HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.1 Solid Waste Agmt CITY CLERK
File#J IE IIOIO-I IO
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:April 6, 2004
SUBJECT: Solid Waste Franchise Consultant Services Agreement
Report Prepared By: Jason Behrmann, Administrative Analyst
ATTACHMENTS: 1) R3 Consulting Group Qualifications
2) Proposed Project Schedule
3) Resolution Approving Agreement with R3 Consulting Group
4) Budget Change Form
RECOMMENDATION~.)
.tx/ 1) Adopt Resolution
~, - 2) Approve Budget Change in the amount of $26,650
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: The total cost of the agreement is for an amount not to exceed
$79,950. It is estimated that one third of this amount will be spent in Fiscal Year 2003-2004, requiring a
Budget Change in the amount of $26,650 from Unappropriated General Fund Reserves. The remaining
amount will be included in the Fiscal Year 2004-2005 Budget. The City will receive 100% reimbursement
of these costs from the selected hauler.
DESCRIPTION:
At the City Council meeting on January 6, 2004, the City Council authorized Staff to circulate a Request
For Qualifications (RFQ) to firms which provide solid waste consulting services. The focus of the scope
of work is to assist the City in preparing a Request For Proposal and negotiating a franchise agreement for
solid waste and recycling collection and disposal. The current agreement with Waste Management will
expire on June 30, 2005. Staff is recommending the selection orR3 consulting Group to assist with this
process.
CONSULTANT SELECTION:
Staff distributed the Consultant RFQ to five firms that have a background with solid waste issues. The
City received responses from four firms, which have a variety of consulting experience related to
municipal solid waste procurements. The four firms are: R3 Consulting Group, Hilton Farnkopf &
Hobson (HF&H), Brown Vence & Associates (BVA) and Environmental Planning Consultants.
Environmental Planning Consultants was excluded from consideration early in the process due to its
limited resources and experience compared to the other three firms. City Staff conducted individual
interviews with representatives from R3, HF&H and BVA in order to clarify information submitted in
each proposal.
COPIES TO: Ric Hutchinson, R3 Consulting Group ITEM NO. ~,t
H/cc-forms/agdastmt.doc
While the consulting firms and their proposals have many similarities, Staffbelieves that the proposal
presented by R3 Consulting Group provides the best overall approach and value to the City. Staff
therefore recommends R3 Consulting Group for this project.
As shown in Attachment 1, R3 Consulting Group has extensive experience in assisting public agencies
with the procurement of solid waste services. The firm exclusively represents public agencies, which
avoids any appearance of a conflict of interest. One of the primary concerns with BVA was that they
provide consulting services to public agencies as well as the waste industry. The cost proposal submitted
by R3 was also a factor as it was more than $30,000 less than the proposal received by HF&H. In addition,
Staff contacted the Cities of San Jose and Santa Rosa whose recent procurement projects were managed
by R3's proposed project manager and received favorable recommendations. These cumulative factors
support the recommendation to select R3 Consulting Group for this project.
PROJECT APPROACH:
The project schedule (Attachment 2) anticipates awarding the waste Franchise Agreement in December
2004, allowing sufficient time for the selected hauler to prepare for a contract start date of July 1, 2005.
Exhibit A of the Consulting Services Agreement (Attachment 3) describes the proposed approach for the
project. The project tasks are summarized below:
Task 1: Determine City's Collection and Disposal Needs - This task will consist of reviewing
existing solid waste documents, evaluating current and potential future programs and
developing a "short list" of program alternatives for presentation at Council Workshops. In
addition to the consultant team, it is anticipated that this task will involve meetings with
Staff from the City Manager's Office, City Attorney's Office and the Alameda County
Waste Management Authority's franchise assistance staff.
Task 2: Community Outreach Program- The primary objectives of the'community outreach
program is to inform residents and businesses about the procurement process and to receive
input on the proposed program options. R3 anticipates working with City Staff, City
Council, residents, homeowners associations, business groups and the media to provide
opportunities for community input. R3 proposes to initially conduct one or more City
Council workshop(s) during the development of the Request for Proposal to discuss
program and service options. Additional public outreach will be developed as needed
during the process.
Task 3: Prepare, Issue and Evaluate Request for Proposals (RFP's)- This phase includes the
development of the RFP based on information generated from Task 1 and 2. The RFP will
specify minimum requirements and qualifications and will require contractors to submit
work plans that specify how they will transition to new services, achieve diversion
requirements, implement customer service programs, and promote public education
activities.
In an effort to procure the best combination of services at the best price, the City will
evaluate separate versus combined collection and disposal contracts. R3 recommends that
the City request cost proposals for both scenarios in the RFP document, thereby allowing
the evaluation team and City Council to select the alternative that offers the best deal to the
City
Separate sections of the RFP will include instructions specifying the rules of the
negotiation process for the contractors and the City, the format and submittal of responses,
proposal cost and service forms, and the method for evaluating responses.
In addition, R3 recommends developing and issuing the draft Franchise Agreement as part
of the RFP package. This'significantly reduces the time and cost of negotiations, and
contractually links the requested services to proposed costs as part of the evaluation
process. Contractors will be required to specify any exceptions and provide language for
any changes they propose as part of their proposal package.
The RFP package will be presented to Council for approval prior to release. Finally, R3
will assist the City in evaluating the proposals in response to the RFP.
Task 4: Negotiate with Top Ranked Contractor(s), and Finalize New Franchise Agreement for City
Council Approval- R3 will participate in Franchise Agreement negotiations with the top
ranked contractor(s). Negotiations will focus on clarifying the contractor's service and cost
proposals, finalizing contractual language, and ensuring that the proposed collection and
disposal rates are appropriate given the level of requested service.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Resolution approving the Consulting Services
Agreement with R3 Consulting Group and approve the Budget Change in the amount of $26,650.
Section A
Firm Information Firm
Qualifications
R3 Consulting Group, Inc. (,'R3") specializes in management
consulting services for solid waste and water / wastewater utilities.
We routinely provide a range of services to our municipal clients,
including competitive procurement of services, negotiation,
implementation and monitoring of contracts and franchise
agreements, financial and technical analysis of programmatic and
policy alternatives, and performance assessments, management
reviews and compliance audits. The Project Manager for the City
of Dublin Solid Waste Procurement Project is listed below.
Mr. Ric Hutchinson, Principal and Project Manager
R3 Consulting GrOup
4811 Chippendale Drive, Suite 902
Sacramento, CA 95841
Phone: (916) 576-0308 Fax: (916) 331-9600
E-mail: rhutchinson@r3cgi.com
Resources, Responsibility and Respect - these are
the guiding principles of R3 Consulting Group. Our
mission is to assist municipal clients identify challenges,
evaluate alternatives, and implement cost-effective,
environmentally sound and "community-friendly"
solutions. For more than 30 years, R3 team members
have assisted municipal clients in the implementation of
a variety of programs, services, and facilities.
Firm R3 provides the following services to our municipal clients:
Qualifications · Procurement of refuse collection, disposal and recycling
services;
· Development, negotiation, execution and monitoring of
contracts and franchise agreements;
· Rate audits, financial analyses, and cost-of-service studies;
· Performance reviews, management audits and
benchmarking of solid waste operations;
· Community outreach and public education workshops,
forums, campaigns and surveys;
· Preparation of AB 939 planning documents and Regional
Agency Formation Agreements.
R3 Provides Solutions
We believe that preparing clear, comprehensive procurement
documents and conducting an objective and fair procurement
process will result in lower customer rates and a higher level of
service. As a result of a procurement that R3 team members
recently completed, one California community will receive an
additional $350,000 in annual franchise fee payments,
customer rates were reduced by over 20 percent, and
collection services were dramatically improved.
Projects that R3 staff have completed with issues similar to those
requested by the City are listed in the table on page A - 3. This is
followed by descriptions of selected projects.
Conflict of interest
R3 understands the sensitive nature of conducting competitive
procurement projects for public agencies. We are strongly
committed to providing our clients with unbiased opinions and
recommendations. Accordingly, R3 only provides services to
public agencies. R3 does not currently have (or historically
had) any contractual or employment agreement or
relationshipofanykindwithanyprivatewastehaulingcompany.
Section A - 2
Project Summary Table Firm
Qualifications
The following summary table cross-references the services that
R3 team members have provided for public agencies over the
past 30 years. This is followed by project descriptions of selected
projects.
~i~ of Albuquerque,
City°fBradbuw'CA I ¢"~~~
City°f Citrus I
Section A - 3
Qualifications ~¢~" ~"'~'~'~" ~'%~' ~'~ ~,~ .......
Douglas
Count,
NV
C,, of DuaAe, CA 47 ~l
Grove, CA
CACity of Los Angeles, ~&~~~ ¢
Mari~pa Count, ~ ~~~ ¢~
~~ Ci~ofMonrovia, CA ¢ ~ / ¢ I [ ¢ ¢ ~ I ¢ I
Section A - 4
Firm
Qualifications
Monterey County,' CA
City of Novato, CA
Palm Beach County,
FL
City of Rancho Palos
Verdes, CA
City of Rancho
Cordova, CA
Puerto Rico
Infrastructure
Finance Authority
San Bernardino
County, CA ~
Section A- 5
Firm
Qualifications
City of San Gabriel,
CA
City of San Rafael, ./
CA
City of Scottsdale, AZ ¢'
Seminole County, FL
State of Arizona '/
Town Of Windsor, CA
State of New Mexico
Guam EPA ¢'
Section A - 6
Section B
The R3 Project Team Staff
The R3 project team has provided management consulting Qualifications
services for more than 200 clients, representing more than 150
jurisdictions throughout the United States. Our project team
members all have experience with similar engagements and will The R3 project team
provide the City.with a unique set of skills and experience, routinely provides the
including: following services to
· procurement, negotiation, implementation and monitoring municipal clients:
of solid waste contracts and franchise agreements;
· financial reviews, rate analyses and cost-of-service · Procurement and
studies; negotiation of contracts
· contract compliance reviews,' performance enhancement and franchise
audits and contract administration services; agreements
· community workshops and forums to encourage resident · Service rate audits and
participation and feedback throughout all project phases financial analyses
from program design to contract, execution and
· Contract administration
implementation, and compliance
An organizational chart, biographical summaries, and estimated reviews
level of effort are listed below. This is followed by full resumes.· Hands-on operations
and program
PropoSed Project Organization performance reviews
Section B- 1
Project Team Biographical Summaries
Ric Hutchinson - Project Manager
Mr. Hutchinson is a Florida Certified Public Accountant with more
than 30 years of experience in the fields of accounting, auditing,
and financial and management consulting for state and local
governments. He has an extensive background in rate audits and
financial analysis, procurement of solid waste collection and
recycling services, and preparation of solid waste ordinances. Mr.
Hutchinson currently is managing the procurement projects for the
cities of Rancho Cordova and Citrus Heights, CA. Mr. Hutchinson
holds a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Accounting.
Mr. Hutchinson will serve as Project Manager and Task Leader on
all project tasks.
Richard Tagore-Erwin Senior Analyst
Mr. Tagore-Erwin's project work encompasses all aspects of solid
waste management and environmental consulting. Over the past
18 years, Mr. Tagore-Erwin has conducted over 40 solid waste
procurement and management projects for a variety of public
agencies in California and Arizona. These projects include
complex rate audits, performance reviews, and procurement
projects. Mr. Tagore-Erwin has conducted numerous
procurement and negotiation projects for communities in Southern
California, including the cities of Rancho Palos Verdes, Duarte,
Bradbury, Colton, San Bernardino, Upland, Montebello, and
Irwindale. Mr. Tagore-Erwin holds both a Bachelor and Master of
Arts Degree in Political Science, and is a certified meeting
facilitator.
Mr. Tagore-Erwin will assist Mr. Hutchinson on ...
Steve Harriman Senior Analyst
Mr. Harriman has more than 14 years of experience in conducting
procurements, rate analysis, performance assessments, and
contract development and administration. Mr. Harriman has
performed on-site program management and audit services,
conducted complex franchise compliance reviews and rate audits,
implemented green waste collection and processing programs.
Recently, Mr. Harriman managed the Franchise Compliance Audit
p-"'"~,~ for the City of Citrus Heights. Mr. Harriman holds a Master of City
and Regional Planning Degree, and a Bachelor of Arts Degree in
· Environmental Studies and Physical Geography.
Mr. Harriman will assist Mr. Hutchinson on ...
Section B - 2
Project Experience Staff
Qualifications
Mr. Hutchinson has served as the project manager or materially
participated in the following projects: Ric Hutchinson
COMPLIANCE REVIEW AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
City of Santa Rosa, California; City of Citrus Heights, Mr. Hutchinson has more
California; City of Pleasant Hill, California; Douglas County, than 30 years of experience
Nevada; E1 Dorado County, California; Polk County, Florida; in financial and
Lake County, Florida; Palm Beach County, Florida, and management consulting,
Seminole County, Florida auditing, and accounting.
He has extensive
Project Manager. Mr. Hutchinson analyzed financial records to experience in financial
verify the accuracy of franchise fee payments made under the analysis and modeling,
terms of collection service contracts. He also reviewed rate contract negotiations,
adjustment methodologies and tested the validity of customer procurement of solid waste
billing systems. Mr. Hutchinson worked closely with the and recycling services, cost
municipalities and contractors to prepare compliance checklists of service studies,
and develop reporting formats to aid in the review and resolution development of franchise
of contract compliance issues, areas, and rate studies.
Implementation of the San
CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS AND AMENDMENTS Jose contracts resulted in
City of San Jose, California; City of Santa Rosa, California; savings to the City's rate
City of Pleasant Hill, CalifOrnia; Placer County, California; payers of over $70 million.
Douglas County, California; El Dorado County, California;
Polk County, Florida; Lake County, Florida; Palm Beach
County, Florida; Martin County, Florida, and Seminole
County, Florida
Project Manager. Mr. Hutchinson assisted in negotiating and
amending existing solid waste and recycling collection contracts to
comply with changes in law or changing needs of the client, and in
negotiating the associated changes in terms, conditions and rates.
SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING PROCUREMENT SERVICES
City of San Jose, California; City of Santa Rosa, California;
Central Virginia Waste Management Authority; Polk County,
Florida; Seminole County, Florida; Lake County, Florida;,
Okeechobee County, Florida;, Palm Beach County, Florida;
Martin County, FlOrida; Volusia County, Florida; Cooper City,
Florida;DaniaBeach, Florida;LighthousePoint, Florida; p_~,,~
Deerfield Beach, Florida; Kansas City, Missouri; and
Lubbock, Texas
Project Manager. Mr. Hutchinson prepared solid waste and
recycling procurement documents for numerous cities, counties Section B-3
ProjeCt Team and authorities. This included developing and designing service
terms and conditions, contracts for services and cost proposal
forms for the solid waste and recycling programs. He reviewed
proposed programs, met with citizens and local officials, designed
Ric Hutchinson procurement packages, developed collection contracts, analyzed
responses, prepared award recommendations and drafted
required Ordinances and Resolutions.
FINANCIAL MODELING WORKSHOP
Solid Waste Association of North America
Project Manager. Mr. Hutchinson developed and presented a
financial modeling workshop for the Solid Waste Association of
North America (SWANA).
SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING PROCUREMENT
WORKSHOPS
Illinois Recycling Association, Solid Waste Association of
North America, University of FlOrida.
Project Manager. Mr. Hutchinson developed a workshop entitled
"Contracting for Solid Waste and Recycling Collection Services"
for the Illinois Recycling Association (IRA). He presented the
workshop in several states for both the IRA and the Solid Waste
Association of North America, (SWANA). In addition, he taught
the course for several years for the University of Florida TREEO
Center as part of the Landfill Managers Accreditation program.
SOLID WASTE RATE STUDIES AND FINANCIAL ANALYSES
City of San Jose, California; E1 Dorado County, California;
Placer County, California; Douglas County, Nevada; City of
San Anselmo, California; City of King City, California; City of
Scottsdale, Arizona; City of Lubbock, Texas; City of Kansas
City, Missouri; City of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; Winchester
Municipal Utilities (WMU), Winchester, Kentucky.
Project Manager. Mr. Hutchinson assisted these units of local
government in the review and analysis of their solid waste and
recycling collection and processing costs. As part of these
projects, he reviewed contracts, analyzed collector and processor
costs and related data, prepared reports and recommendations
and made presentations to governing boards.
Section B - 4
DEVELOP SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE AREAS Staff
Polk County, Florida; Seminole County, Florida; Solid Waste Qualifications
Authority of Palm Beach County, Florida
Project Manager. Using a relational database and mapping Ric Hutchinson
software in conjUnction with County customer data, Mr.
Hutchinson developed new franchise areas for the counties as
they converted their solid waste collection programs from non-
exclusive franchises to exclusive franchises. This included an
analysis'of the cost variables related to providing collection
services in different geographic and demographic areas of each
county. The projects ranged in size from developing four
franchise areas to developing twenty-one franchise areas.
FINANCIAL PLANNING AND PROJECTION MODELS
City of Scottsdale, Arizona; City of San Jose, California;
Douglas County, Nevada; Polk County, Florida; and DeSoto
County, Florida
Project Manager. Mr. Hutchinson prepared long-term financial
planning and projection models for residential and commercial
solid waste and recycling collection programs, some of which
included transfer stations and MRFs. The models normally
include over 100 interactive variables for use in performing "what-
if" scenarios and contain a "Historically Proactive" module that is
used to develop the projections. At the end of each year, the
annual data are automatically added to the historical database
used to produce the projections, and all projections are
reevaluated and restated.
Registrations
Certified Public Accountant, Florida
Affiliations
Member, Solid Waste Association of North America
Member, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants
Member, Florida Institute of Certified Public Accountants
Education
Bachelor of Arts Degree in Accounting, University of South Florida
Section B - 5
Project Team Publications, Presentations, and
Workshops
Ric Hutchinson "Successfully Contracting for Solid Waste and Recycling
Services", a training workshop presented nationally to the Illinois
Recycling Association, Solid Waste Association of North America,
and the TREEO Center of the University of Florida.
"Building A Contract in San Jose" Waste A.qe, June 2002, Co-
authored with E. Leung, City of San Jose, CA.
"Contracting Services: A Question of Needs" World Wastes,
October 1995.
"Financial Aspects of Solid Waste Services", presented to the
Solid Waste Association of North America, Arizona Landfill and
Solid Waste Management Seminar.
"Designing a Solid Waste Funding System for Today",
presented to the Solid Waste Association of North America.
"Competitive Procurement of Solid Waste Services",
presented to the SWANA 30th Annual Western Regional
Conference.
"Evaluating Vendor Proposals", presented to the Illinois
Counties Solid Waste Management Association.
"Privatization of Disposal Facilities: A Ratepayers
Perspective", presented to the Solid Waste Association of North
America.
"An Incremental Approach to Managed Competition"
presented to the Solid Waste Association of North America's 2nd
Annual Planning & Management Symposium.
"Financial Assurance - Is it Really a Sure Thing?" presented to
the Solid Waste Association of North America, WASTECON
Section B - 6
Project Experience Staff
Qualifications
Mr. Tagore-Erwin has served as project manager or had
significant involvement with the following projects: Richard
PERFORMANCE REVIEW AND MANAGEMENT EVALUATION Tagore-P__rwin
City of Bell Gardens, California; City of Colton, California;
City of Manteca, California; City of Monrovia, California; City Over the past 18 years, Mr.
of Garden Grove, California; City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Tagore-Erwin has worked
California; City of San Bernardino, California; City of Upland, with public agencies to
California; City of Gilbert, Arizona; City of Glendale, Arizona; design, evaluate, and
City of Phoenix, Arizona; City of Scottsdale, Arizona; implement solid waste
MaricOpa County, Arizona collection, processing,
Project Manager. Mr. Tagore-Erwin reviewed management disposal, and administrative
structures, job classifications and qualification requirements, and operations. His work
billing and customer service systems. He also conducted on-site focuses on procurement,
inspections of collection operations and maintenance procedures, financial analysis,
and reviewed routing and route efficiency. He analyzed operational review, and
operational and financial impacts of implementing automated sustainable development.
collection Systems, single-stream recycling programs, and variable
The work that Mr. Tagore-
can rates for residential and commercial customers. Erwin completed for Santa
Rosa allowed the City to
implement single-stream
RATE REVIEW AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS and "no charge"commercial
City of Scottsdale, Arizona; City of Sacramento, California; recycling four years ahead
City of Garden Grove, California; City of Capitola, California; of schedule.
CoUnty of E1 Dorado, California; County of Douglas, Nevada
Project Manager. Mr. Tagore-Erwin assisted in reviewing rate Mr. Tagore-Erwin's work in
applicatiOns for franchise haulers. As part of his efforts, he the City ofColton resulted in
reviewed financial statements and assisted in the preparation and a 20% rate decrease,
analysis of pro-forma rate models. He also conducted Peer implementation of
Community Surveys to determine if proposed rates were automated collectionand
consistent with surrounding market rates. He assisted in working provided over $~0 million .to
sessions with the Cities and Counties and their franchised the City's generalfund.
haulers, prepared the reports, and assisted in the presentations to
City Councils and County Boards of Supervisors.
Section B - 7
Project Team
CONTRACT COMPLIANCE, MONITORING AND REPORTING
City of Santa Rosa, California; City of Irwindale, California;
City of Monrovia, California; City of Montebello, California;
Rich a rd City of Sacramento, California; County of Marin, California;
Tagore-Erwin County of Sacramento, California; County of San Bernardino,
California; Western Placer Solid Waste Authority, California;
City of Phoenix, Arizona
Project Manager. Mr. Tagore-Erwin prepared hauler monitoring
and reporting programs for single jurisdictions and regional
agencies. He conducted on-site audits of hauler financial and
operational records. He also developed and implemented
reporting databases by jurisdiction, facility used, material type,
and tonnage.
SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING PROCUREMENT SERVICES
City of Santa Rosa, California; City of Upland, California; City
of Duarte, California; City of Bradbury, California; City of
Monrovia, California; City of Colton, California; City of
Irwindale, California; City of Montebelio, California; City of
Rancho Palos Verdes, California; City of San Jose, California;
County of Santa Barbara, California; County of Sacramento,
California
Project Manager. Mr. Tagore-Erwin developed and designed
service terms and conditions, franchise agreements and contracts,
and cost proposal forms for the solid waste and recycling
programs. He assisted in the preparation of the solid waste and
recycling procurement documents, conducted pre-proposal
conferences and interviews, prepared RFP addenda, negotiated
final franchise agreements and contracts, and presented
recommendations to City Councils and County Boards of
SuPervisors.
SOLID WASTE FACILITY EVALUATION AND DEVELOPMENT
City of Phoenix, Arizona; City of Tucson, Arizona; City of
South Pasadena, California; City of San Gabriel, California;
City of Sacramento, California; County of'Santa Cruz,
California; County of Marin, California; County of
Sacramento, California; Western Placer Solid Waste
~~ Authority, California
Project Manager. Mr. Tagore-Erwin prepared feasibility plans,
conducted performance testing, and evaluated processing
equipment and facility layouts. He administered procurement
Section B-8 processes for MRF and compost equipment and operators,
reviewed operating contracts, provided contract language Staff
amendments, prepared secondary markets analyses, developed
marketing agreements, and reviewed protocol for material Qualifications
acceptance. Mr. Tagore-Erwin also conducted facility tours, made
presentations to community groups, City Councils, and Boards of Richard
Supervisors. Tagore,Erwin
TUCSON ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY PARK
Actlink USA Corp., Arizona
Project Manager. Mr. Tagore-Erwin led the project team in
assembling a development team, developing the project concept,
conducting the economic and technical analysis, and preparing a
project proposal to build the Tucson Environmental Technology
Park (TETP). In conjunction with the project developer, Actlink
USA, his efforts focused on preparing an extensive economic
development analysis in terms of job creation, capital investment,
payroll, and value-added. The work effort also included preparing
Preliminary site design, identifying and negotiating agreements
with TETP's end-use manufacturers, conducting a market study,
preparing a waste characterization study, and performing an
environmental site review.
RECYCLING MARKET DEVELOPMENT STUDY
State of Arizona, Department of Commerce.
Project Manager. Mr. Tagore-Erwin conducted this landmark
study to assess the current and potential impacts of the recycling
industry on Arizona's economy. His efforts focused on quantifying
the amount and types of recyclables collected, processed, and
used as feedstock in Arizona. Next, Mr. Tagore-Erwin analyzed
the impact of recycling on Arizona's economy, in terms of jobs,
investment, and value-added economic a~ctivity. The results of the
study indicated that recycling accounted for over $1.3 billion in
capital investment and value added activities, and approximately
4,000 direct jobs.
SOLID WASTE PLANS, WORKSHOPS, AND MANUALS
City of Sacramento, California; City of Manteca, California;
City of Clayton, California; County of San Bernardino,
California; County of Sacramento, California; Los Angeles
CoUnty, California; Napa County, California; Marin County,
California; Monterey County, California; State of California, ~ ~
Department of Commerce; State of Arizona, Department of
Environmental Quality; State of Arizona; State of New Mexico;
Guam: U.S. Navy
Section B - 9
Project Team Project Manager. Mr. Tagore-Erwin led project teams in
preparing over 100 solid waste management plans, waste
characterization studies, and resource and planning manuals. He
prepared state-wide, regional and local solid waste management
RiChard plans, conducted multi-jurisdiction waste characterization studies,
and worked with individual municipal agencies to develop in-
Tagore-Erwin house recycling programs. He has also prepared planning
manuals and conducted workshops for jurisdictions throughout
California, Arizona and New Mexico, and has advised the
California and Arizona state legislatures on solid waste policies.
"BUY RECYCLED" PROCUREMENT STRATEGIES
City of Tucson, Arizona.
Project Manager. Mr. Tagore-Erwin led the project team in
conducting a comprehensive review of Tucson's procurement
policies and processes. His efforts focused on providing the City
with an implementation plan detailing how bid specifications and
the procurement process should be changed to increase the
purchase and use of products with recycled .content, those that
generate less waste, and those products that can easily be
recycled.
Education
Bachelor of Arts in Political Science, University of Hawaii, Manoa
Master of Arts.in Political Science, University of Hawaii, Manoa
Publications, Presentations, and
Workshops
"Creating Effective Local Partnerships," presented to the
League Of California Cities Annual Conference, San Francisco,
CA.
"Linking Solid Waste Management to Sustainable
Development," presented to the Commission on Sustainable
Development, Washington, D.C.
"Implementing Source Reduction and Recycling Programs,"
presented to regional groups in Flagstaff, Phoenix and Tucson,
Arizona.
"Economic Impact of Recycling," presented to the Southwest
Public Recycling Association, Tucson, Arizona.
Section B - 10
Staff
Project Experience Qualifications
Mr. Harriman has served as project manager or materially Steve
participated in the following projects:
Harriman
FRANCHISE COMPLIANCE REVIEW AND TRANSITION
ASSISTANCE PROJECT Mr. Harriman has more
City of Santa Rosa, California than 14 years of experience
Mr. Harriman assisted the City of Santa Rosa with a' franchise in the field of solid waste,
compliance review and transition assistance project regarding the water and wastewater utility
Agreement between the City and North Bay Corporation management. He has
("Contractor"). The project included the formation of a extensive experiencein
comprehensive compliance checklist to monitor the performance procurement of residential
of the Contractor, and facilitation of meetings between the City and commercial solid waste
and the Contractor to coordinate the implementation of several collection, disposal and
new programs, including residential and commercial single-stream recycling services,
recycling and weekly green waste collection. In addition, Mr. public/private partnerships,
Harriman reviewed franchise fee payments and corresponding recycling and compost
calculations from the Contractor, and reviewed the customer program design and
service and billing functions for compliance with the franchise implementation, variable
can rate programs, regional
agreement, agency formation, litigation
support, contract
CONTRACT COMPLIANCE REVIEW negotiation and
administration, waste
City of Citrus Heights, California characterization, customer
Mr. Harriman assisted the City of Citrus Heights with a rate study service and billing, and
and contract compliance review project for the Service Agreement public education and
with the Sacramento County Department of Waste Management outreach.
and Recycling. The project included a review of the County
Service Fee and Franchise Fee calculations and payments to- As a result of Mr.
date, and the construction cfa rate model to p~'oject the financial Harriman's work for Citrus
solvency of the Citrus Heights Enterprise Fund for the remaining Heights, the City will
contract term. The project included on-site review of financial receive an addition $7'2,000
documents, interviews with City and County staff, and in franchise fees and save
presentation of the project findings to the Citrus Heights City over$5OO, OOOin collection
Council. fees.
FINANCIAL AUDIT MANAGER
Puerto Rico Infrastructure Authority, Puerto Rico
The Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority ("PRASA") utilizes
a private contractor to perform the operations and maintenance
Section B - 11
"'-: 'r--rujec~ Team functions of the island-wide water and wastewater utility. Under
contract to the Puerto Rico Infrastructure Finance Authority, Mr.
Harriman served as the Financial Audit Manager of the Contract
Administration Group from October 1998 through October 2002.
In this capacity, Mr. Harriman managed a financial audit team
Steve Harriman charged with the review, reconciliation, payment and reporting of
maintenance, operational and capital improvement program
expenditures incurred by the private operator on behalf of the
Commonwealth of. Puerto Rico in the annual amount of $200
million. In addition, he prepared monthly financial status reports to
the Governor of Puerto Rico and PRASA Governing Board, and
calculated budget deficit projections for the Government
Development Bank.
NEGOTIATION OF $700,000 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE
INCENTIVES TO PRIVATE CONTRACTOR
Puerto Rico Infrastructure Authority, Puerto Rico
Under contract to the Puerto Rico Infrastructure Finance Authority,
Mr. Harriman served as the Audit Manager of the Customer
Service and Billing DePartment from October 1998 through
October 2002.
In this capacity, Mr. Harriman managed quarterly and annual
audits of the Customer Service and Billing Department that serves
approximately 1.8 million water and wastewater accountS, and
negotiated annual incentive payments of $700,000 to the private
operator. These tasks included audits of the meter reading and
bill production functions, handling of new and delinquent accounts,
posting of water and wastewater receipts to the general ledger,
wait time reductions in commercial agencies, etc. The audit and
incentive payment system resulted in improvements in every
audited customer service and billing function performed by the
private operator.
DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF GREEN WASTE
COLLECTION AND PROCESSING PROGRAM
Sacramento County Waste Management and Recycling
Division, California
Mr. Harriman was the project manager for the design and
implementation of the countywide green waste collection and
processing program. The first phase of this project included a
three-year pilot study to quantify specific programmatic and
Section B - 12
operational parameters, including fluctuation in green waste Staff
generation levels, resident participation and contamination levels Qualifications
in different neighborhoods, and seasonal variation in green waste
generation and composition. Mr. Harriman also coordinated with
the Operations Division to establish a data monitoring system
throughout the pilot study. Steve Harrirnan
At the conclusion of the three-year pilot study, Mr. Harriman
incorporated the pilot study data into the design and
implementation of the first phase of the countywide
implementation of the program. These tasks included design of
collection routes to maximize efficiency, analysis of collection
equipment and labor utilization, coordination of the public
education program, and monitoring of the private contractor on
material processing and marketing issues. The program currently
serves approximately 165,000 residential accounts in the
unincorporated portion of Sacramento County.
PROCUREMENT PROCESS FOR A GREEN WASTE FACILITY
OPERATOR
Sacramento County Waste Management and Recycling
Division, California
Serving as a Solid Waste Planner for the Sacramento County
Waste Management and Recycling Division, Mr. Harriman was the
project manager for the initial process to procure a private
operator to site, permit and operate a facility to accept, process
and market green waste material from the county collection fleet.
The project included the preparation and distribution of a Request
for Statement of Qualifications ("SOQ"). Mr. Harriman chaired the
selection committee charged with the review of the SOQ
documents and subsequent selection of a shod-list of qualified
bidders. He then prepared a Request for Proposal document
("RFP") and administered the bid preparation process with the
qualified bidders. Upon receipt of the proposals, Mr. Harriman
chaired the evaluation committee charged with the review and
selection of a qualified bidder for award of the contract.
At the conclusion of the RFP process, Mr. Harriman drafted a
contract document and administered the execution of the
document with the County Environmental Management
Department and Board of Supervisors. The prOgram currently
diverts approximately 100,000 tons per year of greenwaste from
landfill disposal in Sacramento County.
Section 2 - 13
r~ ..I ..~rruje~,t Team EVALUATION OF COMMERCIAL RECYCLING PROGRAM
ALTERNATIVES
City of Pleasanton, California
Steve Harrirnan Mr. Harriman assisted the City of Pleasanton in the development
and evaluation of commercial recycling program alternatives in an
effort to comply with the landfill diversion mandates of AB 939.
The project included facilitation of meetings between City staff, the
franchise hauler and several representatives of the Pleasanton
~' business community to define alternatives and establish review
criteria. Mr. Harriman also coordinated on-site surveys and
employee interviews of large-scale commercial generators within
the City to evaluate the feasibility of alternatives, and prepared a
cost/revenue model and evaluation matrix for the selected
alternatives.
Affiliations
Member, California Resource Recovery Association
Education
Master of City of and Regional Planning, California Polytechnic,
San Luis Obispo
Bachelor of Arts in Environmental Studies and Physical
Geography, University of California, Santa Barbara
Publications, PreSentations, and
Workshops
"Strategies for Regulating the Compost Industry in
California'; Presented to California Organics Recycling Council,
Sacramento, CA.
"Closing the Loop -. Comprehensive Residential Collection
System in Sacramento County", Presented at California
Resource Recovery Association Annual Conference, Santa
Barbara, CA.
"The Effects of Energy Deregulation on the California
Biomass Industry", Presented to the Legislative Subcommittee
on Energy Deregulation, Sacramento, CA.
Section B - 14
Project
Schedule
Task Date (Week of...)
Notice to Proceed April 5, 2004
Project Kick-off Meeting (Task 1.2) April 12, 2004
Initial Program EValuation (Task 1.3) May 3, 2004
First Council Workshop (Task 2.1) May 17, 2004
Second Council Workshop (Task 2.1) May 24, 2004
Complete Development of RFP and Release July 12, 2004
Document (Tasks 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4)
Mandatory Pre-Proposal Conference (Task 3.5) August 9, 2004
Proposals Due Sept 13, 2004
Evaluation Team Completes Evaluation October 4, 2004
Council Approves Selection October 25, 2004
Complete Negotiations and Finalize Franchise Dec 6, 2004
Agreement
Council Executes Franchise Agreement Dec 13, 2004
(Task 4)
Begin Service July 1, 2005
Section D - 2
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION NO. '- 04
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING AN GREEMENT WITH R3 CONSULTING GROUP FOR SOLID WASTE
FRANCHISE PROCUREMENT SERVICES
WHEREAS, the City currently has a solid waste franchise agreement which will expire on June
30, 2005; and
· WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the City's best interest to solicit
competitive bids for solid waste collection and disposal services; and
WHEREAS, due to the technical nature of these services it is important for the City to obtain
professional assistance on this project; and
WHEREAS, the City completed a consultant selection process resulting in the recommendation
that R3 Consulting Group serve as the City's consultant on this project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council received and considered the report outlining the proposal submitted
by R3 Consulting Group; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby
approve the agreement with R3 Consulting Group attached hereto.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor is authorized to execute the agreement.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of April, 2004.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
ATTACHMENT 3
CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND
R3 CONSULTING GROUP
THIS AGREEMENT for consulting services is made by and between the City of Dublin ("City") and
R3 Consulting Group("Consultant") as of April 6, 2004.
Section 1. SERVICES. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Consultant
shall provide toCity the services described in the Scope of Work attached as Exhibit A at the time and
place and in the manner specified therein. In the event of a conflict in or inconsistency between the terms
of this Agreement and Exhibit A, the Agreement shall prevail.
1.1 Term of Services. The term of this Agreement Shall begin on the date first noted above
and shall end on February 28, 2005, and Consultant shall complete the work described in
Exhibit A prior to that date, unless the term of the Agreement is otherwise terminated or
extended, as provided for in Section 8. The time provided to Consultant to complete the
services required by this Agreement shall not affect the City'S right to terminate the
Agreement, as provided for in Section 8.
1.2 Standard of Performance. Consultant shall perform all services required pursuant to this
Agreement in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent
practitioner of the profession in which Consultant is engaged in the geographical area in
which Consultant practices its profession. Consultant shall prepare all work products
required by this Agreement in a substantial, first-class manner and shall conform to the
standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in Consultant's profession.
'1.3 Assignment of Personnel. Consultant shall assign only competent personnel to perform
services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, at any
time during the term of this Agreement, desires the reassignment of any such persons,
Consultant shall, immediately upon receiving notice from City of such desire of City,
reassign such person or persons.
1.4 Time. Consultant shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this
Agreement as may be reasonably necessary to meet the standard of performance
provided.in Section 1.1 above and to satisfy Consultant's obligations hereunder.
Section 2. COMPENSATION. City hereby agrees to pay Consultant a sum not to exceed $79,950,
notwithstanding any contrary indications that may be contained in Consultant's proposal, for services to be
performed and reimbursable costs incurred under this Agreement. In the event of a conflict between this
Agreement and Consultant's proposal, attached as Exhibit A, regarding the amount of compensation, the
Agreement shall prevail. City shall pay Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement at the
time and in the manner set forth herein. The payments specified below shall be the only payments from
City to Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall submit all invoices to
City in the manner specified herein. Except as specifically authorized by City, Consultant shall not bill City
for duplicate services performed by more than one person.
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group Page 1 of 13
Consultant and City acknowledge and agree that compensation paid by City to Consultant under this
Agreement is based upon Consultant's estimated costs of providing the services required hereunder,
including salaries and benefits of employees and subcontractors of Consultant. Consequently, the parties
further agree that compensation hereunder is intended to include the costs of contributions to any pensions
and/or annuities to which Consultant and its employees, agents, and subcontractors may be eligible. City
therefore has no responsibility for such contributions beyond compensation required under this Agreement.
2.1 Invoices. Consultant shall submit invoices, not more often than once a month during the
term of this Agreement, based on the cost for services performed and reimbursable costs
incurred prior to the invoice date. Invoices shall contain the following information:
· Serial identifications of progress bills; i.e., Progress Bill No. 1 for the first invoice,
etc.;
· The beginning and ending dates of the billing period;
· A Task Summary containing the original contract amount, the amount of prior
billings, the total due this period, the balance available under the Agreement, and
the percentage of completion;
· At City's option, for each work item in each task, a copy of the applicable time
entries or time sheets shall be submitted showing the name of the person doing
the work, the hours spent by each person, a brief description of the work, and
each reimbursable expense;
· The total number of hours of work performed under the Agreement by Consultant
and each employee, agent, and subcontractor of Consultant performing services
hereunder, as well as a separate notice when the total number of hours of work by
Consultant and any individual employee, agent; or subcontractor of Consultant
reaches or exceeds 800 hours, which shall include an estimate of the time
necessary to complete the work described in Exhibit A;
· The Consultant's signature.
2.2 Monthly Payment. City shall make monthly payments, based on invoices received, for
services satisfactorily performed, and for authorized reimbursable costs incurred. City
shall have 30 days from the receipt of an invoice that complies with all of the requirements
above to pay Consultant.
2.3 Final Payment. City shall pay the last 10% of the total sum due pursuant to this
Agreement within sixty (60) days after completion of the services and submittal to City of a
final invoice, if all services required have been satisfactorily performed.
2.4 Total Payment. City shall pay for the services to be rendered by Consultant pursuant to
this Agreement. City shall not pay any additional sum for any expense or cost whatsoever
incurred by Consultant in rendering services pursuant to this Agreement. City shall make
no payment for any extra, further, or additional service pursuant to this Agreement.
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group Page 2 of 13
In no event shall Consultant submit any invoice for an amount in excess of the maximum
amount of compensation provided above either for a task or for the entire Agreement,
unless the Agreement is modified prior to the submission of such an invoice by a properly
executed change order or amendment.
2.5 Hourly Fees. Fees for work performed by Consultant on an hourly basis shall not exceed
the amounts shown on the following fee schedule:
2.6 Reimbursable Expenses. Reimbursableexpenses are specified on Exhibit B, and shall
not exceed $3,000. Expenses not listed on Exhibit B are not chargeable to City.
Reimbursable expenses are included in the total amount of compensation provided under
this Agreement that shall not be exceeded.
2.7 Payment of Taxes' Consultant is solely responsible for the payment of employment taxes
incurred under this Agreement and any similar federal or state taxes.
2.8 Payment upon Termination. In the event that the City or Consultant terminates this
Agreement pursuant to Section 8, the City shall compensate the Consultant for all
outstanding costs and reimbursable expenses incurred for work satisfactorily completed as
of the date of written notice of termination. Consultant shall maintain adequate logs and
timesheets in order to verify costs incurred to that date.
2.9 Authorization to Perform Services. The Consultant is not authorized to perform any
services or incur any costs whatsoever under the terms of this Agreement until receipt of
authorization from the Contract Administrator.
Section 3. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT. Except as set forth herein, Consultant shall, at its sole
cost and expense, provide all facilities and equipment that may be necessary to perform the services
required by this Agreement. City shall make available to Consultant only the facilities and equipment listed
in this section, and only under the terms and conditions set forth herein.
City shall furnish physical facilities such as desks, filing cabinets, and conference space, as may be
reasonably necessary for Consultant's use while consulting with'City employees and reviewing records and
the information in possession of the City, The location, quantity, and time of furnishing those facilities shall
be in the sole discretion of City. In no event shall City be obligated to furnish any facility that may involve
incurring any direct expense, including but not limited to computer, long-distance telephone or other
communication charges, vehicles, and reproduction facilities.
Section 4. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Before beginning any work under this Agreement,
Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall procure "occurrence coverage" insurance against claims for
injuries to persons or damages to property that may arise from or in connection with the Performance of the
work hereunder by the Consultant and its agents, representatives, employees, and subcontractors.
Consultant shall provide proof satisfactory to City of such insurance that meets the requirements of this
section and under forms of insurance satisfactory in all respects to the City. Consultant shall maintain the
insurance policies required by this section throughout the term of this Agreement. The cost of such
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group Page 3 of 13
insurance shall be included in the Consultant's bid. Consultant shall not allow any subcontractor .to
commence work on any subcontract until Consultant has obtained all insurance required herein for the
subcontractor(s) and provided evidence thereof to City. Verification of the required insurance shall be
submitted and made part of this Agreement prior to execution.
4.1 Workers' Compensation. Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, maintain
Statutory Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance for any
and all persons employed directly or indirectly by Consultant. The Statutory Workers'
Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance shall be provided with limits of
not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) per accident. In the alternative,
Consultant may rely on a self-insurance program to meet those requirements, but °nly if
the program of self-insurance complies fully with the provisions of the California Labor
Code. Determination of whether a self-insurance program meets the standards of the
Labor Code shall be solely in the discretion of the Contract Administrator. The insurer, if
insurance is provided, or the Consultant, if a program of self-insurance is provided, shall
waive all rights of subrogation against the City and its officers, officials, employees, and
volunteers for loss arising from work performed under this Agreement.
An endorsement shall state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by
either party, reduced in coverage or in limits, except after thirty (30) days' prior written
notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City.
4,2 Commercial General and Automobile Liability Insurance.
4.2.1 General requirements. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain
commercial general and automobile liability insurance for the term of this
Agreement in an amount not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00)
per occurrence, combined single limit coverage for risks associated with the work
contemplated by this Agreement. If a Commercial General Liability Insurance or an
Automobile Liability form or other form with a general aggregate limit is used,
either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be
performed under this Agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be at least
twice the required occurrence limit. Such coverage shall include but shall not be
limited to, protection against claims arising from bodily and personal injury,
including death resulting therefrom, and damage to property resulting from
activities contemplated under this Agreement, including the use of owned and non-
owned automobiles.
4.2.2 Minimum scope of coverage, Commercial general coverage shall be at least as
broad as Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability occurrence form
CG 0001 (ed. 11/88) or Insurance Services Office form number GL 0002 (ed. 1/73)
covering comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services Office form
number GL 0404 covering Broad Form Comprehensive General Liability.
Automobile coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Services Office
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting' Group Page 4 of 13
Automobile Liability form CA 0001 (ed. 12/90) Code 1 ("any auto"). No
endorsement shall be attached limiting the coverage.
4.2.3 Additional requirements. Each of the following shall be included in the
insurance coverage or added as an endorsement to the policy:
a. City and its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be covered
as insureds with respect to each of the following: liability arising out of
activities performed by or on behalf of Consultant, including the insured's
general supervision of Consultant; products and completed operations of
Consultant; premises owned, occupied, or used by Consultant; and
automobiles owned, leased, or used by the Consultant. The coverage
shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to
City or its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers.
b. The insurance shall cover on an occurrence or an accident basis, and not
on a claims-made basis.
c. An endorsement must state that coverage is primary insurance with
respect to the City and its officers, officials, employees and volunteers,
and that no insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City shall be
called upon to contribute to a loss under the coverage.
d. Any failure of CONSULTANT to comply with reporting provisions of the
policy shall not affect coverage provided to CITY and its officers,
employees, agents, and vOlunteers.
e. An endorsement shall state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided,
canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits, except after
thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt
requested, has been given to the City.
4.3 Professional Liability Insurance. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall
maintain for the pedod covered by this Agreement professional liability insurance for.
licensed professionals performing work pursuant to this Agreement in an amount not less
than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) covedng the licensed professionals' errors
and omissions.
4.3.1 Any deductible or self-insured retention shall not exceed $150,000 per claim.
4.3.2 An endorsement shall state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided,
canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits, except after thirty (30)
days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given
to the City.
Consulting Services Agreement between Apdl 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group Page 5 of 13
4.3.3 The policy must contain a cross liability or severability of interest clause.
4.3.4 The following provisions shall apply if the professional liability coverages are
written on a claims-made form:
a. The retroactive date of the policy must be shown and must be before the
date of the Agreement.
b. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be
provided for at least five years after completion of the Agreement or the
work, so long as commercially available at reasonable rates.
c. If coverage is canceled or not renewed and it is not replaced with another
claims-made policy form with a retroactive date that precedes the date of
this Agreement, Consultant must provide extended reporting coverage for
a minimum of five years after completion of the Agreement or the work.
The 'City shall have the right to exercise, at the Consultant's sole cost and
expense, any extended reporting provisions of the policy, if the Consultant
cancels or does not renew the coverage.
d. A copy of the claim reporting requirements must be submitted to the City
prior to the commencement of any work under this Agreement.
4.4 All Policies Requirements.
4.4.1 Acceptability of insurers. All insurance required by this section is to be placed
with insurers with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VII.
4.4.2 Verification of coveraqe. Prior to beginning any work under this Agreement,
Consultant shall furnish City with certificates of insurance and with original
endorsements effecting coverage required herein. The certificates and
endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized
by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The City reserves the right to
require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.
4.4.3 Subcontractors. Consultant shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its
policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each
subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the
requirements stated herein.
4.4.4 Variation. The City may approve a variation in the foregoing insurance
requirements, upon a determination that the coverages, scope, limits, and forms of
such insurance are either not commercially available, or that the City's interests
are otherwise fully protected.
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group Page 6 of 13
4.4.5 Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Consultant shall disclose to and
obtain the approval of City for the self-insured retentions and deductibles before
beginning any of the services or work called for by any term of this Agreement.
During the period covered by this Agreement, only upon the prior express written
authorization of Contract Administrator, Consultant may increase such deductibles
or self-insured retentions with respect to City, its officers, employees, agents, and
volunteers. The Contract Administrator may condition approval of an increase in
deductible or self-insured retention levels with a requirement that Consultant
procure a bond, guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim
administration, and defense expenses that is satisfactory in all respects to each of
them.
4.4,6 Notice of Reduction in Coverage. In the event that any .coverage required by
this section is reduced, limited, or materially affected in any other manner,
Consultant shall provide written notice to City at Consultant's earliest possible
opportunity and in no case later than five days after Consultant is notified of the
change in coverage.
4.5 Remedies. In addition to any other remedies City may have if Consultant fails to provide
or maintain any insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time
herein required, City may, at its sole option exercise any of the following remedies, which
are alternatives to other remedies City may have and are not the exclusive remedy for
Consultant's breach:
· Obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such
insurance from any sums due under the Agreement;
· Order Consultant to stop work under this Agreement or withhold any payment that
becomes due to Consultant hereunder, or both stop work and withhold any payment,
until Consultant demonstrates compliance with the requirements hereof; and/or
· Terminate this Agreement.
Section 5. INDEMNIFICATION AND CONSULTANT'S RESPONSIBILITIES. Consultant shall
indemnify, defend with counsel selected by the City, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers,
employees, agents, and volunteers from and against any and all losses, liability, claims, suits, actions,
damages, and causes of action arising out of any personal injury, bodily injury, loss of life, or damage to
property, or any violation of any federal, state, or municipal law or ordinance, to the extent caused, in whole
or in part, by the willful misconduct or negligent acts or omissions of Consultant or its employees,
subcontractors, or agents, by acts for which they could be held strictly liable, or by the quality or character
of their work, The foregoing obligation of Consultant shall not apply when (1) the injury, loss of life, damage
to property, or violation of law arises wholly from the negligence or willful misconduct of the City or its
officers, employees, agents, or volunteers and (2) the actions of Consultant or its employees,
subcontractor, or agents have contributed in no part to the injury, loss of life, damage to property, or
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group Page 7 of 13
violation of law. It is understood that the duty of Consultant to indemnify and hold harmless includes the
duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code. Acceptance by City of insurance
certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not relieve Consultant from liability
under this indemnification and hold. harmless clause. This indemnification and hold harmless clause shall
apply to any damages or claims for damages whether or not such insurance policies shall have been
determined to apply. By execution of this Agreement, Consultant acknowledges and agrees to the
provisions of this Section and that it is a material element of consideration.
In the event that Consultant or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant providing services
under this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees
Retirement System (PERS) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of City, Consultant shall
indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any employee and/or employer contributions
for PERS benefits on behalf of Consultant or its employees, agents, or subcontractors, as well as for the
payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of
City.
Section 6. STATUS OF CONSULTANT.
6.1 Independent Contractor. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall
be an independent contractor and shall not be an employee of City. City shall have the
right to control Consultant only insofar as the results of Consultant's services rendered
pursuant to this Agreement and assignment of personnel pursuant to Subparagraph 1.3;
however, otherwise City shall not have the right to control the means by which Consultant
accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other
City, state, or federal policy, rule, regulation, law, or ordinance to the contrary, Consultant
and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing services under this
Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any and
all claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including
but not limited to eligibility to enroll in the California Public Employees Retirement System
(PERS) as an employee of City and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for
employer contributions and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits.
6.2 Consultant No Agent. Except as City may specify in writing, Consultant shall have no
authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an
agent. Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement
to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.
Section 7. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS.
7.1 Governing Law. The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement.
7.2 Compliance with Applicable Laws. ConsUltant and any subcontractors shall comply With
all laws applicable to the performance of the work hereunder.
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group Page 8 of 13
7.3 Other Governmental Regulations. To the extent that this Agreement may be funded by
fiscal assistance from another governmental entity, Consultant and any subcontractors
shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations to which City is bound by the terms of
such fiscal assistance program.
7.4 Licenses and Permits. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant and
its employees, agents, and any subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications,
and approvals of whatsoever nature that are legally required to practice their respective.
professions. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant and its
employees, agents, any subcontractors shall, at their sole cost and expense, keep in effect
at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals that are
legally required to practice their respective professions. In addition to the foregoing,
Consultant and any subcontractors shall obtain and maintain during the term of this
Agreement valid Business Licenses from City.
7.5 Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity. Consultant shall not discriminate, on the
basis of a person's race, religion, color, national origin, age, physical or mental handicap or
disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, or sexual orientation, against any
employee, applicant for employment, subcontractor, bidder for a subcontract, or participant
in, recipient of, or applicant for any services or programs provided by Consultant under this
Agreement. Consultant shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws,
policies, rules, and requirements related to equal opportunity and nondiscrimination in
employment, contracting, and the provision of any services that are the subject of this
Agreement, including but not limited to the satisfaction of any positive obligations required
of Consultant thereby.
Consultant shall include the provisions of this Subsection in any subcontract approved by
the Contract Administrator or this Agreement.
Section 8. TERMINATION AND MODIFICATION.
8.1 Termination. City may cancel this Agreement at any time and without cause upon written
notification to Consultant.
Consultant may cancel this Agreement upon 30 days' written notice to City and shall
include in such notice the reasons for cancellation.
In the event of termination, Consultant shall be entitled to compensation for services
performed to the effective date of termination; City, however, may condition payment of
such compensation upon Consultant delivering to City any or all documents, photographs,
computer software, video and audio tapes, and other materials provided to Consultant or
prepared by or for Consultant or the City in connection with this Agreement.
8.2 Extension. City may, in its sole and exclusive discretion, extend the end date of this
Agreement beyond that provided for in Subsection 1.1. Any such extension shall require a
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group Page 9 of 13
written amendment to this Agreement, as provided for herein. Consultant understands and
agrees that, if City grants such an extension, City shall have no obligation to provide
Consultant with compensation beyond the maximum amount provided for in this
Agreement. Similarly, unless authorized by the Contract Administrator, City shall have no
' obligation to reimburse Consultant for any otherwise reimbursable expenses incurred
during the extension period.
8.3 Amendments. The parties may amend this Agreement only by a writing signed by all the
parties.
8.4 Assignment and Subcontracting. City and Consultant recognize and agree that this
Agreement contemplates personal performance by Consultant and is based upon a
determination of Consultant's unique personal competence, experience, and specialized
personal knowledge. Moreover, a substantial inducement to City for entering into this
Agreement was and is the professional reputation and competence of Consultant.
Consultant may not assign this Agreement or any interest therein without the prior written
approval of the Contract Administrator. Consultant shall not subcontract any portion of the
performance contemplated and provided for herein, other than to the subcontractors noted
in the proposal, without prior written approval of the Contract Administrator.
8.5 Survival. All obligations arising prior to the termination of this Agreement and all
provisions of this Agreement allocating liability between City and Consultant shall survive
the termination of this Agreement.
8.6 Options upon Breach by Consultant. If Consultant materially breaches any of the terms
of this Agreement, City's remedies shall included, but not be limited to, the following:
8.6.1 Immediately terminate the Agreement;
8.6.2 Retain the plans, specifications, drawings, reports, design documents, and any
other work product prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement;
8.6.3 Retain a different consultant to complete the work described in Exhibit A not
finished by Consultant; or
8.6.4 Charge Consultant the difference between the cost to complete the work
described in Exhibit A that is unfinished at the time of breach and the amount that
City would have paid Consultant pursuant to Section 2 if Consultant had
completed the work.
Section 9. KEEPING AND STATUS OF RECORDS.
9.1 Records Created as Part of Consultant's Performance. All reports, data, maps,
models, charts, studies, surveys, photographs, memoranda, plans, studies, specifications,
records, files, or any other documents or materials, in electronic or any other form, that
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group Page 10 of 13
Consultant prepares or obtains pursuant to this Agreement and that relate to the matters
covered hereunder shall be the property of the City. Consultant hereby agrees to deliver
those documents to the City upon termination of the Agreement. It is understood and
agreed that the documents and other materials, including but not limited to those described
above, prepared pursuant to this Agreement are prepared specifically for the City and are
not necessarily suitable for any future or other use. City and Consultant agree that, until
final approval by City, all data, plans, specifications, reports and other documents are
confidential and will not be released to third parties without prior written consent of both
parties.
9.2 Consultant's Books and Records. Consultant shall maintain any and all ledgers, books
of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents
evidencing or relating to charges for services or expenditures and disbursements charged
to the City under this Agreement for a minimum of three (3) years, or for any longer period
required by law, from the date of final payment to the Consultant to this Agreement.
9.3 Inspection and Audit of Records. Any records or documents that Section 9.2 of this
Agreement requires Consultant to maintain shall be made available for inspection, audit,
and/or copying at any time during regular business hours, upon oral or written request of
the City.. Under California Government Code Section 8546.7, if the amount of public funds
expended under this Agreement exceeds TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($10,000.00), the
Agreement shall be subject to the examination and audit of the State Auditor, at the
request of City or as part of any audit of the City, for a period of three (3) years after final
payment under the Agreement.
Section 10 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
10.1 Attorneys' Fees. If a party to this Agreement brings any action, including an action for
declaratory relief, to enforce or interpret the provision of this Agreement, the prevailing
party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees in addition to any other relief to which
that party may be entitled. The court may set such fees in the same action or in a
separate action brought for that purpose.
10.2 Venue. In the event that either party brings any action against the other under this
Agreement, the parties agree that trial of such action shall be vested exclusively in the
state courts of California in the County of Alameda or in the United States District Court for
the Northern District of California.
10.3 Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this
Agreement is invalid, void, or unenforceable, the provisions of this Agreement not So
adjudged shall remain in full force and effect. The invalidity in whole or in part of any
provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this
Agreement.
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group Page 11 of 13
10.4 No Implied Waiver of Breach. The waiver of any breach of a specific provision of this
Agreement does not constitute a waiver of any other breach of that term or any other term
of this Agreement.
10.5 Successors and Assigns. The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of
and shall apply to and bind the successors and assigns of the parties.
10.6 Use of Recycled Products. Consultant shall prepare and submit all reports, written
studies and other printed material on recycled paper to the extent it is available at equal or
less cost than virgin paper.
10.7 Conflict of Interest, Consultant may serve other clients, but none whose activities within
the corporate limits of City or whose business, regardless of. location, would place
Consultant in a "conflict of interest," as that term is defined in the Political Reform Act,
codified at California Government Code Section 81000 et seq.
Consultant shall not employ any City official in the work performed pursuant to this
Agreement. No officer or employee of City shall have any financial interest in this
Agreement that would violate California Government Code Sections 1090 et seq.
Consultant hereby warrants that it is not now, nor has it been in the previous twelve (12)
months, an employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City. If Consultant was an
employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City in the previous twelve months,
Consultant warrants that it did not participate in any manner in the forming of this
Agreement. Consultant understands that, if this Agreement is made in violation of
Government Code {}1090 et. seq., the entire Agreement is void and Consultant will not be
entitled to any compensation for services performed pursuant to this Agreement, including
reimbursement of expenses, and Consultant will be required to reimburse the City for any
sums paid to the Consultant. Consultant understands that, in addition to the foregoing, it
may be subject to criminal prosecution for a violation of Government Code {} 1090 and, if
applicable, will be disqualified from holding public office in the State of California.
10.8 Solicitation. Consultant agrees not to solicit business at any meeting, focus group, or
interview related to this Agreement, either orally or through any written materials.
10.9 Contract Administration. This Agreement shall be administered by Jason Behrmann,
Administrative Analyst ("Contract Administrator"). All correspondence shall be directed to
or through the Contract Administrator or his or her designee.
10.10 Notices. Any written notice to Consultant shall be sent to:
ATTENTION: RICHARD J. HUTCHINSON
R3 CONSULTING GROUP
4811 CHIPPENDALE DRIVE, SUITE 902
SACRAMENTO, CA 95841
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group Page 12 of 13
Any written notice to City shall be sent to:
ATTENTION: JASON BEHRMANN, ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST
CITY OF DUBLIN
100 CIVIC PLAZA
DUBLIN, CA 94568
10.11 Professional Seal. Where applicable in the determination of the contract administrator,
the first page of a technical report, first page of design specifications, and each page of
construction drawingS shall be stamped/sealed and signed by the licensed professional
responsible for the report/design preparation. The stamp/seal shall be in a block entitled
"Seal and Signature of Registered Professional with report/design responsibility," as in the
following example.
Seal and Signature of Registered Professional with
report/design responsibility.
10.12 Integration. This Agreement, including the scope of work attached hereto and
incorporated herein as Exhibit A, represents the entire and integrated agreement between
City and Consultant and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements,
either written or oral.
CITY OF DUBLIN CONSULTANT
JANET LOCKHART, MAYOR RICHARD J. HUTCHINSON, PRINCIPAL
Attest:
Kay Keck, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Elizabeth H. Silver, City Attorney
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group Page 13 of 13
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SEEVICES
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group--Exhibit A Page 1 of 14
Section G
- Scope-.ofServices
Project Approach
The following information
R3 understands that the City of Dublin ("City") wishes to conduct a
was used by R3 in the
competitive proposal process by issuing a Request for Proposals
document ("RFP") to procure_residential and commercial collection, preparation of this proposed
disposal and processing services. Scope of Services:
· The City's' RFP
Our proposed scope of services is for full service procurement
assistance. R3 has considered the following factors in regards to the · Discussions with Jason
City of Dublin in the development of this Scope of Services: Berhmann, Administrative
Analyst and Project
Customer Service and Cost Effectiveness: The primary objective of
Manager for the City of
the competitive proposal process is to provide the residents and Dublin
businesses of the City of Dublin with the highest level of solid waste
collection, disposal, and recycling service at the most competitive · Review of the City of
price. R3 has prepared this Scope of Services to successfully Dublin, ACI~TffA and
accomplish this objective. CIWMB websites and
printed materials
Proiect Schedule: The current Franchise Agreement with Livermore-
Dublin Disposal expires on June 30, 2005. The City's objective is · R3 's experience working
to complete the negotiation phase and execute the new Franchise on numerous procurement
Agreement by the end of December 2004. This will allow sufficient projects with similar
time for the selected hauler to prepare for the start date of July 1, issues
2005. This Scope of Services is designed to successfully complete
this project on schedule.
Combined versus Separate Collection and Disposal Contracts:
In an effort to procure the best combination of services at the best
price, the City is evaluating separate versus combined collection and
disposal contracts. R3 recommends that the City request cost
proposals for both scenarios in the RFP document, thereby allowing
the evaluation team and City Council to select the alternative that
offers the best deal to the City.
AB 939 Compliance: R3 understands that the City has a firm
commitment to aggressive waste reduction and recycling goals. R3
recommends that the City consider a mechanism to provide a
financial incentive to the selected hauler to exceed the diversion
mandates of AB 939 and meet the diversion goals of the ACWMA.
R3 has successfully implemented this system in similar Franchise
Agreements.
Commercial Recycling Programs:_The_currentcommercial recycling ---I ............. [~.~
Section G - 1
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group--Exhibit A Page 2 of 15
Scope of
Services --net ~cost savings for businesses that recycle, we b~lieve this system
sends the wrong message to the business community. R3
recommends that the City consider restructuring the commercial
rates such that recycling is offered to local businesses at no
additional charge, and all program costs are built into the
commercial garbage collection rates. R3 recently implemented this
system in a similar Franchise Agreement, and waste reduction and
recycling activities have increased dramatically as a result. As the
business sector continues to grow in the City of Dublin, commercial
recycling will play an increasing role in the effort to comply with
the diversion requirements of AB 939, and this strategy will likely
provide a long-term benefit to the business community and the City.
Urban Growth: R3 understands that the residential and commercial
sectors of the City are forecasted to experience significant growth
throughout the term of the new Franchise Agreement. This will
require the selected hauler to efficiently accommodate increases in
accounts, collection fleet, labor, service area, etc.
Ownership of Existing Garbage and Recycling Carts: The ownership
of the existing garbage and recycling carts in the City of Dublin
affects the structure of the RFP document and potential hauler
transition issues. R3 recommends that ownership of the existir~g
carts be determined early in the process, and that the RFP document
be drafted accordingly.
Community Participation: R3 understands that the City is committed
to community participation and feedback throughout the
procurement process. R3 recommends that a community outreach
program be developed to educate residential, multi-family and
business sector customers about the procurement process and to
receive feedback on the design of new programs. We have utilized
numerous outreach formats including City Council and public
workshops on similar prOcurement projects, and we believe it is an
important component of the process.
Our project approach is designed to result in a successful
competitive procurement and franchisee selection process within the
requested time schedule.
Work Tasks
[~.__ ~ ] This sect-ion details R3's work tasks for providing comprehensive
": ...... ....... - - ...... "~'-- ~ -~d prOcessing se~i'ces. Please-note that the- tasks ~e 'desired to
Section G 2 [ assist the City evaluate the ~o pfimaw options ~d implement ~e
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group--Exhibit A Page 3 of 15
_ Scope of
preferred option. The two options include separate collection and SerVices
disposal agreements, and a combined collection and disposal
agreement.
Task1: Determine' The City's Collection and
Disposal Needs
Task 1.1 Document Request and Review
Upon authorization to proceed, R3 will provide the City with a
preliminary document request list. This will allow the City to
assemble the required documents so the R3 Project Team can
immediately begin work upon receipt of a Notice to Proceed.
The following is a preliminary list of documents that will likely be
requested from the City:
· Solid waste ordinances and resolutions;
· Current Franchise Agreement and all amendments;
· Current customer rate schedule;
· Residential and commercial demographic information;
·Growth projections in the residential and commercial
sectors;
· Annual disposal and diversion reports submitted to the
California Integrated Waste Management Board ("CIWMB").
R3 will review the data and information submitted and identify any
additional data requirements or issues for discussion at the Project
Kick-off Meeting (Task 1.2).
Task 1.2 Project Kick-Off Meeting
The primary objective of the kick-off meeting is to confirm the
project goals, review the project scope and schedule, identify
appropriate contacts from the City and R3, and address any
outstanding issues or concerns. In addition, R3 will discuss the
initial data and information review, and coordinate the nature and
timing of access to City staff, facilities and records.
Prior to the Project Kick-off Meeting, R3 will prepare an agenda and
project schedule in a detailed Gantt chart format. We will request
that City staff review this documentation and work with R3 to
~:_p~ep~o_.the.final meeting agenda.:andJnatefials pfiorm the Project---.~
Section G - 3
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting GrouP-Exhibit A Page 4 of 15
ScoPe of
Services - -Task 1.3 Initial Program Evaluation
R3 will work with City staff to determine the best combination of
solid waste collection, disposal and recycling programs for
residential and commercial customers. The primary objective of
this Task is to develop a "shod-list" of program alternatives for
presentation at a Council Workshop and for further technical
evaluation. The programs and issues for evaluation may include,
but not be limited to, the following:
· Separate versus combined solid waste collection and
disposal contracts;
· Residential and commercial food waste recycling programs;
· Effectiveness of proposed programs in diverting waste from
landfill dis posal;
· Container sizes, colors, footprint and labeling requirements;
· Rate structures for residential and commercial garbage
collection and recycling services;
· Financial incentives to increase recycling and / or penalties
for failure to meet diversion requirements;
· Waste reduction, recycling and education programs and
strategies for multi-family complexes and residents;
· Specific list of acceptable recyclables in City programs;
· Appropriate level of City Franchise Fee revenue;
· Household Hazardous Waste and E-Waste collection,
disposal and recycling alternatives;
· Bi-Annual customer rate setting and contractor(s) service
fee adjustment mechanisms;
· Split-bodyversus conventional collection vehicles;
· Open versus exclusive franchise or permit system for
recycling companies and debris-box haulers;
· Clean air technologies versus conventional vehicles;
Section G - 4
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group--Exhibit A Page 5 of 15
S _c ope of
· Service challenges such as narrow or steep streets, long Services
driveways, gated communities, mixed-use developments,
etc;
· Public education and community outreach programs.
R3 will prepare a report to the City detailing the results of the initial
evaluation of alternatives. The report will include an evaluation
matrix with linkages between specific program options and the
technical and financial evaluation. R3 will then work with City staff
to develop a "short-list" of program options to be presented and
discussed at one or more Council Workshops (Task 2). The
recommendations will also form the basis of program options to be
included in the RFP Package (Task 3).
Deliverables
Task 1 includes the following deliverables:
· Initial document request list submitted to City staff;
· Detailed project schedule in Gantt chart format;
· Review and confirmation with City Staff of Project
Objectives, Approach, Schedule, Budget, Communication
Protocol, etc;
· Preliminary agenda for Project Kick-off meeting;
· Participation during Project Kick-Off meeting;
· Five (5) copies of a written report summarizing the
evaluation of prog ram options;
· One (1) presentation of Task I results to City staff, City
Council or evaluation committee, as directed by City staff.
Task 2: Community Outreach Program
R3 believes that community participation in the procurement
process at the early stage of selecting program options is a key
feature of a successful procurement. The primary objectives of the
Community Outreach Program are to inform residents and
businesses about the procurement process and to receive input on
the proposed program options.
Section G - 5
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group-Exhibit A Page 6 of 15
Scope of
Services R3 anticipates working with City staff, City Council, residents,
homeowners associations, business groups, and local media outlets
to provide opportunities for community input.
Task 2.1 Council WOrkshops on Program Options
Building on Task 1, R3 will conduct up to two (2) Council
Workshop(s) to generate/receive input, ask/answer questions, .and
review the issues matrix (addressing issues such as service
frequency and containers).
Prior to the initial Council Workshop(s), R3 will prepare and submit
the presentation materials to City staff for review and comment.
Task 2.2 Additional Community Workshops and/or Public
Outreach
Additional community outreach opportunities will be Provided to
ensure adequate public participation and input throughout the
process. The scope and nature of this outreach will be as directed by
the City following the initial Council Workshop(s).
Task 3: Prepare, Issue and Evaluate Request for
Proposals (RFP's)
Task 3.1 Develop Performance Requirements
This phase of the preparation of the RFP document involves the
development of performance requirements. R3 understands
that the process of developing performance requirements will
involve a series of meetings with City Staff and R3.
The performance requirements will establish minimum service
standards and focus primarily on operational issues. Upon
completion by City staff and R3, the performance requirements
will be incorporated into the draft Franchise Agreement and
distributed in the RFP package. The performance requirements
may include, but not be limited to, the following:
· Minimum waste diversion requirements;
· Minimum waste disposal facility requirements;
· Specifications for container size, color, and labeling;
~~2-:.!. i._'`''-~:~-- --: -:---~" ':~ --:: Public--- education:-:' 'program'-req uirements ' (e':g:;"~- quarterly
Section-O - 6
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group-Exhibit A Page 7 of 15
Scope of
· Collection, disposal and recycling services to City offices, -~ ~ -' -
facilities and events; Services
· Time requirements for responses to customer calls
regarding service complaints (e.g., missed collections,
material spillage, hydraulic leaks, etc);
· Time requirements for responses to customer calls
regarding billing complaints, new accounts, etc.;
· Time requirements for cart or bin exchanges;
· Vehicle noise requirements;
· Vehicle maintenance requirements;
· Minimum insurance coverage requirements;
· Collection frequency and method; and
· Processing and marketing requirements for green waste and
recyclables.
Tasl~ 3.2 Develop Request for Proposals Document
R3 will prepare an RFP package based on information generated
from Tasks 1 and 2, as well as our experiences working with the
solid waste community. The RFP will include a draft Franchise
Agreement, which will specify the conditions of the franchise (e.g.,
collection and disposal service requirements, performance standards,
insurance, and liability/indemnification requirements), and cost
forms for contractors to complete. The RFP will specify minimum
requirements and qualifications and will require contractors to
submit work plans that speCify how they will transition to new
services, achieve diversion requirements, implement customer .
service programs, and promote public education activities.
Separate sections of the RFP will include instructions specifying the
rules of the negotiation process for the contractors and the City, the
format and submittal of responses, proposal cost and service forms,
and the method for evaluating responses. We suggest including
computer disks that contain forms for the contractors as part of the
submittal package. As an option, the City may wish to post the RFP
on its web site in PDF format.
In our experience, the Franchise Agreement should bedeveloped_-j ........ -._: .._~ _V_.___._~ ................
the time and cost of negotiations, and contractually links the [ .
Section G - 7
Consulting Se rvices Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group-Exhibit A Page 8 of 15
.Scope of
Service --re{:tuested services to proposed costs as part of the evaluation
process. We have followed this proven approach in our scope of
services and strongly recommend that the City elect to Use it given
the project timeline.
Accordingly, R3 will prepare the draft Franchise Agreement to be
included as part of the RFP document. The draft Franchise
Agreement will be structured to incorporate the two potential
options for the final agreement, including separate collection and
disposal agreements, and a combined collection and disposal
agreement. Contractors will be required to specify any exceptions
and progide language :for any changes they propose as part of their
proposal package.
In addition, contractors will not be allowed to make changes to the
Franchise Agreement after submittal of proposals. The Franchise
Agreement will include, at a minimum, the following primary
sections:
· Definitions;
· Representations and warranties;
· Franchisee term;
· Scope of services;
· Compensation;
· Operating assets;
· General requirements;
· Financial record-keeping and reporting requirements;
· Indemnity, insurance, and bond;
· Performance standards;
· Breach, default, and remedies; and
· AB 939 diversion requirements and indemnification.'
The Franchise Agreement will establish the scope of services to be
provided by the contractor and will specify performance standards.
Section G - 8
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group-Exhibit A Page 9 of 15
Scope_.of
Task 3.3 City Council Presentation -~
Services
R3 will develop and give a presentation explaining the details of the
draf~ RFP for review by the City Council. R3 will attend a City
Council meeting to present the details of the draft RFP for
discussion and approval prior to release.
Task 3.4 Finalize & Issne RFP
R3 will finalize the RFP and provide the City with one un-punched,
original, and twenty (20) copies in three-ring binders. In addition,
R3 will publicize the availability of the RFP package, and provide
the City with a draft notice of the availability for release on City
letterhead
Task 3.5 Evalnation of Proposals
R3 will assist the City in evaluating the proposals received in
response to the RFP. R3 recommends using a "double-blind"
process to complete the evaluation and selection process. This
"Double Blind'.' process has worked effectively in numerous
procurement processes completed by R3 Team Members, and has
proven effective in maintaining the objectivity of the selection
process. However, the-City may select an alternate or modified
selection process, as it deems appropriatel The recommended
"double-blind" process is described below:
First, R3 will provide scoring instructions and tables to members of
the eValuation committee with six (6) evaluation criteria, including:
· Overall responsiveness to the RFP;
· Proposers' experience;
· Adequacy and completeness of the technical proposal;
· Financial stability;
· References;
· Proposed cost.
After the evaluation committee has completed the evaluation
process, the raw scores will be sealed and given to the City Clerk.
R3 :_wilt then make a-presentation- to_:the. City-_ Council.-0nthe six (6)
evaluation criteria, and the Council members will individually
Section G - 9
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group--Exhibit A Page 10 of 15
S cope of
Servl-Ce a~ign ~veights to each criterion. The Council weights will then be
averaged and applied to the raw scores from the evaluation
committee. R3 will calculate the weighted results for each proposal
by applying the average weighting factors from the City Council to
the raw scores fi.om the evaluation committee.
For this task, R3 will be responsible for the following:
· Preparing an RFP package for distribution to prospective
haulers and disposal facilities that includes the draft
Franchise Agreement, process rules, evaluation and
selection criteria, project schedule, and all required forms;
· Drafting a Franchise Agreement that all items listed in Task
3.2 above;
· Providing process rules to guide the negotiation process
(e.g., how the proposers may communicate with City staff,
the consultant, and the City Council, the format for
negotiation sessions; and options available to the City if
negotiations are not completed successfully);
· Preparing a notice of availability of the RFP document and
how proposers may obtain copies;
· Conducting a pre-proposal meeting;
· Preparing written responses to questions submitted before
and during the pre-proposal meeting;
· Preparing addenda to the RFP, as required;
· Assisting the evaluation committee with the evaluation of the
technical feasibility of each proposal;
· Assisting the evaluation committee with the evaluation of
each proposers statement of technical feasibility, financial
solvency and demonstrated success in the industry;
· Preparing an evaluation matrix to easily compare the
proposed collection and disposal rates for each service or
program;
· Preparing any written request for clarification to the
272-'r---.~::~_--_ : :_~:~-~:: :r~:::.z:~..~:_z ::~:::--:_w-, :r--Scheduling and.-conduc~ting-inte~iews-with th-e~proposers;
Section G - 10
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group-Exhibit A F~age 11 of 15
Scope of
· Conducting additional community workshops; as necessary- ~ ~ ~~erv:ce
(Task 2);
·Preparing a letter report detailing the results of the
evaluation committee;
· Presenting the results of the evaluation process to the City
Council.
Task 4 Negotiate with Top Ranked Contractor,
and Finalize New Franchise Agreement
for City Council Approval
R3 will participate in Franchise Agreement negotiations with the top
ranked contractor(s). Negotiations will focus on clarifying the
contractor's service and cost proposals, finalizing contractual
language, and ensuring that the proposed collection and disposal
rates are appropriate given the level of requested service. Based on
similar project experience, we anticipate a series of offers and
counter-offers over an approximate two-week period. We therefore
suggest that the City host the negotiation sessions.
For this task, R3 will be responsible for."
· Participating in negotiations with the top ranked
contractor(s). Negotiations will focus on clarifying the
contractors' service and cost proposals, finalizing
contractual language, and to the extent necessary, clarifying
the proposed collection and disposal rates;
· Preparing a listing of outstanding service, cost, and
Franchise Agreement issues to be negotiated with the
contractors;
· Preparing a report detailing the results of the negotiation
session;
·Revising the Franchise Agreement(s) based on the resUlts
of the negotiation sessions~;
· Conducting additional community workshops as necessary
~ It has been our experience that minimal changes are required to finalize the Franchise
Agreement. Section G - 11
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group-Exhibit A Page 12 of 15
Scope of
oc~t v~tC'~'~'"lces · -Pre~enting the results 'of the final negotiations to the City
Council.
Optional Tasks
The following are examples of optional tasks that R3 has performed
for other clients in the execution of similar procurement projects.
These services would be performed as necessary at the direction of
City staff. Please note that the Project Budget included in Section F
'does not include any of these optional tasks.
Transition Assistance
In order to ensure a smooth transition of haulers (potentially) and
implementation of new programs, R3 will work with the selected
contractor to develop and maintain a checklist to organize and track
implementation tasks during the transition period. R3 proposes that
the checklist be initially developed in conjunction with the selected
contractor, and reviewed and updated regularly during the transition
process.
The following are examples of transition checklist tasks:
· Order collection vehicles, carts and/or bins;
· Develop a plan to coordinate the transition of customer and
billing functions to a new hauler;
· Develop plan to coordinate the delivery of new carts and/or
bins with the collection of old carts and/or bins from local
residents and businesses;
· Develop new route maps and inform residents of collection
day changes;
· Develop equipment inventory;
· Develop and implement public education campaign;
· Coordinate "Kick-off' media event for collection programs;
· Advertise community meetings;
· Develop press releases.
Section G - 12
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group-Exhibit A Page 13 of 15
Scope of
Develop Contractor Reporting Checklist -- ServiCes
The contractor will be required to submit numerous reports to the
City during the contract term. R3 will develop a checklist for easy
reference by both the City and the contractor to identify recurring
contractual requirements and the corresponding due dates. The
checklist will be used as a tool at the meetings between the City, the
contractor and R3 to address concerns or confusion regarding these
requirements.
The following are examples of reporting checklist tasks:
· Annual diversion report;
· Contractors payment to City;
· Financial information report;
· Accounting records;
· Contract materials records;
· CIWMB (format) annual reports;
· Public education and outreach plan;
· Annual collection service notice; and
· Performance bond and insurance certificates.
Development of Franchise Fee Payment System
The contractor will be required to submit a monthly Franchise Fee
payment to the City throughout the contract term. R3 will
coordinate 'with the City and the contractor to develop a Franchise
Fee Payment form for use by the contractor. The form will provide
the detail needed by the City to document the basis for the franchise
fee payments.
Review of Contractor Accounting System
For purposes of calculating franchise fees and reviewing financial
records, it is important that the contractor's accounting system be
designed to segregate the revenues and expenses related to the City
Franchise Agreement from those revenues and expenses related to
services pro~idedto o.~_ermunicipalities
Section G - 13
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
Oity of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group-.Exhibit A Page 14 of 15
Scope of
S ervices As part ~' th~ develo-~mer/t of the franchise fee payment system, R3
will review the accoUnting system developed by the contractor to
verify that it is designed to segregate the revenues and expenses
related to the services provided under the terms of the Franchise
Agreement with the City.
Customer Service and Billing
The contractor will be required to provide a Customer Service and
Billing center for City residents. In addition, the Franchise
Agreement will contain a variety of other requirements related to
customer service and billing.
R3 will review the customer service training program and observe
the customer service operations during the transition period. In
addition, we will review customer service call logs for problem area
patterns, and work with the City and the contactor as needed to
resolve the identified problem areas.
Section G - 14
Consulting Services Agreement between' April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group-Exhibit A Page 15 of 15
EXHIBIT B
COMPENSATION SCHEDULE
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group--Exhibit B Page 1 of 2
Section F
Project Budget Project Budget
Table F-1 below provides a not-to-exceed cost estimate to
administer the procurement process. This is followed by the R3
billing rate schedule and charges.
Task Hours Cost
Task 1: Document Request, Project Kick- 85 $11,475
off Meeting, and Initial Program
Evaluation
Task 2: Community Workshops 100 $13,500
Task 3: Prepare, Issue and Evaluate RFP's 305 $41,175
Task 4: Negotiation and Execution of 80 $10,800
Franchise Agreement
Reimbursable Expenses 0 $3,000
Totals 570 $79,950
Billing Rates and .Charges
Rates valid through term of contract
Technical Services
Project Manager $135~00/hour
Senior Analyst $135.00/hour
Analyst $90.00/hour
Associate $75.00 hour
Administrative Support $50.00/hour
Reimbursable Expenses
Consultants/Subcontractors N/A
Lodging and meals cost
Travel Private or company car $0.375 per mile
Delivery and other expenses cost
Payments
Un!~ss 9~.~ise...agreed in wdfing, fees .~v~!..be._.bi!!e.d m0~hly at
the..first of.each_month..for the preceding.month and .will'be payable
............ within 30 days of the date of.the invoice._'..~_ ..... . __ .: ............................. ~Se_c_ti?.~F.
Consulting Services Agreement between April 6, 2004
City of Dublin and R3 Consulting Group--Exhibit B Page 2of 2
CITY OF DUBLIN
BUDGET CHANGE FORM
CHANGE FORM #:
New Appropriations (City Council Approval Required): Budget Transfers:
x From Unappropriated Reserves Fund # __ From Budgeted Contingent Reserve (1080-799.000)
FrOm New Revenues Within Same Department Activity
Between Departments (City COuncil Approval Required)
Other
qame: Name: Waste Management
Account: Account: 001.50200.740.000 26,650
Name: Name:
Account: Account:
Name: Name:
Account: Account:
Name: Name:
Account: Account:
Name: Name:
Account: Account:
Name: Name:
Account: Account:
Name: Name:
Account: Account:
Total Total 26,650
Reason for Budget Change: Staff did not receive authorization to proceed with competitive bid process that require consultant
I services until mid Fiscal Year 2003-2004, therefore a budget change is required.
Signature ~
City Manager: ~ Lt Date: ~/~~
Signature /
Mayor: Date:
Signature
Posted By: Date:
Signature
\\Snapserver\pccommon~orms\budget change form.xls 1 of I ATTACH M E NT 4