HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-11-07 e-packet@630Monday, November 7, 2016
6:30 PM
City of South San Francisco
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
Municipal Services Building, Council Chambers
33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA
Special City Council
Special Meeting Agenda
November 7, 2016Special City Council Special Meeting Agenda
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 54956 of the Government Code of the State of
California, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco will hold a Special Meeting on Monday,
November 7, 2016, at 6:30 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo
Drive, South San Francisco, California.
Purpose of the meeting:
Call to Order.
Roll Call.
Agenda Review.
Public Comments - comments are limited to items on the Special Meeting Agenda.
CLOSED SESSION
Closed Session:
Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation
(Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9)
Name of case: In the Matter of the Calculation of Final Compensation of Michael J.
Massoni and City of South San Francisco, Case No. 2015-0984; OAH No.
2016090205
1.
Closed Session:
Conference with Real Property Negotiators: (Pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.8)
Properties: 178-190 Airport Boulevard (APN 012-338-060, 012-338-070)
City Negotiators: Alex Greenwood and Ron Gerber
Negotiating Parties: 150 Airport SSF LLC, and the City of South San Francisco
Under Negotiations: Price and terms for disposition of the property
2.
Closed Session:
Conference with Real Property Negotiators: (Pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.8) Properties: A vacant 20.78-acre property located on the south end on the
north slope of Sign Hill (Parcel 012-351-050)
City Negotiators: Alex Greenwood and Ron Gerber
Negotiating Parties: City of South San Francisco and the Cheryl A and Ross H
Liberty Trust.
Under Negotiations: Price and terms for disposition of the property
3.
Page 2 City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2016
November 7, 2016Special City Council Special Meeting Agenda
Closed Session: Conference with Labor Negotiators.
(Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6)
Agency designated representative: LaTanya Bellow
Employee organizations: AFSCME, Local 829, AFL-CIO; Confidential Unit,
Teamsters Local 856; International Association of Firefighters, Local 1507;
International Union of Operating Engineers Local 39; Mid-management Unit,
Teamsters Local 856; South San Francisco Police Association; Public Safety
Managers; Executive Management Unit
4.
PRESENTATIONS
Certificate of Achievement presented to Jim Metz for organizing the Taste of South
San Francisco Event for more than 30 years. (Richard Garbarino, Councilmember)
5.
ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS
Report regarding a resolution approving a second amendment to an existing
consulting services agreement with Carollo Engineers of Walnut Creek, California for
engineering services for the Water Quality Control Plant Digester Design Project in
an amount not to exceed $1,249,695. (Eric Evans, Associate Civil Engineer)
6.
Resolution approving a second amendment to an existing consulting services
agreement with Carollo Engineers for the Water Quality Control Plant Digesters
Design Project in an amount not to exceed $1,249,695.
6a.
Report regarding a Resolution Accepting the Year-End Financial Results and
Amending the Budget for Fiscal Year 2015-16. (Richard Lee, Finance Director)
7.
Resolution Accepting the Year-End Financial Results and Amending the Budget for
Fiscal Year 2015-16.
7a.
Report regarding a resolution approving various Consulting Services Agreements for
On-Call Architectural, Engineering and Other Professional Services for various
City-funded projects in the amount not to exceed $200,000 per fiscal year per selected
consultant. (Sam Bautista, Principal Engineer)
8.
Resolution approving various Consulting Services Agreements for On-Call
Architectural, Engineering and Other Professional Services for various City-funded
projects in an amount not to exceed $200,000 per fiscal year for a two year period per
selected consultant.
8a.
Adjournment.
Page 3 City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2016
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:16-890,Version:1
Closed Session:
Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation
(Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9)
Name of case: In the Matter of the Calculation of Final Compensation of Michael J. Massoni and City of South
San Francisco, Case No. 2015-0984; OAH No. 2016090205
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/3/2016Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:16-827,Version:1
Closed Session:
Conference with Real Property Negotiators: (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8)
Properties: 178-190 Airport Boulevard (APN 012-338-060, 012-338-070)
City Negotiators: Alex Greenwood and Ron Gerber
Negotiating Parties: 150 Airport SSF LLC, and the City of South San Francisco
Under Negotiations: Price and terms for disposition of the property
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/3/2016Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:16-908,Version:1
Closed Session:
Conference with Real Property Negotiators: (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8) Properties: A
vacant 20.78-acre property located on the south end on the north slope of Sign Hill (Parcel 012-351-050)
City Negotiators: Alex Greenwood and Ron Gerber
Negotiating Parties: City of South San Francisco and the Cheryl A and Ross H Liberty Trust.
Under Negotiations: Price and terms for disposition of the property
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/3/2016Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:16-831,Version:1
Closed Session: Conference with Labor Negotiators.
(Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6)
Agency designated representative: LaTanya Bellow
Employee organizations:AFSCME,Local 829,AFL-CIO;Confidential Unit,Teamsters Local 856;
International Association of Firefighters,Local 1507;International Union of Operating Engineers Local 39;
Mid-management Unit,Teamsters Local 856;South San Francisco Police Association;Public Safety
Managers; Executive Management Unit
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/3/2016Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:16-916,Version:1
Certificate of Achievement presented to Jim Metz for organizing the Taste of South San Francisco Event for
more than 30 years. (Richard Garbarino, Councilmember)
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/3/2016Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:16-876,Version:1
Report regarding a resolution approving a second amendment to an existing consulting services agreement with
Carollo Engineers of Walnut Creek,California for engineering services for the Water Quality Control Plant
Digester Design Project in an amount not to exceed $1,249,695. (Eric Evans, Associate Civil Engineer)
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution approving a second amendment to an existing
consulting services agreement with Carollo Engineers of Walnut Creek,California for engineering services for
the Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP)Digester Design Project (Project)in an amount not to exceed
$1,249,695.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
At the City Council meeting of July 23,2014,Carollo Engineers was awarded a consulting services agreement for $1,171,799 for the
design of major improvements at the South San Francisco/San Bruno WQCP.During design,staff identified several important
improvements that were not included in the original design agreement.Staff additionally became aware of relatively new technology
that would allow for replacement of only one digester tank rather than two as originally designed,for a capital cost savings of
approximately $3,000,000 and operations and maintenance (O&M)savings of approximately $100,000/year.Staff recommended that
the capital cost savings be invested into a biogas conditioning system which would provide approximately $150,000/year in O&M
savings.The combined O&M savings of these design changes total approximately $250,000/year.A slideshow presentation about
these new WQCP improvements is included as Attachment 1.
On January 27,2016,Council approved Amendment No.1 of the existing consulting services agreement in the amount of $319,814 to
proceed with pre-design of the revised scope and new WQCP features.The associated staff report and resolution are included as
Attachment 2. The pre-design phase was completed on August 16, 2016.
Carollo Engineers presented an initial proposal in July 2016 to incorporate the new treatment plant processes into the existing design
and to complete the overall design.Following some refinements in scope and negotiation of the fee,a revised proposal was provided
in late September 2016 in the amount of $1,249,695.The proposed Amendment No.2,includes implementation of a new high solids
digestion process (known as the Omnivore digestion system),design of a new digester gas conditioning system,environmental and
permitting assistance and loan assistance for the project. This final design phase is expected to be complete in June 2017.
Although this $1,249,695 amendment is large,it is a relatively small percentage of the approximate $40,000,000 construction
contract.Approximately 27%of capital improvement design and construction costs of this and other projects are borne by the City of
San Bruno per their shared ownership of the WQCP.This particular consultant amendment cost is also a worthy investment in view
of post-project savings of approximately $250,000/year.
Carollo is the engineer of record for all project design work performed thus far.Staff determined that it would be highly impractical
and significantly more costly for a different consultant to complete the design at this stage,because they would need to re-do much of
the previously completed work in order to feel confident about assuming responsibility for it.
In early 2017,staff will issue a Request for Proposals (RFP)for construction management (CM)services so that the CM consultant
will be ready to assume this role when the construction contract is awarded.Per City policy,and to prevent possible conflicts of
interest,Carollo Engineers will not be eligible to be the CM.Carollo Engineers will,however,be hired to provide Engineering
Services During Construction (ESDC)in order to answer technical questions and provide as-needed clarification of their design to
both the CM and the City. The duration of construction is expected to be approximately 3 years.
Since the beginning of the project several years ago,staff had anticipated that financing for construction will be available via the State
Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF)program.In September 2016,the SWRCB
announced that due to a shortage of funds,the Digesters project (and similar projects elsewhere in the State)are very unlikely to
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2016Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:16-876,Version:1
announced that due to a shortage of funds,the Digesters project (and similar projects elsewhere in the State)are very unlikely to
receive funding in the near future.Staff then hired a consultant to inform and advise the City of available alternative financing
methods.The selected funding approach for construction,in addition to Sewer Enterprise appropriations,will likely be a bond
issuance for a relatively small portion of the construction cost in order to be prepared to award the contract.In parallel with the bond
process,staff may apply for SRF or another funding source.After bids come in and the cost of construction is known,a second bond
issuance and/or financing from another source will be arranged in the exact amount necessary to finish the work.
FUNDING
Approval of Amendment 2 would increase the existing consulting services agreement not-to-exceed amount as shown below.
Original Agreement Amount $ 1,171,799
Amendment 1 Amount $ 319,814
Proposed Amendment 2 Amount $ 1,249,695
Total Proposed Not-to-Exceed Agreement Amount $ 2,741,308
Approved Contingency $ 58,590
Total Project Budget $2,799,898
When City Council first approved the original consulting services agreement during the July 23,2014 meeting,
a contingency budget of $58,590 was also approved.This amount will remain unchanged,and will continue to
be available for unforeseen expenses.Examples of possible unforeseen expenses include adjusting the design to
incorporate new components if exact replacements are no longer on the market,or performing additional
structural investigation on existing structures.
This consulting services agreement amendment will enable the consultant to complete the design of WQCP
improvements such that the project will be ready for construction in 2017.Sufficient unencumbered funding is
available in the project budget for this proposed amendment.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends approval of Amendment 2 to this existing consulting services agreement with Carollo
Engineers in order to allow the design effort to proceed to completion.The new design elements will result in
regulatory permit compliance as well as long terms annual savings in electrical and operational costs.
Attachments:
1.Project Slideshow Presentation
2.Staff Report & Resolution of Amendment 1 (January 27, 2016)
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2016Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
WQCP Digesters:
Proposed Second Amendment
to existing Consultant Agreement
Special City Council Meeting: November 7, 2016
-32-
Second Amendment Services:
•Complete the overall design of major
treatment plant improvements, including
new sludge thickening and gas
conditioning features.
•Modified design will result in savings of
approximately $250,000/yr.
-33-
D1 D2
D3
Sludge Thickening –Design Change
•Original design calls for complete replacement of
Digesters 1 and 2, and major upgrades to Digester 3.
•Adoption of sludge thickening technology means
that only Digester 1 needs to be replaced.
Thickening equipment can be installed in the vacant
spot of Digester 2.
-34-
Sludge Thickening Benefits
•At least $3M in capital cost savings.
•Greater than $100,000/year energy savings.
•Increased solids treatment capacity. Adoption of this
technology will move the WQCP closer to being able to
process food waste and becoming energy self-sufficient.
•Increased plant space for other equipment and processes.
-35-
Gas Conditioning –Design Change
•$3M savings can be invested in gas conditioning system.
•Digesters produce methane (natural gas), which is
burned in the WQCP’s boilers to produce heat for the
digester tanks.
•Methane is also burned in the WQCP’s cogeneration
engine, which produces electricity for the Plant.
•Without gas conditioning, this methane contains high
concentrations of contaminants, which increase
maintenance and reduce efficiency of the boilers and
engine.-36-
Gas Conditioning –Benefits
•Ability to use smaller, more efficient, and lower
maintenance boilers.
•Approximately $120,000/yrin energy savings due to
increased electrical generation that offsets energy
purchase from PG&E.
•Approximately $30,000/yrin engine maintenance savings
and extended engine life by using clean, dry gas.
-37-
Example Gas Conditioning FacilityReno, NV
-38-
Next Steps
•Proceed with design, prepare construction bid package.
•Acquire financing for construction phase.
•Proceed with construction.
-40-
QuestionsandAnswers
-41-
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:16-877,Version:1
Resolution approving a second amendment to an existing consulting services agreement with Carollo Engineers
for the Water Quality Control Plant Digesters Design Project in an amount not to exceed $1,249,695.
WHEREAS,on July 23,2014,the City Council awarded a consulting services agreement (Exhibit A)to
Carollo Engineers (“Consultant”)of Walnut Creek,California for design of major improvements at the South
San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant (“WQCP”) in the amount of $1,171,799; and
WHEREAS, the Consultant has performed satisfactorily in completing the design to the 95% level; and
WHEREAS,several unforeseen technical difficulties arose during the course of the design which necessitated
extra effort for their resolution; and
WHEREAS,in August of 2015,staff became aware of a new technology that can greatly increase the
efficiency of the WQCP,such that some features of the original design need not be built,at an estimated capital
cost savings of at least $3,000,000, and operational savings of at least $100,000 per year; and
WHEREAS,the capital cost savings can be invested in equipment that cleans the natural gas produced by the
WQCP,such that the plant’s generator can produce more electricity,resulting in energy and maintenance
savings of approximately $150,000 per year for a total post-project operational savings of approximately
$250,000 per year; and
WHEREAS,the new technology will allow the WQCP to accept and process food waste in the future,such that
the plant would no longer rely on PG&E for electrical power; and
WHEREAS,in view of the very significant present and future cost savings from the new technology and gas
cleaning equipment,and in consideration of the City’s goal of decreasing its carbon footprint in a cost effective
manner, staff has determined that a partial redesign of the WQCP is worthwhile; and
WHEREAS,on January 27,2016,the City Council approved Amendment 1 (Exhibit B)to the existing
consultant services agreement to proceed with pre-design of the new WQCP features; and
WHEREAS,on August 16,2016,Carollo Engineers completed the pre-design effort satisfactorily and is now
ready to proceed with completion of the overall design effort; and
WHEREAS,to allow this work to proceed,staff recommends approving Amendment 2 to the existing
consultant agreement with Carollo Engineers for the WQCP Digester Design Project in an amount not to
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2016Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:16-877,Version:1
consultant agreement with Carollo Engineers for the WQCP Digester Design Project in an amount not to
exceed $1,249,695 (Exhibit C); and
WHEREAS,the cost of the proposed Amendment 2 is a worthy investment in view of the future $250,000/year
savings and this cost is a relatively small percentage of the resultant $40,000,000 construction contract,
approximately 27%of which will be paid for by the City of San Bruno via their shared ownership of the
WQCP; and
WHEREAS,because Carollo Engineers is the engineer of record for design work completed thus far,it would
be impractical and significantly more costly for a different consultant to perform the design work of this
amendment; and
WHEREAS,funding for the Project is included in the City of South San Francisco Capital Improvements
Program (“CIP”) and sufficient funds are available to cover the amendment cost.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City
Council hereby authorizes the second amendment of the existing consulting services agreement with Carollo
Engineers in an amount not to exceed $1,249,695.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby authorizes the
City Manager to execute an amendment to the consulting services agreement on behalf of the City upon timely
submission of Carollo Engineer’s signed contract amendment and all other required documents,subject to
approval as to form by the City Attorney.
*****
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2016Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND CAROLLO
ENGINEERS, INC.
THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT
(“Amendment”) amending that certain Consulting Services Agreement dated July 23,
2014 (“Agreement”), by and between THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, a
public body, corporate and politic (“City”), and CAROLLO ENGINEERS, INC.
(“Consultant”) (together referred to as the “Parties”), is made effective as of November
14, 2016 (the “Effective Date”).
RECITALS
WHEREAS, on July 23, 2014, Consultant and City entered into the Agreement,
pursuant to which City contracted with Consultant to provide consulting services related
to the South San Francisco / San Bruno WQCP Digester Design Project (“Project”) as
detailed in Attachment 1. The end date of the Agreement was established as December
31, 2015; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, City agreed to pay consultant a sum not
to exceed One Million, One Hundred Seventy One Thousand, Seven Hundred and Ninety
Nine Dollars, ($1,171,799.00) for professional services set forth in the Agreement; and
WHEREAS, on January 27, 2016, Consultant and the City executed the First
Amendment to the Agreement, which increased the Agreement amount by Three
Hundred Nineteen Thousand, Eight Hundred Fourteen Dollars ($319,814.00) and
extended the end date to December 31, 2018 (as detailed in Attachment 2). The First
Amendment scope addressed unforeseen design difficulties and resulted in pre-design of
major changes to the existing design.
WHEREAS, in order to complete the final design, Consultant has requested an
additional payment of One Million Two Hundred Forty Nine Thousand Six Hundred
Ninety Five Dollars ($1,249,695) as shown on the proposal dated September 20, 2016 (as
detailed in Attachment 3); and
WHEREAS, City desires to provide payment in excess of that originally stated in
the Agreement for additional services performed by Consultant; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8.3 of the Agreement, the Parties desire to
modify the Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereto agree as follows:
1. The City agrees to pay Consultant an additional payment not to exceed an amount
of One Million Two Hundred Forty Nine Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Five
Dollars ($1,249,695) for additional design services.
2. All other terms, conditions and provisions in the Agreement including its
expiration date of December 31, 2018 shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Consultant have executed this Amendment as of
the date first above written.
City Consultant
The City of South San Francisco Carollo Engineers, Inc.
____________________________ _____________________________
Mike Futrell Signature
City Manager
_____________________________
Print Name and Title
_____________________________
Date
ATTEST:
___________________________
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________
City Attorney
Exhibit A - Scope of Services-2016-09-20.docx Page - 1
AMENDMENT NO. 2
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO/SAN BRUNO
WQCP DIGESTER DESIGN PROJECT
SCOPE OF SERVICES
(September 20, 2016)
The following scope of services is provided for the WQCP Digester Design Project. It includes
implementation of a new high solids digestion process (known as the Omnivore digestion
system provided by Anaergia) that the City has selected based of its sole review and
acceptance of the technical features and performance of the system, which comes with a
process warranty to be provided by Anaergia. This scope also includes design of a new digester
gas conditioning system, design of a new primary sludge screening system, and providing
services for environmental and permitting assistance, as well as State Revolving Fund (SRF)
loan assistance for this project.
Task 1 – Project Management and Meetings
Task 1.1 – Project Management
Carollo shall provide additional administration and management necessary to perform planning,
execution, monitoring, and reporting of the project. Carollo shall prepare a monthly progress
letter report for attachment to the monthly invoice to track and report status of budget
expenditures and key work products completed during that billing period.
Deliverables:
Invoices and monthly progress letter reports.
Task 1.2 - Meetings
Carollo shall attend four (4) project meetings during final design. The meetings will include two
(2) progress meetings, one (1) 50% design review meeting, and one (1) 90% design review
meeting. A decision log will be maintained during the course of the project and updated monthly.
Carollo shall prepare meeting notes after each meeting to document key discussion issues,
action items, and decisions made.
Deliverables:
Meeting agendas, presentation materials, and meeting notes.
Decision log.
Exhibit A - Scope of Services-2016-09-20.docx Page - 2
Task 2 – Surveying and Geotechnical Report
Task 2.1 – Surveying and Mapping
Aerial surveying and mapping of the project site was completed in September 2011 for the Wet
Weather Improvements Project. Therefore, no additional surveying and mapping will be required
for this Amendment as the 2011 mapping work will be sufficient for use on this project.
Deliverables:
None.
Task 2.2 – Geotechnical Report
A draft geotechnical report was prepared for the Wet Weather Improvements Project and
additional geotechnical studies were completed for the Digester Design Project. For this
Amendment, Carollo and its geotechnical consultant, Fugro West, shall perform supplemental
geotechnical investigations of the project site for the new structures (high solids digester (HSD),
recuperative thickener facility, digester gas condition system, and primary sludge screening
facility). Fugro shall perform field investigation and gather information of the project site, acquire
drilling permits from the County, perform utilities checking, perform two (2) boring investigations
(one at the proposed site of the digester gas conditioning system and one at the proposed site
of the primary sludge screening facility), perform associated field and laboratory tests, and
prepare a supplemental geotechnical information in support of the proposed design
improvements concerning structural foundation design and temporary shoring requirements
during construction.
Fugro shall also perform review of the 90 percent design documents and prepare a letter
confirming that the final bid documents are in compliance with the final geotechnical
investigations. The updated geotechnical report will initially be submitted as a draft report. As
the design reaches approximately 95 percent completion the report will be finalized
incorporating updates made during design.
Deliverables:
Draft updated geotechnical report (one hard copy and one electronic pdf copy).
Final updated geotechnical report (one hard copy and one electronic pdf copy).
Task 3 – Final Design
Task 3.1 – Final Design
Carollo shall revise the Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project with the following
project elements as described in “Technical Memorandum No. 1 Preliminary Design of High
Solids Digestion and Digester Gas Conditioning System – Draft June 2016” and other elements
as discussed with plant staff to produce a set of drawings and specifications for bidding as a
single design package:
Exhibit A - Scope of Services-2016-09-20.docx Page - 3
Add implementation of the equipment associated with the high solids digestion process
utilizing Anaergia’s Omnivore digestion system that was selected by the City, which
consists of one high solids digester, a recuperative thickener facility, and associated
support facilities and appurtenances. The facilities and equipment for the high solids
digestion system will be located in the existing Digester Control Building (DCB) No. 1,
the existing Dissolved Air Flotation Thickening (DAFT) Building, and the space provided
after demolition of Digester No. 2. Electrical power feed for the high solids digestion
facilities will be supplied via existing MCC-F and MCC-G. A new section MCC-G1 in the
DAFT Building is required and can be provided after relocation of a transformer and
lighting panel in the DAFT electrical room.
Add design one 250 scfm digester gas conditioning system (DGCS) to be located south
of mixed liquor channel and Aeration Basin Nos. 1-4. The new DGCS will utilize
hydrogen sulfide (H2S) removal vessels with iron sponge or SulfaTreat media, gas
compression, single-stage refrigeration moisture removal system, and siloxane removal
vessels with adsorptive carbon-based media. Electrical power feed for the DGCS will be
supplied via MCC-B.
Revise layout within DCB No. 1 to accommodate equipment associated with HSD and
Digester No. 3 and remove equipment associated with Digester No. 2.
Revise boiler and associated piping design to allow firing with natural or digester gas.
Remove design of Digester No. 2, design new canopy-covered area for the new
recuperative thickener facility, and revise civil and yard piping design.
Remove design of DCB No. 3 as this is no longer required and revise civil and yard
piping design.
Modify DAFT Building to house equipment associated with the HSD.
Add design of a primary sludge screening facility adjacent to the Primary Sludge Pump
Station. The facility will be an elevated structure with a canopy cover.
Remove design of Storm Water Pump Station No. 4 from the west of the existing
Maintenance Building and add design of Storm Water Pump Station No. 4 to the north of
the existing Maintenance Building.
Incorporate installation of new turbo blowers designed by others in the background
drawings for Blower Building Nos. 1 and 2.
Revise or add new civil, yard piping, electrical, and instrumentation systems as needed
for new or modified processes.
Structural design of the new project elements will comply with the 2016 California Building Code
(CBC). The project elements completed to date for the Wet Weather and Digester
Improvements Project were designed in accordance with the 2013 CBC. Therefore, Carollo will
also be revising those structural elements to comply with the 2016 CBC.
Exhibit A - Scope of Services-2016-09-20.docx Page - 4
Drawings will be updated and prepared using Carollo’s standard CAD format and include
general sheets, typical details, demolition, civil, architectural, structural, mechanical, HVAC,
process, and electrical/instrumentation drawings. Specifications will be updated and prepared
using Carollo’s standard CSI format and include front-end specifications to be provided by the
City for markup by Carollo and technical specifications by Carollo.
Carollo shall prepare and submit updated progress submittals at the 50, 90, and 100 percent
design stages for the new project elements. City comments at the 50 and 90 percent design
stages will be incorporated into the subsequent design stage as appropriate.
Deliverables:
50 and 90 percent design submittals (five hard copies of half-size drawings and
specifications).
Biddable construction drawings and specifications (100 percent design).
Task 3.2 – Prenegotiation Assistance with Anaergia
Carollo shall assist the City in working with Anaergia to obtain a prenegotiated price for the
Omnivore Digestion System to be used on this project. Carollo’s assistance will include
development of specifications and drawings related to equipment for the HSD system outlined in
Anaergia’s Pre-Selection and Final Design Assistance proposal to the City dated August 1,
2016 that can be attached to the request for the pre-negotiated proposal. The pre-negotiated
price will be documented in a letter proposal from Anaergia and include their material list, as
well as their contract terms and conditions for a process warranty of the Omnivore digestion
system. Carollo will provide technical review of the proposal. It is anticipated that the City’s legal
department will need to review and comment on Anaergia’s proposal for final acceptance. Once
the City accepts Anaergia’s proposal, it will be included with the Specifications and the
prenegotiated price will be included in the bid forms.
Deliverables:
Technical specifications and drawings related to the HSD system.
Technical review comments on Anaergia’s letter proposal concerning their material list,
pricing, terms, conditions, and process warranty for the Omnivore digestion system for
this project.
Task 3.3 – Construction Cost Estimates
Carollo shall update the construction cost estimate prepared for the Wet Weather and Digester
Improvements Project to incorporate the new and revised project elements. The updated
construction cost estimates will be prepared for the 50, 90, and 100 percent design submittals.
Deliverables:
Updated construction cost estimates as part of the 50, 90, and 100 percent design
submittals.
Exhibit A - Scope of Services-2016-09-20.docx Page - 5
Task 3.4 – Preliminary Construction Schedule
Carollo and its scheduling consultant, Construction Scheduling Experts (CSE), prepared a
preliminary construction schedule for the Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project. For
this Amendment, CSE shall update the preliminary construction schedule with the new and
revised project elements to reflect a single construction package based on the 90 percent
design submittal.
Deliverables:
Preliminary construction schedule at the 90 percent design stage.
Task 4 – Bid Period Services
Task 4.1 – Bid Period Services
Bid period services have been included in the Wet Weather and Digester Improvements Project.
Therefore, no additional effort is required for this Amendment.
Deliverables:
None.
Task 5 – SRF Loan Assistance
Task 5.1 – SRF Loan Assistance
Carollo has provided SRF loan assistance services to the City for the Wet Weather and Digester
Improvements Project. For this Amendment, Carollo will assist the City in coordinating with the
State Water Resource Control Board about the new project elements and updating the SRF
loan application. The City will be responsible for updating the financial application package
documents.
Deliverables:
Updated SRF loan application packages: General Information Package, Technical
Package, Environmental Package (from Task 6), and Final Budget Approval Package.
Task 6 – Environmental and Permitting Assistance
Task 6.1 – CEQA Document Assistance
Carollo and its environmental permitting consultant, Environmental Science Associates (ESA),
prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) in 2013 for the Wet Weather
and Digester Improvements Project. ESA shall prepare an amendment to the 2013 IS/MND to
incorporate the new project elements and new federal regulations. ESA shall also prepare an
updated SRF Environmental Checklist, including an alternative analysis, updated cultural
resources report, biological resources report, and updated air pollution analysis to comply with
new federal regulations. This work will reset the 5-year window on CEQA documents required
by the SWRCB for SRF loan assistance. It is anticipated that the City will repeat the public
review period for the amended IS/MND, return to Council to adopt the amendment, and file
Exhibit A - Scope of Services-2016-09-20.docx Page - 6
another Notice of Determination to record the amended IS/MND. It is assumed that a new
Biological Assessment will not be required.
Deliverables:
Amended IS/MND.
Updated SRF Environmental Checklist.
Task 6.2 – NPDES Permit Assistance
Carollo and its NPDES permitting consultant, Larry Walker Associates (LWA), shall provide on-
call assistance to the City to coordinate with the Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB). This will include updating the RWQCB concerning the status of the Wet Weather
and Digester Improvements Project to ensure that completion timelines of the Wet Weather
Project elements will remain in compliance with the requirements of the NPDES Permit (Permit
No. CA0038130, Order No. R2-2014-0012). If necessary, Carollo and LWA shall also prepare
letter(s) for the City to sign and mail to correspond with the RWQCB.
Deliverables:
Coordination letter(s) for the RWQCB.
Task 6.3 – BCDC Permit Assistance
Carollo assisted the City in preparation of a Bay Conservation and Development Commission
(BCDC) application in 2013 for work associated with the Wet Weather Improvements Project.
Carollo shall contact BCDC and update them about the new project elements to be included in
this Project. An updated BCDC permit application is not anticipated because the new project
elements are not within the BCDC’s 100-foot jurisdictional shoreline band. Carollo shall prepare
letter(s) for the City to sign and mail extending the compliance deadlines in the current BCDC
permit to ensure the permit does not expire.
Deliverables:
Extension letter(s) for the BCDC permit.
Task 6.4 – BAAQMD Permit Assistance
Carollo and its permitting consultant, Mizutani Environmental, prepared two Bay Area Air Quality
Management District (BAAQMD) Authority to Construct (ATC) permit applications for the Wet
Weather Project and the Digester Improvements Project. Two applications were produced due
to the timing of the work. For this Amendment, Mizutani Environmental shall update the Digester
Improvements ATC permit application to incorporate the new project elements. Carollo and
Mizutani Environmental shall also review the draft permit conditions received from BAAQMD
and assist the City in negotiating the details of the Permit to Operate. Carollo and Mizutani
Environmental shall also prepare letter(s) for the City to sign and mail extending the compliance
deadlines in the Wet Weather Project ATC to ensure the permit does not expire.
Exhibit A - Scope of Services-2016-09-20.docx Page - 7
Deliverables:
Updated BAAQMD ATC permit application.
Review comments on the draft permit conditions.
Extension letter(s) for the Wet Weather Project ATC.
S
P
L
P
P
P
P
P
A
P
C
A
D
W
P
T
o
t
a
l
L
a
b
o
r
P
E
C
E
O
D
C
T
o
t
a
l
Ta
s
k
T
a
s
k
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
$
2
8
1
$
2
5
9
$
2
4
0
$
2
0
2
$
1
6
6
$
1
7
4
$
1
0
9
H
o
u
r
s
C
o
s
t
F
u
g
r
o
C
SE
E
S
A
L
W
A
M
E
$
1
1
.
7
0
P
r
i
n
t
i
n
g
T
r
i
p
s
A
m
o
u
n
t
T
o
t
a
l
C
o
s
t
1.
0
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
s
1.
1
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
4
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
6
0
$
1
5
,
2
8
0
$
5
4
0
$
0
0
$
0
$
5
4
0
$
1
5
,
8
2
0
1.
2
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
s
(
4
)
2
4
32
0
24
32
0
0
11
2
$2
5
,
1
9
2
$1
,
3
1
0
$
0
4
$
1
9
4
$
1
,
5
0
5
$
2
6
,
6
9
7
Ta
s
k
1
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
s
=
6
4
3
2
0
4
4
3
2
0
0
1
7
2
$
4
0
,
4
7
2
Ta
s
k
1
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
s
=
$
4
2
,
5
1
7
2.
0
S
u
r
v
e
y
i
n
g
a
n
d
G
e
o
t
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
R
e
p
o
r
t
2.
1
S
u
r
v
e
y
i
n
g
a
n
d
M
a
p
p
i
n
g
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
2.
2
G
e
o
t
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
R
e
p
o
r
t
8
8
0
16
0
0
0
32
$7
,
5
5
2
$3
8
,
5
0
0
$
3
7
4
$
0
1
$
4
9
$
3
8
,
9
2
3
$
4
6
,
4
7
5
Ta
s
k
2
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
s
=
8
8
0
1
6
0
0
0
3
2
$
7
,
5
5
2
Ta
s
k
2
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
s
=
$
4
6
,
4
7
5
3.
0
F
i
n
a
l
D
e
s
i
g
n
3.
1
F
i
n
a
l
D
e
s
i
g
n
4
7
9
4
3
1
3
3
5
6
7
0
9
5
7
1
,
6
7
5
2
3
9
4
,
7
8
5
$
9
3
8
,
0
5
1
$
5
5
,
9
8
5
$
3
,
0
0
0
4
$
1
9
4
$
5
9
,
1
7
9
$
9
9
7
,
2
3
0
3.
2
P
r
e
n
e
g
o
t
i
a
t
i
o
n
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
A
n
a
e
r
g
i
a
8
2
4
0
4
0
0
0
1
6
8
8
$
1
8
,
2
8
8
$
7
92
$
0
0
$
0
$
7
9
2
$
1
9
,
0
8
0
3.
3
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
C
o
s
t
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
s
1
6
1
6
0
6
0
0
0
0
9
2
$
2
0
,
7
6
0
$
8
2
8
$
0
0
$
0
$
8
2
8
$
21
,
5
8
8
3.
4
P
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
8
8
0
24
0
0
0
40
$9
,
1
6
8
$7
,
7
0
0
$
3
6
0
$
0
0
$
0
$
8
,
0
6
0
$
1
7
,
2
2
8
Ta
s
k
3
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
s
=
5
1
1
4
7
9
3
3
5
7
9
4
9
5
7
1
,
6
7
5
2
5
5
5
,
0
0
5
$
9
8
6
,
2
6
7
Ta
s
k
3
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
s
=
$
1
,
0
5
5
,
1
2
6
4.
0
B
i
d
P
e
r
i
o
d
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
4.
1
B
i
d
P
e
r
i
o
d
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$0
$0
$
0
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
Ta
s
k
4
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
s
=
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$
0
Ta
s
k
4
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
s
=
$
0
5.
0
S
R
F
L
o
a
n
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
5.
1
S
R
F
L
o
a
n
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
1
2
0
0
60
0
0
0
72
$1
5
,
4
9
2
$8
4
2
$
0
1
$
4
9
$
8
9
1
$
1
6
,
3
8
3
Ta
s
k
5
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
s
=
1
2
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
7
2
$
1
5
,
4
9
2
Ta
s
k
5
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
s
=
$
1
6
,
3
8
3
6.
0
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
a
n
d
P
e
r
m
i
t
t
i
n
g
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
6.
1
C
E
Q
A
D
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
4
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
4
4
$
9
,
2
0
4
$
4
4
,
0
0
0
$
5
1
5
$
0
0
$
0
$
4
4
,
51
5
$
5
3
,
7
1
9
6.
2
N
P
D
E
S
P
e
r
m
i
t
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
4
0
0
8
0
0
0
1
2
$
2
,
7
4
0
$
1
1
,
0
0
0
$
1
4
0
$
0
0
$
0
$
1
1
,
1
4
0
$
1
3
,
8
8
0
6.
3
B
C
D
C
P
e
r
m
i
t
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
2
0
0
1
6
0
0
0
1
8
$
3
,
7
9
4
$
2
1
1
$
0
0
$
0
$
2
1
1
$
4
,
0
0
5
6.
4
B
A
A
Q
M
D
P
e
r
m
t
i
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
2
0
0
16
0
8
0
26
$5
,
1
8
6
$1
2
,
1
0
0
$
3
0
4
$
0
0
$
0
$
1
2
,
4
0
4
$
1
7
,
5
9
0
Ta
s
k
6
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
s
=
1
2
0
0
8
0
0
8
0
1
0
0
$
2
0
,
9
2
4
Ta
s
k
6
.
0
T
o
t
a
l
s
=
$
8
9
,
1
9
4
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
T
o
t
a
l
s
=
6
0
7
5
1
9
3
3
5
9
9
4
9
8
9
1
,
6
8
3
2
5
5
5
,
3
8
1
$
1
,
0
7
0
,
7
0
7
$
3
8
,
5
0
0
$
7,
7
0
0
$
4
4
,
0
0
0
$
1
1
,
0
0
0
$
1
2
,
1
0
0
$
6
2
,
2
0
2
$
3
,
0
0
0
1
0
$
4
8
6
$
1
7
8
,
9
8
8
$
1
,
2
4
9
,
6
9
5
Le
g
e
n
d
:
P
E
C
E
:
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
x
p
e
n
s
e
SP
S
e
n
i
o
r
P
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
M
i
l
e
a
g
e
:
B
a
s
e
d
o
n
9
0
M
i
l
e
s
p
e
r
R
o
u
n
d
T
r
i
p
@
$
0
.
5
6
/
m
i
l
e
LP
P
L
e
a
d
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
P
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
S
u
b
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
s
:
PP
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
P
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
F
u
g
r
o
:
G
e
o
t
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
P
P
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
C
S
E
:
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
E
x
p
e
r
t
s
AP
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
t
P
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
ES
A
:
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
S
c
i
e
n
c
e
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
CA
D
C
a
d
d
D
r
a
f
t
e
r
/
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
L
W
A
:
L
a
r
r
y
W
a
l
k
e
r
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
WP
W
o
r
d
P
r
o
c
e
s
s
o
r
ME
:
M
i
z
u
t
a
n
i
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
Su
b
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
s
M
i
l
e
a
g
e
LA
B
O
R
A
N
D
B
U
D
G
E
T
E
S
T
I
M
A
T
E
SO
U
T
H
S
A
N
F
R
A
N
C
I
S
C
O
/
S
A
N
B
R
U
N
O
WQ
C
P
W
E
T
W
E
A
T
H
E
R
A
N
D
D
I
G
E
S
T
E
R
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
(I
N
C
O
R
P
O
R
A
T
E
H
I
G
H
S
O
L
I
D
S
D
I
G
E
S
T
I
O
N
S
Y
S
T
E
M
A
N
D
D
I
G
E
S
T
E
R
G
A
S
C
O
N
D
TI
O
N
I
N
G
S
Y
S
T
E
M
)
Ot
h
e
r
D
i
r
e
c
t
C
o
s
t
s
(
O
D
C
)
Bu
d
g
e
t
-
R
e
v
1
.
x
l
s
9/
2
0
/
2
0
1
6
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:16-736,Version:1
Report regarding a Resolution Accepting the Year-End Financial Results and Amending the Budget for Fiscal
Year 2015-16.(Richard Lee, Finance Director)
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve a resolution accepting the Year-End Financial Results
and amending the budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2015-16.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
This report provides an overview of the financial condition of the City of South San Francisco for the fiscal
year that ended June 30, 2016.
Overall,total General Fund revenues in FY 2015-16 were $94.6 million,$1.2 million over the final amended
budget,a favorable variance of 1.3 percent.General Fund Total Expenditures were $88.9 million,or $3.6
million under budget,a favorable variance of 4.3 percent,due to savings in salary and supplies across all
departments.
Below is an overview of major changes to General Fund revenues at year-end compared to final amended
budget.
Revenues
1.Secured/Unsecured Property Tax +$230,000
Current year secured and unsecured property tax revenues,one of the City’s primary recurring General Fund
revenue sources,totaled $17 million in 2015-16.Revenues came in 1.4 percent,or $230,000 higher than
budget,primarily due to supplemental secured property taxes,which reflect new properties that were assessed
after the close of the property tax roll on a county-wide basis,and cannot be relied upon for an ongoing revenue
stream.
2.Sales & Use Tax -$1,570,000
Sales and Use Tax totaled $14.5 million in FY 2015-16,which was $1.6 million under the projected amended
budget.This shortfall was due to the remaining unwinding of the Triple Flip.Specifically,Economic Recovery
Bonds were paid off,however due to timing issues with the Board of Equalization,the return to the City’s full
one percent share of Sales Tax did not go into effect until March 1st, 2016.
3.Transient Occupancy Tax +$12,800 | Commercial Parking Tax +$339,000
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)revenues reached $13.4 million in FY 2015-16.This surpassed the previous
year’s record by $495,000 and surpassed the FY 2015-16 Amended Budget by $13,000.This increase was
driven by high occupancy rates as well as higher room rates in FY 2015-16.Commercial Parking Tax revenues,
which move in parallel trends with TOT revenues,were $399,000 above the amended budget.South San
Francisco’s proximity to San Francisco International Airport (SFO)is a primary driver for the positive variance
above.In 2015,SFO had over 50 million passengers,breaking another record from the previous year by more
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/4/2016Page 1 of 4
powered by Legistar™
File #:16-736,Version:1
above.In 2015,SFO had over 50 million passengers,breaking another record from the previous year by more
than 6 percent.
4.Building & Fire Permits +$935,000 | Business License +$176,000
General Fund permit revenue totaled $6.9 million in FY 2015-16,which was $935,000 more than the amended
budget.This is a primarily due to an increase of $2 million in job valuations compared to the prior fiscal year
for permits that have been issued for development and construction projects.Correlating with the increase in
permit revenue,business license revenue totaled $1.48 million,which is $176,000 over the amended budget.
These positive variances generally reflect continued growth and new developments.Permit revenues are
somewhat unpredictable, as they are susceptible to economic fluctuation.
5.Franchise Fees +$638,000
General fund franchise fees totaled just under $4 million dollars in FY 2015-16,which was $638,000 over the
amended budget.While most franchises,including AT&T,Astound,and Comcast all increased their gross
receipts over last year,the most significant increase was from South San Francisco Scavenger Company,which
provided an additional $180,000 in franchise fees compared to the prior year.
Other Funds
In addition to the fiscal year-end review process for the General Fund,staff also reviews the assets,liabilities,
revenues,and expenditures of other funds which are used to account for the resources needed to provide
various services to the community.
The Sewer Enterprise Fund provides for the operation,maintenance and improvements of the Water Quality
Control Plant (WQCP)and provides funding for reinvestment in critical sewer collection infrastructure.
Revenues were $25.5 million,less than the amended budget,primarily due to the delay in financing for major
WQCP improvements and a commensurate amount lower than expected in CIP reimbursement revenue.
Expenditures totaled $24.7 million,$17.1 million,or 40.9 percent,under budget due to less than expected CIP
spending,which also contributed to the lower revenues above.The Sewer Fund was able to fund its capital and
operating reserves at year end according to its reserve policy needs.The cash balance of $17.4 million as of the
fiscal year ended June 30,2016,was needed to meet operational and capital improvement needs during the
current three-year rate plan,which goes through FY 2016-17.These reserve balances are consistent with the
funds that will be needed,as well as additional loan proceeds,in order to fund the next phase of Water Quality
Control Plant capital costs, and was factored into the current rate setting process.
The Parking District Fund received $875,200 in revenue from the collection of parking fees from City owned
parking meters and parking lots.This reflected an increase of $165,200 or 23 percent from the amended budget,
primarily due to a boost in parking meter usage.Expenditures in FY 2015-16 were $580,700 under budget,as a
result of the Council’s direction to implement a pilot program for the new parking meters in lieu of a full
implementation. Fund balance for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016 was $1.7 million.
The Storm Water Fund is used to account for resources needed to fund storm drain and storm infrastructure
operations and maintenance and capital replacement,as well as comply with various storm water runoff federal
and state regulations.Revenues totaled $1.3 million,which were $573,000 under budget due to less than
expected CIP reimbursement revenues.Revenues included $405,000 from a levy on property owners,
$670,000 from the Gas Tax Fund and a $250,000 from the General Fund.Expenditures totaled $1.4 million,
$1.4 million less than the amended budget due to less than expected CIP spending,which also contributed to
the lower revenues above.Reserves as of the fiscal year ended June 30,2016,totaled $1.0 million,and are
restricted to fund future storm water infrastructure improvements.Service fee revenues remain capped in this
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/4/2016Page 2 of 4
powered by Legistar™
File #:16-736,Version:1
fund without a ballot measure to increase assessed fees.
Self Insurance Fund
The Self Insurance Fund accounts for general liability and workers’compensation premiums and claim activity.
General liability is pooled through the Association of Bay Area Governments Pooled Liability Assurance
Network (ABAG PLAN).The City is self-insured for workers’compensation up to $500,000.FY 2015-16
revenues were $1.0 million more than the adopted budget,reflecting reimbursements from ABAG PLAN for
general liability claims above the City’s Self Insured Retention of $100,000.Commensurately,expenses were
$1.4 million above budget.The additional budget overage was due to payroll costs that were $154,100 over
budget, which represents the cost of salaries and benefits for employees on injury leave.
Reserves
In FY 2015-16,Total General Fund Revenues were $94.6 million while total General Fund Expenditures were
$88.9 million,which generated a surplus of $5.7 million.General Fund Reserves have been funded in
compliance with the City’s Reserves Policy as follows:
Description Discretionary Committed Total
(Purchase Orders/CIP)
Beginning Balance $17.1 $4.2 $21.3
Ending Balance $18.5 $4.5 $23.0
Surplus needed $1.4 $0.3 $1.7
Remaining Surplus $4.0
Staff recommends that the remaining $4.0 million in General Fund surplus be transferred to a new reserve in
recognition of the increases to the cost of pensions with the California Public Employees’Retirement System
(CalPERS).
As illustrated in Attachment 1,the City’s pension contributions to CalPERS are projected to increase by $8.9
million or 67.4%in the next five years.This staggering increase will pose a significant challenge to the City’s
long term financial sustainability efforts.CalPERS’current actuarial assumption for return on its investments
is 7.5%.Attachment 2 illustrates the volatility of CalPERS’actual investment results over the past twelve
years.Every year which CalPERS misses its investment target of 7.5%generates an unfunded liability.For
example,the return on investment in FY 2014-15 was 2.4 percent.CalPERS fared even worse in FY 2015-16
with a return of 0.61 percent.CalPERS’investment losses place pressure within its other pension funding
sources, namely, contributions from member agencies.
For every dollar paid to a CalPERS retired annuitant,62%comes from investment returns.Contributions from
member agencies represent the majority of the remaining funding.The CalPERS Board of Administration
recently adopted a new risk mitigation strategy that will gradually lower the target return on investment (ROI)
from 7.5%to 6.5%and mitigate investment return volatility.Given CalPERS’inability to rely on its
investments as a reliable funding source, the reliance upon contributions from member agencies is increased.
The PERS Stabilization Reserve would serve as a resource to mitigate the financial impact of CalPERS
volatility.However,the City Council would still have purview over the funds in the PERS Stabilization
Reserve, which could be used for any valid governmental purpose.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/4/2016Page 3 of 4
powered by Legistar™
File #:16-736,Version:1
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve a resolution accepting the year end financial results and amending the
budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2015-16.
Attachments:
1.CalPERS Employer Contribution History 2011-12 to 2015-16
2.CalPERS Rate of Return 2004-05 to 2015-16
3.General Fund Summary
4.Other Fund Summaries
5.PowerPoint Presentation
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/4/2016Page 4 of 4
powered by Legistar™
$-
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$-
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22
Mi
l
l
i
o
n
s
Mi
l
l
i
o
n
s
CalPERS
Employer Contributions
Historical & Projected
Safety
Miscellaneous
Total
20
0
4
‐
0
5
2
0
0
5
‐
0
6
2
0
0
6
‐
0
7
2
0
0
7
‐
0
8
2
0
0
8
‐
0
9
2
0
0
9
‐
1
0
2
0
1
0
‐
1
1
2
0
1
1
‐
1
2
2
0
1
2
‐
1
3
20
1
3
‐
1
4
2
0
1
4
‐
1
5
2
0
1
5
‐
1
6
As
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
7.
7
5
7
.
7
5
7
.
7
5
7
.
7
5
7
.
7
5
7
.
7
5
7
.
7
5
7
.
5
7
.
5
7
.
5
7
.
5
7
.
5
Ac
t
u
a
l
12
.
2
1
1
.
9
1
8
.
8
‐
2
.
9
‐
2
3
.
6
1
1
.
1
2
0
.
7
1
1
2
.
5
1
8
.
4
2
.
4
0
.
6
1
‐3
0
‐2
5
‐2
0
‐1
5
‐1
0
‐50510152025
Ca
l
P
E
R
S
R
e
t
u
r
n
o
n
I
n
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
FY
2
0
0
4
‐
0
5
t
o
2
0
1
5
‐
1
6
FY 2015‐16 YEAR END
GENERAL FUND OPERATING SUMMARY
Change from 2015‐16 Amended
ActualAdoptedAmendedActual Favorable / %
Revenues2014‐152015‐162015‐162015‐16(Unfavorable)Change
Property Taxes 15,808,502 16,726,607 16,726,607 16,956,412 229,805 1.4%
Former RDA Property Tax 4,837,627 5,142,750 5,142,750 5,587,321 444,571 8.6%
ERAF Refund from County 2,433,729 2,444,500 2,444,500 2,233,926 (210,574) (8.6%)
Sales Tax 11,185,992 14,534,284 16,034,284 14,464,807 (1,569,477) (9.8%)
Triple Flip 4,098,020 1,996,152 3,298,152 3,245,618 (52,534) (1.6%)
Transient Occupancy Tax 12,947,474 12,000,000 13,430,100 13,442,951 12,851 0.1%
Business License 1,357,031 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,375,875 175,875 14.7%
Commercial Parking Tax 3,149,134 2,912,863 2,912,863 3,252,356 339,493 11.7%
Franchise Fees 3,743,656 3,344,000 3,344,000 3,982,092 638,092 19.1%
Building and Fire Permits 4,795,159 3,876,854 5,961,854 6,896,895 935,041 15.7%
Motor Veh. License & In‐Lieu 5,551,651 5,385,045 5,385,045 5,770,060 385,015 7.1%
Rev. from Other Agencies 1,986,116 984,842 2,317,321 2,063,600 (253,721) (10.9%)
Charges for Services 7,330,000 7,420,843 7,351,843 7,294,607 (57,236) (0.8%)
Administrative Charges 1,365,265 1,365,265 1,365,265 1,365,265 ‐ 0.0%
Fines 1,221,413 838,500 838,500 791,756 (46,744) (5.6%)
Interest & Rent 2,865,351 2,931,500 2,931,500 3,079,978 148,478 5.1%
Transfers In & Other 2,579,597 1,529,049 2,695,996 2,810,057 114,061 4.2%
Add Prior Year Committed Reserves N/AN/A3,994,820 N/AN/A
Total Revenues87,255,718 84,633,054 97,375,400 94,613,575 1,232,995 1.3%
Change from 2015‐16 Amended
ActualAdoptedAmendedActual (Favorable) / %
Expenditures2014‐152015‐162015‐162015‐16UnfavorableChange
City Council221,157 237,768 268,135 268,134 (1) (0.0%)
City Clerk426,410 691,304 751,304 646,517 (104,786) (13.9%)
City Treasurer102,577 131,193 131,193 118,788 (12,405) (9.5%)
City Attorney861,748 782,578 782,578 782,389 (189) (0.0%)
City Manager1,223,158 1,588,362 1,764,099 1,735,427 (28,672) (1.6%)
Finance1,982,912 2,027,713 2,231,312 2,186,649 (44,664) (2.0%)
Non‐Departmental1,075,053 1,013,535 1,305,477 1,108,496 (196,980) (15.1%)
Human Resources1,266,565 1,475,848 1,527,383 1,468,781 (58,603) (3.8%)
Economic & Community Dev4,246,016 5,731,979 6,849,485 6,144,860 (704,625) (10.3%)
Fire21,247,987 21,754,722 24,103,926 24,058,472 (45,454) (0.2%)
Police23,512,557 24,959,424 25,356,509 25,319,520 (36,989) (0.1%)
Public Works4,564,493 3,912,331 5,328,834 5,025,903 (302,931) (5.7%)
Library4,247,645 4,607,218 4,769,354 4,681,186 (88,169) (1.8%)
Parks & Recreation11,826,409 13,903,626 13,464,414 13,234,028 (230,386) (1.7%)
Transfers Out2,552,911 1,200,000 3,837,720 2,108,614 (1,729,106) (45.1%)
Total Expenditures79,357,600 84,017,601 92,471,723 88,887,764 (3,583,959) (4.3%)
Net Operating Surplus / (Deficit)7,898,119 615,453 4,903,676 5,725,811 4,816,954
SEWER FUND
Revenues
Actual
2014-15
Adopted
2015-16
Amended
2015-16
Actual
2015-16
Change from
Amended
2015-16
%
Change
SSF Service Charge Revenue 19,758,128$ 20,066,346$ 20,066,346$ 19,515,093$ (551,253)$ (2.7%)
Other Agency Share of O&M Expenses 4,296,052 4,549,061 4,549,061 4,443,579 (105,482) (2.3%)
Other Agency CIP Reimbursement 815,863 1,346 1,030,846 261,164 (769,682) (74.7%)
Other Agency Loan Pymt Reimb 1,048,022 1,048,022 1,048,022 1,048,022 - 0.0%
Grants & CIP Contributions from Others - 29,620 29,620 - (29,620) (100.0%)
Interest/Other Income 228,385 245,000 245,000 235,884 (9,116) (3.7%)
SRF Loan Proceeds for CIP - 8,300,000 8,300,000 - (8,300,000) (100.0%)
Transfers In 16,191 - 46,817 4,716 (42,101) (89.9%)
Total Revenues 26,162,641$ 34,239,395$ 35,315,712$ 25,508,458$ (9,807,254)$ (27.8%)
Expenditures
Operating Expenses 16,186,945$ 18,373,806$ 18,724,951$ 16,493,835$ (2,231,117)$ (11.9%)
Debt Service 5,633,310 5,706,476 5,706,476 5,627,728 (78,748) (1.4%)
CIP Budgeted Expenditures 2,880,290 12,400,000 17,402,573 2,594,632 (14,807,941) (85.1%)
Transfers Out 1,029 - 24 24 - 0.0%
Total Expenses 24,701,574$ 36,480,282$ 41,834,024$ 24,716,219$ ##########(40.9%)
Surplus/(Deficit)1,278,409 (2,240,887) (6,518,312) 792,239 7,310,552
Adj between Net Income and Cash Bal.
214,945
Ending Fund Balance 16,400,834$ 14,159,947$ 9,882,522$ 17,408,019$
Capital Reserves [1]3,829,000 3,829,000 3,829,000 3,983,000 154,000 4.0%
Operating Reserves [2]3,868,007 4,530,528 4,617,111 4,066,973 (550,138) (12.1%)
The Sewer Fund consists of the Water Quality Control Plant Division, the Sewer Maintenance Division, and planned sewer
capital project expenses.
[1] The Capital Reserve is based on the State loan requirements and is 0.5% of the each loan amount from 0 to 10 years after
construction; thereafter the reserve must be maintained until the State loans are retired. After the State loans are retired,
the Capital Reserve will be based on the lesser of: 1) 10% of total principal due on debt, 2) 125% of the average annual debt
service, or 3) The maximum annual debt service.
[2] The Operating Reserve is calculated based on at least 90 days of annualized operations and maintenance costs.
PARKING FUND
Revenues
Actual
2014-15
Adopted
2015-16
Amended
2015-16
Actual
2015-16
Change from
Amended
2015-16
%
Change
Charges for Services:
Parking Permit Fees 98,795$ 95,000$ 95,000$ 116,885$ 21,885$ 23.0%
Parking Meter Fees 664,249 555,000 555,000 646,079 91,079 16.4%
Miller Ave Parking Garage 56,007 50,000 50,000 80,235 30,235 60.5%
Interest/Other Income 12,652 10,000 10,000 32,012 22,012 220.1%
Total Revenues 831,703$ 710,000$ 710,000$ 875,211$ 165,211$ 23.3%
Expenditures
Payroll 281,180$ 246,348$ 246,348$ 268,371$ 22,023$ 8.9%
Supplies & Services 98,668 347,947 867,843 265,159 (602,684) (173.2%)
Interdepartmental Charges 103,726 104,682 104,682 104,682 - 0.0%
Total Expenditures 483,574$ 698,977$ 1,218,873$ 638,212$ (580,661)$ (83.1%)
Surplus/(Deficit)348,129 11,023 (508,873) 236,999 (415,450)
Adj between Net Income and Cash Bal.
(172,152)
Fund Balance 1,640,870$ 1,651,893$ 1,131,997$ 1,705,717$
STORM WATER FUND
Revenues
Actual
2014-15
Adopted
2015-16
Amended
2015-16
Actual
2015-16
Change from
Amended
2015-16
%
Change
Administrative Fines 2,100$ 5,000$ 5,000$ 7,000$ 2,000$ 40.0%
Service Charges 405,537 405,000 405,000 405,105 105 0.0%
Transfer In from Gas Tax/Measure M 670,000 670,000 670,000 670,000 - 0.0%
Transfer In from General Fund 750,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 - 0.0%
Transfer in for CIP Projects - 600,000 600,000 10,841 (589,159) -98.2%
Interest and Other 7,392 5,000 5,000 18,800 13,800 -
Total Revenues 1,835,029$ 1,935,000$ 1,935,000$ 1,361,746$ (573,254)$ -29.6%
Expenditures
Operating Expenses 1,055,302$ 1,649,025$ 1,669,709$ 1,394,530$ (275,179)$ -16.5%
Capital Improvements 168,310 955,000 1,188,107 54,620 (1,133,487) -95.4%
Total Expenditures 1,223,612$ 2,604,025$ 2,857,816$ 1,449,150$ (1,408,666)$ -49.3%
Surplus/(Deficit)611,417 (669,025) (922,816) (87,404) 835,412
Adj between Net Income and Cash Bal.(31,071)
Fund Balance 1,162,770$ 493,745$ 239,954$ 1,044,295$
SELF INSURANCE FUND
Revenues
Actual
2014-15
Adopted
2015-16
Amended
2015-16
Actual
2015-16
Change from
Amended
2015-16 % Change
Charges for Services (3,029)$ -$ -$ (2,801)$ (2,801)$ 0.0%
Use of Money & Property 87,826 75,000 75,000 204,649 129,649 272.9%
Other Revenues 4,299,920 3,776,518 3,776,518 4,693,481 916,963 124.3%
Transfers In 1,000,000 - - - - 0.0%
Total Revenues 5,384,717$ 3,851,518$ 3,851,518$ 4,895,329$ 1,043,811$ 127.1%
Expenditures
Payroll 1,201,541$ 650,000$ 650,000$ 804,124$ 154,124$ 23.7%
Supplies & Services 3,883,453 2,475,000 2,695,000 3,964,279 1,269,279 47.1%
Interdepartmental Charges 213,187 - - (20,058) (20,058) 0.0%
Total Expenditures 5,298,181$ 3,125,000$ 3,345,000$ 4,748,346$ 1,403,346$ 42.0%
Surplus/(Deficit)86,536 726,518 506,518 146,983 (359,535)
Adj between Net Income and Cash Bal.(239,825)
Fund Balance 821,644$ 1,548,162$ 1,328,162$ 728,802$
NOVEMBER 7, 2016
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
FY 2015-16 YEAR END
OVERVIEW
•Resolution
•General Fund Summary
•General Fund Revenues
•Other Funds
•General Fund Reserves
RESOLUTION
•Accept the year end financial results and amend
the budget for Fiscal Year 2015-16.
GENERAL FUND SUMMARY
•Total Revenues $94.6M
•Total Expenditures $88.9M
•Total Surplus $5.7M
GENERAL FUND REVENUES
•Property Tax +$230K
•Sales Tax -$1.5M
•TOT/Parking Tax +$352K
•Building Permits +$935K
•Franchise Fees +$638K
OTHER FUNDS
•Sewer Fund
•Revenues $25.5M
•Expenditures $24.7M
•Parking District Fund
•Revenues $875K
•Expenses $638K
OTHER FUNDS (CONTINUED)
•Storm Water Fund
•Total Revenues $1.3M
•Total Expenses $1.4M
•Self Insurance Fund
•Total Revenues $4.9M
•Total Expenses $4.7M
GENERAL FUND RESERVES
Description Discretionary Committed Total
Beginning Balance $17.1 $4.2 $21.3
Ending Balance $18.5 $4.5 $23.0
Surplus needed $1.4 $0.3 $1.7
Remaining Surplus $4.0
$-
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$-
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22
Mi
l
l
i
o
n
s
Mi
l
l
i
o
n
s
CalPERS
Employer Contributions
Historical & Projected
Safety
Miscellaneous
Total
CALPERS PENSION BUCK
2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
Assumption 7.75 7.75 7.75 7.75 7.75 7.75 7.75 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5
Actual 12.2 11.9 18.8 -2.9 -23.6 11.1 20.7 1 12.5 18.4 2.4 0.61
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
CalPERS Return on Investment
FY 2004-05 to 2015-16
RESOLUTION
•Accept the year end financial results and amend
the budget for Fiscal Year 2015-16.
QUESTIONS
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:16-737,Version:1
Resolution Accepting the Year-End Financial Results and Amending the Budget for Fiscal Year 2015-16.
WHEREAS,staff has transmitted the Fiscal Year 2015-16 year end results for the City of South San Francisco
to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Fiscal Year 2015-16 year end results in a General Fund surplus of $5.7 million; and
WHEREAS,staff recommends that the City Council approve various budget actions as described in Exhibit 1,
attached hereto, and incorporated into this Resolution by reference; and
WHEREAS,such approval will result in General Fund Reserves of $18.5 million and a PERS Stabilization
Reserve of $4.0 million as of June 30, 2016.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby
takes the following actions:
1.Accepts the Fiscal Year 2015-16 year-end financial results; and
2.Approves the various budget actions as described in Exhibit 1,attached hereto,and incorporated
into this Resolution by reference.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Director of Finance is hereby authorized to make any budget changes
consistent with what is presented herein as recommended by the City of South San Francisco’s external
auditors for Fiscal Year 2015-16 in order to close the books for Fiscal Year 2015-16.
*****
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2016Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
EXHIBIT 1
FY 2015‐16 Year End Budget Adjustments
FundDescriptionAmount
General FundTransfer Out to PERS Stabilization Reserve4,000,000$
Benefits FundTransfer In from General Fund for PERS Stabilization Reserve4,000,000$
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:16-789,Version:1
Report regarding a resolution approving various Consulting Services Agreements for On-Call Architectural,
Engineering and Other Professional Services for various City-funded projects in the amount not to exceed
$200,000 per fiscal year per selected consultant.(Sam Bautista, Principal Engineer)
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution approving various Consulting Services
Agreements for On-Call Architectural,Engineering and other Professional Services for various City-
funded projects in the amount not to exceed $200,000 per fiscal year per selected consultant.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
In November 2014,City Council approved thirty-seven (37)consultant services agreements for on-call
architectural,engineering and other professional services,which were put in place to augment city staff and
help deliver multiple projects at the same time.In the past two years,staff has utilized the on-call consultants
regularly as professional services are needed on all city-funded projects.
On July 7,2016,staff advertised a Request for Statement of Qualifications (SOQ)for on-call architectural,
engineering and other professional services.Staff asked for SOQ’s for 16 service areas from consulting firms to
support the CIP projects.The professional service areas solicited include:appraisal services;architecture;
biological services;civil engineering,construction management and inspection services;electrical engineering;
geotechnical engineering and materials testing;hazardous material testing and monitoring;landscape
architecture;marine engineering;mechanical engineering;program management;structural engineering;
surveying, mapping and right-of-way engineering; traffic engineering and transportation; and water resources.
On August 22,2016,staff received 129 proposals for the various professional service areas from consultants in
response to the SOQ.Staff from the Engineering Division,Economic and Community Development
Department,and Parks and Recreation Department reviewed and rated the proposals.Staff selected the
consultants based on their project understanding,example projects,expertise,South San Francisco experience,
reference checks,and overall quality of their proposal.Attachment 1 shows the various service areas and
potential projects.Attachment 2 shows the recommended consultants to be selected for each service area.
Attachment 3 shows all consultants that submitted for each services area.
The on-call consultant services agreements have been very beneficial to the City as they have enabled staff to
progress on all projects,provide expertise in specialized services areas,and prepare exhibits and applications
for competitive grants.In the past two years,staff has executed approximately $2.92 million dollars’worth of
task orders with the on-call consultants.The services areas that are widely used are architecture,civil
engineering,landscape architecture,surveying,structural engineering,and traffic engineering and
transportation.The on-call consultant services agreements are now expiring and staff is recommending
procuring new and/or additional consultants for the various professional services.Based on the anticipated
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/3/2016Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:16-789,Version:1
procuring new and/or additional consultants for the various professional services.Based on the anticipated
projects to be delivered,staff recommends increasing the number of on-call consultants for all the professional
services from 37 to 50. This would allow additional capacity for the widely used services areas listed above.
The consulting service agreements for the selected consultants and would initially be for the term of November
12,2016 to June 30,2018,with the City having the option to extend for an additional two (2)years.The two-
year extension would allow for the on-call consultants to complete any work they commenced prior to the end
of the term.The first fiscal year of the contract will begin on November 12,2016 and end on June 30,2017.A
copy of the draft on-call consultant services agreement for the selected consultants has been included as an
attachment to the Resolution.
The Fiscal Year 2016-2017 Capital Improvement Program (CIP)appropriated approximately $44.2 million
worth of capital projects.To support this effort,the total not to exceed amount for each agreement over the
fiscal one-year term is recommended at $200,000,although it is not anticipated to be reached for all
agreements.These costs would be charged against the various projects through their sources of funding.There
is no city obligation to expend any funds or guarantee any work under these agreements.The consultants will
work on an on-call basis as defined by the City on a project-by-project need.Accordingly,all work performed
under the agreements will be pursuant to individual work orders that will have a specifically defined scope and
schedule that will be negotiated on a project-by-project need.Further,the individual agreements will
acknowledge that the individual work orders will dictate the work done under each agreement,up to the not to
exceed amount.Should an on-call consultant exceed $200,000 per fiscal year,staff will present an amendment
to City Council for approval.The Consultant Services Agreement has been attached to the resolution as Exhibit
B.
FUNDING
Each specific project budget includes funding for architectural,engineering and/or specialized professional
services.Costs for these special on-call services will be charged to the respective projects approved by the City
Manager and/or City Council.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that City Council approve consulting services agreements with the selected consultants listed
in Attachment 2 for the various service areas.This would allow city staff to deliver city-funded projects in an
efficient manner.
Attachments:1. Service Areas and Potential Projects (7 pages)
2. Selected Consultants (2 pages)
3. Consultants Submitting Proposals (3 pages)
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/3/2016Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
Page 1 of 7
ATTACHMENT 1 - SERVICE AREAS, POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS AND TASKS
NO
SERVICE AREA
POTENTIAL PROJECTS
POTENTIAL TASKS
1.
Appraisal Services
• Any City Property, Project, Improvements,
Municipal Service, or Low-Moderate Income
Housing Properties
• Appraisal Services
• Fair Market Lease Rates
• Highest and Best Use Determinations
• Revenue Projections
• On-Call Services
2.
Architecture
• Facility Remodels/Renovations
and Tenant Improvements for:
- City Hall Complex
- Conference Center
- Fire Stations
- Library
- Police Station
- Senior Center
- Park and other Public Restrooms
- Other Administrative Offices
- Other City Projects
• Building Condition Assessments
• Site Selection
• Master Planning/Space Planning
• Feasibility Studies
• Renderings/Models/Displays
• Disabled Accessibility Evaluations and
Mitigation
• Life Cycle Cost Estimates
• Peer Review of Building Design by Others
• Interior Design/FF&Es
• Sustainable Solutions
• Public Charettes/Community Outreach
• Technical Studies, Reports and
Presentations
• Conceptual/Schematic Design
• Design Development
• Final Design Plans, Specifications and
Estimates (PS&E)
• Public Bidding and Construction Phase
Services
• On-Call Services
3.
Biological Services
• Any City Property, Project, Improvements,
or Municipal Services
• Private Projects submitted for City
Approval
• Biological Surveys and Analysis
• Mitigation
• Regulatory Agency Permitting
• Federal, Tribal, Regional and State
Consultations
• Reporting and Presentations
• On-Site Monitoring (during Construction)
• On-Call Services
Page 2 of 7
NO
SERVICE AREA
POTENTIAL PROJECTS
POTENTIAL TASKS
4.
Civil Engineering
• Roadways and Street Improvements
• Parking Lots
• Intersection Improvements
• ADA Compliance Projects
• Pavement Resurfacing Projects
•Driveways, Curbs, Gutters, Medians,
Sidewalks, Cross Gutters, Walkways
• Pavement Management System
•Complete Streets
•Plan Checking of Private Development
Grading, Drainage, and Street
Improvement Plans and Technical Reports
•Standard Plans & Specifications Update
•Preventative Maintenance Plans
•Assessment Districts – Engineer’s Reports
Staff Augmentation
• Project Management
• Plan Checking
• Design Survey and Geometrics
• Pavement Evaluation and Design
• Environmental Permitting
• Coordination w/Other Agencies & Utilities
• Constructability/Bidability Reviews
• Peer Review of PS&Es prepared by Others
(Roadways/Traffic/Parks/Drainage/Sewers)
• Value Engineering
• AutoCAD Services
• Preliminary Engineering Studies
• Technical Reports
• Alternatives Analysis
• Final Design PS&Es
•Public Bidding and Construction Phase
Services
• On-Call Services
• Staff Augmentation is intended to Provide
Qualified Engineering Staff on a Temporary,
On-Call, As-Needed Basis.
5.
Construction
Management and
Inspection Services/
Horizontal
Construction
• Roadways and Street Improvements
• Pavement Resurfacing
• Traffic Signals
• Drainage, Culverts, Basins
• Grading
• Sewer Pipelines and Lift Stations
• Parks and Trails
• Constructability/Bidability Reviews
• Value Engineering
• Public Bidding Phase Support
• Submittal Tracking and Reviews
• Construction Staking
• Construction Management & Controls
• Contract Administration
• Inter-agency and Third Party Utility
Coordination
• Construction Inspection
• Storm Water Quality Inspections
• Materials Testing
• Progress Meetings and Reporting
• Public Relations/Outreach
• Progress Payments and Grant/Fund
Tracking
• Change Order Management
• Permit Monitoring
• SWPPP & Erosion/Sediment Control
Monitoring
•Claims & Disputes Prevention/Mitigation
• Project Closeout
• On-Call Services
Page 3 of 7
NO
SERVICE
AREA
POTENTIAL PROJECTS
POTENTIAL TASKS
6.
Electrical
Engineering
• Any City Property, Project, Improvements,
or Municipal Services
• Emergency Generators
• Facility Lighting
• Sports Field Lighting
• Switchgear
• Communications Systems
• Fire Alarm and Security Systems
• Street Lighting
• HVAC and Building Systems
• Radio Systems
• Electrical/Mechanical Assessments
• Feasibility Studies
• Energy and Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Strategies
• Renewable Energy Solutions
• Photometric Studies
• Recommendations on Lights & Fixtures
• Preliminary Engineering
• Final Design PS&Es
• Public Bidding and Construction Phase
Services
• On-Call Services
7.
Geotechnical
Engineering and
Materials Testing
• Any City Property, Project, Improvements,
or Municipal Services
• Erosion and Stabilization
• Site Investigations & Peer Reviews
• Geologic Investigations
• Soils and Asphalt Pavement Borings
• Laboratory Testing
• Non-destructive Testing
• Geotechnical Reports
• Pavement Condition Surveys
• Pavement Section Design Alternatives
• Retaining Wall Design Parameters
• Slope Stabilization
• Landslide Monitoring
• Grading Observations
• Multi-Trades Building Inspections and
Materials Testing (asphalt, concrete,
masonry, steel)
• On-Call Services
8.
Hazardous Materials
Testing and Monitoring
Services and/or
Construction Material
Testing / Monitoring
• Any City Property, Project, Improvements,
or Municipal Services
• Hazardous Materials Testing (Asbestos,
Molds, and others)
• Laboratory Testing
• Abatement and Remediation PS&Es
• Policies and Procedures
• Documentation and Training
• Emergency Response
• On-Call Services
Page 4 of 7
NO
SERVICE
AREA
POTENTIAL PROJECTS
POTENTIAL TASKS
9.
Landscape Architecture
• Any City Property, Project, Improvements,
or Municipal Services
• Park Renovations
• Landscaping and Streetscapes
• Water-Conserving Irrigation Systems
• Xeriscape
• Sports Fields
• Dog Park
• Playgrounds, Picnic Areas
• Erosion Control
• Parks Condition Assessments
• Parks/Trails Master Planning
• Playground Equipment Inspections
• Feasibility Studies
• Cost Estimating
• Schematics and Renderings
• Reporting and Presentations
• Peer Review of PS&Es Prepared by Others
• Preliminary Design
• Final Design PS&Es
• Public Bidding and Construction Phase
Services
• On-Call Services
10. Marine Engineering • Marina Evaluation and Design
• Marina Design or Re-Design
• Modern Dry Storage
• Site Expansion & Upgrades
• Efficiency & Movement Engineering
• Bathometric Analysis
• Load Engineering
• Wave Studies
• Market Research Preliminary Engineering
• Technical Studies and Reports
• Final Design PS&Es
• Reporting and Presentations
• Public Bidding and Construction Phase
Services
• On-Call Services
11.
Mechanical
Engineering
• Any City Property, Project, Improvements,
or Municipal Services
• Fuel Tanks Renovations
• Grease Traps
• HVAC Systems
• Mechanical Building Systems
• Emergency Generators
• Mechanical/Electrical Systems
Assessments
• Feasibility Studies
• Energy and Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Strategies
• Renewable Energy Solutions
• Preliminary Engineering
• Final Design PS&Es
• Public Bidding and Construction Phase
Services
• On-Call Services
Page 5 of 7
NO
SERVICE
AREA
POTENTIAL PROJECTS
POTENTIAL TASKS
12. Program
Management
• Program Management for various City
projects
• Manage a team in planning and executing
programs.
• Oversee daily activities of team and provide
assistance whenever needed.
• Work with management, financial, and IT
teams to support program execution.
• Work with management to analyze
program proposals and program objectives.
• Develop program plan, budget, schedule,
and scope.
• Develop program management standards
and methodologies to achieve program
goals.
• Monitor and control expenses within
allotted budgets.
• Ensure that program deliverables meet
quality standards and project
requirements.
• Develop best practices to improve program
performance.
• Develop and maintain program
documentations
13.
Structural Engineering
• Any City Property, Project, Improvements,
or Municipal Services
• Parking Garages
• Retaining Walls
• Roadway and Pedestrian Bridges
• Utility Vaults
• Box Culverts, Headwalls
•Building Framing Systems
Foundation Slabs
• Buildings/Facilities Condition Assessments
• Structural Analysis and Design
• Seismic Evaluations
• Structural Modifications
• Non-destructive Testing
• Rehabilitation Strategies
• Preliminary Engineering
• Final Design PS&Es
• Public Bidding and Construction Phase
Services
On-Call Services
Page 6 of 7
NO
SERVICE
AREA
POTENTIAL PROJECTS
POTENTIAL TASKS
14.
Surveying,
Mapping, and
Right-of-Way
Engineering
• Any City Property, Project, Improvements,
or Municipal Services
• Ground Control
• Aerial Photography/Base Mapping
• Ortho-Photogrammetry/Mapping
• Design Surveys
• Digital Terrain Modeling
• Topographic Surveys
• Construction Staking
• Quality Assurance of Contractor’s Staking
• Set Monuments
• Records and Lands Title Research
• Plats and Legal Descriptions for Right-of-
Way and Easement Acquisitions
• Right-of-Way Certifications (Caltrans)
• Acquisition Support
• Subdivision or Parcel Map Checking
• On-Call Services
15.
Traffic Engineering &
Transportation
• Any City Property, Project, Improvements,
or Municipal Services
• Private Projects submitted for City
Approval
• New and Upgraded Traffic Signals
• Pedestrian Crossings and Connectivity
• Bicycle Lane Linkages
• Signal Timing Assessments
• Fiber Optics
• Interconnection & Synchronization
• Intersection Modifications
• Transportation Planning
• Pedestrian and Bicycle Projects
• Traffic Calming Plans
• Corridor Evaluations
• Circulation Studies
• Radar Speed Signs
• Electronic Parking Signs
• Staff Augmentation
• Traffic Counts
• Traffic Studies & Modeling
• Speed Surveys
• Parking Studies & Management
• Signal Warrants
• Signal Design
• Signage and Striping Plans
• Traffic Control and Barricading Plans
• Interagency Coordination
• Reporting and Presentations
• Preliminary Engineering
• Final Design PS&Es
• Public Bidding and Construction Phase
Services
• On-Call Services
• Staff Augmentation is Intended to Provide
Qualified Traffic Engineering Staff on a
Temporary, On-Call, As-Needed Basis
Page 7 of 7
NO
SERVICE
AREA
POTENTIAL PROJECTS
POTENTIAL TASKS
16.
Water Resources
(Storm
Water/Drainage
and Waste Water)
• New and Rehabilitated Pipelines
• Lift Stations
• Storm Drainage Retention and
Conveyance Facilities
•Pipe Lining and Pipe Bursting
• Spot Repairs
• Wastewater Collection Master Plan
• Preventative Maintenance Plans
• Erosion Control
• Storm Water C.3 requirements
• Utility Condition Assessment & Inspections
• Utility Master Planning
• Alignment Studies
• Hydrology/Hydraulic Analyses
• Design Surveying
• Environmental Permitting
• Coordination with Utilities and Federal,
Tribal and Regional Agencies
• Utility System Modeling
• Preliminary Engineering
• Technical Studies and Reports
• Final Design PS&Es
• Reporting and Presentations
• Value Engineering
• Public Bidding and Construction Phase
Services
• On-Call Services
-1-
ATTACHMENT 2 – SELECTED CONSULTANTS
NO. SERVICE AREA SELECTED CONSULTANTS
1. Appraisal • AR/WS of Pleasant Hill, CA
2. Architecture • BSA Architects of San Francisco, CA
• Group 4 Architecture of South San Francisco, CA
• Hamilton & Aitken of San Francisco, CA
• Marcy Wong Donn Logan Architects of Berkeley, CA
• Polytech Associates, Inc. of San Francisco, CA
• SIM Architects, Inc. of San Francisco, CA
3. Biological Services • AECOM of Oakland, CA
4. Civil Engineering • BKF Engineers of Redwood City, CA
• CSG of Foster City, CA
• Mark Thomas & Company of San Jose, CA
• NCE of Point Richmond, CA
• T.Y. Lin International of San Ramon, CA
• Wilsey Ham of San Mateo, CA
5. Construction Management and
Inspection Services/ Horizontal
Construction
• Anchor Engineering of Lafayette, CA
• CALTROP of Emeryville, CA
• Ghirardelli Associates of San Jose, CA
6. Electrical Engineering • Randall Lamb of San Francisco, CA
• Salas O’Brien of San Jose, CA
• TJC & Associates of Oakland, CA
7. Geotechnical Engineering and
Materials Testing
• Cotton Shires & Associates of Los Gatos, CA
• Fugro Consultants of Walnut Creek, CA
• Ninyo & Moore of Oakland, CA
8. Hazardous Materials Testing and
Monitoring Services
• Geo Con Consultants of Livermore, CA
• Intertek PSI of Oakland, CA
• Ninyo & Moore of Oakland, CA
9. Landscape Architecture • Callander Associates of San Mateo, CA
• Gates & Associates of San Ramon, CA
• RRM of San Leandro, CA
• SSA Landscape of, Santa Cruz, CA
• SWA of San Francisco, CA
• Verde Design of Santa Clara, CA
10. Marine Engineering • Anchor QEA of San Francisco, CA
11. Mechanical Engineering • Laws & Associates of Burlingame, CA
• Randall Lamb of San Francisco, CA
• Salas O’Brien of San Jose, CA
12. Program Management • CSG of Foster City, CA
• Swinerton Management & Consulting of South San
Francisco, CA
-2-
13. Structural Engineering • Biggs Cardoza & Assoc. of San Francisco, CA
• Lionakis Architects of San Francisco, CA
• Skyline Engineering of Salinas, CA
• TJC & Associates of Oakland, CA
14. Surveying, Mapping, and Right-of-
Way Engineering
• Macleod & Associates of San Carlos, CA
• Sandis of Campbell, CA
• Towill, Inc. of Concord, CA
• Wilsey Ham of San Mateo, CA
15. Traffic Engineering and
Transportation
• Crane Transportation of Elk Grove, CA
• DKS Associates of Oakland, CA
• Fehr & Peers of San Francisco, CA
• Kimley-Horn & Associates of Pleasanton, CA
• TJKM of Pleasanton, CA
16. Water Resources (Drainage and
Waste Water)
• Carollo Engineers of Walnut Creek, CA
• RMC Water and Environment of Walnut Creek, CA
• Schaaf &Wheeler of San Francisco, CA
• Wilsey Ham of San Mateo, CA
-1-
ATTACHMENT 3–CONSULTANTSSUBMITTING PROPOSALS
NO.SERVICE AREA CONSULTANTS
1.Appraisal AR/WS ofPleasant Hill, CA
Bender Rosenthal, Inc. of Sacramento, CA
2.Architecture BSA Architects ofSan Francisco, CA
Dougherty &Dougherty ofOakland, CA
Facility Engineering of Santa Rosa, CA
FMG Architects ofSan Francisco, CA
Gelfand Partners Architects ofSan Francisco, CA
Group 4 Architecture of South San Francisco, CA
Hamilton & Aitken of San Francisco, CA
Hilliard Architects ofOakland, CA
LCA ArchitectsofWalnutCreek, CA
LDA ofSan Francisco, CA
Joseph Chow & Associates ofSan Francisco, CA
Lionakis Architects of San Francisco, CA
Marcy Wong Donn Logan Architects of Berkeley, CA
Noll & Tam Architects ofBerkeley, CA
Polytech Associates Inc. of San Francisco, CA
Powell and Partners ofOakland, CA
Ratcliff ofEmeryville, CA
Ross Drulis Cusenbery of Sonoma, CA
Sim Architects ofSan Francisco, CA
3.Biological Services AECOM ofOakland, CA
Anchor QEAofSan Francisco,CA
Johnson MarigotConsulting, LLCofBrisbane, CA
NCE of Point Richmond, CA
Rincon ofOakland, CA
4.Civil Engineering AECOM of Oakland, Ca
BKF Engineers of Redwood City, CA
CSG ofFoster City, CA
KPFF ofSan Francisco, CA
Mark Thomas & Company of San Jose, CA
NCE of Point Richmond, CA
Quincy Engineering ofWalnut Creek, CA
R&M of San Jose, CA
Sandis ofOakland, CA
T.Y. Lin International ofSan Ramon, CA
Wilsey Ham of San Mateo, CA
5.Construction Management and
Inspection Services/ Horizontal
Construction
AnchorCM of Lafayette, CA
Carollo Engineers ofWalnut Creek, CA
CALTROPof Emeryville, CA
CSG ofFoster City, CA
Ghirardelli Associates ofSan Jose, CA
4Leaf,Inc. ofPleasanton, CA
Park Engineering of Orinda, CA
-2-
6.Electrical Engineering Randall Lamb ofSan Francisco, CA
Salas O’Brien ofSan Jose, CA
TJC & Associates of Oakland, CA
7.Geotechnical Engineering and
Materials Testing
AECOM of Oakland, CA
Alan Kropp & Associates, CA
Cotton Shires ofLos Gatos, CA
Engeo Incorporated ofSan Francisco, CA
Fugro Consultants of Walnut Creek, CA
Geo Con Consultants ofLivermore, CA
Geosphere Consultants ofSan Ramon, CA
Intertek-PSIofOakland, CA
Ninyo & Moore of Oakland, CA
RMA Group ofSan Jose, CA
Smith-Emery ofSan Francisco, CA
8.Hazardous Materials Testing and
Monitoring Services
CSSEnvironmental Services, Inc.ofNovato, CA
Geo Con Consultants ofLivermore, CA
Intertek PSI ofOakland, CA
Ninyo & Moore of Oakland, CA
SCA ofSan Francisco, CA
TerraconConsultants, Inc. ofEmeryville, CA
9.Landscape Architecture Callander Associates of San Mateo, CA
Gates & Associates of San Ramon,CA
Merill Morris Partners ofSan Francisco, CA
RRM ofSan Leandro, CA
SSA Landscape of,Santa Cruz,CA
SWA of San Francisco,CA
Urban Design ofSan Francisco, CA
Verde Design ofSanta Clara, CA
TanakaDesign GroupofSan Francisco, CA
10.Marine Engineering Anchor QEA ofSan Francisco, CA
COWI North America, Inc.of Oakland, CA
11.Mechanical Engineering Facility Engineering ofSanta Rosa, CA
Interface Engineering ofSan Francisco, CA
Laws & Associates ofBurlingame, CA
Randall Lamb of San Francisco, CA
Salas O’Brien of San Jose, CA
12.Program Management CALTROP of Emeryville, CA
CSG ofFoster City, CA
Swinerton Management of South San Francisco,CA
The Hvidt Group ofLos Gatos, CA
13.Structural Engineering Biggs Cardoza & Assoc. of San Francisco, CA
Cornerstone of San Francisco, CA
KPW ofOakland, CA
Lionakis Architects of San Francisco, CA
Mark Thomas & Company of San Jose, CA
Quincy Engineering ofWalnut Creek, CA
R&M of San Jose, CA
Simpson Gumpertz & Heger ofSan Francisco, CA
-3-
SkylineEngineering of Salinas, CA
TJC & Associates of Oakland, CA
T.Y. Lin International of San Ramon, CA
14.Surveying, Mapping, and Right-of-
Way Engineering
BKF of Redwood City, CA
CSG of Foster City, CA
GeophexSurveys ofRaleigh, NC
GeoWing Mapping, Inc.ofOakland, CA
Macleod & Associates ofSan Carlos, CA
Mark Thomas & Company of San Jose, CA
Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar ofPleasanton, CA
Sandis of Campbell,CA
Towill, Inc. of Concord, CA
Wilsey Ham ofSan Mateo, CA
15.Traffic Engineering AECOM of Oakland, CA
Crane Transportation ofElk Grove, CA
DKS Associates of Oakland, CA
Fehr & Peers ofSan Francisco, CA
Iteris, Inc.ofBerkeley, CA
Kimley-Horn & Associates of Pleasanton, CA
Kittelson & Associates ofOakland, CA
RKH Civil and Transportation ofFoster City, CA
R&M of San Jose, CA
Stantec Consulting ServicesofWalnut Creek, CA
TJKM ofPleasanton, CA
Willdan Engineering ofOakland, CA
W-Trans ofOakland, CA
16.Water Resources (Drainage and
Waste Water)
BKF Engineers of Redwood City, CA
Carollo Engineers ofWalnut Creek, CA
CSG ofFoster City, CA
KPFF ofSan Francisco, CA
RMC Water and Environment of Walnut Creek, CA
Schaaf &Wheeler of San Francisco, CA
Wilsey Ham of San Mateo, CA
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:16-790,Version:1
Resolution approving various Consulting Services Agreements for On-Call Architectural,Engineering and
Other Professional Services for various City-funded projects in an amount not to exceed $200,000 per fiscal
year for a two year period per selected consultant.
WHEREAS,on July 7,2016,City of South San Francisco (“City”)staff issued a Request for Statement of
Qualifications (“SOQ”)for on-call architectural,engineering and professional services for 16 service areas
from consulting firms,which professional service areas include appraisal services;architecture;biological
services;civil engineering,construction management and inspection services;electrical engineering;
geotechnical engineering and materials testing;hazardous material testing and monitoring;landscape
architecture;marine engineering;mechanical engineering;program management;structural engineering;
surveying,mapping and right-of-way engineering;traffic engineering and transportation;and water resources;
and
WHEREAS,on August 22,2016,staff received one hundred twenty nine (129)proposals for the various
service areas from consultants in response to the SOQ; and
WHEREAS,City staff from the Engineering Division,Economic and Community Development Department
and Parks and Recreation Department reviewed the proposals and selected the consultants based on their
project understanding, example projects, expertise and proposal; and
WHEREAS,staff recommends approving the consulting services agreements for the selected consultants listed
in Exhibit A and utilizing and customizing the form Consultant Services Agreement for each selected
consultant, attached as Exhibit B; and
WHEREAS,costs for the on-call architectural,engineering and other professional services will be charged to
various city-funded projects through their sources of funding and shall not exceed $200,000 per agreement per
fiscal year for the term of November 12,2016 to June 30,2018,in which the first fiscal year will begin on
November 12,2016 and end on June 30,2017,with the City having the option to extend their agreement for an
additional two (2) years.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby
approves the consulting services agreements for on-call architectural,engineering &other professional services
for various Capital Improvement Projects,for those selected consulting firms listed in Exhibit A in an amount
not to exceed $200,000 per agreement per fiscal year for the term of November 12,2016 to June 30,2018,in
which the first fiscal year will begin on November 12,2016 and end on June 30,2017,with the City having an
option to extend any agreement for an additional two (2) years.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the City Council
hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute the on call consulting services agreements on behalf of the City
for those selected consulting firms listed in Exhibit A,upon timely submission by the selected consultants’
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2016Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:16-790,Version:1
for those selected consulting firms listed in Exhibit A,upon timely submission by the selected consultants’
signed contracts and all other required documents, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,by the City Council that the City Manager is authorized to take any action
consistent with the intent of this Resolution that does not materially alter the City’s obligations hereunder.
Exhibit A - Selected Consultants
Exhibit B - On Call Consulting Services Agreement for On Call Consultants
*****
City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2016Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
-1-
ATTACHMENT 2 – SELECTED CONSULTANTS
NO. SERVICE AREA SELECTED CONSULTANTS
1. Appraisal • AR/WS of Pleasant Hill, CA
2. Architecture • BSA Architects of San Francisco, CA
• Group 4 Architecture of South San Francisco, CA
• Hamilton & Aitken of San Francisco, CA
• Marcy Wong Donn Logan Architects of Berkeley, CA
• Polytech Associates, Inc. of San Francisco, CA
• SIM Architects, Inc. of San Francisco, CA
3. Biological Services • AECOM of Oakland, CA
4. Civil Engineering • BKF Engineers of Redwood City, CA
• CSG of Foster City, CA
• Mark Thomas & Company of San Jose, CA
• NCE of Point Richmond, CA
• T.Y. Lin International of San Ramon, CA
• Wilsey Ham of San Mateo, CA
5. Construction Management and
Inspection Services/ Horizontal
Construction
• Anchor Engineering of Lafayette, CA
• CALTROP of Emeryville, CA
• Ghirardelli Associates of San Jose, CA
6. Electrical Engineering • Randall Lamb of San Francisco, CA
• Salas O’Brien of San Jose, CA
• TJC & Associates of Oakland, CA
7. Geotechnical Engineering and
Materials Testing
• Cotton Shires & Associates of Los Gatos, CA
• Fugro Consultants of Walnut Creek, CA
• Ninyo & Moore of Oakland, CA
8. Hazardous Materials Testing and
Monitoring Services
• Geo Con Consultants of Livermore, CA
• Intertek PSI of Oakland, CA
• Ninyo & Moore of Oakland, CA
9. Landscape Architecture • Callander Associates of San Mateo, CA
• Gates & Associates of San Ramon, CA
• RRM of San Leandro, CA
• SSA Landscape of, Santa Cruz, CA
• SWA of San Francisco, CA
• Verde Design of Santa Clara, CA
10. Marine Engineering • Anchor QEA of San Francisco, CA
11. Mechanical Engineering • Laws & Associates of Burlingame, CA
• Randall Lamb of San Francisco, CA
• Salas O’Brien of San Jose, CA
12. Program Management • CSG of Foster City, CA
• Swinerton Management & Consulting of South San
Francisco, CA
-2-
13. Structural Engineering • Biggs Cardoza & Assoc. of San Francisco, CA
• Lionakis Architects of San Francisco, CA
• Skyline Engineering of Salinas, CA
• TJC & Associates of Oakland, CA
14. Surveying, Mapping, and Right-of-
Way Engineering
• Macleod & Associates of San Carlos, CA
• Sandis of Campbell, CA
• Towill, Inc. of Concord, CA
• Wilsey Ham of San Mateo, CA
15. Traffic Engineering and
Transportation
• Crane Transportation of Elk Grove, CA
• DKS Associates of Oakland, CA
• Fehr & Peers of San Francisco, CA
• Kimley-Horn & Associates of Pleasanton, CA
• TJKM of Pleasanton, CA
16. Water Resources (Drainage and
Waste Water)
• Carollo Engineers of Walnut Creek, CA
• RMC Water and Environment of Walnut Creek, CA
• Schaaf &Wheeler of San Francisco, CA
• Wilsey Ham of San Mateo, CA
DR
A
F
T
ON CALL CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND [ON CALL CONSULTANT]
THIS AGREEMENT for on-call consulting services is made by and between the City of South San
Francisco (“City”) and (“Consultant”) (together sometimes referred to as the “Parties”) as of
____________, 20__ (the “Effective Date”).
Section 1. SERVICES. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Consultant
shall provide consulting services on an on-call basis to City as described in the Scope of Work attached
hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A, at the time and place and in the manner specified by the
respective executed Task Orders, a sample of is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit B. In
the event of a conflict in or inconsistency between the terms of this Agreement and Exhibit A, and/or and
any executed Task Orders, the Agreement shall prevail.
1.1 Term of Services. The term of this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and shall
end on _______________, 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 Task Order. Prior to execution of a Task Order, the City shall request a Task Order Scope
Proposal from the Consultant. Consultant shall provide the City with a Task Order Scope
Proposal, and if satisfactory, the City and Consultant shall execute a Task Order. Upon an
executed Task Order, Consultant shall perform the services listed in the Task Order and in
a manner consistent with this Agreement.
1.3 Standard of Performance. Consultant shall perform all work 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.
1.4 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.
1.5 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 1.3 above and to satisfy Consultant’s obligations hereunder.
1.6 Public Works Requirements. Because the services described in Exhibit A may include
“work performed during the design and preconstruction phases of construction including,
but not limited to, inspection and land surveying work,” the services may constitute a public
works within the definition of Section 1720(a)(1) of the California Labor Code. As a result,
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
Consultant is required to comply with the provisions set forth in Exhibit E, which is attached
hereto and incorporated herein.
Section 2. COMPENSATION. This On-call Services Agreement does not guarantee any amount of
work for the Consultant. Task Orders will be developed and executed as needed and provided for in this
Agreement. The Consultant shall be paid by the City only for completed services rendered under each
approved individual Task Order. Such payment shall be full compensation for payment shall be full
compensation for work performed or services rendered and for all labor, materials, supplies, equipment and
incidentals necessary to complete the work stated in the Task Order. Notwithstanding the foregoing,
Consultant shall not receive total compensation under this Agreement in an amount over Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00) per fiscal year, in which the first fiscal year shall begin on
November 12, 2016 and end on June 30, 2017 and the second fiscal year shall begin on July 1, 2017
and end on June 30, 2018. In the event of a conflict between this Agreement and Consultant’s proposal,
regarding the amount of compensation, the Agreement shall prevail. The payments for completed work
under an executed Task Order 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 in writing, Consultant shall not bill City for duplicate services
performed by more than one person.
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 per month during
the term of this Agreement, based on the cost for all services performed and reimbursable
costs incurred prior to the invoice date. Invoices shall contain all 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 each
employee, agent, and subcontractor of Consultant performing services hereunder;
Consultant shall give separate notice to the City when the total number of hours
worked by Consultant and any individual employee, agent, or subcontractor of
Consultant reaches or exceeds eight hundred (800) hours within a twelve (12)-
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
month period under this Agreement and any other agreement between Consultant
and City. Such notice shall include an estimate of the time necessary to complete
work described in Exhibit A and the estimate of time necessary to complete work
under any other agreement between Consultant and City, if applicable.
The amount and purpose of actual expenditures for which reimbursement is
sought;
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 thirty (30) days from the receipt of an invoice that complies with all of the
requirements above to pay Consultant. Each invoice shall include all expenses and
actives performed during the invoice period for which Consultant expects to receive
payment.
2.3 Final Payment. City shall pay the five percent (5%) 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. 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 compensation schedule attached hereto and incorporated
herein as Exhibit C.
2.6 Reimbursable Expenses. Reimbursable expenses, as specified in Exhibit D, attached
hereto and incorporated herein, shall not exceed Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000).
Expenses not listed below 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. Contractor
represents and warrants that Contractor is a resident of the State of California in
accordance with California Revenue & Taxation Code Section 18662, as it may be
amended, and is exempt from withholding. Contractor accepts sole responsible for
verifying the residency status of any subcontractors and withhold taxes from non-California
subcontractors.
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
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 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.
2.10 False Claims Act. Presenting a false or fraudulent claim for payment, including a change
order, is a violation of the California False Claims Act and may result in treble damages
and a fine of five thousand ($5,000) to ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per violation.
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, unless otherwise specified below, shall procure the types and
amounts of insurance listed below 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. Consistent with the following provisions, 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, and that such insurance is in effect prior to beginning work to
the City. Consultant shall maintain the insurance policies required by this section throughout the term of
this Agreement. The cost of such 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). Consultant shall maintain all required insurance listed herein for
the duration of this Agreement.
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 $1,000,000 per accident. In the alternative, Consultant may rely on a self-
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
insurance program to meet those requirements, but only 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, as defined in Section 10.9. 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.
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) 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 or GL 0002 (most recent editions) covering comprehensive General
Liability Insurance and Services Office form number GL 0404 covering Broad
Form Comprehensive General Liability on an “occurrence” basis. Automobile
coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Services Office Automobile
Liability form CA 0001 (most recent edition). 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 a certified endorsement to the policy:
a. The Insurance shall cover on an occurrence or an accident basis, and not
on a claims-made basis.
b. 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.
4.3 Professional Liability Insurance.
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
4.3.1 General requirements. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain
for the period 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 covering the licensed
professionals’ errors and omissions. Any deductible or self-insured retention shall
not exceed one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) per claim.
4.3.2 Claims-made limitations. The following provisions shall apply if the professional
liability coverage is 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 (5) 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 shall purchase an extended period coverage
for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of work under this
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
for review prior to the commencement of any work under this Agreement.
4.3.3 Additional Requirements. A certified endorsement to include contractual liability
shall be included in the policy
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 coverage. Prior to beginning any work under this Agreement,
Consultant shall furnish City with complete copies of all policies delivered to
Consultant by the insurer, including complete copies of all endorsements attached
to those policies. All copies of policies and certified endorsements shall show the
signature of a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. If
the City does not receive the required insurance documents prior to the Consultant
beginning work, this shall not waive the Consultant’s obligation to provide them.
The City reserves the right to require complete copies of all required insurance
policies at any time.
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
4.4.3 Notice of Reduction in or Cancellation of Coverage. A certified endorsement
shall be attached to all insurance obtained pursuant to this Agreement stating that
coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, or 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. In the event that any
coverage required by this section is reduced, limited, cancelled, 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 ten (10)
working days after Consultant is notified of the change in coverage.
4.4.4 Additional insured; primary insurance. City and its officers, employees, agents,
and volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to each of the
following: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of Consultant,
including the City’s general supervision of Consultant; products and completed
operations of Consultant, as applicable; premises owned, occupied, or used by
Consultant; and automobiles owned, leased, or used by the Consultant in the
course of providing services pursuant to this Agreement. The coverage shall
contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to City or its
officers, employees, agents, or volunteers.
A certified endorsement must be attached to all policies stating 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.
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.
Further, if the Consultant’s insurance policy includes a self-insured retention that
must be paid by a named insured as a precondition of the insurer’s liability, or
which has the effect of providing that payments of the self-insured retention by
others, including additional insureds or insurers do not serve to satisfy the self-
insured retention, such provisions must be modified by special endorsement so as
to not apply to the additional insured coverage required by this agreement so as to
not prevent any of the parties to this agreement from satisfying or paying the self-
insured retention required to be paid as a precondition to the insurer’s liability.
Additionally, the certificates of insurance must note whether the policy does or
does not include any self-insured retention and also must disclose the deductible.
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
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
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 Subcontractors. Consultant shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its
policies or shall furnish separate certificates and certified endorsements for each
subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the
requirements stated herein.
4.4.7 Wasting Policy. No insurance policy required by Section 4 shall include a
“wasting” policy limit.
4.4.8 Variation. The City may approve a variation in the foregoing insurance
requirements, upon a determination that the coverage, scope, limits, and forms of
such insurance are either not commercially available, or that the City’s interests
are otherwise fully protected.
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:
a. Obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such
insurance from any sums due under the Agreement;
b. 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
c. Terminate this Agreement.
Section 5. INDEMNIFICATION AND CONSULTANT’S RESPONSIBILITIES. Consultant shall, to the
fullest extent allowed by law, with respect to all Services performed in connection with this Agreement,
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 (“Claims”), to the extent
caused, directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, by the willful misconduct or negligent acts or omissions of
Consultant or its employees, subcontractors, or agents. 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 gross
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 violation of law.
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
5.1 Insurance Not in Place of Indemnity. 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.
5.2 PERS Liability. 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.
5.3 Third Party Claims. With respect to third party claims against the Consultant, the
Consultant waives any and all rights of any type of express or implied indemnity against
the Indemnitees.
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 Not an 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 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.
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
7.2 Compliance with Applicable Laws. Consultant and any subcontractors shall comply with
all federal, state and local laws and regulations applicable to the performance of the work
hereunder. Consultant’s failure to comply with such law(s) or regulation(s) shall constitute
a breach of contract.
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, including from City, 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.
7.6 Contractor’s Residency and Tax Withholding Contractor declares that Contractor is a
resident of the State of Californa in accordance with the California Franchise Tax Board
form 590 (“Form 590”), as may be amended, attached hereto and incorporated herein as
Exhibit F. Unless provided with valid, written evidence of an exemption or waiver from
withholding, City may withhold California taxes from payments to Contractor as required by
law. Contractor shall obtain, and maintain on file for three (3) years after the termination of
the Contract, Form 590s from all subcontractors. Contractor accepts sole responsibility for
withholding taxes from any non-California resident subcontractor and shall submit written
documentation of compliance with Contractor's withholding duty to City.
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
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 for cause upon thirty (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 notice of termination; City, however, may condition
payment of such compensation upon Consultant delivering to City all materials described
in Section 9.1.
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
Contractor to execute a 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 assign or 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 include, but not be limited to, the following:
8.6.1 Immediately terminate the Agreement;
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
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
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 except as required by law.
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 ($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.
9.4 Records Submitted in Response to an Invitation to Bid or Request for Proposals. All
responses to a Request for Proposals (RFP) or invitation to bid issued by the City become
the exclusive property of the City. At such time as the City selects a bid, all proposals
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
received become a matter of public record, and shall be regarded as public records, with
the exception of those elements in each proposal that are defined by Consultant and
plainly marked as “Confidential,” "Business Secret" or “Trade Secret."
The City shall not be liable or in any way responsible for the disclosure of any such
proposal or portions thereof, if Consultant has not plainly marked it as a "Trade Secret" or
"Business Secret," or if disclosure is required under the Public Records Act.
Although the California Public Records Act recognizes that certain confidential trade secret
information may be protected from disclosure, the City may not be in a position to establish
that the information that a prospective bidder submits is a trade secret. If a request is
made for information marked "Trade Secret" or "Business Secret," and the requester takes
legal action seeking release of the materials it believes does not constitute trade secret
information, by submitting a proposal, Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold
harmless the City, its agents and employees, from any judgment, fines, penalties, and
award of attorneys fees awarded against the City in favor of the party requesting the
information, and any and all costs connected with that defense. This obligation to
indemnify survives the City's award of the contract. Consultant agrees that this
indemnification survives as long as the trade secret information is in the City's possession,
which includes a minimum retention period for such documents.
Section 10 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
10.1 Attorneys’ Fees. If a Party to this Agreement brings any action, including arbitration or 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 San Mateo 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.
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.
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
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 (12) 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 Brian McMinn, City
Engineer/Public Works Director ("Contract Administrator"). All correspondence shall be
directed to or through the Contract Administrator or his or her designee. Further, the
Contract Administrator has authority to approve Task Orders under this Agreement.
10.10 Notices. All notices and other communications which are required or may be given under
this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given (i) when
received if personally delivered; (ii) when received if transmitted by telecopy, if received
during normal business hours on a business day (or if not, the next business day after
delivery) provided that such facsimile is legible and that at the time such facsimile is sent
the sending Party receives written confirmation of receipt; (iii) if sent for next day delivery
to a domestic address by recognized overnight delivery service (e.g., Federal Express);
and (iv) upon receipt, if sent by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested. In
each case notice shall be sent to the respective Parties as follows:
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
Consultant
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
City
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
City Clerk
City of South San Francisco
400 Grand Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
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 Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, and F represents the entire and integrated
agreement between City and Consultant and supersedes all prior negotiations,
representations, or agreements, either written or oral pertaining to the matters herein.
Exhibit A Scope of Services
Exhibit B Task Order
Exhibit C Compensation Schedule
Exhibit D Reimbursable Expenses
Exhibit E Public Works Requirements
Exhibit F Form 590
10.13 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which
shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one agreement.
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
10.14 Construction. The headings in this Agreement are for the purpose of reference only and
shall not limit or otherwise affect any of the terms of this Agreement. The parties have had
an equal opportunity to participate in the drafting of this Agreement; therefore any
construction as against the drafting party shall not apply to this Agreement.
10.15 No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made solely for the benefit of the
Parties hereto with no intent to benefit any non-signatory third parties.
The Parties have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date.
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO CONSULTANT
____________________________ ______________________________
City Manager [NAME, TITLE]
Attest:
____________________________
Krista Martinelli, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
____________________________
City Attorney
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
.
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
EXHIBIT B
TASK ORDER
On-Call Consulting Services Agreement
TASK ORDER ##
This Task Order pertains to the On-Call Consulting Services Agreement by and between the City of South
San Francisco ("City"), and [CONSULTANT FIRM NAME] ("CONSULTANT"), dated [AGREEMENT
EFFECTIVE DATE] ("the Agreement"). Task Order ## is generally described as:
1. Sub-task 1.
2. Sub-task 2.
3. Sub-task 3, etc.
Consultant shall perform the Consulting Services on the Project described below as provided herein and in
the On-Call Consulting Services Agreement. This Task Order shall not be binding until it has been properly
signed by both parties. Upon execution, this Task Order shall supplement the Agreement as it pertains to
the Project described below.
PROJECT NAME: Project Name
TASK ORDER NUMBER: #:#
Project Budget: $ Amount - numbers
Task Order Scope: See attached, Attachment 1. [attach specific task scope and cost]
This Task Order is executed this ____ day of ____________, YEAR.
CONSULTANT FIRM NAME
Approved: _________________________________________ Date: _________________________
Name Title
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
Approved: _________________________________________ Date: _________________________
Brian McMinn, City Engineer/Public Works Director
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
EXHIBIT C
COMPENSATION SCHEDULE
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
EXHIBIT D
REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
EXHIBIT E
PROVISIONS REQUIRED FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS
I. HOURS OF WORK:
A. In accordance with California Labor Code Section 1810, eight (8) hours of labor in performance of
the services described in Exhibit A shall constitute a legal day’s work under this contract.
B. In accordance with California Labor Code Section 1811, the time of service of any worker
employed in performance of the services described in Exhibit A is limited to eight (8) hours during
any one (1) calendar day, and forty (40) hours during any one calendar week, except in
accordance with California Labor Code Section 1815, which provides that work in excess of eight
(8) hours during any one (1) calendar day and forty (40) hours during any one calendar week is
permitted upon compensation for all hours worked in excess of eight (8) hours during any one (1)
calendar day and forty (40) hours during any one (1) calendar week at not less than one-and-
one-half (1.5) times the basic rate of pay.
C. The Consultant and its subcontractors shall forfeit as a penalty to the City twenty five dollars
($25) for each worker employed in the performance of the services described in Exhibit A for
each calendar day during which the worker is required or permitted to work more than eight (8)
hours in any one (1) calendar day, or more than forty (40) hours in any one (1) calendar week, in
violation of the provisions of California Labor Code Section 1810, et seq..
II. WAGES:
A. In accordance with California Labor Code Section 1773.2, the Contractor and any subcontractors
shall pay not less than the general prevailing wages for each craft or type of work needed for
completion of the services described in Exhibit A, as published by the State of California
Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Statistics and Research. A copy of this
publication is on file in the City Public Works Office and shall be made available on request.
B. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1775, Contractor may be subject to a penalty of up to two
hundred dollars ($200) per day for each worker engaged in the performance of the services
described in Exhibit A that the Consultant or any subcontractor pays less than the specified
prevailing wage. The Consultant or subcontractor shall also pay the difference between the
prevailing wage rates and the amount paid to each worker for each calendar day or portion
thereof for which each worker was paid less than the prevailing wage rate.
C. Consultant shall comply with all of the following requirements:
1. contracts between the Consultant and the subcontractor for the performance of part of
the services described in Exhibit A shall include a copy of the provisions of California
Labor Code Sections 1771, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1813, and 1815.
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
2. The Consultant shall monitor payment of the specified general prevailing rate of per diem
wages by the subcontractor by periodic review of the subcontractor’s certified payroll
records.
3. Upon becoming aware of a subcontractor’s failure to pay the specified prevailing rate of
wages, the Consultant shall diligently take corrective action to halt or rectify the failure,
including, but not limited to, retaining sufficient funds due the subcontractor for
performance of the services described in Exhibit A.
4. Prior to making final payment to the subcontractor, the Consultant shall obtain an
affidavit signed under penalty of perjury from the subcontractor that the subcontractor
has paid the specified general prevailing rate of per diem wages for employees engaged
in the performance of the services described in Exhibit A and any amounts due pursuant
to California Labor Code Section 1813.
D. In accordance with California Labor Code Section 1776, the Consultant and each subcontractor
engaged in performance of the services described in Exhibit A shall keep accurate payroll
records showing the name, address, social security number, work, straight time and overtime
hours worked each day and week, and the actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman,
apprentice, worker, or other employee employed in performance of the services described in
Exhibit A. Each payroll record shall contain or be verified by a written declaration that it is made
under penalty of perjury, stating both of the following:
1. The information contained in the payroll record is true and correct.
2. The employer has complied with the requirements of Sections 1771, 1811, and 1815 for
any work performed by the employer’s employees on the public works project.
The payroll records required pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1776 shall be certified
and shall be available for inspection by the City and its authorized representatives, the Division of
Labor Standards Enforcement, the Division of Apprenticeship Standards of the Department of
Industrial Relations and shall otherwise be available for inspection in accordance with California
Labor Code Section 1776.
E. In accordance with California Labor Code Section 1777.5, the Consultant, on behalf of the
Consultant and any subcontractors engaged in performance of the services described in Exhibit
A, shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with California Labor Code Section 1777.5
governing employment and payment of apprentices on public works contracts.
EXHIBIT B
DR
A
F
T
EXHIBIT F
FORM 590
EXHIBIT B