. Cost standards also enable different types of facilities to be analyzed based on a single measure (cost or value), useful when disparate facilities are funded by a single fee program. Examples include facility costs per capita, per vehicle trip, or cost per gallon of water per day. Identifying New Development Facility Needs and Costs We have a number of approaches that can be used to identify facility needs and costs to serve new development. Often this is a two-step process: (1) identify total facility needs; and (2) allocate to new development its fair share of those needs.Total facility needs are often identified through a master facility planning process that typically takes place concurrent with or prior to conducting the fee study. Engineered facility plans are particularly important in the areas of traffic, water, sewer, and storm drain because of the specialized technical analysis required to identify facility needs. There are three common methods for determining new development's fair share of planned facilities costs: (1) the existing inventory method; (2) the planned facilities method; and (3) the system plan method. Often the method selected depends on the degree to which the community has engaged in comprehensive facility master planning to identify facility needs. The formula used by each approach and the advantages and disadvantages of each method is summarized below: Existing Inventory Method The existing inventory method allocates costs based on the ratio of existing facilities to demand from existing development as follows: Current Value of Existing Facilities = $/unit of demand Existing Development Demand l/Y WI LLDAN rs� � City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study Under this method new development funds the expansion of facilities at the same standard currently serving existing development. By definition, the existing inventory method results in no facility deficiencies attributable to existing development. This method is often used when a long-range plan for new facilities is not available. Only the initial facilities to be funded with fees are identified in the fee study. Future facilities to serve growth are identified through an annual Capital Improvement Plan ("CIP")and budget process, possibly after completion of a new facility master plan. Planned Facilities Method The planned facilities method allocates costs based on the ratio of planned facility costs to demand from new development as follows: Cost of Planned Facilities = $/unit of demand New Development Demand This method is appropriate when specific planned facilities can be identified that only benefit new development. Examples include street improvements to avoid deficient levels of service or a sewer trunk line extension to a previously undeveloped area. This method is appropriate when planned facilities would not serve existing development. Under this method new development funds the expansion of facilities at the standards used for the master facility plan. System Plan Method This method calculates the fee based on the ratio of the value of existing facilities plus the cost of planned facilities divided by demand from existing plus new development: Value of Existinq Facilities+ Cost of Planned Facilities =$/unit of demand Existing+ New Development Demand This method is useful when planned facilities need to be analyzed as part of a system that benefits both existing and new development. It is difficult, for example,to allocate a new fire station solely to new development when that station will operate as part of an integrated system of fire stations that together to achieve the desired level of service. Police substations, civic centers, and regional parks are examples of similar facilities. The system plan method ensures that new development does not pay for existing deficiencies. Often,facility standards based on policies such as those found in General Plans are higher than existing facility standards.This method enables the calculation of the existing deficiency required to bring existing development up to the policy-based standard. The local agency must secure non-fee funding for that portion of planned facilities, required to correct the deficiency, to ensure that new development receives the level of service funded by the impact fee. Calculating the Fee Schedule The fee schedule uses the cost per unit of demand discussed in the last subsection to generate the fee schedule. This unit cost is multiplied by the demand associated with a new development project to calculate the fee for that project. The fee schedule uses different demand measures by land use category to provide a reasonable relationship between the type of development and the amount of the fee. We are familiar with a wide range of methods for identifying appropriate land use categories and demand measures depending on the particular study. Related Approach Issues Funding and Financing Strategies In our experience,one of the most common problems with impact fee programs and with many CIPs is that the program or plan is not financially constrained to anticipated revenues. The result is a "wish list" of projects that generate community expectations that often cannot be fulfilled. Our approach is to integrate the impact fee program into the local agency's existing CIPs while encouraging those plans to be financially constrained to available resources. We clearly state the cost of correcting existing deficiencies, if any, to document the relationship between the fee program and the need for additional non-fee funding. We can also address one of the most significant drawbacks of an impact fee program — the inability to support conventional public debt financing,so projects can be built before all fee revenues have been received. In collaboration with financial advisors and underwriters, we have developed specific underwriting criteria so that fees can be used to pay back borrowing as long as another source of credit exists. Typically,this approach involves the use of Certificates of Participation or revenue bonds that are calibrated so that they can be fully repaid using impact fee revenues. WWI LLDAN I` 7 , City of Rosemead,.California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study . . • . • Economic Development Concerns The development community often is concerned that fees and other exactions will become too high for development to be financially feasible under current market conditions. Local agencies have a number of strategies to address this concern, including: • Conducting an analysis of the total development exaction burden to see if feasibility may be compromised by the proposed fees; • Gathering similar data on the total fee burden imposed by neighboring or competing jurisdictions; • Developing a plan for phasing in the fees over several years to enable the real estate market to adjust; • Providing options for developers to finance impact fees through assessment and other types of financing districts; and • Imposing less than the maximum justified fee. If less than the maximum justified fee is imposed, we will work with staff to identify alternative revenues sources for the CIP. The CIP should remain financially feasible to maintain realistic expectations among developers, policy- makers, and the public. Our proposed scope will include an analysis of neighboring and comparable jurisdictions. Stakeholder Participation Stakeholder participation throughout the study supports a successful adoption process. Our approach is to create consensus first around the need for facilities based on agreed upon facility standards. Second, we seek consensus around a feasible funding strategy for these needs, leading to an appropriate role for impact fees. Gaining consensus among various groups requires a balanced discussion of both economic development and community service objectives. Often, our approach includes formation of an advisory committee to promote outreach to and input from the development community and other stakeholders. We have extensive experience facilitating meetings to explain the program and gain input. Program Implementation Fee programs require a certain level of administrative support for successful implementation. Our final report will include recommendations for appropriate procedures, such as: • Regularly updating development forecasts; • Developing procedures for developer credits and • Regularly updating fees for capital project cost inflation; reimbursements; and • • Regularly updating capital facility needs based on Including an administrative charge in the fee changing demands; program. Required City Data We will work with the City to identify data regarding existing land uses,development projections and other demographic assumptions needed for the study.We anticipate that much of this information will come from the City's General Plan, but we will also identify other sources that can be used in the analysis. We will require the City to provide us with a facility inventory of owned City facilities, by anticipated fee category, and planned capital facilities, by fee category for any facility category that the City wishes to investigate. W I LLDAN 8 City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study Work Plans Our proposed work plans, described in detail by task, are provided below. We propose to maximize efficiency and cost-effectiveness by combining meetings and data gathering efforts between the cost allocation plan and user fee study wherever possible. We explain how each task will be accomplished and identify associated meetings and deliverables.We want to ensure our scope provides quality and clarity and is responsive to the City's needs and specific local circumstances. We will work in concert with the City to adjust scopes as needed during the course of the studies. Full and OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan This proposed scope of services addresses the completion of both the full and OMB compliant versions of the Cost Allocation Plan (CAP). We have noted where activities specific to the OMB compliant plan occur. :Task 1: Initial Document Request Objective: Initial due diligence. Description: Prior to the kick-off call, relevant documentation will be obtained and reviewed in order to enhance our understanding of the City's current cost allocation plan and internal structure of the agency. A written request for specific data will be sent to the City. The data provided in this task will provide the building blocks for later model development. Our request may include(but is not limited to): • Detailed budget and accounting data; • Prior year's financial data, salary, position and staffing data; • Organizational structure; • Prior cost allocation plan and/or user fee documentation and models; and • Data related to various allocation bases that may be incorporated as part of the methodology, i.e. City Council agenda frequencies by department,AP/AR transactions by department, IT equipment distribution by department, etc. Deliverables: Willdan: Submit information request to City. City: Provide requested data to Willdan(prior to Task 2, Kick-off Call/Refine Scope).We will follow up with the City to confirm in writing the data that we have received, or which is still outstanding. Task 2: Kick-off Conference Call/Refine Scope Objective: Confirm project goals and objectives. Identify and discuss policy issues raised by the study and determine appropriate fee categories. Description: Willdan will identify and discuss policy issues typically raised by these studies and address data gaps in order to gain a full understanding of the City's goals for the cost allocation plan. We will establish effective lines of communication and processes for information gathering and review. We will also discuss costs that may not be allocable for OMB purposes, and the potential impact on the OMB version of the CAP. During this call,we will ask that the City assign a project manager to serve as its primary contact.The selected City project manager will ensure that available data is provided to Willdan in a timely manner, thereby maintaining adherence to the project's schedule. We will obtain and review the current cost allocation methodology and discuss with City staff. The objective of this review is to determine specific areas of focus as they relate to the City's objectives, and to discuss and evaluate current and potential allocation factors. Meetings: One (1) project kick-off conference call to initiate the project, discuss data needs and methodologies and to address policy issues. We would propose to conduct the user fee study kick-off during this same call, to maximize efficiency and cost effectiveness of staff and Willdan time. Deliverables: Willdan: If needed, a revised project scope and schedule. City: Provide further data requirements and select/introduce City's project manager. - • 1►Y: W I LLDAN 9 City of Rosemead, California 3 .E Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study ITask 3:, Gather Staffing Information and Develop.Cost Allocation Plan Model Description: This task involves the gathering of specific information, directly from City staff,through interviews and discussion, related to the functions served by indirect staff and the departments served by their activities. This task also focuses on the development of, and/or adjustment of existing, allocation bases, and the development and testing of a model that will ultimately be used to calculate the proper cost allocations derived from data gathered in prior tasks. The model will be developed to incorporate any recent changes in the provision of City services, and fully allocate central service costs. The model will also be developed to allocate only those costs eligible under 2 CFR Part 200. This is accomplished by loading relevant data into the model, identifying which costs are not allocable under the OMB guidelines. The OMB Super Circular compliant model is valuable as the City may receive Federal or State grant funding that mandates compliance with Federal OMB regulations. We will utilize budget and organizational information, and other required information gathered from City staff to complete the work in this task. Specific discussions will be held to discuss bases, how central overhead services are provided to and utilized by other departments, cost categories and allocation criteria, and how these will factor into the overall cost allocation methodology. The model and methodology will also produce indirect cost rates. These rates will be suitable for a variety of uses, including incorporation into the User Fee Study's personnel rates, billing to CIP projects, and in the OMB Super Circular compliant CAP, to Federal grants. Meetings: Online meetings with staff to understand structure and operations as model and allocation bases are developed. Key staff will be interviewed to best understand central overhead staffing and functions and the departments served. Deliverables: Willdan: One(1) user-friendly model in Microsoft Excel format that provides both a full cost allocation plan and an OMB Super Circular compliant cost allocation plan. ,Task 4: Testand Review Cost Allocation Methodology Objective: Test and review model and results with City. Description: The draft cost allocation plan model will be reviewed with City staff, and adjusted as necessary, to ensure that preliminary allocations provide an accurate depiction of how the central overhead costs should be borne by the operating programs and funds. Over the past several years, we have successfully integrated online meetings by using WebExTM as an element to our approach.This allows us to remotely guide staff through the model review and allows you the opportunity to interactively change inputs and test approaches. Meetings: One(1) online meeting and demonstration with City Staff to review the model. Deliverables: Willdan and City: Draft cost allocation plan model review. !Task 5: Prepare and Present Draft-Report Objective: Prepare the draft cost allocation report. Description: This task involves the draft report preparation. The cost allocation plan's background, model methodologies, and results will be discussed; calculations and supporting data will be presented textually and in easily understood tables and provided to the City. Meetings: One(1)online meeting to present the draft report to City Staff. Deliverables: Willdan: Draft report for City review and input. City: Review of draft report,with comments, and edits. Task 6: Discuss and Revise Report Objective: Review of draft report, cost distribution methods, and model. Description: An in-depth review of the draft report and model will be conducted to arrive at an optimum allocation method for each expenditure type. .�� WILLDAN o�; City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study Often, through the course of an engagement, comments usually revolve around issues of understandability; appropriate levels of enterprise funds' cost recovery, etc.; ease of calculation; and overhead costs' distribution methods. Our reports are structured to include both the full and OMB compliant plan, but in the course of review if a separate report is desired for each or just one.of the plans, they will be split. Following a round of comments from City staff concerning the draft report, the final report will be prepared for presentation to the Council. Meetings: One(1)conference call with City staff to review the report with changes and revisions. Deliverables: Draft report, and revised draft/final report. Task 7:' , Prepare and Present Final,Report and Model Objective: Prepare and present the final report to City Council. Educate City staff on the operation and use of the model for future modifications. Description: This task is the culmination of the cost allocation plan project. Based on staff comments on the draft report, Willdan will prepare the final report for presentation to City Council. Meetings: One (1) meeting with the City Council to present the final plan if necessary. This meeting would be held in conjunction with the presentation of the user rate study results. We will also provide staff training on the operation and use of the model. Deliverables: Willdan: Provide one (1) electronic PDF file copy of the final report and models (full and OMB Super Circular compliant); and five (5) bound copies, and one (1) unbound copy to the City. Using Microsoft Word and Excel, an updateable electronic copy of the study and models, as well as related schedules, will also be provided on CD/ROM. Comprehensive User Fee Study Task 1: Initial Document Request Objective: Initial due diligence; obtain study-related data. Description: Prior to the kick-off meeting,we will obtain and review relevant documentation to further enhance our understanding of the services, fees, and rates to be studied. A written request for data will be sent to the City. Please note that Time Survey data is not part of this request and will be gathered during the on-site interviews described in Task 5. We will request information and documentation on current fees and fee programs, activity levels, and budget and staffing information (to the extent not already available) related specifically to programs and activities which have associated fees, and for which the City has this level of detail. Deliverables: Willdan: Submit information request to City. City: Provide requested data to Willdan (prior to Task 3, Kick-off Meeting/Refine Scope). As with the cost allocation plan,we will follow up with the City to confirm receipt of requested data and information and highlight data elements that are outstanding. (Task 2 Compile Inventory of Current and Potential Fees I Objective: Willdan will identify a schedule of fees and methodology for calculating the fees. Description: Based on the results of the initial document request and independent research, incorporate into our model the existing fees, provided by the City, to comprise the parameters of the fee study. Meetings: It is possible that a conference call with the City may be necessary to discuss new fees to implement or existing fees that may no longer be required. Deliverables: Willdan: One(1) draft list of current fees based on initial data provided (to be discussed and finalized during the kick-off call). City: Review completed fee schedule with comments/revisions to be discussed during the kick-off meeting. 1W I LLDAN 111`' City of Rosemead, California . " , Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study ;Task 3: Kick-off Conference Call/Refine Scope .. Objective: Confirm goals and objectives for the User Fee Study. Identify and resolve policy issues typically raised by a User Fee Study, address gaps in data, and refine appropriate existing or new fee categories (based on Task 2). Description: Verify our understanding of the City's goals,the City's cost-recovery policy for user fees, and to fill any gaps in data/information necessary for the project. It is important for the City and Willdan to identify and address any foreseeable problems and maintain open communication throughout the process. During this call, we will ask that the City identify a project manager who will serve as the primary contact for the project. The project manager shall have responsibility for ensuring that all available data is provided in a timely manner, thereby maintaining adherence to the project's schedule. Meetings: One(1)project kick-off call to initiate the entire project,discuss data needs,and address policy issues. This will be held in conjunction with the kick-off for the cost allocation plan. As mentioned in the cost allocation plan work plan,we suggest combining the kick-off calls to increase efficiency. Deliverables: Willdan: 1) Revised project scope and schedule(if needed); and 2) brief summary of policy decisions (if needed). City: 1) Provide further data needs; and 2) determine/introduce City's project manager. ;Task4: Develop User-Fee Model Objective: Develop and test model. Description: This task involves the development of the model ultimately used to calculate the departmental fees, based on data and information gathered in previous tasks and in the Time Survey Interviews described in Task 5.To ensure that City policies are met through the imposition of the calculated fees,the model will be formatted to include appropriate costs. Key model inputs will include staff and allocated overhead costs per position, and relevant budget data on salaries and benefits. Most of this information will be developed during the cost allocation plan phase of this project and will be incorporated directly into the user fee model. We will request clarification and/or additional data if necessary. The model will build upon the cost allocation plan results, to provide an allocation of administrative and overhead costs to fee related activities and departments providing services to customers, so that fees and billable rate schedules incorporate applicable costs. Furthermore,the fees and rates charged to customers will also reflect the cost of the services being provided,to the extent possible given policy and/or political considerations. Deliverables: Willdan: One (1) user-friendly model in Microsoft Excel format, which, when finalized, City staff can use to calculate fee changes annually, or as often as deemed appropriate by the City Council. Task 5: Time Survey Interviews and On-site Information Gathering' Objective: Meet with City staff to complete Time Surveys and understand service delivery processes. Description: In order to assist staff with the completion of the survey worksheets, we will schedule one(1)full day of on-site meetings with staff; however, the number of meetings needed may vary depending on the number of staff and departments involved. The Willdan Team will conduct interviews with supervisors/managers, as well as other staff, as deemed appropriate and/or necessary, from each department involved in the user fee study to determine the average time required by City staff to provide each of the services for which a fee is collected. The fee model is designed so that full cost recovery fees are calculated immediately upon input of staff time. These full costs are also compared to current cost recovery levels. This will allow Willdan and City staff to conclude with a final meeting to review the draft full cost recovery fees, and adjust any times as necessary, once all information has been compiled and input into the fee model. We will schedule the interviews with staff to minimize any disruption to their normal workflow. Meetings: One (1) full business day of on-site meetings/staff interviews. In light of ongoing public health mandates associated with COVID-19, we will discuss with the City whether these meetings need to be conducted via WebEx or Zoom.We have been using these tools during the course of the shutdowns and they have proven effective and successful. Deliverables: Willdan and City: Time surveys and draft full cost recovery fees. 12 WWI LLDAN City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study ;Task 6: Common Fees Comparison Objective: Examine selected user fees charged by up to five (5) comparable cities in Los Angeles County, or jurisdictions that are similar to the City of Rosemead. Description: We will access and use our knowledge of other jurisdictions to benchmark the City's five (5) most common fees or highest yielding fees with comparable jurisdictions agreed. Fee schedules are rarely readily or directly comparable from agency to agency due to definitional and operational differences. For example, a grading permit in one jurisdiction may include the plan check service, while the same permit in another jurisdiction may not, resulting in similar sounding services with widely varying costs. For this reason, Willdan takes a selection of the City's most commonly used and/or highest yielding fees. The survey will contain the following, a comparison of common or similar fees and charges used by the City and other jurisdictions; current and proposed fees and charges unique to the City of Rosemead; fees and charges used by other public entities not currently used in the City; and If possible, identify characteristics and processes unique to the City that account for significant variances in fees and charges used by other jurisdictions. Deliverables: Willdan: Recommendations provided in Task 8 will incorporate the data gathered during our examination. ;Task 7: Review of Development Tax and Business License Tax Objective: Review current City taxes for business licenses and development/construction and provide feedback. Description: We will request City policies/ordinances/resolutions, and other documentation as available, related to these mechanisms. We will discuss the taxes with staff to determine whether there are specific questions or areas of concern and whether they are achieving their objectives. To the extent possible, depending on available information, we will provide feedback based on 3 to 5 similar neighboring cities with similar tax mechanisms; examining those cities' policies, approaches and structures as compared with Lomita. Deliverables: Willdan: Recommendations provided in Task 9 will incorporate the data gathered during our examination. Task 8: Data Analysis and Final User Fee Schedule Objective: Incorporate information obtained from on-site surveys to fully develop model. Description: We will update the model, based on information received during the on-site surveys, to generate a comprehensive user fee schedule. In addition, it is very common that a supplemental data request may be necessary, based on new fees identified that the City is not currently collecting. Where appropriate,we will suggest and discuss with staff alternate approaches to existing fee programs (i.e. building fees)and suggest potential areas where fees could be collected where they are not currently. We will present the full cost recovery level for fees, both current and projected under the new calculated fees, and revenue projections, given certain assumptions about the levels of subsidy for different fees. Current levels of cost recovery will be compared to actual full costs calculated during the course of this study. Cost will be calculated at reasonable activity levels and include all appropriate direct and indirect costs and overhead. We will review fee programs for compliance with Propositions 218 and 26. in developing the fee schedule,we will make recommendations for new fees where appropriate, based on our experience with other cities. Some areas for new fees may be due to changes in law(legalized cannabis),or for activities that the City finds itself performing regularly, but for which no fee is collected. Where possible, we will incorporate discussion of the City's economic development policies, and where these may intersect with fee programs, for instance setting fees in a manner that encourages certain activities. The user fee data analysis and model development may take three (3)to four(4)weeks with frequent correspondence with City staff to discuss current cost recovery amounts, necessary to recover full cost and frequency activity. Meetings: One(1)meeting, as necessary,to gather additional input, complete analysis and finalize fee schedule. Please see the note in Task 5 regarding in-person meetings. Deliverables: Final user fee model for City Council presentation and discussion. 1►N, WILLDAN :-13 City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study Task 9: Prepare and Present Draft Report Objective: Prepare draft report. Description: This task involves the preparation of the draft report that discusses the study's background, the methodologies utilized in the study, and the results and presentation to various stakeholder groups. As noted below, meetings may occur during this or the next task as appropriate.The calculations used to generate the user fee study will be included textually, as well as in easy to understand tables. Individual fee summaries by department and a comprehensive fee schedule will be included.The draft report will include the following: • Key results and findings; • Basic descriptions of each service; • The full cost of each service and current cost recovery levels; • Costs broken down graphically into indirect and direct components, with a graphic display of the level of cost recovery; • Fee recommendations with associate levels of cost recovery; • Projections of potential fee revenue; • Assessment of reasonableness of each City's costs; • Review of reasonableness of current consultant cost structure(for Building Division services); • As appropriate, recommend alternative methodologies for building permit fee calculation; and • Summary and recommendations. The objective of the report is to communicate the recommendation of appropriate fees, which include the appropriate subsidy percentage for those fees where full cost recovery may be unrealistic. Meetings: One(1)conference call with City staff,to present draft results address questions and receive feedback. Deliverables: Willdan: Draft report for City review and comment. City: Review of draft report,with comments and edits. rfask 10: Revise Draft Report/Determ=ine Cost Recovery Levels for Recommended Adoption Objective: Review of draft report and fee model. Description: The goal of this task is to conduct an in-depth review of the draft report and model, incorporate feedback and changes as a result of previous discussions, and arrive at an optimum fee structure. Often through the course of an engagement, City staff will volunteer insightful likes and dislikes regarding the existing fee structure. We listen to this feedback carefully because your staff members know the community best. Comments usually revolve around issues of: • Understandability; • Appropriate levels of cost recovery; and • Fairness to applicants; • Full cost recovery hourly rates. • Ease of calculation; When adjusting fee recovery levels,we believe it is important to address these concerns. Following one (1) round of comments from City staff on the draft report and feedback from City staff, we will prepare the final report for presentation to the City Council. Meetings: One (1)online demonstration (WebEx)to review the report and model,with any revisions. Deliverables: Draft report, revised draft/final report. ifask 11:` Prepare and Present Final Report/Train Staff on Model Objective: Prepare and present final report to City Council. Train staff on the operation and use of the model for future modifications. Description: This task is the culmination of the entire project. Based on staff comments received regarding the draft report, we will prepare the final report for presentation. Meetings: One (1) meeting with City Council to present the results and adopt the updated fee schedule. We will also provide staff training on the operation and use of the model on the same day, during regular business hours. WW I LLDAN 14 City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study Deliverables: Provide one(1) electronic PDF file copy of the final report and models; and, if requested, provide five (5) bound copies, and one (1) unbound copy to the City. Using Microsoft Word and Excel, an updateable electronic copy of the study and models,as well as related schedules,will also be provided on CD/ROM. Development Impact Fee Review Willdan will consider and recommend modifications to the existing program structure. In addition to the services for which the City presently charges fees, the study shall identify and recommend other potential impact fees consistent with the City's goals and objectives. This is not a full scope impact fee study and analysis, but rather the development of recommendations and next steps for the City's Development Impact Fee programs and fees. ;Task 1: Identify and Resolve Policy Issues Objective: Identify and resolve policy issues raised by the review. Description: Review agency documents related to existing capital planning policies and funding programs including existing impact fees. Bring policy issues to City staff's attention, as appropriate, during the project and seek guidance prior to proceeding. Potential policy issues include: • Potential new impact fees for consideration; • Adequacy of General Plan and other public facility planning policies (e.g. level of service standards); impact fee ordinances and resolutions, and prior nexus studies; • Availability of existing public facility master plans and CIPs to identify needed facilities; • Types of facilities to be funded by each fee; • Land use categories for imposition of fees; • Nexus approach to determining facility standards; • Nexus approach to allocating cost burden among land uses, including need for separate fee zones; • Potential alternative funding sources, if needed; • Funding existing deficiencies, if identified; and • Implementation concerns and strategies. Deliverables: (1) Information requests; (2) revised project scope and schedule(if needed); and (3) brief summary of policy decisions (if needed). ;Task 2: Comparison Objective: Provide a comparison of the current and proposed impact fees to those of comparable/surrounding jurisdictions. Description: Typically, this would be neighboring jurisdictions, and a few that are nearby and comparable to the City. Willdan will compare a total of five jurisdictions to be selected by the City. Typically, Willdan prepares an analysis of fees charged to a series of prototype developments(such as residential, retail, etc.) in order to provide an "apples to apples" comparison, but the exact methodology will be set in consultation with the City. This comparison will be limited to five other jurisdictions. !Task 3: Prepare Technical Memorandum Description: Provide a technical memorandum that summarizes Willdan's findings and outlines a roadmap to future 1 actions to consider(such as a fee update study, adoption of additional fee categories, etc.). Deliverables: We will provide up to five(5) hard copies of the technical memorandum, one(1) unbound copy, and a copy in Microsoft Word. Task 4: Meetings Objective: The project manager or other necessary Willdan staff will attend project meetings. A member of the impact fee project team will attend up to two meetings throughout this portion of the City's engagement. Phone conferences are not considered meetings for the purposes of this scope. Additional meetings may be requested for an additional fee based on our hourly billing rates. WW I LLDAN 15 City of Rosemead, California ° Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study °.a • , Development Impact Fee Study— Optional Full Study Scope Willdan will review current fees, and complete the analysis necessary to recommend updated fees, consider and recommend modifications to the existing program structure, cost components, and fee amounts. In addition to the services for which the City presently charges fees, the study shall identify and recommend other potential impact fees consistent with the City's goals and objectives. 1T4k 1: Identify and Resolve Policy Issues Objective: Identify and resolve policy issues raised by the study. Description: Review agency documents related to existing capital planning policies and funding programs including existing impact fees. Bring policy issues to City staff's attention, as appropriate, during the project and seek guidance prior to proceeding. Potential policy issues include: • Potential new impact fees for consideration; • Adequacy of General Plan and other public facility planning policies (e.g. level of service standards); impact fee ordinances and resolutions, and prior nexus studies; ■ Availability of existing public facility master plans and CIPs to identify needed facilities; • Types of facilities to be funded by each fee; • Land use categories for imposition of fees; • Nexus approach to determining facility standards; • Nexus approach to allocating cost burden among land uses, including need for separate fee zones; • Potential alternative funding sources, if needed; • Funding existing deficiencies, if identified; and • Implementation concerns and strategies. Deliverables: (1) Information requests; (2) revised project scope and schedule(if needed); and (3) brief summary of policy decisions (if needed). Task 2:` .Identify Existing Development and Future Growth Objective: (1) Identify estimates of existing levels of development; and (2) identify a projection of future growth consistent with current planning policy. Description: Identify base year for estimating existing levels of development and for calculating facility standards based on existing facility inventories(see Task 3). Include entitled development that would be exempt from fee program. Consult with City staff to identify growth projections to a defined long-range planning horizon (10 to 30 years). Projections provide a basis for determining the facilities needed to accommodate growth (see Task 4). Consider projections from regional metropolitan planning agencies and other available sources-City staff to provide estimates and projections by zone if needed. Develop approach for converting land use data to measure of facility demand. For example, identify population and employment density factors to convert population and employment estimates to dwelling units and building square footage. Select appropriate approach for each impact fee Ij based on: ■ Available local data on facility demand by land use category; • Approaches used by other agencies; and • Support for other agency policy objectives. Changes to estimates and projections during subsequent tasks could cause unanticipated effort and require an amendment to the scope of services and budget. Obtain approval of estimates and projections from City staff prior to proceeding. 1n/ WILLDAN i 16 City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study ;Task 3: Determine Facility Standards Note: Conduct Tasks 3, 4, and 5 separately for each intended facility and fee type. Conduct tasks concurrently because of the effect of facility standards(Task 3),facility needs(Task 4),and alternative funding (Task 5)on the fee calculation. Objective: Determine standards to identify facilities required to accommodate growth. Description: Identify and evaluate possible facility standards depending upon the facility type, current facility inventory data, and available facility planning documents. Consider use of: (1) adopted policy standards (e.g. General Plan, master facility plans); (2) standards derived from existing facility inventories;or(3)standards derived from a list of planned facility projects.City staff to provide policies, inventories, and project lists. Flask 4: Determine Facilities Needs and°Costs Objective: Identify the type, amount and cost of facilities required to accommodate growth and correct deficiencies, if any. Description: Quantify total planned facilities based on growth projection from Task 2 and facility standards from Task 3. Express planned facilities in general quantities such as acres of parkland, or as a specific list of capital projects from a master facility plan. Location of planned facilities may or may not be specified. If only a general description of planned facilities is available through the planning horizon, City staff to provide a list of specific capital projects for use of fee revenues during the short term (e.g. five years). Distinguish between: (1)facilities needed to serve growth(that can be funded byimpact fees); and (2) facilities needed to correct existing deficiencies (that cannot be funded by impact fees). Use one of three cost allocation methods (existing inventory, system plan, or planned facilities). Gather planning-level data on new facilities costs based on lump sum project cost estimates, or unit costs and project quantities (acres, building square feet, lane miles, etc.). Consider recent City experience, local market data such as land transactions, and consultant team experience from prior projects. Inflate older cost estimates to base year using appropriate cost indices. This scope of work does not include additional engineering analysis to identify total facility needs, existing deficiencies, or cost estimates. ;Task 5: Identify Funding and Financing Alternatives • Objective: Determine the extent of alternative(non-fee)funding available for new facilities. Description: If impact fees are going to only partially fund a capital project, the Mitigation Fee Act requires the agency report on the anticipated source and timing of the additional funding every five years. There are two types of alternative funding sources that we will identify: 1. Funding from non-impact fee sources to correct existing deficiencies; and 2. Funding from new development other than impact fees that must be credited against new development's impact fee contributions, possibly including taxes paid to finance facilities. Identify anticipated alternative funding based on information from City staff, or note that funds are still to be identified based on a list of probable funding alternatives. If fees will fund debt service include financing costs in the total cost of facilities. Assume facilities to be funded predominantly on a pay-as-you-go basis. Scope does not include a cash flow analysis to analyze effect of timing of fee revenues on financing costs. 'Task 6: Comparison f Objective: Provide a comparison of the current and proposed impact fees to those of comparable/surrounding jurisdictions. Description: Typically, this would be neighboring jurisdictions, and a few that are nearby and comparable to the City. Willdan will compare a total of five jurisdictions to be selected by the City. Typically, Willdan prepares an analysis of fees charged to a series of prototype developments(such as residential, retail, etc.) in order to provide an "apples to apples" comparison, but the exact methodology will be set in consultation with the City. This comparison will be limited to five other jurisdictions. in WI LLDAN 17 City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study ,Task 7: Calculate Fees and Prepare Report Objective: Prepare a technically defensible fee report that comprehensively documents project assumptions, methodologies, and results. Description: Generate fee schedule to apportion facility costs to individual development projects. Use facility costs per unit of demand multiplied by demand by land use category based on data developed in prior tasks. Prepare draft report tables for City staff to review that document each step of the analysis, including schedule of maximum justified fees by facility type land use category. Following one (1) round of comments from City staff on the quantitative analysis and fee schedules, prepare administrative draft report. Following one (1) round of comments on administrative draft, prepare public draft for presentation to interested parties,the public and elected officials. Prepare final report, if necessary, based on one (1) round of comments received on the public draft report. If requested, post report on our website for public access. Provide legal counsel with copies of fee resolutions and ordinances used by other jurisdictions. Deliverables: We will provide up to five (5) bound copies of the draft report, one (1) unbound copy, one Microsoft Word copy;and up to five(5)bound copies of the final report,one(1) unbound copy,and one Microsoft Word copy. .Task 8: Meetings Objective: The project manager or other necessary Willdan staff will attend project meetings. A member of the Impact project team will attend up to four meetings throughout the Impact Fee Study portion of the City's engagement. Phone conferences are not considered meetings for the purposes of this scope. Additional meetings may be requested for an additional fee based on our hourly billing rates. City Staff Support To complete our tasks,we will need the cooperation of City staff. We suggest that the City of Rosemead assign a key individual to represent the City as the project manager who can function as our primary contact.We anticipate that the City's project manager will: 1) Coordinate responses to requests for information; 2) Coordinate review of work products; and 3) Help resolve policy issues. Willdan will endeavor to minimize the impact on City staff in the completion of this project. We will ask for responses to initial information requests in a timely manner. If there are delays on the part of the City, we will contact the City's project manager to steer the project back on track.We will keep the City's project manager informed of data or feedback we need to keep the project on schedule. Willdan will rely on the validity and accuracy of the City's data and documentation to complete the analysis. Willdan will rely on the data as being accurate without performing an independent verification of accuracy and will not be responsible for any errors that result from inaccurate data provided by the client or a third party. W W I LLDAN ; 18 City of Rosemead,California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study a 4, "" 4. s Project Schedules Willdan understands time is of the essence for the City of Rosemead to begin this engagement. These schedules can only be met with the cooperation of City staff. Delays in responding to our requests for data and review will result in corresponding delays to the project schedule. If that is the case, we will notify the City immediately of the possible impact on the schedule. Cost Allocation Plan " City of Rosemead Full and OMB Cost Allocation Plan P w °. °. ®r _.., .. ., • Schedul"•e. e • q .a e .. • October I November December Scope of Services 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 fpm -w - ,..,a�..;s�,.aaa ��:ak:s.,.r,u:.: � _ :� ax.»f..W °gra w..:.r•a _',.y::«. t..T.m.n ....w o :a,... M. . ...,. . .;"�_as �»,.w<:. -+ .. ,.�xi'�.xs �a.�-'.a,:�.�„, . ..ate Task 1: Initial Document Request ; ::1 Task 2: Kick-off/ Refine Scope (conference call) _ 2 Task 3: Gather Staffing Information and Develop Model (conference call) ^ ::3 Task 4: Test and Review Cost Allocation Methodology (conference call) :•:4 Task 5: Prepare and Present Draft Report(meeting) 4,444 ::5 Task 6: Discuss and Revise Report(conference call) ::6 Task 7: Prepare and Present Final Report/Train Staff on Model (meeting) :•:7 Legend: X1: Information Request X5: Draft Report 2: Revised Project Scope and Schedule (if needed) X 6: Revised Draft Report/Final Report 3C3: User-friendly Model in Microsoft Excel x7: Final Report—Hard and Electronic Copies X4: Draft Cost Allocation Plan Model Review W I LLDAN 1.9; City of Rosemead,California Cost Allocation Plan;Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study . Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Rosemead Comprehensive User Fee Study Project Schedule: OctoberNovember December January '21 February_. Scope of Services 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 Dmm 1 8 15 22` Task 1: Initial Document Request 4:1 Task 2: Compile Inventory of Current and Potential Fees 8 Task 3: Kick-off/ Refine Scope (web meeting/conference call) ::2 Task 4: Develop User Fee Model ;:•:3 Task 5: Time Survey Interviews and Information Gathering (web meetings) :•:9 Task 6: Common Fees Comparison :•:10 Task 7: Review of Development Tax Business License Tax "f Task 8: Data Analysis and Final User Fee Schedule (conference calls) _ ;:•:4 Task 9: Prepare and Present Draft Report (conference call) :•:5 Task 10: Revise Draft Report/Determine Cost Recovery Levels (conference call) i:•:6 Task 11: Prepare and Present Final Report/Train Staff on Model (meeting) Legend: 1: Information Request N6: Revised Draft Report/Final Report :•:2: Revised Project Scope and Schedule (if needed) ::7: Final Report—Hard and Electronic Copies :•:3: User-friendly Model in Microsoft Excel N8: Draft List of Current Fees $$4: Draft Fee and Rate Model Review N9: Time Surveys and Draft Full Cost Recovery Fees N5: Draft Report $B 10: Common Fee Comparison 111 W I LLDAN 20 City of Rosemead, California . , - - " - - Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study Development Impact Fee Study City of Rosemead Development Impact Fee Review - Project Schedule r. : October November December January '21February Scope of Services 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 E�Emmm Task 1: Identify and Resolve Policy Issues IN Task 2: Identify Existing Development and Future Growth ' Task 3: Determine Facility Standards ; '' * Task 4: Determine Facilities Needs and Costs _ i Task 5: Identify Funding and Financing Alternatives [ _ Task 6: Comparison j Task 7: Calculate Fees and Prepare Report ° f Task 8: Meetings WW I LLDAN i21i d,o. City of Rosemead, California . '.i . Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study ^ Project Management and Quality Assurance At Willdan, we utilize a Project Management Process/Approach that ensures projects are completed on time, within budget and most importantly yield results that match our clients'expectations.We will document discussions leading to important policy decisions and/or the choice of critical assumptions used in constructing the analysis and model. Following key stakeholder discussions, we will schedule a call to summarize findings and direction with City staff, to make certain that we are in agreement with stated objectives, and that feedback is incorporated as appropriate. Project Management V •` • •ill X dr-mi. It-ral Define the project Plan the project Manage the project Review the project Communicate the project • Identify the project !' . Collaborate. with the ii • Manage the - It ■• Review all work P. •Communicate: with thel f , scope,set Ii project team and i1 execution of the product and fI client regarding work I objectives, list client staff, and GI project. 1 deliverables. ,I status and.progress I potential constraints, ' agree upon timeline I, ' . I Direct existing and , • Utilize structured • Ensure client'is in , document i - to meet the l i assumptions. �; estimated project l',- upcoming project ;i quality assurance I, -receipt of regular I II tasks. ;i process involving up`� status updates. . I timeline. II 3 1, • Define:a course of t, • Controlandmonitor I to three levels of action and develop , Assign workload` it i i ■ Schedule regular ;• gh review at the peer I i, work in progress. i E . conference calls to:, i an effective • i functions to p g If level, project, i. communication plan. i appropriately II ■ Provide'feedback to-li manager level. I touch,base. ■ Provide a forum for ii qualified staff to client and project °i' . Procure executive ' inform clieht of ensure milestones + roadblocks,work .. ( applying the team's 1h Il, team. ,� officer level review. , collective expertise li '. are met, on.time. it ■ Identify and resolve outside of projected I to solvingdifficult I ■ Pre-schedule qualitydeviances from• ` II scope: f analyticalissues that ; ,l I ` �i control meetings �• ,' project timeline :i � �I arise in complex II with project team to li i I iprojects. maintain the 1i ,i Ii progressive motion . II i. , I# of the'project. I ? I� }i __- __:__ I :____._.___ _ tit _ __ v_ see , Through the process of providing regular updates and conducting status conference calls, potential issues will be highlighted, discussed and resolved. Any deviances from the project timeline will be identified and plans will be developed for course corrections. If necessary, changes in approach or strategy will be discussed with City staff, to meet the needs of the City of Rosemead. In doing this, we will ensure the project stays on track and evolves, based upon current thinking and outside dynamics. h ; WILLDAN x`22_; City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study va .`, , y Quality Assurance / Quality Control Process Our quality control program is incorporated as a required element of Willdan's day-to-day activities. There are three levels of reviews incorporated for our deliverables: 1) Peer review; Quality Assurance Analyst Prepares 2) Project Manager review; Manager Review Y`c• , Deliverables and �a 3) Final quality assurance manager review. Quality Peer reviews involve one Analyst Revises Data `Q' Assurance Peer Review of analyst reviewing the work of based on PM Review Levels of Deliverables another, while project Review. manager reviews are conducted prior to delivery to Q the quality assurance = t manager. The quality ya , assurance manager then Project Manager Analyst Revises Data performs a final review. This Reviews based on Peer Review assures that our final product has been thoroughly evaluated for potential errors;thus, providing quality client deliverables, and high levels of integrity and outcomes. The primary mission of our quality control plan is to provide staff with the technical and managerial expertise to plan, organize, implement, and control the overall quality effort, thereby ensuring the completion of a quality project within the time and budget established. Quality Assurance Goals a„ Tas14" + p � ' ` k =',' • Establish a set of planned and systematic actions for maintaining a high level of quality in the professional services performed; Emphasize quality in every phase of work; Quality Assurance/ ' ■ Ensure efficient use of resources; Chris Fisher Control Process , • Establish a consistent and uniform approach to the services performed; and • Implement appropriate quality control measures for each work task of the project. • Contract deliverables; • Specific quality control procedures; Chris Fisher, Quality Control Plan; James Edison, • Special quality control emphasis; Tony Thrasher& • Budget and manpower requirements; Robert Quaid, CPA • Overall project schedule and budget; and • Project documentation requirements. WWI LLDAN 23 City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study Experience and Expertise Firm Profile Willdan Financial Services, a California Corporation, is an _ __� operating division within Willdan Group, Inc. (WGI), which • �_� ._ rr 5�.1. was founded in 1964 as an engineering firm working with local .' "▪ y• � governments. Today, WGI is a publicly traded company ' - • ',;c_t _: L. :1,°;" Offices (WLDN). WGI, through its divisions, provides professional Fou aed in 1964 ,. v. •l-f-A—k Nationwide i technical and consulting services that ensure the quality, r., value and security of our nation's infrastructure, systems, ' SOo1- Tr..-- facilities, and environment. The firm has pursued two primary !;;I'l1 service objectives since its inception—ensuring the success Municipal/Government Clients of its clients and enhancing its surrounding communities. -- — — - Experiencet Experience A financially stable company,Willdan has annual revenues in across i ' spa ping;: 41,:. excess of $400 million and approximately 1,400 employees9 ® "1" working in more than a dozen states across the U.S. Our L___6_fates _ i 2,0 Years employees include a number of nationally recognized Subject . Matter Experts for all areas related to the broadest definition 11- : '0Co . of connected communities—six of whom are committed to O.O ` contribute their expertise throughout the duration of the F.ee Studies,OMB Compliant;a`nd Citywide Cost Allocation Plans in the Past 5 Years City of Rosemead's Fee Study engagement. _ Members of Municipal Municipal i Government Management Management Willdan has solved economic, engineering and energy I California Society Finance Association of Association of I of Municipal Officers Northeast Southern challenges for local communities and delivered industry- Finance Officers Association California California leading solutions that have transformed government and L CSMFO GFOA MMANC MMASC_; commerce. Today, we are leading our clients into a future accelerated by change in resources, infrastructure, MULTI- ' . E technology, regulations and industry trends. SKILLED ® V �A PROJECT FINANCIAL COMMUNITY CPA'S, °s` TEAM ' RIANAGERS CONSULTANTS ENGAGEMENT .._ . ... EXPERTS Willdan Financial Services Established on June 24, 1988, Willdan Financial Services, a California Corporation, is a national firm, and is one of the largest public sector financial consulting firms in the United States. Since that time, we have helped over 1,500 public agencies successfully address a broad range of financial challenges, such as financing the costs of growth and generating revenues to fund desired services. Our staff of nearly 80 full-time employees supports our clients by conducting year-round workshops and on-site training to assist them in keeping current with the latest developments in our areas of expertise. Willdan assists local public agencies by providing the following services: Willdan Financial Services . . Services • Utility rate and cost of service studies; • Development impact fee establishment and analysis; • User fee studies; • Municipal Advisory Services; • Cost allocation studies; • District administration; • Real estate economic analysis; • Feasibility studies; • Tax increment finance district formation and • Housing development and implementation strategies; amendment; • Arbitrage and Continuing Disclosure Services; • Property tax audits; • Debt issuance support; and • Economic Development Strategic Plans • Long-term financial plans and cash flow modeling. WWI 24 W I LLDAN 1 , _ City of Rosemead, California. Cost Allocation,Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study'&Development Impact Fee;Study Staff Continuity Mr. Fisher has been assigned to serve as the City's representative; he has It is important to note that been selected for this role due to his extensive experience, which includes Mr. Fisher has been with Willdan the preparation and supervision of numerous fee studies, as well as his for more than 21 years, ensuring experience presenting to governing bodies, stakeholders, and industry the City of Rosemead of continuity groups. and dedication in staffing during the completion of the project. Project Dedication Willdan's Financial Consulting Services group is composed of a team of over 20 senior-level professional consultants. While each member of the project team currently has work in progress with other clients, the workload is at a manageable level with sufficient capacity to meet the needs of the City specific to the schedule and budget for this engagement. Professional Expertise Unique Combination of Services and Expertise/Public Engagement Willdan has provided User Fee and Impact Fee services to municipal clients for over 20 years; and has prepared comprehensive impact fee studies, user fee studies, as well as cost allocation plans, and OMB compliant cost allocation plans for clients throughout California, and the United States. Since 1998, we have developed the expertise to successfully integrate this service into the Financial Consulting Services group's primary functions. Willdan's Financial Consulting Services staff has assisted well over 100 California government agencies with the development and/or update of all fee types. Each project has required defensible documentation and thorough coordination of fee program changes for different agency departments and stakeholders within the business community. In some cases, Willdan has been required to negotiate fees with stakeholders and, on occasion, defend them in meetings and public forums. We are particularly strong in advising our clients on the advantages and disadvantages of different fee schedule structures (citywide versus multiple-fee districts/zones; more versus fewer land-use categories; etc.) and methods of fee calculation that are based on the City's and stakeholder priorities and applicable regulations that comply with Proposition 26 and Proposition 218. Our record of success within the industry provides assurance of the professionalism and capability we will bring to this engagement. A team composed of project managers and analysts develop and/or, update user fee studies, cost allocation plans and development impact fees. Willdan has extensive experience with the range of fees charged in the region and the state, and the typical pros, cons and challenges of each, both in implementation and management. Willdan will be bring its expertise to the City's process of considering financial, practical and policy issues in deciding on its future fee program. Similar Studies Listed in the table below, is an abbreviated list of the public agencies in which similar services are currently in progress, or have been completed, in the previous five years by the project team included within this submission. 5 Year Cost of Services Study Experience • Agency Impact'Fee Study, ' 'User Fee Study Cost Allocation Plan City of Alameda, CA • City of Arcadia,CA O City of Banning,CA City of Bell, CA City of Bell Gardens, CA • City of Bellflower, CA • City of Belmont,CA City of Blythe, CA City of Brea, CA • • City of Carpinteria, CA • WI LLDAN • 25 d City of Rosemead, California • Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee•Study&Development Impact Fee Study ___:_° 5 Year Cost of Services Study Experience • ' 'Agency ' ' ' Impact Fee Study' UserFee Study 'Cost Allocatiion,Plan'. City of Cerritos, CA City of Chino Hills, CA • ♦ City of Claremont, CA ----- ---- -- City of Coalinga, CA City of Colton, CA City of Commerce, CA • City of Compton, CA City of Corona,CA • City of Cudahy, CA City of DeSoto,TX • City of Dinuba,CA ♦ _♦ ' City of El Centro, CA • City of El Cerrito, CA _ City of El Monte, CA ♦ ♦ ♦ City of Emeryville, CA ♦ ' City of Encinitas, CA ♦ ♦ City of Fillmore, CA ♦ ♦ ♦ City of Fountain Hills,AZ _ • - City of Fremont, CA ♦ City of Galt,CA City of Gardena, CA City of Garden Grove,CA • City of Gilroy, CA _♦ City of Glendale,AZ • City of Hawthorne, CA ♦ •♦ ♦ City of Hayward, CA _ ♦ • City of Hesperia, CA • City of Hollister, CA City of Indian Wells, CA • City of Irvine, CA City of Irwindale, CA ' City of La Mesa, CA • City of La Mirada, CA City of La Puente, CA ♦ ♦ City of Laguna Hills, CA City of Lake Elsinore, CA City of Los Angeles — • — City of Lynwood, CA City of Menifee, CA • City of Mission Viejo, CA ♦ • City of Missouri City,TX ♦ ♦ City of Montebello, CA ' City of Monterey Park, CA City of Monterey, CA ' ♦ - City of Morgan Hill, CA • City of Murrieta, CA City of Napa,CA City of National City, CA ♦ ♦ - City of Oroville, CA ♦ _ • A/V W I LLDAN 26 City of Rosemead,,California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study 5 Year Cost of Services Study Experience , '" ' * - 'i - Agency Impact Fee Study User'Fee Study - Cost;Alloca'tion Plan City of Pacifica, CA City of Palm Desert,CA City of Patterson, CA ' City of Petaluma,CA ' City of Pismo Beach, CA 1 • City of Pittsburg,CA ♦ ♦ • City of Rancho Mirage, CA • City of Rialto,CA City of Richmond, CA ♦ - ♦ _ _ • City of Rocklin, CA City of Rosemead, CA • City of St. Helena, CA ♦ ♦ - -_ ♦ City of Salinas,CA - ♦ ♦ ♦ City of San Anselmo,CA • • City of San Bruno,CA i ♦ • • City of San Fernando,CA ♦ ♦ ♦ City of San Jacinto, CA ♦ ♦ _ • City of Santa Ana, CA r ♦ _♦ City of Sierra Madre, CA • City of Signal Hill, CA i City of Soledad, CA ♦ City of South San Francisco, CA 1 • City of Sunnyvale,TX • City of Surprise,AZ ;-- —• _ .._ City of Tehachapi, CA • City of Temecula, CA • City of Tulare, CA , City of Twenty-Nine Palms, CA City of Union City, CA City of Upland,CA City of Watsonville, CA City of West Covina, CA ♦ ♦ City of West Hollywood, CA City of Yucaipa, CA County of Los Angeles, CA • County of Riverside, CA • County of Sacramento,CA ♦ County of San Benito, CA ♦ O County of San Diego,CA • County of Stanislaus, CA ♦ County of Tulare, CA ♦ Kentuckiana Works, KY • San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, CA • Town of Loomis, CA Town of Los Altos Hills,CA ♦ ♦ ♦ Town of Paradise Valley,AZ • Truckee Fire Protection District, CA ' ♦ . WWI 27 City of Rosemead, California • Cost Allocation Plap,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study References Below are recent project descriptions, including client contact information, that are similar in nature to those requested by the City of Rosemead engagement. We are proud of our reputation for customer service and encourage you to contact these clients regarding our commitment to completing the projects within budget and agreed upon timelines. Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study City of Chino Hills, CA _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ Full Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study The City of Chino Hills engaged Willdan to complete a comprehensive Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study. Willdan staff met with City staff to verify the City's objectives for the study, independently gathered most of the necessary data for the development of the CAP model and methodology and worked directly with City staff to gather additional detail or clarify information where necessary.We worked City staff to understand the various functions served by indirect staff in various City departments, and which operating departments or funds they served.We worked directly with City staff to develop and verify allocation bases and make adjustments through several iterations of the CAP model as necessary. We developed a cost of service analysis and model that updated existing fees and incorporated new fees and used it to create an updated comprehensive fee schedule. Willdan is currently providing updates to the study. Client Contact: Ms. Christa Buhagiar, Finance Director 14000 City Center Drive, Chino Hills, CA 91709 Tel#: (909) 364-2642 I Email: cbuhagiar(a,chinohills.orq - City of Irvine, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study,Cost Allocation Plan&OMB Cost Allocation Plan Willdan completed a comprehensive user fee study and full cost allocation plan for the City of Irvine. The cost allocation plan was also OMB compliant, whereas the user fee study focused on the community development/ planning, city clerk, public safety, and public works departments. In addition to identifying the true costs of City-provided services,Willdan staff worked with each department to identify opportunities in recovering costs of services for which no fee had previously been collected. Willdan also conducted the City's previous study, as well as updates to the studies. Client Contact: Ms.Amy Roblyer, Senior Management Analyst—Fiscal Services One Civic Center Plaza, Irvine, CA 92606 Tel#: 949 724-6255 Email: aroblyercityofirvine.orq City of Murrieta, CA Cost Allocation and OMB Compliant Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study Willdan was engaged by the City of Murrieta to complete a full and OMB compliant cost allocation plan and the preparation of a comprehensive user fee study. Our primary objective for the cost allocation study was to ensure that general government costs were fairly and equitably allocated to appropriate programs and funds, which are based on tailored and well thought out allocation factors. For the comprehensive user fee study, the primary objective was to ensure that fees for requested services were calculated to account for the full cost of providing the services, and set appropriately, given City policy and financial objectives. A concerted focus was put on achieving near or full cost recovery for the Building & Safety, Planning, Fire, and Public Works fees. The analysis also justified measured increases in some of the fees associated with the other departments. We also supported the City in answering questions from, and participating in several meetings with, the local Building Industry Association representative,to explain the approach to the study,the data used,and the analytical methodology. Willdan was recently re-selected to provide an update to the User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan. Client Contact: Ms. Stacey Stevenson, Administrative Services Director 1 Town Square, Murrieta, CA 92562 Tel#: 951 461-6004 Email: sstevensonmurrietaca.gov WWI I LLDAN 28 City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation PI"an,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study• :.` • Development Impact Fee County of Riverside, CA Comprehensive Impact Fee Study Willdan assisted the County of Riverside with an update of its comprehensive impact fee program.The fee categories were broad and diverse including countywide facilities such as jail detention facilities and county parks and trails; unincorporated only facilities such as fire stations and libraries; and County planning area specific facilities including storm drain and traffic improvements. Other facilities needed to be differentiated between the Eastern and Western portions of the County due to separation by distance, as well as varying level of facilities by region. The process was lengthy, involving significant efforts to inform staff of methodological differences between the Willdan methodology and the methodology of the previous consultant. Willdan has recent! , throu•h com•etitive bid, been selected to u•date the Develo•ment Im•act Fees. Client Contact: Ms. Serena Chow, Administrative Services Manager 3403 10th Street, Suite 400, Riverside, CA 92501 Tel#: (951) 955-6619 I Email: schow(@rivcoeda.orq County of Stanislaus, CA Development Impact Fee Update Willdan assisted the County with an update to the existing impact fee program. The program is made up of a range of facilities including public protection, library and park facilities. Fees are collected by all cities on new development within the County's jurisdiction. The study also includes a transportation facilities impact fee,with different fees calculated for two zones in the County. Considerable stakeholder outreach was an integral component of this project. Client Contact: Mr. Keith Boggs, Assistant Executive Officer 1010 10th Street, Suite 6800, Modesto, CA 95354 Tel.#: (209) 652-1514 I Email: boqgskstancounty.com City of Pismo Beach, CA Development Impact Fee Study Willdan assisted the City of Pismo Beach with an update to their impact fee program. The program included the following facilities: police, fire protection, park and recreation improvements, water system improvements, wastewater,traffic and general government/administrative facilities.This project was warranted due to the amount of time that had elapsed since the prior update, coupled with the adoption of new and revised public facility master plans that complemented the updated impact fees. Prior to fee program adoption,Willdan held a stakeholder meeting to inform the public about the project, and to solicit feedback from the development community. Client Contact: Ms. Nadia Feeser, Administrative Services Director 760 Mattie Road, Pismo Beach, CA 93449 Tel#: (805) 773-7010 I Email: nfeeser(a •ismobeach.orq City of Santa Clara, CA • Park&Recreation Facilities Development Impact Fee Study Willdan was contracted to update the City's existing park impact fee. The City faced a unique challenge as their park fee dated back many years and was not aligned with the City's newly adopted General Plan. Willdan utilized the information specific to parks contained within the City's current Capital Improvement Plan, as well as demographic information within the City's General Plan.Willdan prepared a nexus study establishing the fee that could be charged to new development, which was adopted by the City Council, and is currently in effect. Willdan was recently retained by the City in August of 2018 to prepare a nexus study to update the In-lieu Parkland Dedication Fee under the Quimby Act, and the Park and Recreation Facilities Fee under the Mitigation Fee Act. Client Contact: Mr. Jim Teixeira, Director of Parks and Recreation 1500 Warburton Avenue, Santa Clara, CA 95050 Tel#: (408) 615-2260 I Email:jteixeirasantaclaraca.qov WWI LLDAN 29 City of Rosemead,°California Cost Allocation'Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development.Impact Fee Study Combined Studies County of San Benito, CA Comprehensive Impact Fee Study&User Fee Study Willdan prepared a Comprehensive User Fee Study for the County of San Benito. The team reviewed existing user fee programs, and based upon conversations with staff, made suggestions, as necessary, for fees that may need to be added to the County's fee schedule for which fees were not currently being charged. We developed a cost of service analysis and model that updated existing fees and incorporated new fees and that were used to create an updated comprehensive fee schedule. Willdan has assisted the County of San Benito with their development impact fees since 2007. Most recently, we updated and expanded the impact fees charged by the County on new development.Willdan prepared the study and presented the results at a stakeholder meeting and before the County Board of Supervisors. The fee categories included: 1) Capital Improvements Impact Fee, including the Law Enforcement Fee and the Jail and Juvenile Hall Fee; 2) Road Equipment Impact Fee; 3) Fire Mitigation Impact Fee; and 4) Park and Recreation Impact Fee. Client Contact: Ms. Dulce Alonso, Management Analyst 481 4th Street, 1st Floor, Hollister, CA 95023 Tel#: 831 636-4000 Email: dalonso• cosb.us City of Laguna Hills, CA Cost Allocation Plan Update,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Park Impact Fee Study The City of Laguna Hills was seeking an outside consultant to complete a review and update of their current cost allocation plan and the preparation of a comprehensive user fee study for the development of its master list of fees. Our primary objective for the cost allocation study was to ensure that general government costs were fairly and equitably allocated to appropriate programs and funds, which are based on tailored and well thought out allocation factors. For the Fee Study, the primary objective was to ensure that fees for requested services were calculated to account for the full cost of providing the services, and set appropriately, given City policy and financial objectives. Upon completion of the update to the cost allocation plan, Willdan utilized the final report to complete the comprehensive user fee study. Willdan also assisted the City of Laguna Hills with the revision and updating of its park impact fee in 2015. The City had two primary goals specific to this engagement. First, the overall program had to be updated to reflect current demographics and park facility costs. Second, the City up to that point had relied exclusively on fees under the Quimby Act, which did not apply to projects subject to the Subdivision Map Act. The City had received proposals for several large apartment complexes that would be exempt from Quimby, and therefore asked Willdan to provide a fee program based on the Mitigation Fee Act. Willdan updated the City's demographic data and facility planning in order to properly update the Quimby Fee and implement an MFA impact fee. The project team then calculated the applicable impact fees for single family and multi-family dwelling units and prepared a nexus study that documented the fees and the necessary legal findings under both applicable Acts. User Fee&CAP Client Contact: Ms. Janice Mateo-Reyes, Finance Manager 24035 El Toro Road, Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Tel#: (949)707-2623 I Email: JReyesaci.laquna-hills.ca.us Impact Fee Study Client Contact: Mr. David Chantarangsu, AICP, Community Development Director 24035 El Toro Road, Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Tel#: (949) 707-26701 Email: dchantarangsu a(r�laqunahillsca.gov WWI LLDAN 30 • City of Rosemead,California } : Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&'Development Impact.Fee Study Project Manager & Key Staff Our management and supervision of the project team is very simple: staff every position with experienced, capable personnel in sufficient numbers to I The team presented within this deliver a superior product to the City, on time and on budget. With that proposal has worked collectively philosophy in mind, we have selected experienced professionals for this on numerous projects, such as the engagement. We are confident that our team possesses the depth of one requested by the City of experience that will successfully fulfill your desired work performance. Rosemead; an established work Our employees know and understand the problems facing local government practice between the team under the current economic climate, and we have oriented our practice to members has been forged,this support an agency's modified budget policies and public service priorities. proven long-standing system has benefited our clients. Project Team Key Team Member Project Role Responsibility to the Rosemead Engagement • • Ensure client satisfaction, flow of communication, • and management of the project Chris Fisher • Technical guidance; Principal-in-Charge • Project oversight; ■ Quality assurance& control; and • Meeting and presentation attendance. • Task Oversight; • Model development and review; Development Impact Fee Study • Produce key elements of the analyses; James Edison Project Manager 9 Responsible for project deliverables; • Report evaluation; and • Meeting and presentation attendance. • Task oversight; • Model development; Tony Thrasher Cost Allocation &User Fee Study • Produce key elements of the analyses; Technical Project Manager ■ Responsible for project deliverables; • Report preparation and evaluation; and • Meeting and presentation attendance. • Collect, interpret, and disseminate key data; Carlos Villarreal Development Impact Fee Study • Model development; Lead Analyst • Report preparation; and • Meeting and presentation attendance • Collect, interpret, and disseminate key data; Priti Patel Cost Allocation & User Fee Study • Assistance with model development; Technical Project Manager ■ Report preparation; and • Meeting and presentation attendance. Robert Quaid, CPA Cost Allocation & User Fee Study • Third party reviewer; and Technical Project Manager • Report evaluation. Resumes Resumes for Willdan's project team are presented on the following pages. 1/M W I LLDAN 31 • City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study Chris Fisher Principal-in-Charge Education Mr. Chris Fisher, Vice President and Group Manager of Willdan's Financial Consulting Services San Francisco State group, will serve as Principal-in-Charge for the City of Rosemead's project. He will also share his University, Bachelor of extensive knowledge related to cost-of-service principles with members of the project team. Science, Finance Mr. Fisher joined Willdan in April of 1999, and during that time has managed an array of financial Areas of Expertise consulting projects for public agencies in California, Arizona, Colorado, Texas, and Florida, Cost of Service coordinating the activities of resources within Willdan, as well as those from other firms working on Analyses these projects. He is one of the firm's leading experts for special district financing related to public infrastructure, maintenance, and services, including public safety. Multi-disciplinary Team Management Related Experience Mr. Fisher was, or is currently serving as, the principal-in-charge for the following multi-disciplined Special District cost of service fee study (Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study, and Development Impact Fee Formations Study) engagements. Due to his extensive experience managing multi-disciplinary teams, his primary responsibilities include planning, overseeing, supporting, and coordinating the project Client Presentations team, and maintaining client contact and satisfaction through all phases of the studies. Proposition 218 • City of Banning, CA • City of Bellflower, CA • City of Compton, CA • City of Cudahy, CA Affiliations California Society of • City of El Monte, CA • City of Fillmore, CA Municipal Finance • City of Gilroy, CA • City of Irwindale, CA Officers • City of Laguna Hills, CA • City of Lake Elsinore, CA Municipal Management • City of Petaluma, CA • City of Richmond, CA Association of • City of St. Helena, CA • City of Salinas, CA Northern California • City of San Bruno, CA • City of San Fernando, CA California Municipal • City of San Jacinto, CA • City of Twenty-Nine Palms, CA Treasurers Association • County of San Benito, CA • Town of Los Altos Hills, CA 21 Years'Experience City of Murrieta,CA—Cost Allocation &OMB Compliant Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Mr. Fisher served as the project manager on the City's fee study.The primary objective for the cost allocation study was to ensure that general government costs were fairly and equitably allocated to appropriate programs and funds. The City has recently re-engaged Willdan to conduct an update to both studies. City of Irvine, CA— OMB Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study:Willdan completed a cost allocation plan and user fee study for the City of Irvine. Mr. Fisher managed and provided quality assurance to this project, ensuring the accuracy of the models, as well as the final reports. He also presented the results to the City's Finance Commission and to the City Council. City of National City, CA—Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study, and ISF Allocation Study: Mr. Fisher served as the principal-in-charge for the City of National City's Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee, and ISF Allocation Study. City of Signal Hill, CA—Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: As principal-in-charge, Mr. Fisher oversaw the development and review of a Full and OMB compliant cost allocation study and a comprehensive user fee and rate study for the City's master list of fees. City of Palm Desert, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Mr. Fisher is the principal-in-charge for the ongoing full cost allocation plan and user fee study. Willdan's work includes the gathering of necessary data and information, interviews with City Staff to identify overhead support services and how they are used and interviews to gather information related to fee-based services. We are also developing financial models to calculate overhead allocations and personnel rates and the full cost of services for which fees are charged. We are working with Staff to finalize cost recovery targets, prepare reports and present the results. 11Y WILLDAN ; 32 City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study City of Indian Wells, CA—User Fee Study: Mr. Fisher was the principal-in-charge for the City's C.Fisher user fee study for the Administrative, Building, Planning and Public Works Departments. Our team Resume Continued gathered and confirmed data, met with City Staff to discuss the City's overhead support structure and how operating activities use and benefit from overhead support services. We conducted interviews to gather information related to fee-based services to be used in calculating the full cost of providing services.We developed financial models to calculate overhead allocations and the full cost of services and worked with Staff to develop fee-setting recommendations. We prepared reports and presented the results and met with the development community to address their questions about the study's methodology and results. City of Union City, CA — Comprehensive Fee and Rate Study & Overhead Cost Allocation Plan: Mr. Fisher served as the principal-in-charge for the City's fee study. He oversaw the development of an overhead cost allocation plan, OMB compliant cost allocation plan, as well as a comprehensive user fee study. City of Belmont,CA—Master Fee Study and Cost Allocation Refinement: Mr. Fisher served as the project manager for Willdan's work with the City of Belmont and the Belmont Fire Protection District's fee study. Willdan completed a Master Fee Study and an analysis and review of the existing Cost Allocation Plan for the City of Belmont, and a Fee and Rate Study for the Belmont Fire Protection District. • City of Pittsburg, CA—Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: Mr. Fisher provided policy guidance and quality assurance to the City's update and development of a comprehensive user fee study for the development of a master user fee and rate schedule and a cost allocation plan to recover overhead costs related to central service activities. City of Hayward, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: Mr. Fisher served as the project manager for the City's full overhead cost allocation plan and OMB A-87 cost allocation plan, along with a comprehensive master user fee study. He worked with the City and Willdan staff to gather the necessary data and is overseeing Willdan's development of the cost allocation model. The City has a complicated and detailed budget and the cost allocation plan that Willdan developed is tailored to their structure and includes provision for several Internal Service Funds. City of Salinas, CA — Comprehensive Fee Study and Full Cost Allocation Plan: Mr. Fisher served as the project manager for the City of Salinas engagement, to prepare an OMB A-87- compliant full cost allocation plan and comprehensive fee study for the development of a master list of fees. Mr. Fisher led an all-departments overview meeting,where the framework and general process was reviewed, and global practical and policy questions were addressed. Immediately following the overview meeting, individual meetings were held with representatives from each department to discuss their specific fee related activities and gather necessary information to update fees. City of DeSoto, TX — User Fee Study: Mr. Fisher served as the principal-in-charge for City's Comprehensive User Fee Study. WW I LLDAN 33 i . City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study Tony Thrasher Technical Project Manager—Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Education Due to his cost allocation and user fee analyses experience, Mr.Tony Thrasher has been selected Bachelor of Science in to serve as Technical Project Manager for the City's User Fee Analysis engagement. Currently, Mr. Economics; California Thrasher is a Senior Project Manager within the Financial Consulting Services group,whereby his State Polytechnic responsibilities include managing projects and conducting fiscal analyses for cost allocation plans, University, Pomona user fees, and utility rate studies. Areas of Expertise Mr.Thrasher's prior employment was as a financial analyst working in bond, equity, and mortgage- Cost Allocation Plans backed security markets for Wells Fargo Bank, Bank of New York Mellon, and Deutsche Bank. His experience includes portfolio accounting, differential analysis, and forecasting. Fiscal Analysis for Related Experience User Fees and Rates City of Chino Hills, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: District Administration Mr. Thrasher is serving as the technical project manager for the City's Cost Allocation Plan and Services Comprehensive User Fee Study. He is working directly with the City contact throughout the engagement. Utility Rate Studies City of Mission Viejo, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: Mr. Thrasher was assigned to work with the City on this project, providing analytical support, gathering data,working 11 Years'Experience with staff to make refinements, and developing cost allocation and fee models to ensure full-cost recovery for building and safety, planning, community development, and public works departments. City of Indian Wells, CA — User Fee Study: Mr. Thrasher served as the technical project manager for the City's Administrative, Building, Planning and Public Works Departments.The study involved the identification of existing and potential new fees, fee schedule restructuring, data collection and analysis, orientation and consultation, quality control, communication and presentations, and calculation of individual service costs cost recovery levels. City of Palm Desert, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Mr. Thrasher is currently serving as the technical project manager for the City's full cost allocation plan and user fee study. He is directly responsible for the creation of both models for the study, gathering and verification of the data, managing the analysts working to support him and presenting results to the City. City of Bellflower, CA — OMB Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study Update: In Willdan's initial engagement with the City, Mr. Thrasher provided analytical support, with his primary duties including finalizing model figures and generating reports. In the subsequent update of both the CAP and the Fee Study, Mr. Thrasher assumed a lead technical role, working directly with the client to develop a new Cost Allocation Model, update the comprehensive fee model, and resolve policy and fee setting issues. He was directly responsible for delivery of reports and presentations to the City. City of National City,CA—Cost Allocation Plan,OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study, and ISF Allocation Study: Mr. Thrasher served as the technical project manager for the City of National City's Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee, and ISF Allocation Study. City of Irvine,CA—OMB Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Serving as the project's analyst, Mr. Thrasher provided analytical support; and designed micro-level allocation models to ensure full-cost recovery for public safety, public works, community development, community services, and administrative departments. City of Cerritos, CA — Development Services User Fee Study: Mr. Thrasher served as the technical project manager for this engagement,whereby he designed micro-level allocation models to ensure full-cost recovery for building and safety, planning, community development, and public works departments. City of Richmond,CA—Cost Allocation Plan&User Fee Study: Mr.Thrasher is serving as the project manager for the City of Richmond's fee study. WI LLDAN 34 • City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study City of Petaluma, CA — Overhead Cost Allocation Plan and OMB Circular Plan, User Fee T. Thrasher Study, CIP Rate Analysis, and Hourly Overhead Rate Study: Mr. Thrasher provided analytical Resume Continued support for this engagement. His primary duties were to work with City staff to gather data, provide assistance to the project manager, and produce reports. The City has hired Willdan for multiple updates since we completed the original study. City of Salinas, CA—Full Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive Fee Study: Mr. Thrasher provided analytical support for the City of Salinas OMB A-87-compliant full cost allocation plan and comprehensive fee study engagement. He worked closely with City staff to gather and analyze data to produce reports, participated in multiple meetings, and assisted the City appointed Project Manager in the adoption of the new fees. City of Hayward,CA—Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: For this project, Mr.Thrasher provided analytical support, and was largely responsible for the development of the models. Primary duties include gathering and verifying necessary data, finalizing model figures and generating reports. The City hired Willdan to complete the original Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study, and has subsequently hired us for updates to both studies. City of Monterey, CA—Cost Allocation Plan: Mr. Thrasher is serving as the technical project manager for the City of Monterey Cost Allocation Plan engagement and updates. He is assisting in the development of the City's general overhead allocation plan, whereby he applies his expertise on alternative allocation methods. The City hired Willdan for the original study, and has since hired us for multiple updates. City of Galt, CA— Cost Allocation Plan: As the assigned technical lead, Mr. Thrasher worked directly with City Staff to develop the Cost Allocation Model and report and worked with Staff to test and adjust the model and methodology where appropriate before finalizing. Following completion of the initial CAP, he worked with the City to update the model for the subsequent budget update. City of DeSoto, TX—User Fee Study: Mr. Thrasher served as the technical project manager for City's Comprehensive User Fee Study. City of Missouri City, TX— Comprehensive User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan: Mr. Thrasher served as the technical project manager for City's Fee Study. City of Mesquite, TX — Cost Allocation Plan: Mr. Thrasher served as the technical project manager for City's Cost Allocation Study. City of Surprise, AZ — Cost Allocation Plan: Mr. Thrasher served as the technical project manager for the 2017 Cost Allocation Plan to identify the City's costs related to rendering internal central support services, and the allocation of those costs to operating departments. Kentuckiana Works, KY — Cost Allocation Plan: Mr. Thrasher was the technical project manager for Kentuckiana Works Cost Allocation Plan. , ! 11Y, . 35 WI LLDAN City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study Priti Patel Project Analyst—Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Education Ms. Priti Patel is a Senior Analyst within the Financial Consulting Services group, whereby she Bachelor of Arts; supports project managers in conducting utility rate analyses, fee studies, cost allocation plans, Business monitoring Proposition 218 compliance, and forming special districts. Management, Information Systems Coordinating and conducting activities associated with Cost Allocation Plans and User Fee Studies, and including database integration and manipulation, revenue and expenditure analyses, and International Business, documentation preparation are just some of Ms. Patel's duties.With these duties,she interacts with University of Cincinnati clients on a regular basis. Areas of Expertise Ms. Patel joined Willdan as an analyst with the District Administration Group, while with DAS she Cost Allocation Plans performed research and analysis needed for local government financial issues related to district administration, including document data entry and updating, database management, research and User Fee Studies report preparation. She also provided general information on questions pertaining to Assessment Districts and special taxes (such as Mello-Roos Pools), as well as the status of property Proposition 218 delinquencies. Ms. Patel came to Willdan with more than five years' experience as an Analyst. 7 Years'Experience Related Experience City of Lake Elsinore, CA — User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan: Ms. Patel provided analytical support and gathering budget and allocation basis data for this engagement. City of National City,CA—Cost Allocation Plan,OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study, and ISF Allocation Study: Ms. Patel is providing analytical support in the preparation of this study, her primary duties include development of the models, finalizing model figures and results, and generating reports. City of San Fernando, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Ms. Patel is currently providing support to senior team members in the preparation of a cost allocation plan, OMB compliant plan and comprehensive user fee study. City of Chino Hills,CA—Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Providing analytical support in the preparation of a cost allocation plan and comprehensive fee study, Ms. Patel worked to identify and take into account direct and indirect costs, along with changes in staffing, structure, and service delivery methods. She is also assisting in the preparation of user- friendly Excel-based models that City staff can easily update in the future to determine the proper allocation of expenditures and ongoing full cost of City-provided services. City of Laguna Hills, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Ms. Patel provided analytical support in the preparation of a full cost allocation plan and comprehensive fee study for the development of a master list of fees. City of Palm Desert, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Ms. Patel is assigned as the analyst to the City of Palm Desert's full cost allocation plan and user fee study.She supports the project manager by gathering necessary data, preparing the initial draft models and reports, and working directly with City Staff to refine and update results during review iterations. City of Indian Wells, CA—User Fee Study: Ms. Patel served as the analyst for the City's user fee study for the Administrative, Building, Planning and Public Works Departments. She led the analytical efforts by developing the User Fee model and report, and gathering and evaluating the data necessary for the study. She also participated in the on-site interviews with Staff to discuss service delivery processes. City of Fillmore,CA—Full Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: Ms. Patel helped develop a cost allocation plan and model that fully allocated central overhead costs to appropriate operating departments, funds, and/or programs. She assisted in the completion of the model and report and worked directly with senior staff to their feedback and revisions. Rainbow Municipal Water District, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and OMB Compliant Plan: Ms. Patel provided analytical support to ensure that the District's Cost Allocation Plan and OMB compliant cost allocation model and plan fairly allocated general and administrative overhead service costs to appropriate activities and departments. 1I1► WI 36 City of Rosemead, California ` Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study City of Yucaipa, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Provided P.Pate! analytical support in the preparation of a Cost Allocation Plan and OMB compliant cost allocation Resume Continued plan and comprehensive fee study for the development of a master list of fees. Ms. Patel worked to identify and take into account direct and indirect costs, along with changes in staffing, structure, and service delivery methods. City of Richmond, CA — Cost Allocation Plan & User Fee Study: Ms. Patel is the financial analyst on the City of Richmond's ongoing User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan. She is assisting the project manager with gathering and validation of data, development of the models and related analysis, staff interviews and preparation of reports and presentations. City of Pittsburg, CA—Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: Ms. Patel was assigned to provide assistance to senior project team members on the City of Pittsburg Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study engagement. She will be a technical lead for the gathering of data, creation of the models and preparation of study reports and presentations. The City hired Willdan for the original study, and for two subsequent updates. City of Monterey, CA— Cost Allocation Plan: Ms. Patel is serving as the financial analyst for the City of Monterey Cost Allocation Plan and updates. In this role she is responsible for obtaining updated information and data, reviewing overhead structure and functions and preparing the updated model and report. The City originally hired Willdan for the creation of the first Cost Allocation Plan, and has hired us for multiple updates since then. City of DeSoto, TX — User Fee Study: Ms. Patel served as the financial analyst for City's Comprehensive User Fee Study. City of Missouri City, TX — Comprehensive User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan: Ms. Patel provided analytical support in the preparation of a full cost allocation plan and comprehensive fee study. Kentuckiana Works, KY— Cost Allocation Plan: Ms. Patel is the financial analyst assigned to the Kentuckiana Works Cost Allocation Plan engagement. City of Dinuba, CA —Cost Allocation Plan Update and Utility Rate Study: Ms. Patel assisted with a utility rate study and a cost allocation plan update for the City. Duties included reviewing relevant documentation, gathering information related to indirect staffing and functions, assisting in the preparation of a comprehensive draft cost allocation model and plan, and testing and reviewing the model and results with project management staff. WWI LLDAN 37 City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study • Robert Quaid, CPA QA/Technical Advisor–Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Education With his 35 years of extensive experience in public financing, Mr. Robert Quaid has been selected Bachelor of Science, to provide quality assurance/quality control in the role of technical advisor. In his position as a University of Southern Principal Consultant at Willdan, Mr. Quaid provides project management, procedural support, California technical support, and quality review for Willdan's District Administration group, as well as the Financial Services Consulting group specific to cost allocation plans, user fee studies, and special Areas of Expertise financial analysis. Fiscal Analysiseandfor User Prior to joiningWilldan, Mr. Quaid worked in theprivate industryof real estate accountingand Fees Rates finance. He began his career with the public accounting firm formerly known as Haskins & Sells Cost Allocation Plans (currently known as "Deloitte & Touche"). His experience includes financial statement analyses, asset administration, computer conversion, and reporting to the Securities and Exchange Acquisition Audit Commission for several public real estate partnerships. In 1979, Mr. Quaid became a licensed Services California CPA. Statutory Financial Related Experience Reporting City of Thousand Oaks, CA—Cost Allocation Plan: Mr. Quaid served as project manager for the development of an OMB A-87 compliant cost allocation plan model using fiscal year actual Fund Audits costs as the basis for the allocations. He was responsible for the preparation of the Cost Allocation Plan report and provided cost allocation model training to City staff. Quality Review of Community Facilities, The objective of this project was to determine the appropriate allocation of indirect costs from City Lighting&Landscaping, General Fund central service departments to the General Fund operating departments/programs and Assessment and the non-General Fund departments/programs. The plan model included 16 allocation bases Districts allocating costs to over 100 departments and divisions. Both full and OMB A-87 cost allocation models were delivered to the City. Willdan was awarded a four-year contract. Affiliations California Society of Cities of Fontana,Gardena and Hawthorne, CA—Cost Allocation Plan Projects: For each of Municipal Finance these cities, Mr. Quaid served in the role of task manager for the development of an OMB A-87 Officers compliant cost allocation plan model using Microsoft Excel. He was responsible for the preparation of the cost allocation plan report and trained City staff on how to use the cost allocation model. California Society of CPAs City of Rialto, CA—Comprehensive User Fee Study: Project manager for the Comprehensive User Fee Study to develop a user fee model in Microsoft Excel and update fees for Planning, Certifications/Licenses Engineering, Building, Public Works, Recreation, Police, Fire, City Clerk, Treasurer and Finance. Certified Public Accountant City of Cathedral City, CA — Comprehensive User Fee Study: Mr. Quaid served as project manager for a user fee study that required updating fees for Planning, Engineering, Building, Police, 35 Years'Experience Fire, City Clerk, and Finance. Mr. Quaid has provided Quality Assurance and Quality Control to multiple clients throughout California. Provided below are a few examples of clients in which services have been provided in the previous three years. • City of Belmont, CA • City of Petaluma, CA • City of Cerritos, CA • City of Rocklin, CA • City of Claremont, CA • City of St. Helena, CA • City of Coalinga, CA • County of San Benito, CA • City of El Cerrito, CA • City of San Bruno, CA • City of Fillmore, CA • Sacramento Public Library, CA • City of Galt, CA • City of Salinas, CA • City of Hayward, CA • City of Union City, CA • City of Indian Wells, CA • City of Watsonville, CA • City of Monterey, CA • City of Yucaipa, CA 1VW I LLDAN ' 38 City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study James Edison, JD, MPP Project Manager—Development Impact Fee Study Education Mr. James Edison specializes in the nexus between public and private, with expertise in public- Juris Doctorate, private partnerships, and the benefits of economic development to municipalities and state, Boalt Hall School of provincial, regional and national governments. He possesses deep expertise in land use Law, University of economics, with a specialty in finance and implementation, including fiscal impact and the public California, Berkeley and private financing of infrastructure and development projects, both in the U.S. and Master of Public internationally. Mr. Edison's public-sector experience includes local and regional economic impact Policy Richard and studies;fiscal impact evaluations; new government formation strategies;and the creation of impact Rhoda Goldman fees, assessments, and special taxes to fund infrastructure and public facilities. He has conducted School of Public numerous evaluations of the economic and fiscal impact of specific plans and consulted on a wide Policy, University of variety of land use planning topics related to community revitalization and the economic and fiscal California, Berkeley impacts of development. Bachelor of Arts, As a former bond attorney, Mr. Edison understands the legal underpinnings and technical magna cum laude, requirements of public financing instruments and has advised both public and private clients on the Harvard University use of individual instruments, and the interaction between those instruments and the needs of Professional developers and project finance. Registrations Related Experience Member of State Bar, Cityof Morgan Hill, CA—Development Impact Fee Update: Mr. Edison managed the update of. California the City's existing nexus study, which included general government, fire, police, parks and Licensed Real Estate recreation, library and storm drain fee categories.The project scope included stakeholder outreach. Broker, California The City has once again engaged Willdan to update their impact fees. City of Santa Clara, CA — Parks Fee Update: Mr. Edison served as principal-in-charge of the Affiliations City's park impact fee update. This project included a demographic analysis and estimation of the Council of cost of acquiring and improving public park land. Development Finance Agencies City of Alameda, CA — Comprehensive Impact Fee Update: Mr. Edison led the Willdan team updating the impact fee programs of the City of Alameda and creating a separate impact fee CFA Society of for Alameda Point,the former Alameda Naval Air Station. San Francisco program County of Tulare, CA—Countywide Impact Fees: Mr. Edison served as project manager for a Congress for the study that involved the creation of an impact fee program for the County. The study includes a New Urbanism range of facilities including public protection, library and parks, as well as a transportation facilities Urban Land Institute impact fee,with different fees calculated for two zones in the County. City of Fremont, CA—Comprehensive Impact Fee Update: Mr. Edison led the Willdan team in Seaside Institute the successful update of the impact fee programs for the City of Fremont. The effort included an update of the City's transportation impact fee program and capital improvement program. International Economic Development Council County of Riverside, CA — Comprehensive Impact Fee Update: Mr. Edison led the effort to establish a comprehensive fee program for the County, including facilities fees for fire,police, parks, 20 Years'Experience criminal justice, libraries and traffic. He prepared the technical and analytical documents necessary to calculate the fee and establish the necessary nexus to collect it, as well as presented the fees during public hearings to the County Board of Supervisors. City of Manteca, CA — Fire Impact Fee Update: Mr. Edison served in the capacity of project manager for the update of the City's fire services impact fee program. City of Pacifica, CA — Park Fee Update: Mr. Edison served as the City's project manager to update their park fee to include new costs and to impose fees for home expansion/remodels, in addition to new development. Stanislaus County Council of Governments, CA—Regional Transportation Fee Update: Mr. Edison worked on an update of the County's transportation impact fee program. Key tasks included a revised capital improvement program and fee model, along with a public participation process that ensures buy in from the communities of Stanislaus County and the County government itself. W W I LLDAN 39 City of Rosemead, California Cost.Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study _- '�• County of Imperial,CA—Solar Farm Fiscal and Economic Analysis: Mr. Edison was engaged J.Edison by the County of Imperial to evaluate the fiscal and economic impacts of a series of proposed solar- Resume Continued voltaic facilities (or"solar farms") on land near the Town of Calipatria, which is within the County. For each, Mr. Edison calculated the tax revenues and service expenditures accruing to the County from development of the project. He also estimated the economic impacts of the project using IMPLAN, including the impact of the construction and ongoing operation of the solar farm, along with the negative impact of the removal of the project site from agricultural production. City of Foster City, CA—Gilead, Chess Drive, and Mirabella Fiscal Impact Studies: The City of Foster City hired Mr. Edison to provide an evaluation of the fiscal impact of three specific plans in the City. He evaluated the impact on services of each plan, the anticipated new revenues and expenditures, and the necessity for new public facilities to serve the projects. City of Vallejo,CA_Costco Expansion Urban Decay, Economic and Fiscal Impact Analysis: In response to the City of Vallejo's request, Mr. Edison examined the economic impact of a proposed expansion of an existing Costco.The analysis included projections of the impact on sales tax, employment, property tax and the net impact to the City's budget. Based on the analysis, the City Planning Commission approved the Costco expansion. City of Vallejo, CA — Service Island Annexation Fiscal Impact Analysis: The City of Vallejo engaged Mr. Edison to provide an analysis of the fiscal impact of the annexation of three unincorporated areas within the boundaries of the City of Vallejo, areas commonly called "service islands." Solano County LAFCO requested the City examine the impact of annexation as part of a larger annexation proposal by the City. He provided an examination of the fiscal implications of the annexation of each area, including population, business activity, and the likely revenues and costs associated with adding each area to the City. County of Placer,CA—Bohemia Lumber Site, Fiscal Impact and Urban Decay Analysis:The County of Placer engaged Mr. Edison to examine the fiscal impact and potential urban decay effects from the development of the former Bohemia Lumber site into a retail center. Mr. Edison prepared the analysis and presented the results to the County Board of Supervisors. City of Redding,CA—Oasis Towne Centre Financing and Fiscal/Economic Impact Analysis: Hired by the Levenson Development Company(LDC)to assist with an economic/fiscal impact study and a financing plan for the Oasis Towne Center, a retail development of approximately one million square feet in Redding, California. Mr. Edison advised LDC on how to structure the financing of the development to provide public benefits for the project and minimize the need for public resources. He prepared an economic and fiscal analysis and negotiated a series of service plans and fiscal mitigation measures with the City of Redding. Mr. Edison also prepared a financing plan for infrastructure needed not only for the immediate project but also for development within the entire Oasis Road Specific Plan area. WILLDAN 40 City of Rosemead, California , Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study Carlos Villarreal, MPP Lead Analyst- Development Impact Fee Study Mr. Carlos Villarreal is proposed to serve in the role of lead analyst for the City of Rosemead's Education engagement due to his experience documenting nexus findings for development impact fees, Master of Public preparing capital improvement plans, facilitating stakeholder involvement, and analyzing the Policy, Richard and economic impacts of fee programs. He has supported adoption of fee programs funding a variety Rhoda Goldman School of Public of facility types, including, but not limited to transportation, parks, library,fire, law enforcement and Policy, University of utilities. California, Berkeley Related Experience Bachelor of Arts, City of Morgan Hill, CA — Development Impact Fee Update: Mr. Villarreal served as project Geography, University manager for a study to update the City's existing nexus study, including general government, fire, of California, Los police, parks and recreation, library and storm drain fee categories. The project scope included Angeles;Minor in stakeholder outreach.The City has once again engaged Willdan and Mr.Villarreal is serving as the Public Policy and project manager on the project. Urban Planning Areas of Expertise City of Santa Clara, CA— Parks Fee Update: As assistant project manager to Mr. Edison, Mr. Villarreal collected the necessary data to update the City's park impact fee. This project included a Fiscal Impact demographic analysis and estimation of the cost of acquiring and improving public park land. Analyses Development Impact City of Upland, CA—Impact Fee Study Update: Conducted a study to update the City's impact Fees fee program, including general government, regional transportation,water, sewer, storm drain and park fees. Traffic fees were established within the San Bernardino Associated Governments' Public Facilities (SANBAG) guidelines to provide a local funding source for improvements of regional significance. Financing Plans GIS Analysis City of Alameda,CA—Development Impact Fee Update: Mr.Villarreal served as the lead project analyst for this engagement to update the City's impact fee program. He coordinated with the City 14 Years'Experience to gather the pertinent data for the project, and was instrumental in preparing the nexus study, in addition to participating in the presentation to stakeholders and the City Council County of Stanislaus,CA—Impact Fee Study Update: Mr.Villarreal served in the role of project manager for a study updating the County's existing impact fee program. The program includes a range of facilities, like public protection, library, and parks. The study also included a transportation facilities impact fee, with different fees calculated for two zones in the County. Considerable stakeholder outreach was an integral component of this project. County of San Benito,CA—Comprehensive Impact Fee Study: In the role of project manager, Mr.Villarreal assisted the County of San Benito with the preparation of an updated and expanded impact fee program. The fee programs included: 1) Capital Improvements Impact Fee; 2) Road Equipment Impact Fee; 3) Fire Mitigation Impact Fee; and 4) Park and Recreation Impact Fee. City of Soledad, CA — Development Impact Fee Study Update: Mr. Villarreal managed the update of the City's impact fee program, specifically changes in demographics, growth projections, project costs, and facility standards. In particular, the City had to revise its capital facilities needs to accommodate a much lower amount of growth than what was projected before 2007. The resulting fees funded new development's share of planned facilities, while not overburdening development with unnecessary costs. County of Los Angeles/City of Santa Clarita,CA—Law Enforcement Facilities Fee Study: Mr. Villarreal assisted with the development of an impact fee program to fund law enforcement facilities serving the City of Santa Clarita, and other Antelope Valley jurisdictions within the County of Los Angeles. The analysis involved the comparison of law enforcement facilities serving incorporated and unincorporated areas. Kern Council of Governments, CA.— Regional Alternative Funding Program: Mr. Villarreal served in the role of project manager for the establishment of this program, which consisted of a deficiency analysis and nexus study to fund transportation projects in Kern County. 41 WW I LLDAN City of Rosemead,.California • - E` Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study City of Long Beach,CA—Park Impact Fee Update:Willdan assisted with an update to the City's C. Villarreal existing park impact fees, with Mr. Villarreal serving in the role of project manager. The project Resume Continued included updating demographic data and facility planning to properly update park facility standards. He used this information to then calculate impact fees for single family and multi-family residential dwelling units and prepare a nexus study documenting the revised fees and the required legal findings under the Mitigation Fee Act. Rodeo-Hercules Fire Protection District, CA — Fire Impact Fee Update: Mr. Villarreal served as project manager for the District's fire impact fees update. The fee will be charged in two jurisdictions, the City of Hercules and the unincorporated community of Rodeo. The fees were adopted by the City Council in September 2009 and were presented to the Board of Supervisors in December 2009.At present, Mr.Villarreal is assisting the District with an update to their fire impact fee. City of Sierra Madre, CA—Public Facilities Fee Study: Willdan was retained to prepare impact fee documentation for the City of Sierra Madre.The impact fee documentation included several fee categories, including a park facilities fee and a Quimby In-Lieu Fee for parkland dedication. The analysis documented two separate park-related fees; one based on the Quimby Act and the other based on the Mitigation Fee Act. The City would collect the fee based on a standard of 3.0 acres per 1,000 residents if the development was subject to the Quimby Act land dedication requirement. For all other development, the City would collect based on the existing standard through the Mitigation Fee Act. The City would only collect one of the two fees depending on which fee was appropriate. 1 W I��� LLDAN 42 ___ - City of Rosemead, California • F-. , '. - Cost Allocation Plan,Comprehensive User Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study Schedule of Fees Willdan Financial Services ("Willdan") proposes a not-to-exceed fixed fee of$49,170 for the Cost Allocation Plan, Comprehensive User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Review engagement. This fee does not include the optional service to prepare a full Development Impact Fee Study, for a which fee breakdown has been provided. The fee tables that follow provide a breakdown of the proposed fee for each service by task and project team member. Cost Allocation Plan Based on the corresponding work plan identified within the scope of services, we propose a not-to-exceed fixed fee of$10,440 to prepare a Full and OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan. . City of Rosemead Full and OMB Cost.Allocation Plan = Fee Proposal C.Fisher T.Thrasher P.Patel R.Quaid Principal-in- Tech Project Analytical QA/Tech Charge Manager Support Advisor Total $ 250 $ 185 $ 125 $ 210 Hours Cost Scope of Services Task 1:Initial Document Request - 1.0 1.0 _ - 2.0 $ 310 Task 2:Kick-off/Refine Scope - 1.0 1.0 - 2.0 310 Task 3:Gather Staffing Information&Develop CAP Model 1.0 4.0 16.0 - 21.0 2,990 Task 4:Test and Review Cost Allocation Methodology 1.0 3.0 8.0 1.0 13.0 2,015 Task 5:Prepare and Present Draft Report 2.0 2.0 10.0 1.0 15.0 2,330 Task 6:Discuss and Revise Report 1.0 2.0 6.0 - 9.0 1,370 Task 7:Prepare and Present Final Report/Train Staff on Model 1.0 4.0 1.0 - 6.0 1,115 Total-Full Cost Allocation Plan 6.0 . 17.0 43.0 2.0 l 68.0 $ 10,440 Comprehensive User Fee Study Based on the corresponding work plan identified within the scope of services, we propose a not-to-exceed fixed fee of$24,780 to prepare a User Fee Study. City of Rosemead . - Comprehensive User Fee Study e - . Fee Proposal C.Fisher T.Thrasher P.Patel R.Quaid Principal-in- Tech Project Analytical QAITech Charge Manager Support Advisor Total $ 250 $ 185 $ 125 $ 210 Hours Cost Scope of Services Task 1: Initial Document Request - - 1.0 - 1.0 $ 125 Task 2: Compile Inventory of Current and Potential Fees - 1.0 2.0 - 3.0 435 Task 3: Kick-off/Refine Scope 1.0 1.0 2.0 - 4.0 685 Task 4: Develop User Fee Model - 2.0 12.0 - 14.0 1,870 Task 5: Time Survey Interviews and Information Gathering 1.0 10.0 10.0 - 21.0 3,350 Task 6: Review of Development/Business License Taxes 1.0 2.0 16.0 - 19.0 2,620 Task 7: Common Fees Comparison 3.0 3.0 5.0 1.0 12.0 2,140 Task 8: Data Analysis and Final Fee and Rate Schedule 1.0 6.0 34.0 2.0 43.0 6,030 Task 9: Prepare and Present Draft Report 2.0 4.0 12.0 1.0 19.0 2,950 Task 10: Revise Draft/Determine Cost Recovery Levels 1.0 8.0 8.0 2.0 19.0 3,150 Task 11: Prepare and Present Final Report/Train Staff on Model 1.0 5.0 2.0 - 8.0 1,425 Total-User Fee Study - 11.0 • 42.0 104.0 6.0, 163:0 $ 24,780 N1/' WI LLDAN 43 400, S i a City of Rosemead, Californiagee ;� Cost Plan,Comprehensive.User Fee Study Development Impact Fey e.Stud"; ° ® .ate . a: Development Impact Fee Review Based on the corresponding work plan identified within the scope of services, we propose a not-to-exceed fixed fee of$13,950 to conduct the Development Impact Fee Review. City of Rosemead Development Impact Fee Review J. Edison C.Villarreal Project Manager Senior Analyst Total $ 240 $ 165 Hours Cost Scope of Services Task 1: Identify and Resolve Policy Issues 8.0 12.0 20.0 $ 3,900 Task 2: Comparison 6.0 10.0 16.0 3,090 Task 3: Prepare Report 8.0 12.0 20.0 3,900 Task 4: Meetings 10.0 4.0 14.0 3,060 Total-Development Impact Fee Study • .$ 13,950 Development Impact Fee Study- Optional Based on the corresponding work plan identified within the scope of services, we propose a not-to-exceed fixed fee of$29,250 to prepare a comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study. City of Rosemead Development Impact Fee Study - Optional Full Study J 4 Fee Proposal Fa g � J. Edison C.Villarreal Project Manager Senior Analyst Total $ 240 $ 165 Hours Cost Scope of Services Task 1: Identify and Resolve Policy Issues 4.0 6.0 10.0 $ 1,950 Task 2: Identify Existing Development and Future Growth 4.0 8.0 12.0 2,280 Task 3: Determine Facility Standards 4.0 16.0 20.0 3,600 Task 4: Determine Facilities Needs and Costs 6.0 20.0 26.0 4,740 Task 5: Identify Funding and d Financing Alternatives 12.0 20.0 32.0 6,180 Task 6: Comparison 8.0 14.0 22.0 4,230 Task 7: Calculate Fees and Prepare Report 6.0 16.0 22.0 4,080 Task 8: Meetings 5.0 6.0 11.0 2,190 Total=Development Impact Fee Study 49.0 106.0 155:0 -$ 29,250 Development Impact Fee Limitations in Fees stated in the Development Impact Fee budget include attendance at a total of four in-person meetings with City staff, stakeholders, and City Council. Attendance at more than four in-person meetings shall be billed at our current hourly rates, provided below. WI LLDAN44 City of Rosemead, California Cost Allocation Plan°ComprehensiveUser Fee Study&Development Impact Fee Study • Comprehensive written responses to resolve conflicts or preparation of more than one set of major revisions to the draft report, will be classified as additional services, and may require additional billing at hourly rates stated in the Hourly Rates table listed below. These additional fees shall only take effect once the fixed fee stated above has been exceeded. Examples of Additional Services include: • Additional analysis based on revised assumptions requested by the City, including possible changes in Facilities needs list, infrastructure costs, populations projections, and related data once preparation of draft administrative report has been approved; • Negotiations with stakeholders once the report has been prepared (beyond the four meetings included in the proposal); and • Time expended related to obtaining data assigned to City under"City Staff Support", as stated in our work plan. Notes • Our fee includes all direct expenses associated with the project. • We will invoice the City monthly based on percentage of project completed. • Additional services may be authorized by the City and will be billed at our then-current hourly overhead consulting rates. • City shall reimburse Willdan for any costs Willdan incurs, including without limitation, copying costs,digitizing costs, travel expenses, employee time and attorneys' fees, to respond to the legal process of any governmental agency relating to City or relating to the project. Reimbursement shall be at Willdan 's rates in effect at the time of such response. • The cost of preparing the fee study can be included in the resulting new fee schedule.Therefore, over time,the City can recover the initial outlay of funds that was required to complete the studies. • Willdan will rely on the validity and accuracy of the City's data and documentation to complete the analysis.Willdan will rely on the data as being accurate without performing an independent verification of accuracy and will not be responsible for any errors that result from inaccurate data provided by the client or a third party. Additional Professional Services Our current hourly rates are listed below. Willdan Hourly Rate Schedule �.a Position ° Team:Member .' ;a� • Hou'rly Rate':.. Group Manager Chris Fisher $250 Managing Principal James Edison $240 Principal Consultant Bob Quaid $210 Senior Project Manager Tony Thrasher $185 Project Manager Carlos Villarreal $165 Senior Project Analyst $135 Senior Analyst Priti Patel $125 Analyst II $110 Analyst I $100 W I LLDAN ; 45