HomeMy WebLinkAbout- - Park and Landscape RFP - 11/15/2011CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 15, 2011 ITEM NUMBER:
SUBJECT: PARK AND LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
DATE: NOVEMBER 4, 2011
FROM: OFFICE OF THE CEO
PRESENTATION BY: THOMAS R. HATCH, CEO
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: THOMAS R. HATCH @ (714) 754-5328
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize staff to release the Request for Proposal
(RFP) for Park and Landscape Services (Attachment 3) based upon the analysis provided by
both the Park and Landscape Services Contracting Committee and Public Services Department.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
Council Policy 100-6 provides guidelines for evaluating the potential contracting of on-going City
services on a long-term or permanent basis. As set forth in the policy, a committee was formed
and comprised of three segments: Project Responsibility, Department Representative and
Employee Representative. The committee was tasked with the following:
- Hearing a presentation from department representatives and asking questions about the
specific proposal under consideration;
- Working together to outline how to evaluate a comparable City effort to provide the same
or similar service;
- Having the project facilitator draft an analysis addressing the available alternatives for
service delivery as outlined by the committee; and,
- Determining if outside comparative data would be useful.
On October 3, 2011 the Park and Landscape Contracting Committee met to discuss the duties
and responsibilities of the Park and Landscape program and determine "the available
alternatives for service delivery." After hearing a presentation by department staff and asking
questions, the Contracting Committee determined the following alternatives for the Park and
Landscape program:
1. Maintain current service levels at current costs
2. Restore previous level of service at an increased cost
3. Contract all services with a private entity(s)
4. Contract a greater portion of service to a private entity
On October 13, 2011 and October 24, 2011, the Contracting Committee met to discuss, clarify
and finalize the alternatives/options and the draft RFP. The following is an explanation of the
attachments.
Attachment 1, a memo from the Contracting Committee to the City CEO Tom Hatch, provides
identification and analysis of each alternative and survey information provided by other
agencies.
Attachment 2, a memo from the Interim Public Services Director Ernesto Munoz to the City CEO
Tom Hatch, provides a written evaluation (including pros and cons) of each option addressed by
the Contracting Committee.
Attachment 3, the draft RFP for Park and Landscape Services, prepared by the Public Services
Department and reviewed and finalized by the Contracting Committee.
Based on the attached information it appears that the most viable alternatives are to retain the
existing service level but at a lower cost through reorganization or contracting with either a
public entity or private company for services. It is difficult to determine which of these
alternatives would provide the highest level of service at the lowest cost without issuing an RFP
so that appropriate cost analysis and comparisons in level of service can be made.
A few items should be noted with regard to the draft RFP. While we have identified in the draft
RFP the current level of expected service, we have done so on the assumption that the Council
wishes to retain the existing level of service, whoever provides it. However, the draft also
includes a specific request to proposers to identify "innovative and/or creative approaches for
providing the service that will maximize efficient, cost-effective operations or increase
performance capabilities." This would allow the Council to evaluate either a different level of
service, method of delivery, or other alternative that could maintain or enhance service levels at
a lower overall cost. The RFP also requests proposers to offer information about hiring existing
city employees and possible acquisition of City equipment currently used to perform the service.
Also note, that employees or groups of employees, who wish to submit a proposal in response
to the RFP, will be permitted to do so. Staff recommends that employees who wish to submit
bids or responses to RFPs as contract providers, should be advised to do so in compliance with
the RFP requirements and at the same time as other bidders.
As directed under Council Policy 100-6, the above is an analysis addressing the available
alternatives for service delivery as outlined by the Park and Landscape Services Contracting
Committee.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
The City Council may decide not to release the RFP and direct the CEO to evaluate other
alternatives identified by the Park and Landscape Services Contracting Committee.
FISCAL REVIEW:
The fiscal impact for outsourcing the identified City service is unknown at this time. If the City
Council directs staff to release the RFP a complete analysis of the proposals and the costs for
each will be provided to the City Council at that time.
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends releasing the RFP for Park and Landscape Services based upon the analysis
provided by both the Park and Landscape Services Contracting Committee and the Public
Services Department.
E
Thomas R. Hatch
Chief Executive Officer
Attachment: Attachment 1
Attachment 2
Attachment 3
Bobby Young
Finance and IT Director
Contract Committee Analvsis Memo
Departmental Analysis
Draft Request for Proposal