Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8.2 City Services Survey ResultsG~~~ OF Dp~~y ~9`d~~--;~~2 STAFF REPORT CITY C L E R K `~~,~~ ~ DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL File # ^®®®-©© DATE: February 2, 2010 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Joni Pattillo, City Manager SUBJE Community Survey Results and Recommendation to Start Phase 2 of the Project Scope, Including Additional Community Outreach and Education Prepared By: Joni Pattillo, City Manager. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council has established a high priority objective to "effectively communicate and solicit input from the community regarding City services and activities." In October 2009, the City Council authorized a Community Survey to better understand citizen concerns, issues and perceptions. The City Council will be presented with the results of this Community Survey, as well as a recommendation from Staff to continue the community engagement and outreach work FINANCIAL IMPACT: Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the project were funded as a high priority objective in the adopted Fiscal Year 2009/2010 Budget. The funding appropriated was $1,500 more than the combined Phase 1 and Phase 2 agreement awarded to the Lew Edwards Group. The original proposal presented by the Consultant identified additional services that could be added following Phase 1 to provide a complete turn-key project. These services include $35,000 for design, printing, distribution and mailing of printed community information and education materials as well as a followup Community Survey at a cost of $17,500. A Budget Change in the amount of $51,000 is provided for the additional services. RECOMMENDATION: 1) Receive the Community Survey Results from the Consultant Team. 2) Authorize proceeding with Phase 2 of the Project including the Additional Community Outreach and Education. 3) Approve the Budget Change !~ Submitted By: Administrative Services Director ~ewed Assistant City Manager Page 1 of 2 ITEM NO. ~ ~ ~- ~ DESCRIPTION: On October 20, 2009, the City Council authorized an agreement with the Lew Edwards Group (LEG) to assist in conducting a Community Survey. In conjunction with their partner, Fairbank Maslin Maullin Metz & Associates, a survey was conducted with the residents of Dublin between November 30, 2009 and December 6, 2009. The survey was designed to solicit feedback in the following areas: • Level of resident satisfaction with Dublin's quality of life. • Level of resident satisfaction with the job the City is doing in providing City Services. • Identification of what essential City services residents desire to protect. • How the City's long-term financial viability is viewed in the midst challenging economic times. • Areas of concern as it relates to public finances and funding of local services. The consultants will present the survey results during the City Council meeting. The presentation of the survey results completes Phase 1 of the project. In reviewing the results with the Consultant Team, Staff recommends that the Consultant Team continue forward with Phase 2 of the project, as well as appropriate additional funds to conduct community outreach and education with the residents of Dublin on some of the key survey results. The current agreement with the Lew Edwards Group included a recommended option for this additional community outreach and education, including the production and distribution of printed materials and additional survey work. Staff recommends including these additional services to the existing agreement so that coordination efforts can remain streamlined and manageable for Staff, given the number of on-going City communication priorities already underway. The cost for the additional services requires a Budget Change in the amount of $51,000. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: Copy To: Catherine Lew, Lew Edwards Group Dave Metz, Fairbank Maslin Maullin Metz & Associates ATTACHMENTS: 1. Budget Change 2. Staff Report Dated October 20, 2009 City Council Meeting Authorizing Agreement With Lew Edwards Group (without attachments) Page 2 of 2 CITY OF DUBLIN BUDGET CHANGE FORM FY 2009 / 2010 CHANGE FORM # i~b New Appropriations (City Council Approval Required): X From Unappropriated Reserves (Fund) From New Revenues T)~?('RF.ASF RTTI)(:fi"I' ;~('('nTTIYT A'M(TIIIV'1' Budget Transfers: From Budgeted Contingent Reserve (1080-799.000) Within Same Department Activity _ Between Departments (City Council Approval Required) Other TNC'RF,AtiH F3lTilC'k;'f' A('t(}UN`I' AMOUNT • Name: EXPENSE -GENERAL FUND - City Council -Printing GL Account #: 1001.1101.61116 $35,000 Name :EXPENSE -GENERAL FUND - City Council -Contract Services -General GL Account #: 1001.1101.64001 $16 000 Fin Mgr/ASD: Signature Date: ~ ~~ ~ l fl REASON FOR BUDGET CHANGE ENTRY: The agreement with Lew Edwards Group identified additional services as part of a recommended phase 2 which include production and distribution of informational materials as well as additional community surveys. The budget change is required to fund these services as presented in the Staff Report at the City Council meeting on February 2, 2010. City Manager: Signature Date: ~ z~' / a As Approved at the City Council Meeting on: Date: 2/2/2010 Mayor: Date: Signature Posted By: Date: Signature G:IBudgerChmrgesll_2009_/0113_2_1_!0_CmmrySurvey.DOC ATTACHMENT # 1 19r .. ~~} ,8,21 ``~~~1 ~~>~R~ . a~~ STAFF REPORT DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL CITY CLERK File # ^®®~-©0 DATE: October 20, 2009 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Joni Pattillo, City Manager SUBJEC : Authorize an Agreement with Lew Edwards Group as Lead Consultant to Evaluate Opportunities for Revenue Enhancement Prepared By: Paul S. Rankin, Administrative Services Director EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: A high priority City Council goal for this Fiscal Year is to "undertake voter opinion research to determine community support for a revenue measure targeting resident valued enhancements." Given the threat from the State of California raiding traditional local revenues, and the inadequacy of revenue growth to keep pace with expenditures, scoping for possible additional revenue is timely and prudent. The City requested proposals from firms with expertise in the following two areas: Voter Opinion Polling and Funding Strategy /Communication Services. The City Council will consider approving an agreement with Lew Edwards Group. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The total amount budgeted for this project in Fiscal Year 2009-2010 is $65,000. Phase 1 of the project will be completed for a cost' not to exceed $32,500. During Phase 2, the costs associated with Strategic Communication Services over a seven month period are proposed to be $31,000. The costs associated with Phase 2 of the project may vary depending inclusion or exclusion of optional elements and a more refined scope, which would be presented to the City Council upon completion of Phase 1. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt the Resolution Approving an Agreement With Lew Edwards Group (Lead Consultant) For Evaluation of Opportunities to Enhance Local Revenues Submitted By: Administrative Services Director Reviewed By: Assistant City Manager Attachment 2 3~~ DESCRIPTION: The City Council adopted a Fiscal Year 2009-2010 high priority goal to "undertake voter opinion research to determine community support for a revenue measure targeting resident valued enhancements" (Goal I-A-3). As previously discussed in the 2009/2010 Budget Message, the City faces several fiscal challenges this year and into the foreseeable future, including: • Declining property tax and sales tax revenue, the City's two major sources of funding for operations; • The escalation of the City's public safety (including Police and Fire) operating costs. In just the past seven years, the cost of public safety has increased 100 percent; • Increased operating costs associated with new/added parks and infrastructure. Fallon Sports Park is projected to add approximately $350,000 in annual operating costs; • Replacement and repair costs for aging infrastructure and city facilities and the maintenance costs for new infrastructure and streets; • Unfunded mandates and regulatory requirements, including managing and treating storm water; • Balancing the desire for completion of major new facilities funded from Development Fees, which are forecasted to be collected at a much slower rate than in the past; and • The need for resources to provide staffing that will maintain service levels as the City grows (in Fiscal Year 2009-2010 Budget City Staff positions were reduced by over 10%). In addition to the City's current financial issues, the State of California continues to balance its books on the backs of local government. This year, Sacramento plans on "borrowing" $2.4 million from the City of Dublin and the future raids remain unclear. Dublin's fiscal situation is not unique, nor is the City Council's desire to assessment the feasibility of revenue enhancements. In fact, to protect local funds, many cities throughout the State are proactively exploring local revenue measures that cannot be borrowed by the State government and which may add additional diversity to the local revenue base. Process To Solicit Consultants Staff reviewed information presented at local government conferences on key elements required from professional consultants. A Request for Proposal (RFP) was developed based upon this information, as well as samples obtained from other agencies. It was envisioned that Consultants responding may have a Team Approach focused on two areas (Polling Expertise and Communications Strategy). Staff requested that the proposal identify a "Lead Consultant" if this were the case. The RFP envisioned that the approach to services would identify work to be performed in at least two major phases: 1) Voter Opinion Research specific to the City of Dublin and 2) Funding Options Strategy and Communications Services. In accordance with State laws the communications services must adhere to public information standards and not advocate a ballot measure. On September 14, 2009, the RFP was distributed to 10 firms with expertise in one or both of the areas of focus. Firms were given an opportunity to submit questions or requests for clarification. A response to questions submitted was distributed to interested firms on September 23, 2009 and the deadline for submitting a proposal was September 29, 2009. The City received a total of seven proposals (see Attachment 1). Five consisted of Project Teams representing the focus areas. One proposal was from a firm which had an affiliated company ~ $~ with expertise in polling and one proposal only recommended a polling firm but did not include specific responses to information on polling. Staff established an internal review Team which .included: Administrative Services Director; Assistant to the City Manager -Economic Development /Public Information Officer; Assistant Director of Parks and Community Services; and Senior Administrative Analyst -Budget. All of the responses were reviewed to determine those which best met the City's needs, using the following criteria: Quality and completeness of the proposal Proposer's experience with the specific element (Voter Opinion Polling and / or Revenue Strategy Development 8~ Communications), including the experience of staff to be assigned to the project, as well as the Proposer's engagements of similar scope and complexity; iii. Proposer's ability to schedule and efficiently perform the work; iv. Proposer's prior record of performance with the City or others; and v. Cost Proposal and Hours. Based upon this review, two Project Teams were determined to have best addressed the City's needs and presented extensive experience in similar engagements. The two teams were invited to an interview which was conducted on October 9, 2009. The intemal Staff team, which had done the initial screening of proposals, was joined by the Assistant City Manager to conduct the personal interviews of the two Project Teams. The Teams selected to participate in this phase of the selection process were: A. The Lew Edwards Group (LEG) - (Oakland CA -Lead Consultant) Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, & Associates (FMMA) - (Oakland CA -Sub-Consultant Opinion Research} Primary Staffing: Lew Edwards Group -Catherine Lew, President & CEO FMMA -David Metr, Partner B Godbe Research - (San Mateo CA -Lead Consultant) Tramutola (Oakland CA -Sub-Consultant Communications) Primary Staffing: Godbe - Co-Project Managers Bryan Godbe, President and Dr. Alice Chan Tramutola -Bonnie Moss, Sr. Vice President and Chief Operating Officer and Charles Heath, Senior Vice President and Senior Consultant Based on the information presented in the proposals, as well as the interview presentation, Staff is recommending the selection of Lew Edwards Group for this professional services engagement. 5~1~ Background and Experience Offered By Lew Edwards Group Proposal The team presented as part of the Lew Edwards Group (LEG) proposal has extensive experience with city clients in the Bay Area, as well as throughout the State of California. The revenue options available to a City are different than those typically faced by other government entities such as special districts and schools. The LEG/FMMA Team represents that they have assisted agencies in obtaining voter approval of over $27 billion in revenue measures. Among the agencies this Team has worked for is City of San Ramon (Landscaping & Lighting District Increase); City of Palo Alto (Library Funding Measure); City of Gilroy (Library Funding Measure). In addition both firms have worked individually for many agencies statewide. The types of revenue measures have varied including, sales tax, utility user tax, Transient Occupancy Tax, as well as general purpose taxes. Ninety-three percent of the measures they have assisted with have been approved by the voters. The Lew Edwards Group proposal is broken down as follows: Phase 1 -Assessment Planning and Research As proposed the effort will begin with an assessment of unique issues faced by the City and the review of background materials and information. Catherine Lew as part of the initial assessment will conduct individual interviews with City Council as well as working with the City Manager and across-section of input from Department Directors. This element of the information gathering is essential to formulate an understanding of what the potential needs are for the Dublin community. With this information and input the Consultants will work with City Staff to develop the questions to be included in the baseline survey. Given their extensive background working with communities throughout Califomia the Consultants will develop and conduct a statistically valid survey. In order to protect the validity of the survey results the Consultants have advised against public disclosure of survey questions in advance. However, it will be based on the themes and background gathered in the initial research. The survey will gather information on general perceptions of City services and voter concerns. In addition there will be specific testing of options related to potential revenue enhancement. The survey will be designed to be approximately 20 minutes in length and they propose to conduct a sample size of 400 likely November 2010 voters. Upon conclusion of the survey LEG will prepare a report that will be presented to the City Council. After the completion of the survey a formal action by the City Council will be required to decide what future steps will be taken. The Phase 1 Report is expected to offer recommendations and possibly alternatives that can be considered based on interpretation of the survey results. Some agencies conduct this type of research on a regular basis in order to have quantitative base line data regarding the local perception of City Services and how they are valued. The LEG proposal identified specifically that the City may elect to forego any further services upon the completion of Phase 1. This element has also been incorporated into the proposed Agreement. Upon presentation to the City Council of the Phase 1 results, there will be the opportunity to terminate any further work associated with this agreement. The total cost negotiated for Phase 1 services is $32,500. These costs provide for the following services: l!>'`' `~ Lead Consultant $10,000 (Project Management and Facilitation; Oversight of Survey Implementation; Independent analysis of survey findings, Development of Strategic Assessment and Recommendations.) Base Line Public Opinion Research Survey $22,500 (400 respondent sample, 20 minute interviews, top-line survey results, full cross- tabulated results, graphic presentation of key findings and final report.) TOTAL PHASE 1 $32,500 Phase 2 - Develop a Comprehensive Communications Plan Upon completion of Phase 1 the Consultants will present a recommended communications plan. In part the design of this plan will rely heavily on what is learned from the polling regarding voter perceptions of issues and City services. The opportunity to have communication messages developed to specifically address our community will further efforts to assure that the local public is well informed and has an opportunity to obtain important information. This work would be carried out primarily by LEG and is envisioned to span over the period from January 1, 2010 through approximately July 31, 2010. The services will include assistance in defining key messages and developing a variety of communications pieces, which may include: brochures, website information, development of speakers bureau material and training, development of PowerPoint presentations, collaboration with Staff and City Attorney on reviewing all materials, etc. The cost for this phase of services is $31,000 (Professional fees of $30,000 plus reimbursable costs of $1,000). Phase 2 -Optional Services If the City decides to continue with Phase 2 there are potentially optional services that could be undertaken as part of a coordinated effort to refine the City communication efforts. One of these efforts is the development and distribution of direct mail information that shares what has been learned from the polling and helps provide additional education for residents about the key issues that are faced by the City. Lew Edwards Group has found direct mail as one element of a public information effort. An estimate of the cost to produce and distribute three mailings is $35,000. If later in the fiscal year the City were at the point of considering. a specific revenue measure, it may also be desirable to conduct a more focused poll prior to the City Council taking action to place the revenue measure on the ballot. It is envisioned that this would be a shorter interview with an estimated cost of $17,500. None of the optional services are required as part of the current proposed agreement and this would be further evaluated after the Phase 1 results are presented to the City Council. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: None required. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Listing of Firms Submitting Proposals 2. Resolution approving agreement with Lew Edwards Group (Lead Consultant) for evaluation of opportunities to enhance local revenue.