Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - unsigned - 1993-04-26 - Adjourned Regular Meeting1 04/26/93 City Council, Adjourned Regular Meeting City Hall Conference Room A 760 Parkview Avenue Redding, California April 26, 1993 4:00 p.m. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Arness with the following Council Members present: Anderson, Arness, Dahl, Kehoe and Moss. Also present were City Manager Christofferson, City Attorney Hays, Director of Public Works Galusha, Electric Utility Resources Manager Coleman, Assistant City Attorney Calkins, Finance Director Downing, Assistant City Engineer Aasen, General Services Director Masingale, Assistant General Services Director Kohn, Management Analyst Anderson, Budget Services Officer Starman, Public Information Officer Bachman, City Clerk Strohmayer, and Secretary to City Council Rudolph. RESOLUTION - Awarding Contract for Design of Transfer Station/Materials Recovery Facility RESOLUTION - Appropriating Funds * (B-130-070 & S-020-650) John Kenney, representing URS Associates (URS), reviewed the actions which have transpired to date: a) The City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the design of the transfer station/materials recovery facility which set forth the method of evaluation and the evaluation criteria; b) URS responded to the proposal; c) URS went through the selection process and was evaluated according to the criteria set forth in the RFP; d) The selection panel found URS to be the most qualified proposer; e) URS then negotiated a contract with the City, as set forth in the RFP; and f) At the time the contract was presented for approval, Council decided that it would award the contract on a new criteria, local preference. He stated that if the City wants to utilize local preference in its RFPs, it should be done in the future and not retroactively. This would allow the proposer to know the selection and evaluation criteria before determining whether to respond. Pursuant to the procedures set forth in the RFP, he requested that the City award the contract to URS. Tom Hjort of URS Associates emphasized that the RFP, as well as conversations with staff, did not indicate that local preference would be part of the selection criteria. He stated that had he known it was part of the criteria, he would not have responded, as proposals are lengthy and take a considerable amount of time to prepare. He noted that the economic consequences of not receiving large jobs such as this has affected his firm. In the last three weeks, he has been forced to layoff a structural engineer and a drafter. He explained that the Sunnyvale transfer station is a "fast track" project and is in its fourth month of construction. The project is on schedule and currently under construction budget. He stood behind the fact that the "fast track" method, as originally proposed by URS, would save the City both construction time and money. Council Member Anderson stated that the integrity of the City and its bidding process need to be put foremost. He opined that the RFP process was flawed in at least the following two areas: 1) Mathematical formula. Five interviewers were allowed to rate the four firms on a scale of 1 to 100. He preferred to utilize a 1 through 4 selection process; and 2) The current selection process puts the City Council in a position of rubber stamping staff's recommendation. He recommended that before proposers are led to believe they would be receiving a contract, Council should be brought into the consideration process. He requested that these two issues be considered when dealing with future proposals. He personally feels that if there is a well- qualified local firm that is making a significant contribution to the area's economy, it should be given some type of preference. He stated that the City's integrity is extremely important to him and that aspect would guide his vote. Council Member Moss concurred that the RFP process was flawed. He stated that when dealing with subjective issues, a subjective analysis of opinions is commonly utilized, whereby the top and lowest bid in each category is eliminated. This process removes some of the subjectivity from the evaluation process. In the future, it is his intention to award contracts, as much as economically feasible, within the local community. 2 04/26/93 Council Member Kehoe opined that the intentions of the City Council were well meaning, but resulted in the following unfortunate consequences: 1) The integrity of the City's procurement process has been compromised; and 2) The good name and reputation of the City may be tarnished if Council awards this contract to CH2M Hill. He, therefore, recommended that Council cancel the current RFP and start the process over. He stated that if local preference is to be an element of the RFP, it should be decided before the RFP is issued. He also stated that including a non-voting consultant in the process would be beneficial. Council Member Dahl saw no reason for Council to reverse its original decision. He noted that this was a subjective decision and "all things being equal," he would still go with the local firm. He reiterated that he had no intention of reversing his original decision. He expressed concern, however, that Council may be being viewed as a rubber stamp. 3 04/26/93 Council Member Moss related that he feels as strongly about Council's original decision as Council Member Dahl; however, if more objectivity can be introduced into the procedure, he would concur with Council Member Kehoe's recommendation. He noted, however, the problem of time constraints and having the pad down before the winter season. Mayor Arness viewed his participation on the selection panel as being objective. He stated that when considering the presentations, he did not even consider if the firm was local. If the RFP were to be reissued, it would practically have to be rewritten and the mechanics better defined. The one area of improvement he noted would be for staff to request Council's approval of its selection before approaching them regarding a contract. He noted that, in the past, the City, particularly in the Electric Department, has utilized out-of-town consultants. With regard to the comment "all things being equal, it should go to the local consultant," he questioned the definition of equal. In response to Council Member Dahl, General Services Director Masingale replied that, based on an estimate prepared several years ago regarding vehicle miles traveled, a transfer station would save the City approximately $50,000.00 per month. Council Member Kehoe related that he would abstain from voting as he believes the City's process to be flawed and its integrity comprised and would, therefore, not award the contract to either URS Consultants or CH2M Hill. MOTION: Made by Council Member Dahl, seconded by Council Member Moss, to award the contract for the design of the transfer station/materials recovery facility to CH2M Hill. Voting was as follows: Ayes: Council Members - Dahl and Moss Noes: Council Members - Anderson and Arness Absent: Council Members - None Abstain: Council Members - Kehoe Motion failed due to lack of a majority vote. Council Member Anderson related that the City's process, as noted in the RFP, if followed through to its conclusion, indicates that URS should receive the contract. He stated that he changed his original decision because the City's integrity is extremely important to him. He also indicated that if an injunction were to occur, it would cost the City approximately $50,000.00 for every month the project is delayed. He believed it in the City's best interest to award the contract to URS. MOTION: Made by Council Member Anderson, seconded by Council Member Arness, that Resolution No. 93-131 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding approving and authorizing the Mayor to sign the agreement for Professional Services between the City of Redding and URS Consultants, Inc. for the design of the transfer station and materials recovery facility, not to exceed $542,000.00; and authorizing the appropriation of an additional $30,000.00 as a contingency fund. Voting was as follows: Ayes: Council Members - Anderson, Moss and Arness Noes: Council Members - Dahl Absent: Council Members - None Abstain: Council Members - Kehoe Resolution No. 93-131 is on file in the office of the City Clerk. MOTION: Made by Council Member Anderson, seconded by Council Member Arness, that Resolution No. 93-132 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding approving and adopting the 56th amendment to City Budget Resolution No. 92-306 appropriating $362,000.00 for the design of the transfer station/material recovery facility. Voting was as follows: Ayes: Council Members - Anderson, Moss and Arness Noes: Council Members - Dahl Absent: Council Members - None Abstain: Council Members - Kehoe Resolution No. 93-132 is on file in the office of the City Clerk. 4 04/26/93 Council Member Moss explained the reason that he changed his original vote is because the City needs the transfer station today and that a new RFP would be expensive and delay the project's construction. Mayor Arness suggested that staff review the current policy and consider addressing the system's subjectivity. He recommended that in the future, that staff not negotiate with a proposer until Council has approved its selection. Council Member Moss suggested that if the review procedure is to be changed, someone with a statistical background should be included in the review process. Council Member Anderson related that "all things being equal," he would prefer utilizing a local firm. 5 04/26/93 City Manager Christofferson noted problems defining what is "local." He stated that staff would review the issue and bring back a recommendation for Council's consideration. RESOLUTION - Adopting Time Schedule for Electric Utility Annual Budget and Rate Review Process (E-090-100) Electric department staff recalled that Council, at its meeting of January 20, 1993, acknowledged the need to include in the City's annual budget review process, any utility rate adjustments required to support utility budget requests. The Electric Utility Annual Budget and Rate Review Process presented in the Report to City Council dated April 12, 1993, incorporated herein by reference, establishes a procedure which provides a Council- approved, forecasted rate adjustment percentage to be included in the Electric Utility annual budget request. In addition, the proposed review process would allow the Electric Utility to maintain the optimum annual review period currently utilized for electric utility rates. Two significant changes from the current Electric Utility rate review and budget processes would be: 1) Council adoption of a rate adjustment percentage during each October-November rate review to be used during the next annual budget review process; and (2) Council action during the same October- November rate review to confirm or modify the rate adjustment percentage which was adopted during the prior October-November Council rate review and used in the budget review process for the current fiscal year. It was noted that because of the uncertainty which exists in the electric utility industry coincident with the City's budget preparation process due primarily to unknown hydroelectric generation availability for the upcoming summer months, the City's power production costs are not well established at the time Council adopts the budget. The proposed Electric Utility Annual Budget and Rate Review Process recognizes this fact and retains the optimum timing for the annual electric utility rate review process in addition to providing a Council-adopted rate adjustment percentage to be used in the upcoming budget process. It is the recommendation of staff that Council adopt the proposed Electric Utility Annual Budget and Rate Review Process. Council Member Dahl related that in the past, Council has approved the budget with assumptions of forthcoming rate increases. He stated that if the budget is to be balanced with a proposed rate increase, the increase may as well be approved at the same time. Electric Utility Resource Manager Coleman explained that it is difficult to adopt a rate increase in June, as June, July and August are the department's most volatile months. Staff is recommending that in the future, Council set the rate increase in November and at that time estimate next year's rate increase. For budgetary purposes, staff would then utilize the estimate developed the previous November. He commented that two or three hot days during a summer month can increase the City's monthly bill by approximately 30-40 percent. He also related that the Electric Utility Department normally loses money during the summer months. He indicated that a rate increase could be adopted in June, however, depending on the summer months, it might then be necessary to adopt an additional increase three to four months later or extract money from the reserves. Staff can better predict in the fall the needs for the next twelve months. In response to Council Member Anderson, Mr. Coleman replied that the proposed process does not really change the existing procedure, it just memorializes it. Council Member Anderson expressed interest in adopting the rate increase at budget time, rather than maintaining the status quo. Council Member Moss interjected that the process currently utilized by the Electric Utility Department has evolved over the department's life. By November, staff knows all the variables, instead of estimating them in May or June. He noted that previous estimates used for budgetary purposes have been fairly close; therefore, he saw no need to place additional demands upon the Electric Department's resource planners at this time. 6 04/26/93 MOTION: Made by Council Member Moss, seconded by Council Member Dahl, that Resolution No. 93-133 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding adopting a time-schedule for the Electric Utility Annual Budget and Rate Review Process. Voting was as follows: Ayes: Council Members - Dahl, Kehoe, Moss and Arness Noes: Council Members - Anderson Absent: Council Members - None Resolution No. 93-133 is on file in the office of the City Clerk. 7 04/26/93 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, at the hour of 4:48 p.m., Mayor Arness declared the meeting adjourned to 4:00 p.m., April 30, 1993, at City Hall Conference Room A, 760 Parkview Avenue, Redding, California, for a meeting with State Assemblyman Stan Statham. APPROVED: _____________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ City Clerk