Loading...
Agreement - Robert D. Niehaus, Inc. - 2024-11-19AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES This Agreement is made and effective as of November 19, 2024, between the Costa Mesa Sanitary District, a sanitary district (“District”), and Robert D. Niehaus, Inc., a corporation (“Consultant”). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: Recitals WHEREAS, the District is seeking a study to legally justify its sewer fee, connection and fixture fees; and WHEREAS, the Consultant has represented that it is qualified to provide those services and is knowledgeable about what is required to provide these services; and WHEREAS, in July 2024, the District began soliciting proposals from qualified consulting to develop and prepare Sewer Permit fee(s) and Fixture Fee Recommendation(s) and Management Plan; and WHEREAS, the Consultant submitted a proposal that is considered by the District to be “Best Value” and the District has determined that Consultant is fully qualified to provide the services required by this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the District desires to enter into an Agreement with Consultant to provide the services described herein. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1.TERM This Agreement shall commence on the date indicated, above, and shall remainand continue in effect until the project is completed and approved by the District as complete. The District expects that the work product delivery schedule to generally follow the schedule and deadline identified in the Request for Proposal, dated July 30th, 2024, but as adjusted for the anticipated Notice to Proceed date of November 21st, 2024. However, the Consultant shall complete the project work and final report in no more than 100 workdays from Notice to Proceed. The 100 workday contract requirement excludes the fee adoption period. 2.SERVICES Consultant shall perform all the tasks described in the Request for Proposal, Section Ⅲ, Scope of Services, Section Ⅴ, Project Schedule Requirements, and the Consultant’s proposal, dated September 26, 2024. The Exhibits A and B, attached hereto, are incorporated herein and made a part of this Agreement and scope of services, as if set Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC forth herein full and other related tasks as directed by the District Engineer. When a conflict exists, this Agreement, Request for Proposal sections Ⅲ & Ⅴ, and the Consultants proposal govern in priority order. 3. PERFORMANCE Consultant shall, at all times, faithfully, competently and to the best of his/her/its ability, experience, and talent perform all tasks described herein. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. Time is of the essence because the various approvals and fee-related approval activities must be conducted timely, and the proposed fees adopted by the Board of Directors prior to May 3, 2025. The District will assess Liquidated Damages of $100 per day should the Consultant cause delay(s) which in turn causes the adopted date to be missed. 4. DISTRICT MANAGEMENT District’s Engineer will be the project manager for this project work will represent District in all matters pertaining to the administration of this Agreement. As provided by District Ordinance, the District Engineer has the authority to grant time extensions and the General Manager has authority execute all necessary documents subject to Consultant’s compensation or change order fees, subject to Section 5 hereof. 5. PAYMENT (a) The District agrees to pay Consultant in accordance with the tasks as set forth in Exhibit A and B, attached, on a monthly basis. This amount shall not exceed Thirty- nine thousand, nine hundred dollars ($39,900) for the total term of this Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. Said sum includes travel and other costs. (b) Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the General Manager. Consultant shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by General Manager and Consultant at the time District’s written authorized is given to Consultant for the performance of said services. (c) Consultant will submit invoices on a monthly basis showing hours worked and the hourly rates. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the District disputes any of Consultant’s fees, it shall Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC give written notice to Consultant within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. 6. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE (a) The District may, at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Consultant at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the District suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement, such suspension or termination shall not make voice or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. (b) In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the District shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the District. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the District pursuant to Section 5. 7. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT (a) The Consultant’s failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, District shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant’s control, and without fault of negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. (b) If the Project Manager or his/her delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, he/she shall cause to be served upon the Consultant a written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have ten (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the District shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 8. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS (a) Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to the professional services required by this Agreement and will produce the work product Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC specified in Exhibit A and other such information required by District that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Such work product shall be fully usable by District. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of District or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records; shall give District the right to examine and audit said books and records; shall permit District to make transcripts therefrom as necessary; and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. Alternatively, all documents produced shall be maintained and owned at District offices. (b) Upon completion, termination or suspension of this Agreement, all work produced to any medium and/or other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the District and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the District without the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer files, Consultant shall make available to the District, at the Consultant’s office and upon reasonable written request by the District, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer files. (c) The consultant shall provide documents in the following formats and file types i: Written documents: one (1) hardcopy, one Microsoft Word file, one (1) PDF file. ii. Spreadsheet(s): One (1) hardcopy, one electronic file (based on software type), one (1) PDF iii. Models: one (1) hardcopy, one (1) electronic file, one (1) PDF iv. Presentation: one (1) hardcopy, one (1) electronic file, one (1) PDF 9. INDEMNIFICATION (a) Indemnification for Professional Liability. When the law establishes a professional standard of care for Consultant’s services, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless District and any and all of its officials, employees and agents (“Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees and costs to the extent same are caused in whole or in part by any negligent or wrongful act, error or omission of Consultant, its officers, agents, employees or subconsultants (or any entity or individual that Consultant shall bear the legal liability thereof) in the performance of professional services under this Agreement. (b) Indemnification for Other than Professional Liability. Other than in the performance of professional services and to the full extent permitted by law, Consultant Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless District, and any and all of its employees, officials and agents from and against any liability (including liability for claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind, whether actual, alleged or threatened, including attorney’s fees and costs, court costs, interest, defense costs and expert witness fees), where the same arise out of, are a consequence of, or are in any way attributable to, in whole or in part, the performance of this Agreement by Consultant or by any individual or entity for which Consultant is legally liable, including, but not limited to, officers, agent, employees or subconsultants of Consultant. 10. INSURANCE Consultant shall, at its expense, procure and maintain for the duration of this Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of this Agreement by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, employees, or subcontractors. Consultant shall also require all of its subcontractors to procure and maintain the same insurance for the duration of this Agreement. If Consultant is an employer or otherwise hires one (1) or more employees during the term of this Project, Consultant shall procure and maintain workers’ compensation coverage for such employees which meets all requirements of state law (Labor Code § 1861). At a minimum, Consultant is required to submit proof of insurance in accordance with the following standards: Minimum Scope of Insurance: Coverage shall be at least as broad as the latest version of the following: (1) General Liability: Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001): (2) Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form number CA 0001, code 1 (any auto); and (3) Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability: Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer’s Liability Insurance. Minimum Limits of Insurance: CONSULTANT shall maintain limits of no less than: (A) General Liability. One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this Agreement/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. 6 PSA 12 10 (B) Automobile Liability. One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per accident for bodily injury and property damage. Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC (C)Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability. Workers’ Compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California. Employer’s Liability limits of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per accident for bodily injury or disease. Insurance Endorsements: The insurance policies shall contain the following provisions, and a separate endorsement stating to add the following provisions to the insurance policies shall be submitted and approved by District: (A) General Liability. The general liability policy shall be endorsed to state that: (1) District, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Consultant, including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work; and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects District, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Consultant’s scheduled underlying coverage. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by District, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any way. (B) Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability Coverage. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against District, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers for losses paid under the terms of the insurance policy which arise from work performed by the Consultant. (C)All Coverage. Each insurance policy required by this Agreement shall be endorsed to state that: (A) coverage shall not be suspended, voided, reduced, or canceled except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to District, and (B) any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies, including breaches or warranties, shall not affect coverage provided to District its directors, official, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers. Acceptability of Insurers: Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A- or better, licensed to do business in California, and satisfactory to District. All insurance documents must be submitted and approved by the District’s Risk Manager prior to execution of any Agreement with District. 11. INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT (a) Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the District a wholly independent Consultant. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant’s exclusive direction and control. Neither District nor any of its officers, employees, or agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents, Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees, or agents are in any manner officers, employees, or agents of the District. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability whatever against District, or bind District in any manner. (b) No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, District shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for District. District shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. (c) With regard to A.B. 5 (Labor Code §2750.3) this Agreement sets forth a “business to business” relationship and. Consultant is the employer of all persons provided under this Agreement, and those persons are employees of Consultant. Control of those persons shall be with the Consultant and District shall provide direction to Consultant who shall direct its employees in accordance with that direction. 12. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES The Consultant shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The District, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this Section. 13. UNDUE INFLUENCE Consultant declares and warrants that no undue influence or pressure has been used against or in concert with any officer or employee of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District in connection with the award, terms or implementation of this Agreement, including any method of coercion, confidential financial arrangement or financial inducement. No officer or employee of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District will receive compensation, directly or indirectly, from Consultant, or from any officer, employee or agent of Consultant, in connection with the award of this Agreement or any work to be conducted as a result of this Agreement. Violation of this Section shall be a material breach of this Agreement entitling the District to any and all remedies at law or in equity. 14. NO BENEFIT TO ARISE TO LOCAL EMPLOYEES No member, officer, or employee of District, or their designees or agents, and no public official who exercises authority over or responsibilities with respect to the Project Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter, shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in any agreement or sub-agreement, or the proceed thereof, for work to be performed in connection with the Project performed under this Agreement. 15. RELEASE OF INFORMATION / CONFLICTS OF INTEREST (a) All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without District's prior written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subconsultants, shall not without written authorization from the District Manager or unless requested by the District Counsel, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories, or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the District. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives District notice of such court order or subpoena. (b) Consultant shall promptly notify District should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subconsultants be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, requests for admissions, or other discovery request, court order, or subpoena from any person or party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the District. District retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, hearing, or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with District and to provide the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, District's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by District to control, direct, or rewrite said response. (c) Consultant covenants that neither he/she nor any officer or principal of their firm have any interest in, or shall acquire any interest, directly or indirectly, which will conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of their services hereunder. Consultant further covenants that in the performance of this Agreement, no person having such interest shall be employed by them as an officer, employee, agent or subconsultant. Consultant further covenants that Consultant has not contracted with nor is performing any services, directly or indirectly, with any developer(s) and/or property owner(s) and/or firm(s) and/or partnership(s) owning property in the District or the study area and further covenants and agrees that Consultant and/or its subconsultants shall provide no service or enter into any agreement or agreements with a/any developer(s) and/or property owner(s) and/or firm(s) and/or partnership(s) owning property in the District or the study area prior to the completion of the work under this Agreement. 16. NOTICES Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given by: (i) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, which provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by notice: To District: Costa Mesa Sanitary District 290 Paularino Avenue Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Attn: District Clerk/PIO To Consultant: Robert D. Niehaus, Ph.D Managing Director, Principal Economist Robert D. Niehaus, Inc. 140 East Carrillo Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 17. ASSIGNMENT The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the District. 18. LICENSES At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 19. GOVERNING LAW The District and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior or federal district court with jurisdiction over the Costa Mesa Sanitary District. 20. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations, and statements, oral or written, are merged Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 21. CONTENTS OF PROPOSAL Consultant is bound by the contents of Exhibit B hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 22. MODIFICATION No modification to this Agreement shall be effective unless it is in writing and signed by authorized representatives of the parties hereto. 23. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he/she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 24. INTERPRETATION In the event of conflict or inconsistency between this Agreement and any other document, including any proposal or Exhibit hereto, this Agreement shall control unless a contrary intent is clearly stated. Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed this day and year first above written. COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT CONSULTANT __________________________ __________________________ General Manager Signature ATTEST: __________________________ Typed Name __________________________ District Clerk __________________________ Title APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________ District Counsel Director, Strategy & Business Development Jack Lyon Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL Sewer Permit and Fixture Fee Management Plan Development Study RFP Issued: July 30, 2024 Proposals Due: 2:00 P.M. on Tuesday, September 12, 2024 Costa Mesa Sanitary District 290 Paularino Avenue Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Exhibit ADistrict RFP and Scope of Work Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Page | 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Announcement 3 A. Proposal Due Dates and Selection Timeline 3 II. Background 3 III. Scope of Service 4 A. Objectives 4 B. Scope of Work 4 IV. Instructions to Consultants 7 A. Examination of Proposed Documents 7 B. Addenda/Clarification 7 C. Withdrawal of Proposal 7 D. Rights of the District 7 E. Submittal of Proposals 7 V. Project Schedule Requirements 8 VI. Proposal Requirements 8 A. General Information 8 B. Technical Proposal 9 C. Cost Proposal 10 VII. Selection Criteria 10 A. Review of Proposals 10 B. Evaluation Criteria 11 VIII. District Agreement 11 APPENDIX I – EXAMPLE AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Page | 3 I. ANNOUNCEMENT The District is seeking proposals from qualified consulting firms for the preparation of a Sewer Permit and Fixture Fee Management Plan Development Study. This Request for Proposal (RFP) outlines the requirements and selection process. A. PROPOSAL DUE DATES AND SELECTION TIMELINE Proposals must be submitted via email no later than day and time indicated, to: Noelani Middenway District Clerk/Public Information Officer nmiddenway@cmsdca.gov The RFP timeline and selection schedule is listed below. Dates are subject to change. RFP Issued: July 30, 2024 RFP Questions/Requests for Clarification Due: 2:00 P.M, August 15, 2024 Questions & Responses Distributed: August 20, 2024 Proposals Due: 2:00 P.M., September 12, 2024 Evaluation of Proposals: September 16 – September 20, 2024 Tentative Notice to Proceed: September 25, 2024 II. BACKGROUND The Costa Mesa Sanitary District (District) is an independent special district, governed by an elected five-member Board of Directors, formed in 1944 under the Sanitary District Act of 1923. District boundaries encompass the City of Costa Mesa and small portions of Newport Beach and unincorporated Orange County, serving a population of approximately 120,000 and close to 4,000 businesses. As a sanitary district, the District is responsible for residential solid waste (trash) collection and wastewater (sewer) collection throughout its service area. The District accomplishes these core responsibilities through a combination of public and private services, which include an in-house administrative and wastewater staff and privately contracted trash hauler, attorney, treasurer, and IT technicians. The District provides wastewater collection and transmission (sewer system) to Orange County Sanitation District facilities for treatment and disposal. The District’s sewer system consists of approximately 225 miles of sewer mains, approximately 5,000 manholes, and 20 pump stations. Visit www.cmsdca.gov for more information about the District. Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Page | 4 III. SCOPE OF SERVICE A. OBJECTIVES The study is to be performed in conformance with the following directions: a. Produce a Sewer Permit and Fixture Fee Management Plan Development Study (Sewer Fee Study). b. Determine fees required to adequately cover the sewer permit, inspection, plan review, cost for capacity, among other costs for issuing permits and/or connections. Include conducting an analysis of District costs, reviewing local agency sewer permit and fixture fees, making fee recommendations, and producing a Sewer Study Report for sewer permit and sewer fixture fees. The Sewer Study Report must be technically based with data, analysis, calculations, with considered information captured in report appendices, and must provide technical justification that the charges are reasonable and proportionate to the benefit received. c. Identify any revenue sources or enhancements not currently being utilized by the District. d. Legal requirements: i. Consultants shall be knowledgeable about the State law that determines how sewer permit fees and fixtures are set, and the accounting practice required to properly document the proposed fees and justification for said fees. ii. Sewer permits cover the cost of the District staff inspecting the connection and administrative duties related thereto. (See Gov Code §66016) iii. Capacity charges and fixture fees (Gov Code §66013) are required to be reasonable and proportionable to the benefit received and burdens imposed by the development. iv. The public facilities for which the charges are imposed shall be identified in the final report. v. Consultants shall be aware of how these laws apply and provide guidance on how to account for the money collected. B. SCOPE OF WORK All proposals must present a scope of work that achieves the objectives stated above and incorporates the following elements and tasks: Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Page | 5 a. Kick-off Meeting Consultant must discuss study activities, scope of work, consultant information requirements, how and what information must be collected, project schedule, how the consultant will perform the work, and introduce the project team/team lead(s). b. Gather Information and Data i. Provide a list of District data required for the study. ii. Gather and review the District’s financial/information records, such as timecards, expenses, inspection costs, and other various costs associated with sewer permit and sewer fixture fees. iii. Survey local sewer agencies (local cities and sanitary districts) to determine what and how other public agencies charge for sewer permits, fixture rates, sewer fees, and their permitting processes, associated with permitting private sewer modifications and developer building projects. For the sake of preparing the proposal, consider contacting thirty (30) public agencies consisting of OC Sanitation members (25 public agencies), LA County Sanitation, LA City, County of Orange Building department (for unincorporated area), City of Long Beach, and Multon Niguel Water District. An easy-to-read summary chart showing survey results must be provided. iv. Provide summary list of agency rates/fees from previous consultant sewer fee/fixture fee study reports. v. A complete list of the documentation and data gathered and reviewed by the consultant must be included in the Sewer Study Report appendix. c. Staff Interviews i. Interview District staff to learn about and understand the current sewer permitting procedures and processes with the goal of determining shortcoming(s) in the current process, make recommendations for improvements, and advise on best industry practices. ii. Consultant will interview the following District staff: 1. District Engineer 2. Finance Manager 3. Engineering Technician 4. Administrative Assistant Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Page | 6 5. Centricity (District’s City Works/PLL System consultant) 6. District Contract Inspector 7. District Consultant Mike Benesh, RBH & Associates d. Study and Report Requirements i. Develop a fee model with projects expenses, revenue requirements, and the resulting need for changes in sewer permit and fixture fees for a period of 10 years. Through this model and a cost-of-service analysis, a fee schedule shall be developed that includes planned adjustments for a five (5) year period. ii. The consultant is encouraged to suggest and incorporate additions or modifications to the scope of the proposal that will enhance or clarify the study. iii. Provide the District with current best industry practices for issuing permits (building permits, sewer permits, or other permits). Information collected and/or gathered must be included in the Sewer Study Report appendix. iv. Provide a Sewer Fixture Fee Study (Study) narrative documenting the report methodology, assumptions, and data behind the rate and fee recommendations. v. Create an easy-to-use spreadsheet-based sewer fee model. The model must be user-friendly and allow staff to compare different “scenarios” and report on the results for future projections/recommendations. e. Draft Reports i. Provide Draft Study Report, including findings of the program assessments, discussions, conclusions, recommendations, and recommended fee schedule. ii. Submit electronic copy of Draft Report and recommended sewer permit and fixture fee schedule. iii. Prepare a PowerPoint presentation including recommendations, findings, and proposed sewer permit/fixture fees for presentation to the Board of Directors and Community Advisory Committee. f. Final Reports i. Provide a Final Study Report, including the findings of the program assessments, discussions, conclusions, recommendations, and recommended fee schedule. Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Page | 7 ii. Submit Final Report to District. A table/chart indicating item deficiency/finding, relevance, need to address the item, and any recommendation must be included. iii. Prepare a PowerPoint presentation including recommendations, findings, and proposed sewer permit/fixture fee fees for presentation to the Board of Directors. g. Meetings The following meetings are required; however, the consultant may propose additional meetings should they be required for the delivery of work. i. Kick-off meeting ii. Presentation of preliminary findings to staff. iii. Submit Draft Report to staff. iv. Presentation of Draft Report at one (1) Board Study Session and one (1) Community Advisory Committee meeting. v. Presentation of Final Report at one (1) Board Study Sessions. IV. INSTRUCTIONS TO CONSULTANTS A. EXAMINATION OF PROPOSED DOCUMENTS By submitting a proposal, the consultant represents that they have thoroughly examined and become familiar with the work required under this RFP, and that they are capable and qualified to perform the work as requested in Section III - Scope of Service. B. ADDENDA/CLARIFICATION Questions/requests for clarification must be submitted via email. Submit questions/requests for clarification to Noelani Middenway, District Clerk/PIO, at nmiddenway@cmsdca.gov no later than time and day indicated. Specify “Sewer Fixture Fee Study RFP” in the email subject line. Responses to all questions/requests for clarification received by the deadline will be disseminated to all consultants that have received this RFP. C. WITHDRAWAL OF PROPOSAL Consultant may withdraw its proposal at any time prior to the proposal submittal deadline by emailing a written request for withdrawal to Noelani Middenway, District Clerk/Public Information Officer, at nmiddenway@cmsdca.gov. Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Page | 8 D. RIGHTS OF THE DISTRICT This RFP does not commit the District to enter into a legal binding agreement, nor does it obligate the District to pay for any costs incurred in preparation and submission of the proposal or in anticipation of an agreement. The District reserves the right to reject any or all proposals. E. SUBMITTAL OF PROPOSALS Proposals must be received by the District no later than the date and time identified in Section I - Announcement. Once submitted, responses become the property of the District. No corrected or resubmitted proposals will be accepted after the deadline. Late proposals will not be accepted. V. PROJECT SCHEDULE REQUIREMENTS The Sewer Fee Study may commence upon execution of the Agreement. A list of deadlines and the meeting timeline is included below. The District reserves the right to amend this timeline at any time. Proposers will be notified of any changes to this timeline. NTP (estimated) September 25, 2024 Draft Report Due November 12, 2024 Draft Report presented at Board of Director Study Session December 2024 Draft Report presented at CAC Meeting January 2025 Final Report Due January 21, 2025 Final Report presented to Board of Directors during Study Session February 2025 Board Receives and Files Final Report (Board Meeting) February 2025 Public Announcement,………, and/or Adoption of fees February - April 2025 The Board of Directors will deliberate and adopt the new Sewer Permit and Fixture Fees during the February and April 2025 period. The Consultant shall budget/provide about five (5) hours to attend BOD or Public meetings during the deliberation period. For any meetings after Report submittal, District staff will make the presentation(s) for District Board or Public meeting(s). The Consultant must be available at Public Meetings for technical or detailed questions and the District will compensate for the actual meeting attendance whether more or less than budgeted. VI. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Page | 9 For proposals to be considered, submissions must be clear, concise, complete, well organized, and demonstrate both the consultant’s qualifications and ability to follow instructions. Respondents shall read each item carefully and answer each of the following items accurately to ensure compliance with District requirements. Failure to provide all requested information or deviation from the required format may result in disqualification. The proposal must be organized to include the following sections, in the following order. The proposals should be concise and address the required elements below. Proposals must be limited to twenty (20) pages, not including resumes which may be included in an appendix. Extraneous literature and other marketing material should not be included. The proposal shall use 12-point Ariel, have at least 1” top, left, and bottom margin. The right margin must be at least 0.75” or greater. A. GENERAL INFORMATION a. Title Page A title page showing the RFP title; the firm’s name; the name, address, and telephone number of the designated contact person; and the date of the proposal. b. Table of Contents A table of contents detailing the sections and page numbers of the information contained in the proposal. c. Submittal Letter A letter briefly stating the firm’s understanding of the work to be performed, the commitment to perform the work within the timeline, that staff are available to work immediately on this project, and why the firm believes itself to be best qualified to perform the work. The letter shall state that the proposal will be valid for a 90-day period. The person authorized by the firm to negotiate a contract with the District shall sign the submittal letter. B. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL a. Qualifications and Experience Describe your firm and provide a statement of qualifications for performing the requested services. Identify projects completed by your firm that are like those outlined in this RFP. Include a list of cities, counties, and/or special districts for which your firm has performed similar projects. Include an organizational chart Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Page | 10 and your firm’s size, location, and years in business. Use this section to indicate your firm’s areas of expertise and how this expertise will benefit the District. b. References Provide a minimum of three (3) references for projects or services similar in nature and scope to those described in the RFP that have been completed within the last (5) years. Include brief descriptions of the projects; overview of project schedules; dates; size of city, county, or independent special district; and reference contact information. c. Project Team Provide a summary of the role, qualifications, and experience of each team member and designated project manager assigned to this project. Provide an organizational chart with project team members and reporting responsibilities. Include single page resumes of the engineers, technicians, key personnel, and sub- consultants (if any) to be assigned to the project. It is expected that designated key staff will remain for the duration of the project. Key staff substitution will be allowed only after an interview and concurrence with the District. d. Project Overview Provide a narrative describing the firm’s understanding of the services requested in this RFP. This section should also include a discussion of the project organization and a summary of the proposed approach and methodology the consultant will use to complete the project. Include any issues that you believe will require special consideration for this project and identify any unique approaches or strengths your company may have. e. Detailed Project Work Plan/Schedule Provide a detailed description of your firm’s approach to the successful completion of the project, including each step your firm will follow in completing the project by the critical deadlines listed in the RFP. Include thorough discussions of methodologies you believe are essential to accomplishing each task. The work plan description should have sufficient detail to show a clear understanding of the work and proposed approach. A schedule showing the critical path, important milestones, duration of activities, labor hours, and start/completion dates should also be included. Include a Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Page | 11 description of the format, content, and level of detail that can be expected for each deliverable. C. COST PROPOSAL The cost proposal should include the estimated hours and hourly rates to arrive at a firm fixed price, by major task and subtask. The cost proposal must be inclusive of all consultant fees, phone calls/emails, preparation of deliverables, travel, and out-of-pocket expenses, etc. Hourly rates shall be provided should the District require any additional work beyond that specified in this RFP during the term of the Agreement. In addition to cost, the proposal will be used to compare the District’s scope of service with the Consultant’s proposal. VII. SELECTION CRITERIA A. REVIEW OF PROPOSALS An evaluation team of District staff will be assembled. Each evaluator will first score each proposal using the District’s “Best Value” evaluation method. The “Best Value” evaluation method is included below in Section B - Evaluation Criteria. The evaluation team will then convene to review and discuss these evaluations and to combine the individual scores to arrive at a composite score for each firm. Ranking will be assigned based on the composite score. During the evaluation process, the evaluation team reserves the right, where it may serve the District's best interest, to request additional information or clarifications from proposers. At the discretion of the evaluation team, consultants submitting proposals may be requested to make oral presentations as part of the evaluation process. B. EVALUATION CRITERIA Consulting firms submitting proposals are advised that award shall be based on a “Best Value” evaluation criterion. The selection criteria to determine “Best Value” for proposals submitted in response to this RFP is listed below. Proposals will be numerically scored and ranked using the criteria and weighting described in this section. The evaluation criteria and weight of each score are presented as follows: Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Page | 12 Responsiveness to RFP/Project Understanding 5% Note: Non-responsive proposals will be rejected. Firm/Team Qualifications and Experience 20% References and Previous Performance 10% Work Plan and Schedule 20% Unique Consultant features and Services 15% Cost Proposal 20% Note: Reviewed/considered after the technical proposal ranking. VII. DISTRICT AGREEMENT Appendix I is an example Agreement for Consultant Services that the selected consultant will be required to sign. The example agreement is subject to change. Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Robert D. Niehaus, Inc. Costa Mesa Sanitary District Proposal for Sewer Permit and Fixture Fee Management Plan Development Study September 26, 2024 Submitted By: Robert D. Niehaus, Inc. 140 East Carrillo Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Authorized Representative: Jack Lyon Title: Director of Business Development Email: Jack@rdniehaus.com Phone: 805.618.1356 Submitted To : Costa Mesa Sanitary District 290 Paularino Avenue Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Attn: Noelani Middenway Title: District Clerk/ Public Information Officer Email: nmiddenway@gmsdca.gov Exhibit BConsultant Proposal Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC This Page Intentionally Left Blank Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC TABLE OF CONTENTS B. Technical Proposal ............................................................................................................................... 1 Qualificiations and Experience .......................................................................................................................... 1 References ............................................................................................................................................................ 4 Project Team ........................................................................................................................................................ 6 Project Overview .................................................................................................................................................. 8 Summary of Approach ........................................................................................................................................ 8 Detailed Project Work Plan/Schedule ............................................................................................................... 9 Task 1. Kickoff Meeting ................................................................................................................................. 9 Task 2. Gather Information and Data........................................................................................................ 10 Task 3. Staff Interviews ............................................................................................................................... 11 Task 4. Study and Report Requirements ................................................................................................. 12 Task 5. Draft Reports .................................................................................................................................. 13 Task 6. Final Reports .................................................................................................................................. 14 Task 7. Meetings (Summary) ..................................................................................................................... 15 Schedule ......................................................................................................................................................... 16 C. Cost Proposal ...................................................................................................................................... 17 D. Appendix .............................................................................................................................................. 18 Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC September 26, 2024 Noelani Middenway Jack Lyon, Director of Business Development Email: nmiddenway@cmsdca.gov Phone: 805-618-1356 | Email: Jack@RDNiehaus.com Costa Mesa Sanitary District Robert D. Niehaus, Inc. 290 Paularino Avenue 140 E Carrillo Street Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Subject: Sewer Permit and Fixture Fee Management Plan Development Study Dear Ms. Middenway and Costa Mesa Sanitary District, Robert D. Niehaus, Inc. (RDN) is pleased to submit our proposal for the Costa Mesa Sanitary District Sewer Permit and Fixture Fee Management Plan Development Study. RDN is an economic and financial consultancy celebrating 40 years of consulting in Santa Barbara and over 1,000 successful projects. We specialize in rate and fee-setting consulting services for California water and wastewater utilities. RDN is familiar with the District’s operations and finances, having conducted a Sewer Rate Study for the District in 2022. Anthony Elowsky will serve as the Project Manager, ensuring the thorough and efficient execution of the Study. With over seven years of public-sector consulting experience, Anthony is known for his strategic and efficient project management, consistently achieving client policy objectives. Ichiko Kido, with more than 15 years of financial analysis experience, will serve as the Technical Reviewer. Ichiko will ensure Study deliverables meet RDN and industry standards, as well as District satisfaction. Dr. Robert Niehaus, our Project Director with more than 40 years of consulting experience, oversee the Study to ensure its timely, on-budget, and successful project. Our staff are available to work on this project immediately and committed to completing this Study by April 2025. Please direct any inquiries or requests for further discussion to Jack Lyon, Director of Business Development, 805.618.1356, Jack@RDNiehaus.com. Jack is authorized to clarify details of our proposal, negotiate, and obligate the firm. Our proposal is valid for 90 days. We have thoroughly reviewed the RFP, Addenda #1 and #2, and the District’s standard professional services agreement, with no exceptions. RDN is a C-Corporation, and we have no conflicts of interest. We look forward to the opportunity to collaborative with the District and contribute to a productive and successful partnership. Respectfully submitted, Robert D. Niehaus, Ph.D. Jack Lyon (authorized to bind and negotiate) Managing Director, Principal Economist Director of Business Development Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC This Page Intentionally Left Blank Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 1 | P a g e B. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL QUALIFICIATIONS AND EXPERIENCE RDN is an economic and financial consulting firm, headquartered in Santa Barbara, delivering solutions to California utilities and Federal agencies. RDN is celebrating 40 years of consulting services for water, sewer, stormwater, housing, and energy projects throughout California and worldwide since the firm’s founding in 1983. Our proposed Project Team has decades of experience in water, recycled water, and wastewater rate analyses, fees, capacity charges, data management, public relations support, and econometric modeling and forecasting of demand. RDN STRENGTHS RDN leverages our unique combination of economic and financial expertise to design wastewater permit and fixture fees that are equitable, sufficiently meet revenue requirements, and mitigate financial impact on customers. Our data-driven approach gives our clients and their customers confidence in the defensibility of the analysis that determines permit and fixture fees. By employing econometric modeling techniques, RDN is particularly adept at accurately filling data gaps and forecasting customer patterns that engineering or other finance firms overlook. The District is interested in exploring alternative permit and fixture fees that achieve District objectives and has requested a survey of local sewer providers to determine how other public agencies charge for sewer permits, fixture rates, and sewer fees, as well as their permitting processes associated with permitting private sewer modifications and developer building projects. RDN will leverage our extensive survey experience – we conduct over $1 million in survey work annually – to deliver an insightful summary of local permit and fixture fees. Finally, RDN is familiar with the District’s operations and finances, having conducted a Sewer Rate Study for the District in 2022. This proposal includes the same team members from the Sewer Rate Study engagement. This continuity allows the District and RDN to collaborate and hit the ground running soon after the contract award, ensuring a timely and successful project. RDN BY THE NUMBERS ➢ $7M Annual Revenue/22 Employees ➢ 1,000+ Projects Accomplished Worldwide ➢ 100+ Years of Project Team Experience ➢ 48 States Served ➢ 40 Years Consulting for Utility Systems Robert D. Niehaus, Inc. (RDN) Point of Contact: Jack Lyon, Director of Business Development Phone: 805-618-1356 | Email: Jack@RDNiehaus.com Office Location: 140 E Carrillo Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Legal Structure: C-Corporation CEO & Chair of Board: Robert D. Niehaus California Small Business Certification ID: 2004080 Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 2 | P a g e Table 1 presents a selection of RDN’s relevant and recent experience between 2023-2024. Table 1. RDN Recent Projects Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 3 | P a g e Table 2 presents RDN’s relevant and recent experience over the 2019-2022 period. Table 2. RDN Recent Projects Agency Project Year Staff Moulton Niguel Water District Water, Wastewater, Recycled Water Cost of Service Peer Review 2022 Kaden Young|949-831-2500 Kyoung@mnwd.com 26161 Gordon Road, Laguna Hills RN,IK,AE, Ka Lake Arrowhead CSD Water and Wastewater Rate Study 2022 John O'Brien|909-336-7108 jobrien@lakearrowheadcsd.com 27302 CA-189, Bluejay RN,IK,AE, Ka Costa Mesa Sanitary District Wastewater Rate Study 2022 Mark Esquer|949-645-8400 mesquer@cmsdca.gov 290 Paularino Avenue, Costa Mesa RN,IK,AE, Ka Ventura River Water District Water Budget Rate Study 2021 Alma Quezada|805-646-3403 alma@vrwd.ca.gov 409 Old Baldwin Road, Ojai RN,IK,AE, BK,ZV City of Loyalton Wastewater Rate Study 2021 Kathy LeBlanc|530-993-6750 ofclerk- cityofloyalton@psln.com 605 School Street, Loyalton RN,IK,AE, Ka Napa County (LBRID/NBRID) Water and Wastewater Rate Studies ; Post-Fire Review 2020,2021 Annamaria Martinez|707-259-8378 annamaria.martinez@countyofnapa.org 804 First Street, Napa RN,IK,AE, BK,ZV Lost Hills Utility District Wastewater Rate Study 2021 Ana Chavez|661-797-2903 anachavez@lhud.org 14801 Woodward Ave, Lost Hills RN,IK,AE, BK West Valley Water District Development Impact Fee Study 2021 Bertha Perez|909 644-2108 bperez@wvwd.org 855 W Baseline Road, Rialto RN,IK,AE, BK Rosamond CSD Water and Wastewater Rate Study 2021 Kim Domingo|661-256-5807 kdomingo@rosamondcsd.com 3179 35th Street, Rosamond RN,IK,AE, BK Rand CWD Water Rate Study 2021 Debbie Jones|760-374-2414 rcwd@randwaterdistrict.com 501 Comstock Avenue, Johannesburg RN,IK,AE, BK Center Water Company Water Rate Study 2021 Mary Tarrab|760-248-2200 centerwaterco@hotmail.com 32774 Old Woman Springs Road, Lucerne Valley RN,IK,AE, BK Quartz Hill Water District Water Rate Study 2020 Brent Byrne|661-943-3170 brentb@qhwd.org 5034 W Ave L, Lancaster RN,IK,AE, BK Hi-Desert MWC Water Rate Study 2020 Lisset Sanderson|760-307-5169 lissetsanderson@gmail.com 23667 Gazana Road, Barstow RN,IK,AE, BK Palmdale Water District Water Rate Study 2019 Allison Moore|661-317-6825 allison.moore@verizon.net 25315 Ideal Avenue, Lancaster RN,IK,AE, BK Patterson Tract CSD Water Rate Study 2019 Linda Lee|559-734-2965 Pattersontract@gmail.com 32653 Lincoln Road, Visalia RN,IK,AE, BK Orosi Public Utility District Wastewater Rate Study 2019 Maria Vidana|559-528-4262 orosipud@sbcglobal.net 12488 Ave 416, Orosi RN,IK,AE, BK Juniper Riviera CWD Water Rate Study 2019 Denise Johnson|760-247-9818 jrcwd@basicisp.net 25715 Santa Rosa Road, Apple Valley RN,IK,AE, BK Thunderbird CWD Water Rate Study 2019 Carole McMichael|760-247-2503 tcwdoffice@gmail.com 24737 Standing Rock Road, Apple Valley RN,IK,AE, BK Sheep Creek Water Company Water Rate Study 2019 Chris Cummings|760-868-3755 sheepcreek@verizon.net 4200 Sunnyslope Road, Phelan RN,IK,AE, BK CSD |Community Services District; CWD |County Water District; MWC |Mutual Water Company RN:Niehaus, IK:Kido, AE:Elowsky, BK:Kallerud, ZV:Van Dinther, SG:Gaur Contact Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 4 | P a g e REFERENCES With over 90 percent of our work resulting from repeat business, RDN prides itself on continuing relationships that we have developed over 40 years of consulting. We invite you to contact our references to verify our quality of service on similar engagements. Presented below are three references: (1) West Valley Water District; (2) Mid-Peninsula Water District; and (3) Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency. West Valley Water District Development Impact Fee Study (November 2020 – June 2021) Development Impact Fee Study Update (September 2023–September 2024) RDN staff involved: Niehaus, Kido, Elowsky, Kallerud, Van Dinther The West Valley Water District (98,055 people served) retained RDN to produce development impact fees to recover the District’s costs to provide increased capacity demand to new customers. RDN reviewed the District’s current capacity fees for compliance with California law and regulations. We provided fee options based on three different system valuation measures, ultimately recommending a fee based on the Replacement Cost Less Depreciation method. Additionally, RDN evaluated Overhead Charges, Fire Service Capacity Fees, Frontage Charges, Fire Flow Testing Fees, Plan Check Fees, and Release of Easements Fees. The fees provide adequate funding for the District based on projected growth and costs. This project was completed successfully in June 2021, and RDN was retained to update the Fees after District assumptions changed in 2024. Mid-Peninsula Water District Capacity Fee Study (June 2020 – February 2021) RDN staff: Niehaus, Kido, Kallerud, Elowsky, Van Dinther The Mid-Peninsula Water District (28,000 people served) retained RDN to produce connection fees with the primary goal of increasing equitability between the District’s existing and future customers. We evaluated the existing charge structure and provided the District with updated system values and demand projections. RDN performed extensive analyses to ensure that the system values reflected the current cost to repair or replace each asset. Additionally, we reevaluated the customer classification system to ensure that new customers were paying a fair share for system facilities, comparing max demand and average demand across meter sizes. This project was initially completed in February 2021. RDN has since been retained by the District to perform additional analysis as District assumptions have changed. Rocky Welborn Director of Engineering 909-875-1804 855 W Baseline Road Rialto, CA 92376 Rene Ramirez Operations Manager 650-591-8941 3 Dairy Lane Belmont, CA 94002 Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 5 | P a g e Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency Facility Capacity Study (August 2019 – February 2020) Regional Capacity Fee Study (January 2023- October 2023) RDN staff involved: Niehaus, Kido, Elowsky, Kallerud The Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency (SCV Water) (294,088 people served retained RDN to review and evaluate the connection fees developed by SCV Water for their accuracy and equitability with existing and new customers. This project included an evaluation of the methodology used to project demand and account growth for the planning period, a review of capital improvement costs included in the fee calculation, and a review of development projections in the community for the next 30 years. The Facility Connection Fees were approved by SCV Water’s Board of Directors in February 2020. RDN also assisted SCV Water in completing a regional capacity fee study for one of its legacy agencies, the Valencia Water District. Regional Capacity Fees were adopted in October 2023. RDN was once again retained by SCV Water in 2024 to review the Agency’s updated water rates, with Facility Connection Fees scheduled to be reviewed over the 2025-2026 period. Rochelle Patterson CFO/CFA rpatterson@scvwa.org 661-513-1239 27234 Bouquet Canyon Rd Santa Clarita, CA 91350 Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 6 | P a g e PROJECT TEAM RDN’s proposed project team is led by our project director, Dr. Robert Niehaus, and project manager, Anthony Elowsky. Dr. Niehaus, with more than 40 years of consulting experience, will be responsible for the overall Study accountability and to ensure the timely, on-budget, and successful project. Anthony will be responsible for the thorough and efficient execution of the project. Anthony has seven years of public-sector consulting experience and has worked with over 50 different utilities throughout California. Ichiko Kido, as Technical Reviewer, brings more than 15 years of experience in financial analysis and has worked with numerous agencies to build comprehensive financial plans and rate structures. Ichiko will be responsible for reviewing the project deliverables to ensure they meet RDN and industry standards. Consultants Bjorn Kallerud and Zachary VanDinther each have more than five years of experience conducting water, recycled water, and wastewater fee and rate studies and will lead the conduct of data collection, surveys, analysis, report drafting, and deliverables. We affirm that our proposed project team has adequate availability to meet project objectives as outlined in the proposed schedule and that our proposed project team will not change without prior written approval from the District. If necessary, RDN has 16 additional staff who may support the project as needed; however, it is our intent to utilize the project staff proposed below. Figure 1. Proposed Project Team Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 7 | P a g e Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 8 | P a g e PROJECT OVERVIEW The Costa Mesa Sanitary District is an independent special district that provides wastewater and solid waste collection services. The District’s boundaries include the entire City of Costa Mesa and portions of the City of Newport Beach and some areas of unincorporated Orange County. The District serves a residential population of approximately 120,000 and close to 4,000 businesses. The District collects and transfers wastewater to the Orange County Sanitation District for treatment. The District is soliciting a Sewer Permit and Fixture Fee Management Plan Development Study. Primary objectives include: 1. Determine fees required to adequately cover the sewer permit, inspection, plan review, cost for capacity, among other costs for issuing permits and/or connections. 2. Identify any revenue sources or enhancements not currently being utilized by the District, leveraging data gathered from local agency sewer permit and fixture fees. 3. Recommend fees and produce a Sewer Fee Study Report, meeting legal requirements, including California Government Code §66016, §66013, and Proposition 26. SUMMARY OF APPROACH RDN has tailored our approach for this Study with major tasks summarized as follows: Task 1. Kickoff Meeting. RDN will meet with District staff to discuss study objectives, scope of work, schedule, data collection, introduce team leads, among other items. Task 2. Gather Information and Data. We will provide a data request list; gather and review relevant data; survey local sewer agencies to determine how other public agencies charge for various permits, rates, and fees; summarize survey results and previous sewer fee/fixture study reports in an easy-to-read chart; and summarize the data in the report appendix. Task 3. Staff Interviews. RDN will interview District staff to understand the current sewer permitting processes and procedures with the goal of determining shortcomings in the current process, make recommendations for improvements, and advise on best industry practices. Task 4. Study and Report Requirements. We will develop an easy-to-use Excel-based sewer fee model with projected expenses and revenue requirements for 10 years with proposed sewer permit and fixture fees for a five-year period. Task 5. Draft Reports. RDN will provide a Draft Report documenting the methodology, assumptions, data, and analysis used to derive sewer permit and fixture fees, along with a PowerPoint presentation for the Board of Directors and Community Advisory Committee. Task 6. Final Reports. We will incorporate District feedback into the final report and clearly demonstrate the nexus between costs and recommended fees to fulfill AB 1600 reporting requirements, presenting to District leadership as requested. Task 7. Meetings. Meet with District stakeholders as follows: 1. Kickoff meeting; 2. Presentation of preliminary findings; 3. Draft report meeting with staff; 4. Draft report presentation with the Board and Community Advisory Committee; and 5. Final report with the Board. Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 9 | P a g e DETAILED PROJECT WORK PLAN/SCHEDULE Task 1. Kickoff Meeting Task 1.1. Kickoff Meeting The Kickoff meeting will serve as a forum where District staff and RDN will meet to discuss project objectives, approach, work plan, schedule, and priorities. Bi-weekly progress meetings with District staff will be held via webinar. Each month RDN will provide a summary report charting the current progress on each task, data needs, issues requiring action, project schedule update, and status of action items from the previous report. RDN is committed to providing transparent project management and open communication with the District. RDN will develop an internal Project Management Plan (PMP) that serves as a roadmap for the project team, defining project goals and objectives, scope of work, deliverables, schedule, and budget. Table 3. Task 1 – Kickoff Meeting Meetings ▪ Kickoff meeting RDN Deliverables ▪ Meeting agendas and minutes ▪ Progress reports District Deliverables ▪ Direction on project schedule and priorities Objective: RDN is committed to providing transparent project management that fosters collaboration and ensures study success. We will prepare a Project Management Plan that will guide project administration. At the kickoff meeting, we will solidify the project timeline and priorities. We will also hold bi-weekly meetings to discuss project progress. Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 10 | P a g e Task 2. Gather Information and Data Task 2.1. Data Request RDN will provide a data request for that lists necessary data to complete the study. The data request will include financial information and staff resources used to complete the various tasks associated with inspections, permitting, and fixture fees. Task 2.2. Data Review & Supplemental Data Requests We will review District data to confirm completeness and ensure understanding of historical wastewater operations. If data are received in non-csv formats, RDN will convert the data accordingly and perform quality assurance to ensure data accuracy. For data validation, RDN may request additional data throughout the study to reconcile any inconsistencies. Task 2.3. Local Survey RDN will survey local sewer agencies to determine what and how other public agencies charge for sewer permits, fixture rates, sewer fees, and their permitting processes, associated with permitting private sewer modifications and developer building projects. As requested in the RFP, RDN will contact 30 public agencies consisting of OC Sanitation members (25 public agencies), LA County Sanitation, LA City, County of Orange Building department (for unincorporated area), City of Long Beach, and Multon Niguel Water District. RDN will provide an easy-to-read summary chart presenting survey results. Task 2.4. Summary Lists A list of all data gathered and reviewed will be included in the study report appendix. Table 4. Task 2 – Project Management and Data Collection Meetings ▪ Bi-weekly check-in meetings RDN Deliverables ▪ Data request ▪ Summary Chart District Deliverables ▪ Response to data request Objective: Ahead of the kickoff meeting, we will provide the District with a detailed data request form. RDN will also survey local sewer agencies and compile a summary of rates, fees, and permitting processes. Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 11 | P a g e Task 3. Staff Interviews Task 3.1. Staff Interviews RDN will Interview District staff to learn about and understand the current sewer permitting procedures and processes with the goal of determining shortcomings in the current process, make recommendations for improvements, and advise on best industry practices. RDN will interview the following District staff: • District Engineer • Finance Manager • Engineering Technician • Administrative Assistant • Centricity (District’s City Works/PLL System consultant) • District Contract Inspector • District Consultant Mike Benesh, RBH & Associates Table 5. Task 3. – Staff Interviews Meetings ▪ Staff interviews RDN Deliverables ▪ Recommendations for improvements District Deliverables ▪ Staff availability for interviews Objective: RDN will Interview District staff to understand the current sewer permitting processes and procedures with the goal of determining shortcomings in the current process, make recommendations for improvements, and advise on best industry practices. Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 12 | P a g e Task 4. Study and Report Requirements Task 4.1. Calculate System Value Based on District asset records, RDN will determine the value of the capacity-related infrastructure that must be recovered from new customers. Valuation methods may include original cost, replacement cost, replacement cost less depreciation (RCLD), present value cost of future infrastructure, or a combination of methods. RDN will work with District staff to select the most appropriate valuation approach. Adjustments will be made for debt, grants, donated assets, and other deductions to avoid double-charging new development through connection fees and again through wastewater rates. Task 4.2. Evaluate System Capacity RDN will work with District staff to accurately measure existing system capacity to determine the share of capacity available to future customers. The District’s capital improvement plan will be reviewed to allocate each project between existing and future capacity needs. Task 4.3. Assess New Customer Demand RDN will determine system demand based on fixtures. Future fixture values will be based on sound and defensible methodologies, which may include linear regressions or Monte Carlo simulations. RDN will recommend fees that best meet the District’s objectives. Task 4.4. Permit Fees Using the data collected during staff interviews (Task 3) and the local agency survey (Task 2.3), RDN will provide the District with a detailed list of potential fees and costs that may be recovered as part of the fee schedule. Additionally, we will provide recommendations for best fee practices. Task 4.5. Fee Model RDN will provide the District with a user-friendly Excel-based fee model that allows staff to review different scenarios as well as track the 10-year planning horizon which future fees will be based on. The 5-years of recommended fees will be displayed based on values determined within the financial section of the model. Table 6. Task 4. – Study and Report Meetings ▪ Progress meetings RDN Deliverables ▪ Fixture fee recommendations ▪ Permit fee recommendations ▪ Fee model in Excel District Deliverables ▪ Fee analysis feedback Objective: RDN will develop wastewater permit and fixture fees that may include a “buy-in” to existing assets as well as a fair share of “incremental” capital improvements needed to serve new development. The recommended fees will comply with the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code §66016 and §66013), recent U.S. Supreme Court and California property case law (Sheetz v. County of El Dorado), and consider developer concerns. Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 13 | P a g e Task 5. Draft Reports Task 5.1. Draft Fee Report The draft fee study reports will contain an overview, study objectives, assumptions, regulatory requirements, and methodologies. The report will discuss short- and long-term financial planning, capital planning, cost of service, fee-setting analysis, and comparison surveys. Key outputs of data, analysis, and rationale will be visualized in the reports. The visualizations provided in the reports will be an effective tool to communicate conclusions to the District Board, Community Advisory Committee, customers, and other stakeholders. The main sections of the draft report will include: Table 7. Report Sections and Corresponding Contents Task 5.2. Draft Report Presentation Working with District staff, RDN will prepare a presentation that summarizes the fee study report for the Board of Directors and Community Advisory Committee. The presentation will include recommendations, findings, and proposed sewer permit/fixture fees. Table 8. Task 5. – Draft Reports Meetings ▪ Progress meetings RDN Deliverables ▪ Draft in Word and PDF formats ▪ Report Presentation District Deliverables ▪ Report comments, responses, and recommendations Heading Section Brief Executive Summary A narrative to summarize the scope of the study. Introduction A brief description of the District including organizational structure, population, and service area. Methodology Used A description of the methodology used for analyzing the fees and how the study complies with all applicable laws. Asset Valuation, System Capacity and Buy-in Values A review of the District's assets and values, total system capacity, and customer growth/ potential demand. Permitting Best Practice Recommendations A narrative of how the proposed permitting process and fees will improve the overall application of District priorities and better align with industry standards. Fee Design A detail of the proposed fee structures, proposed inflationary adjustments, and fee for different types of customers. Fee Impact A summary on the impacts fee changes will have on each customer and the community. Objective: RDN will provide the District with a draft fee study report and presentation which details the steps taken and results of the study. Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 14 | P a g e Task 6. Final Reports Task 6.1. Final Connection Fee Report In the final fee study report we will incorporate District feedback into the final report and clearly demonstrate the nexus between costs and recommended fees in simple terms to fulfill AB 1600 reporting requirements. The final report will also contain a table summarizing existing deficiencies and recommendations to address the item. Task 6.2. Final Report Presentation Working with District staff, RDN will prepare a presentation that summarizes the fee study report for the Board of Directors. The presentation will include recommendations, findings, and proposed sewer permit/fixture fees. This meeting will be conducted in-person. Table 9. Task 6. – Final Reports Meetings ▪ Progress meetings via teleconference RDN Deliverables ▪ Final report in Word and PDF formats ▪ Final Report Presentation District Deliverables ▪ Comments, responses, and recommendations to draft report Objective: RDN will provide a final Fee report incorporating District feedback. We will also provide the final fee calculation model and meeting presentations as requested. Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 15 | P a g e Task 7. Meetings (Summary) Task 7.1. Meetings Formal Meetings: 1. Kickoff meeting (Virtual) – Described in Task 1. 2. Presentation of preliminary findings to staff (Virtual) – RDN will review all inputs and outputs with appropriate staff as well as the findings of interviews and surveys before beginning the fee design analysis. Fee analysis and the resulting reports will be based on input received at this meeting. 3. Submit Draft Report to staff (Virtual) – Described in Task 5. 4. Submit Draft Report to Board of Directors (Virtual) - Described in Task 5. 5. Submit Draft Report to Community Advisory Committee (Virtual) - Described in Task 5. 6. Present Final Report to Board of Directors (In-Person) - Described in Task 6. Check-in Meetings: 1. Bi-weekly project update meetings. Table 10. Task 7. – Meetings Meetings ▪ Kickoff meeting ▪ Presentation of preliminary findings ▪ Draft report for staff ▪ Draft report for Board of Directors ▪ Draft report for Community Advisory Committee ▪ Final report for Board of Directors ▪ Progress meetings via teleconference RDN Deliverables ▪ Meeting presentations and minutes District Deliverables ▪ Presentation comments, responses, and recommendations Objective: RDN will facilitate meetings throughout the study at the request of District staff. RDN recommends six formal meetings with staff, the Board of Directors, and the Community Advisory Committee as well as bi-weekly check-in meetings to review study progress with staff. Virtual meetings may become in-person meetings per District request at an additional cost to accommodate travel time and costs. Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 16 | P a g e Schedule Figure 2 presents our proposed preliminary timeline for the District’s study with fees scheduled to be implemented in April 2025. The preliminary schedule assumes that the project will be awarded and kicked off by mid-October 2024. If the District responds promptly to RDN’s data request, we estimate that a presentation of the preliminary findings can occur as soon as mid-November 2024. The meetings following the preliminary findings will be adjusted based on staff availability, Board Meeting timing, and holiday schedules as necessary. Completion of the final report will be contingent on the draft report presentation meetings being completed. RDN expects three to four weeks to incorporate comments from staff, the Board, and the Citizen’s Advisory Committee. Figure 2. Preliminary Project Schedule Task Total Hours Task 1 - Kickoff Meeting 10 Task 2 - Gather Information and Data 48 Task 3 - Staff Interviews 22 Task 4 - Study and Report 47 Task 5 - Draft Reports 31 Task 6 - Final Reports 21 Task 7 - Meetings 26 Implementation AprilOctoberNovemberDecemberJanuaryFebruaryMarch Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 17 | P a g e C. COST PROPOSAL Table 10 presents RDN’s cost proposal and compensation schedule, respectively. Our time and materials proposal to provide professional consulting services to conduct a Sewer Permit and Fixture Fee Management Plan Development Study for Costa Mesa Sanitary District, including other direct costs and travel, is $39,900. Table 10. Cost Proposal Table 11. Standard Fee Schedule Consultant Labor Category Hourly Rate Niehaus Project Director $340 Elowsky Project Manager $220 Kido QA/QC Consultant $240 Kallerud Consultant $200 Van Dinther Consultant $200 Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 18 | P a g e D. APPENDIX The appendix of this proposal includes single page resumes for key RDN staff and Addendum #2 to the RFP. Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Robert D. Niehaus, Ph.D. Project Director OVERVIEW & BIOGRAPHY Dr. Niehaus is widely recognized for his expertise in the economics of water resources and the environment. He has broad experience managing public and private sector water and land resource economic analyses and planning efforts, with expertise in water and wastewater fee and rate analysis, cost-benefit evaluations, water demand econometric modeling and forecasting, and regional economics. His expertise extends to river basin planning, groundwater management, economic impacts of water and other resource-use projects, military base realignment, housing, energy, and global climate change. He has provided expert support to senior civilian and military decision-makers for numerous projects. Dr. Niehaus has published a wide range of applied studies in these fields and has directed the successful completion of projects at more than 200 locations worldwide, with much of this experience in Southern California. RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE • City of Alhambra, Water Rate Study • Costa Mesa Sanitary District, Wastewater Rate Study • Rosamond Community Services District, Water and Wastewater Rate Studies • Napa County, Water and Wastewater Rate Studies • Lake Arrowhead Community Services District, Water & Wastewater Rate Study • California City, Water and & Sewer Impact Fee Study • Mid-Peninsula Water District, Capacity Fee Study • West Valley Water District, Development Impact Fee Study • Quartz Hill Water District, Water Rate Study • California City, Water, Sewer, and Recycled Water Rate Study • Palmdale Water District, Water Rate Study • Santa Clarita Valley Water District, Water Rate Study • California Rural Water Association, Water & Sewer Rate Studies • Ventura River Water District, Cost of Service and Rate Setting Study • Moulton Niguel Water District, Cost of Service Peer Review • Carpinteria Valley Water, District Cost of Service and Rate Setting Study • Manatt, Phelps, & Phillips, LLC, Rate Comparison Study • National Resources Defense Council, LADWP Data Collection & Water Rate Analysis • West Basin Municipal Water District, Landscape Irrigation Efficiency Program • Las Virgenes Water Budget Model • Fremont Valley Preservation Project, Water Rate, and Revenue Analysis Study • Golden State Water Company, Comparative Water Rate Analysis • Goleta Sanitary District/Goleta West Sanitary District, Economic Analysis of Development Projections • Santa Barbara County, Economics of Groundwater Management • City of Santa Barbara, Desalination Plant Environmental Impact Report • United States Army Corps of Engineers, Flood Protection and Recreation Study • City of Santa Barbara, Long-Term Water Sales and Revenue Requirements Forecast Analysis • Santa Ynez River Basin, Planning and Cachuma Project Water Allocation Analyses TECHNICAL SPECIALTIES • Project Management • Regional and Resource Economics • Rate and Fee Comparison • Economic Impact Studies • Public Sector Water Economic and Planning Analysis • Technical Report Review • Cost of Service Rate Studies • Development Impact Fees • Resource Planning • Econometric Modeling • Survey Design and Implementation PROFESSIONAL HISTORY Robert D. Niehaus, Inc. Managing Director (1983-Present) EDUCATION Doctor of Philosophy in Economics (1979) University of Maryland Bachelor of Arts in Government (1972) Oberlin College PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS • American Water Works Association • American Economic Association • National Association for Business Economics Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Ichiko Kido, M.B.A. QA/QC Consultant OVERVIEW & BIOGRAPHY Ms. Kido has 34 years of experience in utility financial planning. Ms. Kido advises RDN as a leading expert in developing rates and fees that meet Proposition 218 requirements and other laws and regulations. She is widely recognized as a leading consultant for designing conservation-based water rates, including budget-based rate designs. She also managed capacity fee charges throughout the state, ensuring the fees are compliant despite the dynamic regulatory landscape. Her expertise is founded upon her experience working with more than 200 water utilities throughout California. Ms. Kido is a member of the American Water Works Association (AWWA) and promotes best practices in the AWWA’s Manual M1 Principles of Water Rates, Fees and Charges and the WEF Manual of Practice Number 27. PROJECT EXPERIENCE • South Coast Water District, Water, Recycled Water, and Sewer Rate Studies • City of Alhambra, Water Rate Study • Montecito Sanitary District, Wastewater Rate Study • Ventura River Water District, Water Rate Financial Plan • Napa County – LBRID/NBRID, Water and Wastewater Rate Studies • Quartz Hill Water District, Water Rate Study • Redway Community Services District, Water and Sewer Rate Studies • West Valley Water District, Development Impact Fee Study • Mid-Peninsula Water District, Capacity Fee Study • Timber Cove County Water District, Water Rate Study • Riebli Mutual Water Company, Water Rate Study • Palm Ranch Irrigation District, Water Rate Study • City of Greenfield, Water and Sewer Rate Studies • Chester Public Utilities District, Water and Sewer Rate Studies • Lost Hills Utility District, Water and Sewer Rate Studies • North Edwards Water District, Water Rate Study • Mendocino City Community Services District, Sewer Rate Study • Manatt, Phelps, and Phillips, LLC, Water Rate Comparison Study • Lake County Sanitation District, Sewer Rate Study • Wynola Water District, Water Rate Review • Riverfront Mutual Water Company, Water Rate Study • San Simeon Community Services District, Sewer Rate Study • City of Loyalton, Sewer Rate Study • Rand Community Services District, Water Rate Study • Center Water Company, Water Rate Study • Palmdale Water District, Water Rate Study • Santa Clarita Valley Water, Water Rate Review • West Valley Water District, Construction Water Rate Study • Hi-Desert Mutual Water Company, Water Rate Study • Apple Valley Heights County Water District, Water Rate Study • Daggett Community Services District, Water Rate Study • Mariana Ranchos County, Water Rate Study • Apple Valley View Mutual Water Company, Water Rate Study • Sheep Creek Water Company, Water Rate Study TECHNICAL SPECIALTIES • Financial Planning • Cost of Service Analysis • Rate Design • Rate Comparison Analysis • Housing Market Analysis • Data Analysis • Technical Report Review • Survey Interviewing • Statistical Analysis PROFESSIONAL HISTORY Robert D. Niehaus, Inc. Senior Technical Advisor (2022 – Present) Program Manager (2005 – 2022) EDUCATION Master of Business Administration (2014) Martin V. Smith School of Business & Economic, California State University, Channel Islands Bachelor of Arts in Law (1989) Fukuoka University, Japan PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS • American Water Works Association • Association of California Water Agencies • California Rural Water Association • Association of California Water Agencies Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Anthony Elowsky, M.A. Project Manager OVERVIEW & BIOGRAPHY Mr. Elowsky manages RDN’s utility financial planning projects, including water and wastewater rate- and fee-setting studies. His expertise lies in water and wastewater financial planning, cost of service analysis, rate and fee design, and applied economic research. He manages water and wastewater rate studies, capacity fee studies, and builds customized financial models to help utilities meet their financial goals. He has also conducted comparative water rate analyses and compiled and analyzed data on water rates and financial information for more than 100 purveyors throughout California. He provides rate setting expertise to professional organizations for both water and wastewater concerns. Mr. Elowsky holds a bachelor’s degree from California State University, Los Angeles as well as a master’s degree from California State University, Fullerton. RELEVANT PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS Hilton Creek Community Services District, Wastewater Rate and Connection Fee Study 2022 Hilton Creek Community Services District provides sewer service for over 500 connections in Mono County, California. Hilton Creek CSD retained RDN to complete a sewer rate and fee study for $29,840 which includes a 5-year rate plan, long-term financial model, and a capacity fee analysis. Mr. Elowsky, working for RDN, serves as the project manager and principal contact for the rate and fee study. This project is currently ongoing. RELEVANT PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS Quartz Hill Water District –Water Budget Rate Study • Evaluated District rate and financial data, recommending rate adjustments that met industry standard rate-making policies • Reviewed and made recommendations for outdoor water budget allocations • Assisted in preparation of Proposition 218 hearing process Costa Mesa Sanitary District, Wastewater Rate Study ▪ Develop District’s long-range financial plan for the next ten years ▪ Design wastewater rates that ensure revenue sufficiency and compliance with Proposition 218 ADDITIONAL PROJECT EXPERIENCE City of Alhambra, Water Rate Study Mendocino City Community Services District, Wastewater and GWM Rate Study Rosamond Community Services District, Water and Wastewater Rate Study City of Loyalton, Wastewater Rate Study City of Greenfield, Water and Wastewater Rate Studies Napa County – LBRID/NBRID, Water and Wastewater Rate Studies West Valley Water District, Development Impact Fee Study California City, Water, Recycled Water, and Sanitary Sewer Rate Studies Mid-Peninsula Water District, Capacity Fee Study California City, Water and Wastewater Capacity Fee Studies Manatt, Phelps, and Phillips, LLC, Water Rate Comparison Study Palmdale Water District, Water Rate Study TECHNICAL SPECIALTIES • Financial Planning • Cost of Service Analysis • Rate Design • Database Management • Rate Comparison • Data Analysis • Technical Report Review PROFESSIONAL HISTORY Robert D. Niehaus, Inc. Project Manager/Analyst (2018- Present) Market Researcher (2017-2018) Dudek Environmental, Inc. Field Technician (2016-2017) EDUCATION Master of Arts in Anthropology (2020) CSU, Fullerton Bachelor of Arts in Anthropology (2014) CSU, Los Angeles PROFESSIONAL PRESENTATIONS • Wastewater Rate Changes and the Journey to Acceptance California Rural Water Association Expo 2022, Stateline, NV. March. • Incorporating Customer Use Distributions when Calculating Drought Surcharges. Paper presented at the ACWA Virtual Fall Conference, October 27- 29, 2020. Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Bjorn Kallerud, M.Sc. Consultant OVERVIEW & BIOGRAPHY Bjorn is a quantitative economist specializing in application of statistical programming to water and wastewater rate analyses and capacity fees. He is an integral part of RDN’s water, housing, and regional econometric modeling teams. He has conducted demand and financial analyses in support of rate-setting for water agencies throughout California. He has prepared housing market assessments in the United States and Europe and analyzed alternative methodologies for the DOD’s Basic Allowance for Housing program. His M.Sc. in Economics is from the Stockholm School of Economics (emphasis in applied economic analysis), and his B.A. in Economics is from U.C. Santa Barbara (with distinction). His master’s thesis addressed the effects of drought on irrigation decisions regarding use of groundwater and surface water in the agricultural sector. RELEVANT PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS Mid-Peninsula Water District, Capacity Fee Study ▪ Econometrically forecasted urban water demand and account growth ▪ Built interactive applications for bill impact analysis and compliance with impending changes to state legislation ▪ Reevaluated customer classifications to ensure fee equitability Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency, Rate Payer Advocate ▪ Reviewed Facility Capacity Fee calculation modeling efforts by the agency ▪ Built relational database to reconcile historical customer usage data across three agencies that merged into one ADDITIONAL PROJECT EXPERIENCE California City, Water and Sewer Capacity Fee Study West Valley Water District, Development Impact Fee Study Mid-Peninsula Water District, Capacity Fee Study Quartz Hill Water District, Water Rate Study California City, Water, Recycled Water, and Sanitary Sewer Rate Studies Napa Berryessa Resort Improvement District, Water & Wastewater Rate Study Lake Berryessa Resort Improvement District, Water & Wastewater Rate Study California Rural Water Association, Water & Wastewater Rate Studies Mariposa County, Water Rate Study Daggett Community Services District, Water Rate Study Apple Valley Foothill Community Services District, Water Rate Study Mariana Ranchos County, Water Rate Study Sheep Creek Water Company, Water Rate Study Thunderbird County Water District, Water Rate Study Juniper Riviera Community Water District, Water Rate Study Apple Valley View Mutual Water Company, Water Rate Study Orosi Public Utility District, Water Rate Study Patterson Tract Community Services District, Water Rate Study West Valley County Water District, Water Rate Study Patterson Tract Community Services District, Proposition 218 Support Hi-Desert Mutual Water Company, Water Rate Study TECHNICAL SPECIALTIES • Econometric Modeling • Database Management • Data Visualization • Statistical Programming • Technical Report Review PROFESSIONAL HISTORY Robert D. Niehaus, Inc. Economist (2018-Present) Market Researcher (2016) EDUCATION Master of Science in Economics (2018) Stockholm School of Economics Bachelor of Arts in Economics & Psychology (2014) University of California, Santa Barbara PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS • National Association of Business Economics Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Zachary Van Dinther, B.S. Consultant OVERVIEW & BIOGRAPHY Mr. Van Dinther provides financial and economic consulting support throughout the rate study process. He is responsible for collecting and analyzing water and wastewater data from agency budgetary documents and customer billing records. He also forecasts urban water demand and account growth and produces powerful data visualization tools, which are used in reports and public outreach materials. Mr. Van Dinther leverages his experience conducting research with Dr. Jan Beecher for the Institute of Public Utilities at Michigan State University, where he received his B.S. in Environmental Economics. RELEVANT PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS Rosamond Community Services District, Water and Wastewater Rate Study • Helped evaluate the Districts’ rates and financial data, make recommendations and propose rates that meet the water industry’s rate-making policies. • Performed econometric customer-demand projections and bill impact study • Assisted in preparation of Proposition 218 hearing process Lake Arrowhead Community Services District, Water & Wastewater Rate Study • Forecasted water demand and account growth over a 10-year period utilizing econometric methods. • Calculated cost escalation factors for City expenses using local, state and federal data sources. • Presented findings to Board of Directors at public meeting ADDITIONAL PROJECT EXPERIENCE • City of Alhambra, Water Rate Study • Rosamond CSD, Water and Wastewater Rate Study • Quartz Hill Water District, Water Rate Study • California City, Water, Recycled Water, and Sanitary Sewer Rate Studies • West Valley Water District, Development Impact Fee Study • Lake Arrowhead CSD, Water and Wastewater Rate Study • Lost Hills Utility District, Wastewater Rate Study • Lake County Sanitation District, Wastewater Rate Study • Mid-Peninsula Water District, Capacity Fee Study • California City, Water and Wastewater Capacity Fee Studies • City of Loyalton, Wastewater Rate Comparison Study • Palmdale Water District, Water Rate Study • Santa Clarita Valley Water, Water Rate Review • California Rural Water Association, Water Rate Study • Mariana Ranchos County, Water Rate Study • Apple Valley View Mutual Water Company, Water Rate Study • Thunderbird County Water District, Water Rate Study • Juniper Riviera Community Water District, Water Rate Study • Orosi Public Utility District, Wastewater Rate Study • West Valley County Water District, Water Rate Study • Napa County, Water and Sewer Rate Study TECHNICAL SPECIALTIES • Database Management • Data Analysis • Statistical Programming • Data Visualization • Technical Report Review • Cost Indexes PROFESSIONAL HISTORY Robert D. Niehaus, Inc. Consultant (2020-Present) Market Researcher (2017) Institute of Public Utilities at Michigan State University Research Assistant (2018-2020) EDUCATION Bachelor of Science in Environmental Economics (2020) Michigan State University PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS • National Association for Business Economics (NABE) Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC 290 Paularino Ave, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 • (949) 645-8400 • fax: (714) 540-1392 “Protecting public health and the environment for current and future generations.” Board of Directors Robert Ooten Michael Scheafer Arlene Schafer Arthur Perry Brett Eckles Staff Scott C. Carroll General Manager Harper & Burns, LLP District Counsel Davis Farr, LLP District Treasurer Mark Esquer District Engineer Noelani Middenway District Clerk & Public Information Officer Kaitlin Tran Finance Manager Dyana Bojarski Administrative Services Manager Steve Cano Wastewater Maintenance Superintendent www.cmsdca.gov Platinum Level District of Distinction September 04, 2024 To: Sewer Permit and Fixture Fee Management Plan Development Study Proposers Re: Addendum #2: Sample Agreement and Fee Proposal Form(s) This Addendum is hereby made a part of the contract documents, specifications, and requirements. Receipt of this Addendum shall be noted on the Proposal Form and as submitted with your Proposal. This Addendum #2 includes a Fee Proposal Form and Sample Agreement. The following additions shall be made to the contract documents; all other conditions remain the same. Request for Proposal 1. Appendix I: Sample Agreement 2. Appendix II: Fee proposal Form Please incorporate this addendum and these documents into the RFP and Project Requirements. Sincerely, Mark Esquer, P.E. District Engineer cc. Noelani Middenway, CMSD Clerk of the Board Attachment Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Proposal Form – 1 of 5Sewer Permit Fee Development Study COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Appendix II COST PROPOSAL FORM Sewer Permit and Fixture Fee Management Plan Development Study Name of Proposer: Address: Phone No.: TO THE COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT: Pursuant to and in compliance with the Notice Inviting Sealed Proposals (Bids) and the other documents relating thereto, the undersigned Proposer has carefully examined and is completely familiar with the project requirements, specifications, and contract documents including the local conditions affecting the performance of the contract, the character, quality, quantities, and scope of the work, and the materials to be furnished as to the requirements of the specifications and the contract. If awarded the contract, the undersigned Proposer hereby proposes and agrees to perform within the time stipulated in the contract, including all of its component parts and everything required to be performed, and to furnish any and all of the labor, material, tools, equipment, transportation, services, permits, utilities, and all other items necessary to perform the contract and complete in a workmanlike manner, all of the work required in connection with the construction of said work all in strict conformity with the project document, specifications and other contract documents, including addenda Nos.: , , , , and , on file in the DISTRICT office for the prices hereinafter set forth. The undersigned as Proposer, declares that the only persons or parties interested in this proposal as principals are those named herein; that this proposal is made without collusion with any person, firm, or corporation; and he proposes and agrees, if the proposal is accepted, that he will execute a contract with the DISTRICT in the form set forth in the contract documents and that he will accept in full payment thereof the following prices, to wit: 2 1 805-618-1356 140 E. Carrillo St. Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Robert D. Niehaus, Inc Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Proposal Form – 2 of 5Sewer Permit Fee Development Study CMSD Sewer Permit and Fixture Fee Management Plan Development Study Schedule of Work Items BID ITEM APPROX. QUANTITY DESCRIPTION TOTAL AMOUNT 1 Lump Sum SOW Item b., Gather Information and Data. $ 2 Lump Sum SOW Item c., Staff Interviews. $ 3 Lump Sum SOW Item d., Study and Report Requirements, including Model/Spreadsheet, Best Industry Practice, Narratives, and Improvements. $ 4 Lump Sum SOW Item e., Draft Report & Power Point Presentation. $ 5 Lump Sum SOW Item f., Final Report. $ 6 Lump Sum SOW Item(s) a. & g., Meetings and Presentations. $ Total Amount:$ Proposers Initials Note: In case of a discrepancy between the words and figures, the words shall prevail. The Consultant agrees that the DISTRICT will not be held responsible if any of the approximate quantities shown in the foregoing proposal shall be found incorrect, and Consultant shall not make any claim for damages or for loss of profits because of a difference between the quantities of the various classes of work as estimated and the work actually done. If any error, omission or mis-statements shall be discovered in the estimated quantities, it shall not invalidate this contract or release the Consultant from the execution and completion of the whole or part of the work herein specified, in accordance with the specifications and the plans herein mentioned and the prices herein agreed upon and fixed therefor, or excuse him from any of the obligations or liabilities hereunder, or entitle him to any damages or compensation otherwise than as provided for in this contract. The Consultant agrees that the DISTRICT shall have the right to increase or decrease the quantity of any bid item or portion of the work or to omit portions of the work as may be deemed necessary or expedient, and that the payment for incidental items of work, not separately provided in the proposal shall be considered included in the price proposal for other various items of work. Proposers Initials __________ (WRITE THE TOTAL IN WORDS BELOW) RDN RDN Thirty-nine Thousand and nine-hundred dollars 39,900 5,600 4,400 6,400 10,260 3,160 9,880 Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Proposal Form – 3 of 5Sewer Permit Fee Development Study Respectfully submitted: Business Name Business Address City State Zip Individual Signing Proposal (Printed) (Signed) Individual’s Title/Company Position Individual’s Office or Cell Phone: I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the forgoing is true and correct. Dated on _______________, this ______________ day of 20_ . (Signed) 20249/26/24 805-618-1356 Director of Business Development Jack Lyon Santa Barbara, CA 93101 140 E Carrillo Street Robert D Niehaus, Inc. Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Proposal Form – 4 of 5Sewer Permit Fee Development Study PROJECT REFERENCES To fully evaluate your background and experience for the project herein proposed, it is requested that you submit a list of similar projects completed, or in progress, within the last 36 months. You may provide an additional sheet if needed. Your cooperation in this matter is greatly appreciated. DATE PROJECT AGENCY'S CONTRACT AWARDED AWARDING AGENCY ADMINISTRATOR Rochelle Patterson|661-513-1239 Rpatterson@scvwa.org Annamaria Martinez|707-259-8378 annamaria.martinez@countyofnapa.org Katie Hockett|951-279-3601 katie.hockett@CoronaCA.org Dennis Hoffmeyer 661-456-1021 dhoffmeyer@palmdalewater.org Jerry Vilander|714-538-0079 JerryV@serranowater.org Rene Ramirez|650-591-8941 rramirez@midpeninsulawater.org Jennifer Leisz|949-342-1141 Jleisz@scwd.org Xiwei Wang|760-246-8638 xwang@vvwraca.gov Armando Fernandez|714-647-3316 Afernandez@santa-ana.org Alma Quezada|805-646-3403 alma@vrwd.ca.gov John Weigold|203-912-5652 jweigold@montsan.org Alvin Papa|714-536-5503 alvin.papa@surfcity-hb.org Steve Popelar|951-685-7434 spopelar@JCSD.US Joe Barragan|760-373-7162 Jbarragan@californiacity-ca.gov Rene Cambero|951-581-7757 rcambero@lynwoodca.gov Jennifer Leisz|949-342-1141 Jleisz@scwd.org Tony Nisich|805-697-1403 tnisich@mnsengineers.com Nich Cooper|661-831-0989 ncooper@greenfieldcwd.org Emma Bills|760-920-1113 emmabills21@gmail.com Glenn Gradin|707-923-3101 ggradin.rcsd@gmail.com Lorinda Beatty|760-965-9696 L.Beatty@hiltoncreekcsd.com Kevin Baughman|707-953-8292 kbaughman@sonic.net Dennis Ahlen|626-570-3274 dahlen@cityofalhambra.org Kaden Young|949-831-2500 Kyoung@mnwd.com John O'Brien|909-336-7108 jobrien@lakearrowheadcsd.com Mark Esquer|949-645-8400 mesquer@cmsdca.gov Alma Quezada|805-646-3403 alma@vrwd.ca.gov Kathy LeBlanc|530-993-6750 ofclerk-cityofloyalton@psln.com Annamaria Martinez|707-259-8378 annamaria.martinez@countyofnapa.org Ana Chavez|661-797-2903 anachavez@lhud.org Bertha Perez|909 644-2108 bperez@wvwd.org Kim Domingo|661-256-5807 kdomingo@rosamondcsd.com Debbie Jones|760-374-2414 rcwd@randwaterdistrict.com SCV Water Napa County City of Corona Palmdale Water District Serrano WD Mid-Peninsula Water District South Coast Water District Victor Valley WWRA City of Santa Ana Ventura River Water District Montecito Sanitary District City of Huntington Beach Jurupa CSD City of California City City of Lynwood South Coast Water District City of Greenfield Greenfield CWD Lone Pine CSD Redway CSD Hilton Creek CSD Riebli MWC City of Alhambra Moulton Niguel Water District Lake Arrowhead CSD Costa Mesa Sanitary District Ventura River Water District City of Loyalton Napa County (LBRID/NBRID) Lost Hills Utility District West Valley Water District Rosamond CSD Rand CWD 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2024 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2022 2022 2022 2021 2021 2021 2021 2021 2021 2021 Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC Proposal Form – 5 of 5Sewer Permit Fee Development Study PROJECT ADDENDA Proposer shall signify receipt of all Addenda here, if any: ADDENDUM NO.DATE RECEIVED PROPOSER’S SIGNATURE 9/6/24 8/29/24 2 1 Docusign Envelope ID: C75B009E-0869-483C-91CD-05ABE52CBBCC