HomeMy WebLinkAboutMendocino County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) 2011-05-18MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN
THE MENDOCINO COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY
FORMATION COMMISSION AND THE CITY OF
UKIAH FOR PREPARATION OF CITY OF UKIAH
MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW
This Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") is entered in Ukiah, California, on
2011 ("Effective Date") between the Mendocino County Local Agency
Formation Commission ("LAFCO") and the City of Ukiah ("City"). This MOU may refer
to LAFCO and the City as a "Party" or as "the Parties."
RECITALS:
1. By January 1, 2008, and every five years thereafter, LAFCO is required by
Government Code Section 56425 to review and update spheres of influence ("SOIs") for
cities and districts in Mendocino County.
2. Government Code Section 56430 requires LAFCO to complete municipal
service reviews ("MSRs") to use in performing the five year updates required by
Government Code Section 56425.
3. LAFCO has not completed MSRs for the City or the districts in the Ukiah
Valley area.
4. In 1995 the City adopted a revised General Plan which proposed to revise its
SOI as depicted on the map attached as Exhibit A in the RFP, which would effectively
reduce its SOI from its previously approved boundaries.
5. The City plans to submit its application to LAFCO to determine its SOI as
proposed in the City's General Plan, but according to LAFCO policy LAFCO will not act
on that application until an MSR covering the City and its proposed SOI has been
completed and approved by LAFCO.
6. The City has proposed to pay for a qualified consultant to prepare a single MSR
covering all City services within the City and its proposed SOI ("City Only MSR") for
consideration and approval by LAFCO.
7. LAFCO saw the City's proposal as an opportunity to leverage any funds the
City provides for a City Only MSR to complete the preparation of MSRs for the districts
in the Ukiah Valley area. Thus, the ad hoc committee developed Part 1 and Part 2 of the
RFP to separately address the City Only MSR and MSRs for special districts in the Ukiah
Valley Area.
8. Based on the City's proposal, on January 10, 2011, the Commission appointed
three commissioners to an ad hoc committee for the purpose of developing a Request for
Proposal (RFP) for an MSR for the City and for the Ukiah Valley area. The LAFCO
Executive officer and a City staff person provided support and input to the committee.
9. With some additions, on February 7, 2011, the Commission approved the ad
hoc committee's proposed RFP, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as
Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference, and issuance of the RFP to solicit
proposals from qualified consultants.
10, On March 16, 2011, the City Council approved the RFP and issuance of the
RFP to solicit proposals from qualified consultants.
11. The purpose of this MOU is to memorialize the terms under which the City
will fund and LAFCO will consider for adoption a City Only MSR.
AGREEMENT:
In consideration of and reliance upon the above -recitals and the terms and
conditions as stated below, the Parties agree as follows.
1. Subject to the provisions of this MOU, the solicitation of consultants, the
award of a contract to a consultant and the review and approval of the draft and final City
Only MSR shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the RFP.
2. Before LAFCO issues the RFP, the City shall have a reasonable opportunity to
review the proposed list of consultants and to request the addition of any consultants not
on the list. LAFCO shall send the RFP to any of the consultants requested by the City.
3. The approved compensation for the City Only MSR shall be based on time and
expenses, the rates for which are clearly set forth in the contract, not -to -exceed a
guaranteed maximum dollar amount based on a detailed scope of work.
4. In defining the scope of work for Part 1, the City shall have the opportunity to
provide input to the ad hoc committee. A maximum of two City representatives shall also
have the opportunity to participate in the interviews of the consultants who submitted top
ranked proposals for Part 1 and to provide input during the contract negotiations
conducted by the committee of the chosen consultant(s).
S. The City shall not be responsible for payment of any work performed by the
consultant that is not set forth in the approved scope of work unless the City and the
committee approves such additional work in advance.
6. The ad hoc committee will recommend a consultant and contract terms to the
Commission. The Commission must then consider and approve the consultant contract,
scope of work and guaranteed maximum cost. LAFCO shall not award a contract for the
City only MSR, unless the City Council, in the sole exercise of its discretion, concurs
2
with the Commission's approval of the consultant, the contract and the scope of work.
Any decision to amend, suspend or terminate the consultant agreement approved by the
Parties will require the approval of the City Council and the Commission.
7. Unless subject to a timely objection by the City, it shall pay all ad hoc
committee approved consultant invoices within 30 days of receipt from LAFCO.
Approved invoices shall be submitted to the City Manager and payment should be sent
directly to LAFCO who will be responsible for transmitting payment to the consultant.
LAFCO will copy the City Manager on the payment transmittal. The City shall notify
LAFCO in writing of any objections to the invoice within 10 days of receipt of the
invoice from LAFCO.
8. This MOU, including the attached RFP, contains the entire agreement between
LAFCO and the City concerning the preparation of the City Only MSR and the City's
obligation to pay the consultant's fees and expenses.
9. This MOU may be amended, if the amendment is approved by the
Commission and the City Council and signed by authorized representatives of the Parties.
10. Any notice, payment or other communication required or permitted under this
MOU shall be deemed given and received, if personally delivered, sent by fax or email or
48 hours after deposit in the United States Mail with first class postage affixed thereto
and sent to:
LAFCO
Attention: Frank McMichael, E.O.
CITY
Attention: Jane Chambers, City Manager
11. This MOU may be executed in duplicate originals bearing original signatures.
Each such document shall be admissible in any administrative or judicial proceeding as
evidence of the terms of this agreement.
WHEREFORE, the Parties have entered this MOU on the Effective Date.
LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION
COMMISSION
, Chairman
CITY OF UKIAH
Mari Rodin, Mayor
LAFCO OF MENDOCINO COUNTY
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW
I. REOUEST FOR PROPOSAL
Part One:
As described below, the Local Agency Formation Commission of Mendocino County
("LAFCO"), is seeking the services of a qualified and experienced consultant to prepare a
Municipal Service Review ("MSR") for the City of Ukiah in accordance with the requirements of
Government Code Sections 56430 and 56425. The City will pay for the City only MSR that will
be completed under LAFCO supervision.
Part Two:
As further described below, depending on cost, LAFCO, in addition, may contract and pay for
MSRs covering certain special districts in the Ukiah Valley area. Therefore proposals are
requested to provide separate budgets for Part One and Part Two.
Proposals that demonstrate that the final product will meet the requirements provided below and
the Cortese Knox Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act (CKH); that provide useful
information in a concise format at the lowest cost will be looked upon favorably. A final budget
amount for each will be negotiated with the firm selected for the work prior to an agreement
being recommended for adoption. LAFCO and the City will need to agree on the budget for Part
One and LAFCO will need to agree on the budget for Part Two.
For Part One, an ad hoc committee consisting of three LAFCO commissioners was created by the
Conunission. The ad hoc committee together with LAFCO staff and City staff (collectively, "the
committee") have been charged with developing the RFP, reviewing the proposals and
interviewing potential consultants for the City Report. Once a CONSULTANT is selected, the
cormnittee will administratively review all submittals prior to any public release.
For Part Two, the ad hoc committee together with LAFCO staff will perform these tasks.
II. AGENCY INFORMATION
Mendocino LAFCO
LAFCO serves as the local agency formation commission for Mendocino County pursuant to the
Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act (Gov't Code Sections 56000 et
seq.). Government Code Section 56430 requires LAFCO to complete MSRs for the municipal
services provided by local governments in Mendocino County, in order to establish or update
spheres of influence ("SOI") in the County in accordance with Gov't Code §56425.
There are 50 independent special districts and four cities in Mendocino County. Mendocino
LAFCO is comprised of seven members; two members appointed by the Board of Supervisors,
two members from cities appointed by the City Select Committee, two members elected by the
districts and one public member appointed by the other six members. In addition, each category
has an alternate; therefore there are a total of eleven conunissioners. Under LAFCO policy,
alternate commissioners are "encouraged to take an active role in LAFCO business including
discussions and deliberations on project proposals"; one of the members of the ad hoc committee
is an alternate. The LAFCO Executive Officer functions as the primary analyst and developer of
reports and studies.
City of Ukiah
The City of Ukiah is a full service, general law city incorporated in 1876; it is approximately 4.2
square miles in size with approximately 15,873 inhabitants. It has a five person city council and a
five person planning commission. One of the City Council members is a LAFCO Commissioner.
The City operates its own police department, fire department and electrical, water and wastewater
utilities. It owns and operates an airport, electrical distribution facilities and interests in power
generating facilities, including a hydroelectric generating plant at Lake Mendocino, a water
treatment plant, a recently upgraded and expanded wastewater treatment plant ("WWTP"), a
currently closed landfill that is being considered for re -opening, a golf course and various parks, a
conference center and a museum. It is the County seat and commercial and social -cultural anchor
for the larger Ukiah Valley community.
In 1995 the City adopted a revised General Plan which proposed its SOI to be as depicted on the
map attached hereto as Exhibit A ("1995 General Plan Proposed SOI"). At the time of the
completion of the General Plan the City did not request LAFCO to determine the SOI as adopted
by the General Plan. The City is now requesting such a deternunation; thus the designated
geographical area for the Part One review described below is the City's jurisdictional boundaries
and the proposed 1995 General Plan SOI.
City SOI and Districts
The Ukiah Valley Sanitation District (UVSD) includes territory within the City limits and
the 1995 proposed SOI. The District generally surrounds the City on the North, East and South.
The City contracts pursuant to a "Participation Agreement" with the UVSD to provide sewer
service to the District. Under the Participation Agreement the City operates the entire sewer
system, including the City owned WWTP and collection system and the District owned collection
system as one system with the City and the District sharing the costs proportionally.
The 1995 SOI would also include some territory which is currently within the Millview County
Water District (MCWD) to the north of the City, the Willow County Water District (WCWD) to
the south of the City, and the Ukiah Valley Fire Protection District (UVFPD) which surrounds
the City on all but the West side.
The City and UVFPD have a mutual aid and response agreement with each other; plus a Fire
Protection and Emergency Services Master Plan has been mutually developed for the two
agencies.
The Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District (RRFC)
overlays the City's boundaries and the several districts. RRFC has water rights to 8,000 AFY
obtained from Lake Mendocino. Lake Mendocino water comes from two sources; the watershed
above the Lake and from water diverted to the East Fork of the Russian River from the Eel River
via the Potter Valley Project which provides water to PG&E for a hydroelectric facility. The City
has its own water rights, however the City also contracts for water from RRFC.
2
In addition to their own water rights, RRFC also provides water via contract to Millview CWD
and Willow CWD. These two agencies provide only water services. Due to limited capacity,
Millview CWD is under a Department of Public Health restriction for additional connections.
Because these districts are partially located within the City's proposed SOI, they are affected
agencies as defined by G.C. 56014; thus they necessarily must be included in the Part One
review. It is anticipated that because of the necessity of some review of these agencies for the Part
One effort, additional add-on effort could provide the opportunity to complete an MSR that
would include the above indicated agencies and four others.
Other Districts
Calpella CWD (CC") boundaries begin approximately two miles North of the City's present
boundaries; all of its territory is within RRFC boundaries. Calpella provides water and
wastewater services. Calpella operates and manages its own wastewater treatment plant but does
not have a water treatment plant; it receives raw water via contract from RRFC which is
"finished" by Millview CWD via contract. Millview limits the amount of finished water provided
to Calpella; this amount is presently being fully utilized
Redwood Valley CWD (RVCWD) is in Redwood Valley to the north of the Ukiah Valley. Part of
its territory is within the RRFC boundaries and all of its territory is within the place of use for
RRFC's permit. Redwood Valley CWD has its own water rights and may receive some surplus
water from RRFC. It has a court ordered moratorium for additional connections because of lack
of capacity.
Hopland Public Utilities District (HPUD) is in the Sanel Valley to the South of the Ukiah Valley.
Its territory is within RRFC's boundaries and place of use; it also receives water from RRFC via
contract. Hopland PUD provides water and wastewater services; it owns and operates water and
wastewater treatment plants.
Potter Valley Irrigation District (PVID) is in Potter Valley which is generally Northeast of the
Ukiah Valley. PVID is not within the boundaries of RRFC; it provides only irrigation water.
PVID has water rights from the Eel River via the Potter Valley Project. Because it is within the
watershed of the Russian River and Lake Mendocino and because of the critical nature of the
Project water to the Ukiah Valley; it is being included in Part Two.
There is an emergency water intertie agreement/connection between the following agencies: City
of Ukiah, Redwood Valley CWD, Calpella CWD, Millview CWD, and Willow CWD.
The following maps are attached: Exhibit B; Water Districts within the Mendocino County
Portion of the Russian River Watershed; Exhibit C; Wastewater Treatment Agencies Within the
Ukiah Valley; Exhibit D; Ukiah Valley Fire Agencies.
II. MSR REQUIREMENTS
The Gov't Code §56430 requires that LAFCO complete an MSR to develop baseline information
for establishing or updating spheres of influence as required by Gov't Code Section 56425. The
MSR must be done before or in conjunction with the adoption or updating of SOIs. The statute
sets forth the requirement that the commission prepare six written determinations to include: (1)
Growth and population projections for the affected area; (2) Present and planned capacity of
public facilities including infrastructure needs or deficiencies; (3) Financial ability of agencies to
provide services; (4) Status of, and opportunities for, shared facilities; (5) Accountability for
community service needs, including governmental structure and operational efficiencies; (6) Any
other matter related to effective or efficient service delivery required by commission policy.
LAFCO has not adopted specific policies related to effective or efficient service delivery.
Subsection (b) also requires the commission to "comprehensively review all of the agencies that
provide the identified services within the designated geographical area."
When the commission determines the SOI of each local agency, G.C. 56425 requires four written
determinations: (1) The present and planned land uses in the area; including agricultural and
open -space lands; (2)The present and probable need for public facilities and services in the area;
(3) The present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services that the agency
provides or is authorized to provide; (4) The existence of any social or economic communities of
interest in the area if the commission determines that they are relevant to the agency.
Additionally, when determining the SOI for a district, information specifying the functions or
classes of services provided and the nature, location and extent of these functions or classes of
services is required. Thus, the Part Two MSR should detail this information.
The County of Mendocino has a redevelopment agency that may include some portion of the
City's proposed SOL The information and content of the Part One MSR Report must be sufficient
to support the written determinations as required by Sections 56425 & 56430 and must be
sufficient to inform the commission as to the applicability or non -applicability of the
requirements of Section 56425.5 for the City's SOI or any other interests the County's
redevelopment agency may have.
Except as necessary to make the determinations, the Part One MSR should be limited to the
specific determinations required by Sections 56430 and 56425 and need not address conditions,
findings or detenninations that are addressed during reorganization proceedings, such as
annexations or detachments, including an evaluation of the financial or other impacts to the City
or the affected districts resulting from annexation or detachment of territory from each
jurisdiction's existing boundaries.
Further guidance on the preparation and approval of MSRs is contained in Service Review
Guidelines prepared by the Governor's Office of Planning and Research.
The Part One Report may consolidate sections, but should provide sufficient content to support
recommended determinations that indicate the required element to which they apply. The Part
Two Report should provide general or overview section(s) or chapters that provides information
and content that is common to the districts plus sections or chapters specific to the individual
agencies.
III. SCOPE OF SERVICES
The proposal should address Part One as described below and the additional tasks and costs
associated with Part Two .
Part One: City only MSR. The MSR must cover all of the City provided municipal services
both within the City and within the 1995 General Plan Proposed SOI. The MSR shall include
information about the Millview and Willow County Water Districts, Ukiah Valley Sanitation
District, the Ukiah Valley Fire District and Russian River Flood Control District to the extent
necessary to address the determinations required by Government Code Sections 56430 and
56425, if City services are to be extended within the 1995 Proposed General Plan SOI.
0
Part Two: Ukiah Valley Area MSR. In addition to reviewing the City of Ukiah, the project
may include reviewing and completing MSRs for the following public agencies: Redwood Valley
CWD, Millview CWD, Willow CWD, UVSD, Calpella CWD, Hopland PUD, UVFPD, PVII)
and RRFC. The Ukiah Valley Area MSR must provide sufficient information and content to
address the determinations required by Government Code Section 56430 and 56425 for the
present jurisdictional boundaries of these special districts. Upon completion of the MSR, LAFCO
will therefore be able to update the respective SOIs.
Because formal requests for SOIs beyond the present boundaries of these districts have not been
received by LAFCO, it is anticipated that the Part Two MSR study area will be limited to the
present jurisdictional boundaries of these districts. However, several districts have indicated the
possibility of submitting a request for SOIs to include additional territory beyond their
jurisdictional boundaries.
IV. TASKS
In completing all tasks and work products CONSULTANT recognizes that it is the express desire
of LAFCO to:
• Conduct the service review process in a collaborative fashion with opportunities for input
and review by each of the agencies being reviewed.
• Encourage public participation in the service review process
• Conduct the required analysis in the most cost effective manner possible.
• As described below in Task One (c), the consultant is expected to use any and all
available information relevant to the MSR. A list of draft documents and compiled
information which is available for review at LAFCO's office is attached to this RFP as
Exhibit E.)
Create a product that will be useful to the Commission in (1) reviewing and updating Spheres of
Influence and future proposals for changes of organization, (2) beneficial to agencies as a
planning tool, and (3) readily accessible to, and easily understandable by, the general public.
TASK 1 - Information Collection and Review
Perform the following tasks for the geographic area included in the City only MSR (Part
One) and for the geographic area included in Part Two:
a. Review all available information as to the applicability to current circumstances of the
agency(s)
b. If necessary prepare and distribute a supplemental survey instrument to be used in
conjunction with LAFCO's past Requests For Information (RFIs) which may be outdated
or propose alternative means for obtaining any additional information the Consultant
considers necessary. If surveys are proposed, distribute surveys and work with each
agency to ensure completion and collection of survey results.
c. Collect current relevant documents for each agency as may be appropriate, such as
applicable statutes, maps, master service plans, urban water management plans, sewer
system management plans, best practices plans, audits, budgets, regulatory and operating
permits, annual reports required by regulatory agencies, orders received from regulatory
agencies, engineering reports, other state department reports, county and city general
plans, area plans and other documents.
d. For the ad hoc committee's approval, either (1) develop a database or presentation format
to compile, display and compare relevant survey and other information that will assist in
understanding the service ability and capacity of each agency and in preparing
determinations and recommendations; or (2) propose an alternative means to accomplish
the same result with greater efficiency or less cost.
e. Communicate as necessary with LAFCO and City staff and representatives of each
affected agency to ensure that all necessary information is presented in a consistent
format.
f. Enter information collected into the database or presentation format or proposed alternate
and prepare an initial report to each affected agency which notes relevant information.
g. After ad hoc committee agreement, distribute the database report or proposed alternate to
each affected agency for review and verification or propose an alternate means for
insuring accuracy of information.
h. Prepare final report based on review and verification process.
Task 1 timing and work product: On or before (provide DATE) CONSULTANT shall deliver to
the ad hoc committee a final database report on all information collected and presented.
TASK 2 - Working Draft Reports
Part One: City of Ukiah Report
Prepare an administrative draft MSR that includes:
a. Information about the City's services, capacities, potential future demand and relevant
district information as appropriate to the determination categories and as appropriate to
the City's SOI territory sufficient to support any proposed determinations and
recorn mendations, including maps.
b. The database information or proposed alternate from Task 1.
c. Recommended written determinations for each of the factors in G.C. 56425 and 56430.
d. Recommendation for SOI update action.
e. Any recommendations for reorganization.
f. Following review by the ad hoc comrmittee, modify the administrative draft as needed.
Meet with committee as appropriate.
g. Distribute administrative draft to the City and affected agencies for review and written
comments.
h. Return City's comments to ad hoc committee for final review.
Task 2 timing and work product for Part One: On or before (consultant provide Date)
CONSULTANT shall deliver to the ad hoc committee a completed City of Ukiah administrative
report.
Part Two: Ukiah Valley Area Report
Prepare an administrative draft MSR that includes:
a. Information about the agency's services, capacities, potential future demand and other
appropriate information sufficient to support any proposed determinations including
maps.
b. The database information or proposed alternate from Task 1.
c. Recommended written determinations for each of the factors in G.C. 56425 and 56430.
d. Recommendations for SOI update action.
e. Any recommendations for consolidation or reorganization.
f. Following review by the ad hoc committee, modify the administrative draft as needed.
Meet with committee as appropriate.
6
g. Distribute administrative draft to affected agencies for review and written comment.
h. Return agency's comments to ad hoc committee for final review.
Task 2 timing and work product for Part Two: On or before (consultant provide Date)
CONSULTANT shall deliver to the ad hoc committee a completed districts administrative report.
TASK 3 - Public Draft Reports
Part One: City of Ukiah
a. Based on the written comments received from the City on the administrative draft report
and input from the ad hoc connnittee regarding City input, prepare a Public Review Draft
Report.
b. In conjunction with LAFCO staff and City staff, distribute the Public Review Draft
reports(s) to the Conunissioners, City Council and all affected agencies and interested
parties.
c. Receive and respond to written continents submitted within thirty days after the public
draft Report is provided to affected agencies and interested parties.
d. Present the public draft Report along with written comments and response to LAFCO for
review and comment at a public workshop and note additional comments.
Part One, Task 3 timing and work products: On or before (consultant provide DATE)
CONSULTANT shall deliver to the ad hoc committee the Public Review Draft report containing
draft determinations and recommendations. Attend and make presentations at one City of Ukiah
Task 3 public workshop.
Part Two: Ukiah Valley Area Report
a. Based on the written comments received from agency(s) on the administrative draft
reports and input from the ad hoc committee regarding agency input, prepare a Public
Review Draft Report.
b. In conjunction with LAFCO staff distribute the Public Review Draft reports(s) to the
Commissioners, all affected agencies and interested parties.
c. Receive and respond to written comments submitted within thirty days after the public
draft Report is provided to agencies and interested parties.
d. Present the public draft Report along with written comments and responses to LAFCO
for review and continent at a public workshop and note additional comments.
Part Two, Task 3 timing and work products: On or before (consultant provide DATE)
CONSULTANT shall deliver to the ad hoc committee the Public Review Draft report containing
draft determinations and recommendations. Attend and make presentations at one Ukiah Valley
Area Task Three workshop.
TASK Four: Final Draft Reports
Part One: City of Ukiah
Based on the information and input received at the LAFCO workshop on the Public Draft and any
written comments prepare a Final Report containing:
a. A cover and Table of Contents
b. Executive Sununary
c. Agency information as updated including any applicable maps
d. Content and information from Task Two, updated as necessary
e. Recommendations for written determinations
f. Recommendation for SOI
g. Any recommendations for Reorganization
h. Present the Final Draft Report to the Commission for adoption at a noticed public
hearing.
Based on input received at the LAFCO noticed public hearing, prepare an Approved Final Report.
Part Two: Ukiah Valley Area Report
Based on the information and input received at the LAFCO workshop on the Public Draft and any
written connnents prepare a Final Report containing:
a. A cover and Table of Contents
b. Executive Summary
c. Agency information as updated including any applicable maps
d. Content and information from Task Two, updated as necessary
e. Recommendations for written determinations
f. Recommendation for SOIs
g. Any Recommendations for Reorganization or consolidation.
h. Present the Final Draft Report to the Commission for adoption at a noticed public
hearing.
i. Based on input received at the LAFCO noticed public hearing, prepare and Approved
Final Report.
V. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS
Responses to the RFP must include the following:
1. A statement about the firm that describes the history, competencies and resumes of
principal and all professionals who will be involved in the work. This statement shall
address the following:
• A management level understanding of how the full ranges of municipal services
are financed and delivered.
• A familiarity with the CKH Act, the role and function of LAFCOs, and the
service review process.
• Experience with the operations of Cities and water, wastewater and fire districts.
• Experience in govermnental organization analysis, including performance
measurement and evaluation.
• Ability to facilitate and synthesize input from a variety of services.
• Ability to interpret varied budget and planning documents.
• Experience in identifying and fostering multi -agency cooperation.
• Public input processes and handling the presentation and dissemination of
information to local agencies and the public for review and comment.
• Ability to work cooperatively with divergent interests.
2. Identification of the lead professional responsible for the project and identification of the
professionals who will be performing the day-to-day work.
3. Identification of any sub -consultants who will be involved. If sub -consultants are
proposed, describe the work they will perform and include the same information for each
sub -consultant as required in items 1 and 2.
4. A statement of similar or related experience accomplished in the last three years and
references for each project, including the contact name, address and telephone number.
5. Description of the anticipated approach for this project, explicitly discussing any
suggested changes to the Scope of Services or the proposed tasks that will improve
efficiency or reduce cost.
6. Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest with local agencies in the study area(s) and
Mendocino County.
7. Identification of any information, materials and/or work assistance required from LAFCO
and City staff to complete the project.
8. Project Schedule including timing of each work task.
9. Information about the availability of all of the professionals who will be involved in the
work, including any sub -consultants.
10. The anticipated cost including:
• A not -to -exceed total budget amount for Part One
• A not -to -exceed total budget amount for Part Two.
• The Cost for each major task identified in the Scope of Services provided
according to Part One and Part Two tasks.
• The hourly rates for each person who will be involved in the work, including the
rates for sub -consultants.
11. One copy of a completed MSR which your firm has prepared that has been accepted and
adopted by a LAFCO agency.
VI. SCHEDULE
The MSR is needed for SOI updates which Government Code Section 54625 required LAFCO to
complete by January 1, 2008. The proposal need not include overtime or other costly measures to
accelerate the schedule for completing the work. The consultant should submit a work plan and
time schedule for completion of the project within a reasonable time. The City would like to
complete the City only MSR (Part One) by the summer of 2011. Part Two completion can occur
after this time.
VII. NUMBER OF MEETINGS AND DELIVERABLES
A. Meetings.
The proposal should include at least 2 meetings with the ad hoc committee for Part 1 and 2
meetings for Part 2 while collecting information and preparing the analysis. Meetings shall occur
as necessary with the respective agencies and the Executive Officer while collecting information
and preparing the analysis. The proposal should include participation in at least 2 public hearings
or workshops for Part 1 and 2 for Part 2. The proposal should include a basis for charging for
additional meetings as may be needed and shall include a basis for crediting meetings that did not
occur. The proposal may include options and alternatives regarding meetings, such as
teleconferencing for committee meetings.
B. Deliverables.
As indicated in the Scope of Services above. All deliverables shall be submitted in hardcopy and
electronic format (Word and PDF).
VIII. OPTIONAL PRE -PROPOSAL MEETING
Interested consultants are encouraged to attend a pre -proposal meeting to be held on April 28,
2011, at 1:30 p.m. at City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave., Conference Room 3, Ukiah, CA. 95482.
Interested consultants may participate by telephone. If interested in calling in, contact the
LAFCO Executive Officer for details (707 463 4470). At the meeting, the committee will provide
information which may be helpful in preparing a focused proposal, and will also attempt to
answer questions.
No statements at the meeting by the committee or others will be deemed to alter the terms of this
RFP, unless included in a formal written addendum to the RFP issued after the meeting.
The LAFCO ad hoc committee or its Executive Officer as directed by the committee, will
respond in writing to any written questions submitted by interested consultants before May 3,
2011. Copies of any written responses to questions from interested consultants will be circulated
to all consultants who have requested this RFP.
IX. EVALUATION PROCESS
Part 1
The ad hoc committee with a City representative will review the proposals, evaluate submissions,
contact references, and rank the proposals. The ad hoc committee will interview two or more of
the top ranked proposals. The ad hoc cormnittee may conduct additional negotiations with one or
more of the consultants interviewed. The ad hoc committee in consultation with the City staff will
recommend the award of the contract to the LAFCO Commission and the City Council, both of
which must approve the budget, total costs and award of the contract for Part One, City only
MSR.
Part 2
The ad hoc committee without a City representative will review the proposals, evaluate
submissions, contact references, and rank the proposals. The ad hoc conunittee will interview
two or more of the top ranked proposals. The ad hoc committee may conduct additional
negotiations with one or more of the consultants interviewed. The ad hoc committee will
recommend the award of the contract to the LAFCO Commission which must approve the
budget, total costs and award of the contract for Part Two, Ukiah Area MSR.
X. CONSULTANT SELECTION
The following attributes will be considered in determining the award of the contract:
1. Responsiveness and quality of proposal.
2. Expertise in writing MSRs and an ability to produce a clear, well -researched and
definitive product.
3. Ability to work with pertinent parties and knowledgeable experts.
XI. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
1. Insurance: Consultant must satisfy the insurance requirements set forth in Exhibit F
attached to this RFP.
2. Contract Provisions: LAFCO reserves the right to reject any and all proposals, waive any
irregularity in the proposals and/or conduct negotiations with any firms, whether or not
they have submitted a proposal.
10
XII. SUBMITAL
1. The deadline for submittal is no later than 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, May 17,
2011.
2. Six hard copies are required. However, in order to meet the deadline the proposal may be
emailed to the below address with follow-up delivery within 3 business days after the
deadline. Deliver to the Local Agency Formation Commission of Mendocino County,
Attention: Ad Hoc Committee, CIO Frank McMichael, Executive Officer, 200 S. School
St., Ukiah California 95482
3. Whether emailed or delivered, any proposal received after the deadline will not be
considered.
4. All hardcopy materials shall be submitted in a sealed envelope that is clearly marked with
the title of the RFP. All proposals, whether selected or rejected, shall become the
property of LAFCO for PART One and Two and additionally the City for Part One.
5. Proposals shall be signed by an authorized employee or officer of the consultant company
in order to receive consideration.
6. LAFCO is not responsible for proposals delivered to a person/location other than that
specified herein.
Any questions or requests for information concerning the MSR shall be in writing and may be
delivered by mail or email to: Frank McMichael, Executive Officer, 200 S. School St. Ukiah, CA
95482. Email: franklmmichael@ mendolafco.or,,. (707 463 4470). Unless minor, all questions or
requests for information will be referred to the ad hoc committee.
The RFP includes the following Exhibits:
• Exhibit A --Map of City of Ukiah's 1995 SOI
• Exhibit B --Water Districts Within the Mendocino County Portion of the Russian River
Watershed
• Exhibit C --Wastewater Agencies Within the Ukiah Valley
• Exhibit D --Ukiah Valley Fire Agencies
• Exhibit E --List of Documents and Compiled Information
• Exhibit F --Statement as to Insurance Requirements
Map Exhibits A, B, C & D are provided separate from this document. Exhibits E and F are
attached on the following pages.
11
r ice\ - 6e re4 4 10� v
co
co
CD
C Ll
0) O 10
ca
U V U Q U 0 =
O
._ N •� U ..LO.. O m
N
p CO
o LL U U
m Q L L _ o
Mn o -
0 O f6 .— O O
L U Q U E
L
f6 ' 3 , % m
x O
j o m co c a c ccu
fl� cn
3 0T)c o 3 N m N N 3�
a 2- Q ? '� o U)n to
a w v 122 C) �_ w w= a CD
0o G�\ aoaoo �x o®o i
i
� 1 1
1 � �
� � r
4-2
-V�
k l �
O
N
o
R
L
�
�
0
■
lk
VW
L
Uo
o� a
O
DC
r
fit)
L
or
�o
Pl r
U)
■
■
N=N
ss�2
Z
r ice\ - 6e re4 4 10� v
co
co
CD
C Ll
0) O 10
ca
U V U Q U 0 =
O
._ N •� U ..LO.. O m
N
p CO
o LL U U
m Q L L _ o
Mn o -
0 O f6 .— O O
L U Q U E
L
f6 ' 3 , % m
x O
j o m co c a c ccu
fl� cn
3 0T)c o 3 N m N N 3�
a 2- Q ? '� o U)n to
a w v 122 C) �_ w w= a CD
0o G�\ aoaoo �x o®o i
i
� 1 1
1 � �
� � r
4-2
-V�
k l �
N
o
R
-
o
lk
a
Uo
o� a
� O
r
fit)
or
�o
Pl r
3 U
a
N=N
ss�2
Z
,
i \
i
`= -�t33als
�
i
.f
w
3iais luaoN
1
\
,
o
LL
r
3 itiltili�tifi�(,
i
/
s�EEI
yot
'\
;%
i
LL
J
( EEI
O
z
� ; I
�J \
\I
m
1
be
�
A
s�
o
yJ
�
s 1
�
cs
o1
I
5oµ.
rc
I
o
\
I
r
,c Nom.
ypS50
pHJ Naas
z
/.-'
a '
J}r
w
0
2
O
W
�
I
-
-
-
�
w -L
1 i 7'M\1
-
`= -�t33als
�
.f
w
3iais luaoN
F- LL
o
LL
r
3 itiltili�tifi�(,
�
s�EEI
'\
;%
2 3Na11NIllOL
J
( EEI
O
z
be
�
A
s 1
�
/
-
-
-
d
lO
V ¢
y u
m
s�
`2
t
S
y onmmox+urma�omw
Y
— 1
f
� yp�R siRE� yt -
1 5 REEr \
( WSNs \f
+ w i
.? u
1 3
\ i
u
3
\ 5
/
t
i
f
�
�
r
d
lO
V ¢
y u
m
s�
`2
t
S
y onmmox+urma�omw
Y
— 1
f
� yp�R siRE� yt -
1 5 REEr \
( WSNs \f
+ w i
.? u
1 3
\ i
u
3
\ 5
/
f
-
d
lO
V ¢
y u
m
s�
`2
t
S
y onmmox+urma�omw
Y
— 1
f
� yp�R siRE� yt -
1 5 REEr \
( WSNs \f
+ w i
.? u
1 3
\ i
u
3
\ 5
Exhibit E
List of Draft Documents and Compiled Information
Water
Document Title Author/Preparer Date
Drinking Water Adequacy
Department of Health
Assessment
Services
April 2002
Ukiah Valley — Mendocino County
Drinking Water Field
Operations
Drinking Water Adequacy
Department of Public Health
Assessment
Drinking Water Field
Nov. 2007
Ukiah Valley — Mendocino County
Operations
(Draft)
Aquifer Characterization of the
Greystone Environmental
Masonite Plant Property Ukiah CA
Consultants Inc
Nov 2002
Ground -Water Resources
U.S. Geological Survey
July 1986
In Mendocino County California
California Department of
Water Resources and
Mendocino County
Redwood Valley Water Supply And
Carpenter & Mitchell
Sept 1965
Distribution
Consulting Engineers &
Surveyors
Engineering Report For
Department of Health
May 5. 1988
Consideration
Services
Of The Permit Application From
Public Water Supply Branch
Redwood Valley County Water
District
Irrigated Water Needs and
Prepared For Mendocino
July 2008
Management in the Mendocino
County
County Portion of the Russian River
UCCE County of Mendocino
Watershed
Urban Drought Guidebook (Draft)
State of California
Aug 2007
Department of Water
Resources
An Inventory of Water Use and
Sari Sommarstrom, Ph.D.
Sept 1986
Future Needs in the Russian River
Basin
Of Mendocino County
History of Development of the Water
Sonoma County Water
Feb. 2002
Resources of the Russian River
Agency
Robert Beach
12
Biological Opinion for Water Supply,
Sept. 2008
Flood Control Operations and
Channel Maintenance conducted by
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
the Sonoma County Water Agency
and the Mendocino County Russian
River Flood Control and Water
Conservation Improvement District in
the Russian River Watershed
Urban Water Management Plan
Ukiah Utilities
Nov 2002
2002 Update
Kennedy Jenks Consultants
Final City of Ukiah 2005 Urban
Brown and Caldwell
Nov 26, 2007
Water Management Plan
LAFCO Service Impact Report DDR
LAFCO Executive Officer
August 2009
Specific Plan
Interim Report
LAFCO Executive Officer
Feb. 7 2007
Ukiah Valley Russian River
Watershed
Municipal Service Review
Staff Report Russian River Watershed
State Water Resources
Aug 1997
Control Board Division of
Water Rights
City of Ukiah
Water Systems Engineering,
Feb. 9, 2007
Deposit Analysis Report
Inc.
Well No. 4
Russian River Watershed/Ukiah
LAFCO Executive Officer
Jan. 2010
Valley
Municipal Service Review
(Administrative Draft)
History of Development
3-Ring Binder containing
Russian River Watershed
various information about
watershed
The Russian River
Sonoma County Water
August 1996
An Assessment of Its Condition and
Agency
Governmental Oversight
Robert F. Beach
Amendment of Water Right Permit
Initial Study
May 2006
12952 (Application 15704) for the
Prepared by: Leonard Charles
City of Ukiah and Water Right
and Associates
License 492 and Permit 13936
(Application 3601 and 17587,
respectively) for Millview County
Water District
Engineering Analysis for Millview
Rau and Associates
Jan. 15, 2002
County Water District, Mendocino
Civil Engineers & Land
County, California
Surveyors
100 N. Pine St. Ukiah, CA
13
Redwood Valley Water Supply And
Carpenter & Mitchell
Sep, 1965
Distribution
Consulting Engineers &
By Executive Officer
Surveyors
Final Report
811 College Ave. Santa, Rosa
May 1993
Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade
CA
Engineering Report In The Matter of
Department of Health
May 1988
the Permit Application From
Services
Redwood Valley County Water
Public Water Supply Branch
District
Reservoir Regulation Manual For
U.S. Army Engineer District
April, 1959
Coyote Dam
San Francisco, California
County of Mendocino Draft
Terra Scan
Environmental Impact Report
Rural and Urban Planning
on the adoption of the
Environmental Consulting
March 1979
Redwood Valley — Calpella
Eureka, CA
Conservation Plan
Natural and Cultural Resources of the
Terra Scan
March 1979
Northern Ukiah and Redwood Valley
Rural and Urban Planning
Areas
Environmental Consulting
Eureka, CA
The Upper Russian River Watershed:
Alison Whipple
Winter 2004
A Hydrological Overview
Compilation of Water Information
Accumulated by LAFCO E.O. in 3 -
Ring Binder
Compilation of various information
3 -Ring Binder
about Russian River Permits from
Division of Water Rights, State Water
Resources Control Board
Accumulated by Executive Officer
Water Supply Assessment for the
Mendocino County Water
August, 2010
Ukiah Valley Area Plan (Draft)
Agency
Response letter to Water Supply
LAFCO Executive Officer
August 31,
Assessment for the Ukiah Valley
'2010
Area Plan
Wastewater
Document Title Author/Preparer Date
Compilation of Wastewater
3 -Ring Binder
Information
By Executive Officer
Final Report
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants
May 1993
Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade
Facilities Plan
City of Ukiah, California
14
Technical Memoranda for the
Brown and Caldwell
June 2003
Wastewater Treatment Plant
Improvement Project
Wastewater Collection System and
Kennedy Engineers
August 1977
Treatment Improvements
John B. Dykstra & Associates
Jan. 2003
City of Ukiah
And Seifel Consulting
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative
Scheidegger & Associates
May 2004
Declaration
In Association with Brown and
Wastewater Treatment Plant
Caldwell
Improvement Project
Ukiah Utilities
City of Ukiah & Ukiah Valley
LAFCO Executive Officer
June 2010
Sanitation District
Wastewater Service Review
(Draft—Not Adopted)
City of Ukiah
PMC
Sept. 2008
Ukiah Valley Sanitation District
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Wastewater Municipal Service Review
Suite 220
(Administrative Draft — Not Adopted)
Rancho Cordova, CA
2003 Flow Monitoring Study
June 24,
CyofTIah CA
T�-
2003it
Wastewater Treatment Plan
Improvement Project Planning Phase
Report — Technical Memorandum
Ukiah Valley Sanitation District
Ordinance 29
Sewer Lateral Testing Ordinance
City of Ukiah
Ordinance No. 1091
Sewer Lateral Ordinance
Participation Agreement Between The
July 19, 1995
City of Ukiah and The Ukiah Valley
Sanitation District
Final Report of the City of
Joint Ad Hoc Committee
August 2008
Ukiah/Ukiah Valley Sanitation District
Joint Ad Hoc Committee
Redevelopment
Document Title Author/Preparer Date
Redevelopment Plan For The
May 7, 2003
Mendocino County Redevelopment
Project Area
Mendocino County Redevelopment
John B. Dykstra & Associates
Jan. 2003
Project
And Seifel Consulting
Preliminary Report
15
Mendocino County Redevelopment
John B. Dykstra & Associates
Jan. 2003
Project
And Seifel Consulting
Preliminary Report Appendices
Wainwright & Ramsey Inc.
Sept. 1974
Mendocino County Redevelopment
John B. Dykstra & Associates
May 2003
Project
And Seifel Consulting
Report on the Redevelopment Plan
William R. Zion for Local
Fall 1984
Volume One
Agency Formation Commission
Mendocino County Redevelopment
John B. Dykstra & Associates
May 2003
Project
And Seifel Consulting
Report on the Redevelopment Plan
CWC -HDR, Inc.
Sept. 1986
Volume Appendices Volume Two
An HDR Infrastructure
Final Environmental Impact Report
County of Mendocino and the
May 3003
For the Proposed Redevelopment
Redevelopment Agency of
Project
Mendocino Count
Final Report
Economics and Planning
March 2007
Reorganization or Other Studies
Document Title Author/Preparer Date
2007/2008 Mendocino County Grand
June 30, 2008
Jury Final Report
Spheres of Influence of Cities and
Wainwright & Ramsey Inc.
Sept. 1974
Special Districts of Mendocino
Consultants on Municipal
County
Finance
Mendocino County
William R. Zion for Local
Fall 1984
Sphere of Influence Study
Agency Formation Commission
Ukiah Valley Wide Task Force
Ukiah Valley Wide Task Force
Oct. 1991
Report and Recommendations
Feasibility Study for Consolidation of
CWC -HDR, Inc.
Sept. 1986
Water Services in the Ukiah Valley
An HDR Infrastructure
for
Company
Mendocino County LAFCO
3461 Robin Land
Cameron Park, California
Final Report
Economics and Planning
March 2007
Ukiah Valley Growth Prospects
Systems
Berkeley, California
Joint Powers Agreement for Inland
Sept 1996
Water and Power Commission
10
City of Ukiah Documents
nnn»maf Titles A nthnr/PrPnarPr Date.
City of Ukiah
Planning and Community
Adopted
General Plan
Development Department
December 1995
Growth Management Plan
City of Ukiah
Amended June,
Volume I
16, 2004
General Plan Housing Element
PMC
2009-2014
Update
1590 Drew Avenue, Suite 120
Revised Draft Environmental
Leonard Charles & Associates
October 2002
Impact Report
7 Roble Court
Orr Creek Bridge and Orchard
San Anselmo, California
Avenue Extension Project
Preliminary Drainage and Utility
Prepared for:
Sept. 12, 2008
Servicing Study
Beverly Prior Architects
Criminal Justice Center Feasibility
222 Sutter Street, 9th Floor
Study at Brush Street Triangle
San Francisco, CA
Ukiah, Mendocino County, CA
Prepared By:
Rau And Associates, Inc.
Ukiah, California
City of Ukiah Storm Water
City of Ukiah
Feb. 28, 2006
Management Plan
Department of Public Works
City of Ukiah
Harris & Associates
July 7, 2004
Pavement Management Program
Update Final Report
Ukiah Municipal Airport
Shutt Moen Associates
Adopted by
Master Plan Report
Santa Rosa, California
City July
3,1996
Preliminary Draft
City of Ukiah
March 2007
City MSR Plus Additional
Information (Not Adopted)
Ukiah Police Strategic Plan 2010-
2015
City of Ukiah Budgets
Years as
needed
County of Mendocino Documents
llnm�mant Titla Anthnr/PrPnn nr late
County of Mendocino
PMC
Feb. 2009
General Plan Update
1590 Drew Avenue, Suite 120
Final Environmental Impact Report
Davis, CA
Volume I
County of Mendocino
PMC
Feb. 2009
General Plan Update
1590 Drew Avenue, Suite 120
Final Environmental Impact Report
Davis, CA
Volume II -A
17
County of Mendocino
PMC
Feb. 2009
General Plan Update
1590 Drew Avenue, Suite 120
2007
Final Environmental Impact Report
Davis, CA
Volume II -B
General Plan Update &
PMC
Environmental Impact Report
1590 Drew Avenue, Suite 120
2/22/2010
Comment and Response Matrix
Davis, CA
Feb. 2009
Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
Entrix, Inc.
Nov 2006
Mill Creek Project
590 Ygnacio Valley Road,
Mendocino County
Suite 200
Walnut Creek, CA
Traffic Impact Study for the
Whitlock and Weinberger
Oct. 28, 2009
Pinoleville Pomo Nation Rancheria
Transportation, Inc.
Casino in the County of Mendocino
490 Mendocino Ave. Suite 201
Santa Rosa, CA
County of Mendocino
Mendocino County Planning
December
Draft Ukiah Valley Area Plan
Department and Building
2010
(WAP)
Services
501 Low Gap Road
Ukiah, CA
Draft Program EIR (DEIR) for the
Feb. 7, 2011
Draft 2007 Ukiah Valley Area Plan
(WAP)
Fire
Document Title Author/Preparer Date
Future Fire Service Organization
For The Ukiah Valley
Bi Lice P. Evans
Spring
1974
Ukiah, California
Emergency Services Consulting, Inc.
2007
Master Plan
Fire Protection and Emergency
Services — Final Report
Response by City of Ukiah to:
2/22/2010
Ukiah Valley Fire Municipal
Service Review General
Information Questionnaire plus
Associated Documents
Special Districts
Document Title Author Date
Potter Valley Irrigation District Aug 2008
MSR RFI Questionnaire Return
Plus Additional Information
Millview County Water District
2005-2006
RFI Questionnaire Return Plus
Additional Information
Millview CWD Master Service
Rau and Associates, Inc.
Dec 1993
Element for
Willow County Water District
Oct 2003
MSR RFI Questionnaire Plus
Additional Information
Calpella County Water District
Oct 2003
MSR RFI Questionnaire for Plus
Additional Information
Redwood Valley CWD
MSR RFI Questionnaire Plus
Additional Information
19
Exhibit F
LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION AND CITY OF UKIAH
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSULTANTS
Consultant(s) shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against
claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in
connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant(s), his agents,
representatives, or employees.
A. Minimum Scope of Insurance
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. Insurance Services Office ("ISO) Commercial General Liability
Coverage Form No. CG 20 10 10 01 and Commercial General Liability
Coverage — Completed Operations Form No. CG 20 37 10 01.
2. ISO Form No. CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, Code
1 "any auto" or Code 8, 9 if no owned autos and endorsement CA 0025.
3. Worker's Compensation Insurance as required by the Labor Code of the
State of California and Employers Liability Insurance.
4. Errors and Omissions liability insurance appropriate to the consultant's
profession and the scope of work.
B. Minimum Limits of Insurance
Consultant shall maintain limits no less than:
General Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for
bodily injury, personal injury and property damage including operations,
products and completed operations. If Commercial General Liability
Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, the
general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work performed
under this Agreement, or the aggregate limit shall be twice the prescribed
per occurrence limit.
2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for
bodily injury and property damage.
3. Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability: Worker's
compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of
California and Employers Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident.
4. Errors and Omissions liability: To be determined based on the scope of
work.
W
C. Deductibles and Self -Insured Retentions
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by
the LAFCO. At the option of the LAFCO, either the insurer shall reduce or
eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects to LAFCO, the
City of Ukiah ("City"), and their officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or
the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related
investigations, claim administration and defense expenses.
D. Other Insurance Provisions
The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
General Liability and Automobile Liability Coverages
a. LAFCO, the City, and their officers, officials, employees and
volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds as respects;
liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the
Consultant, products and completed operations of the
Consultant, premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant,
or automobiles owned, hired or borrowed by the Consultant for
the full period of time allowed by law, surviving the termination
of this Agreement. The coverage shall contain no special
limitations on the scope -of -protection afforded to the LAFCO,
the City, and their officers, employees or volunteers.
b. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance
as respects to LAFCO, the City, and their officers, officials,
employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance
maintained by LAFCO, the City, and their officers, employees or
volunteers shall be in excess of the Consultant's insurance and
shall not contribute with it.
C. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies
shall not affect coverage provided to the LAFCO, the City, and
their officers, employees or volunteers.
d. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured
against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with
respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.
2. Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage
The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against
LAFCO, the City, and their officers, officials, employees and volunteers
for losses arising from Consultant's performance of the work, pursuant to
this Agreement.
21
3. Professional Liability Coverage
If written on a claims -made basis, the retroactivity date shall be the
effective date of this Agreement. The policy period shall extend from
the retroactivity date to one year following completion of services under
the Agreement.
4. All Coverages
Each Insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state
that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party,
reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days prior written
notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to
LAFCO and the City.
E. Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with admitted California insurers with an A.M. Best's
rating of no less than A- for financial strength, AA for long-term credit rating and
AMB -1 for short-term credit rating.
F. Verification of Coverage
Consultant shall furnish the LAFCO and the City with Certificates of Insurance
and with original Endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement.
The Certificates and Endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by
a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The
Certificates and Endorsements are to be on forms provided or approved by
LAFCO. All Certificates and Endorsements are to be received and approved by
LAFCO before Consultant begins the work of this Agreement. The LAFCO and
the City reserve the right to require complete, certified copies of all required
insurance policies, at any time. If Consultant fails to provide the coverages
required herein, LAFCO and the City shall have the right, but not the obligation,
to purchase any or all of them. In that event, after notice to Consultant that
LAFCO or the City has paid the premium, the cost of insurance may be deducted
from the compensation otherwise due the contractor under the terms of this
Contract.
G. Subcontractors
Consultant shall include all sub -contractors or sub -consultants as insured under
its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each sub-
contractor or sub -consultant. All coverage for sub -contractors or sub -consultants
shall be subject to all insurance requirements set forth in these insurance
requirements.
