|
City of Pleasanton | Stormwater System Management Plan | PWD 25.601 | PAGE 23
<br />Deliverables: Recommendations to meet/maintain MRP compliance
<br />7.2 – Permit Planning
<br />Wood Rodgers’ team, including Geosyntec, will utilize the approach identified in the ACCWP C.5.f template to assist the City with
<br />MRP3 C.5.f.iii.2. This includes the identification of data gaps from the City's existing GIS which can be collected over the course of
<br />the SWMP Project
<br />Deliverables: MS4 mapping updates
<br />Task 8 | Financial Analysis and Plan
<br />DATA COLLECTION & DOCUMENT REVIEW
<br />Each city presents a unique starting point, especially in stormwater projects where financial systems vary. While the Storm Drain
<br />Master Plan will offer a comprehensive list of capital needs along with its inspection, operations, and maintenance needs, input from
<br />City staff is crucial. SCI will outline data requirements, interview key stakeholders, and ensure alignment with the City leadership’s
<br />strategic goals by cataloging and vetting previous documents. During these interviews, SCI will collect information regarding current
<br />operations, maintenance of the storm drain system, and current and future requirements of the Phase II Small Municipal General
<br />Permit clean water programs.
<br />Deliverable(s): Collected data | Staff interviews, as needed
<br />FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
<br />Stormwater rate‐setting stands out due to its requirement for voter approval and its lack of a five‐year rate limitation. Thus,
<br />establishing a durable initial rate structure is crucial, as adjustments in subsequent years are limited to prescribed inflationary indices.
<br />This task involves iterative processes, with City staff interviewed and continuously engaged in forecasting costs across three key areas:
<br />Operations and Maintenance, Phase II Municipal Permit Compliance, and Capital Needs.
<br />The Wood Rodgers Team will evaluate a range of funding mechanisms (including special taxes, user taxes, and regulatory fees) and
<br />taking into account political viability, legal rigor, legislative factors, and compatibility with existing mechanisms. For each of the
<br />potential funding approaches, a Technical Memorandum will be prepared that includes a pro/con analysis, a timetable for
<br />implementation, identification of applicable cost centers, and a benchmark study of how other local agencies have developed
<br />funding programs for their storm drainage systems.
<br />This task will provide the City with all options, including balloted (fees or parcel taxes) and several non‐balloted options such as
<br />regulatory fees, realignments, and grant opportunities. This effort will enable the City to answer the following question: “Have you
<br />done all you can before asking me for a new fee?” The results of this analysis will provide the City with many options to consider
<br />before proceeding to a costly, risky, and time‐consuming ballot measure.
<br />Deliverable(s): Summary of costs and revenue requirements | Staff interviews, as needed | Workshops with project staff to vet
<br />progress and scenarios
<br />Task 9 | Stormwater System Management Plan Report
<br />Documentation provided to the City will include a summary report and appendices documenting the storm drain inventory and
<br />condition assessment, design standards, hydrologic and hydraulic model development, a capital maintenance and improvement
<br />plan, and a financial analysis and grant funding. The appendices will include all the previously‐developed technical memoranda,
<br />documenting criteria, data sources, regulatory requirements, verifications, databases, condition assessments, hydrologic analyses,
<br />hydraulic analyses, calibrations, reconciliations, and all necessary maps. Wood Rodgers will employ a user‐friendly and graphical
<br />presentation approach to convey complex information throughout the documents.
<br />EXHIBIT A
<br />Docusign Envelope ID: DF86282A-2A84-404C-9F8A-A035AEFBCFF8
|