Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
C2011-023 - 2/8/2011 - Approved
CONTRACT Consultant Services -Analysis on_ Privatization of City Information Technology Services Service Agreement No. THIS Analysis on Privatization of City Information Technology Services CONTRACT (this "Agreement") is entered into by and between Plante & Moran, PLLC (the "Contractor"} and the City of Corpus Christi, a Texas home-rule municipal corporation {the "City"}, by and through its duly authorized City Manager or designee, effective for all purposes upon execution by the City Manager or his designee. WHEREAS Contractor has proposed to provide Analysis on Privatization of City Information Technology Services in response to Request for Proposal No. BI-0057-11 which is incorporated and attached as Exhibit A; WHEREAS the City has determined Contractor to be the best valued proposer; follows: NOW, THEREFORE, Contractor and City enter into this Agreement and agree as 1. Services. Contractor will perform Analysis on Privatization of City Information Technology Services in accordance with Request for Proposal No. BI-0057-11. 2. Term. This Agreement is for approximately ~five_ months commencing on February 9, 2011 and continuing through -July 8, 2011 3. Contract Administrator. The Contract Administrator designated by the City is responsible for approval of all phases of performance and operations under this Agreement including deductions for non-performance and authorizations for payment. All of the Contractor's notices or communications regarding this Agreement must be directed to the Contract Administrator, who is the Assistant City Manager of Community Services or her designee. 4. Independent Contractor. Contractor will perform the services hereunder as an independent contractor and will furnish such services in its own manner and method, and under no circumstances or conditions may any agent, servant or employee of the Contractor be considered an employee of the City. Plante & Moran 2011-423 M2011-042 02/08/11 Rev. 9-96 INDE~C~~ S. Insurance. Before activities can begin under this Agreement, the Contractor's insurance company(ies) must deliver a Certif sate of Insurance, as proof of the required insurance coverages to the Contract Administrator. Additionally, the Certificate must state that the Assistant City Manager of Community Services or her designee will be given at least thirty (3 Q) days notice, by certified mail, of cancellation, material change in the coverages or intent not to renew any of the policies. The City must be named as an Additional Insured. The City Attorney must be given copies of all insurance policies within 15 days of the City Manager's written request. 6. Assignment. No assignment of this Agreement or any right or interest therein by the Contractor is effective unless the City fzrst gives its written consent to such assignment. The performance of this Agreement by the Contractor is of the essence of this Agreement and the City's right to withhold consent to such assignment is within the sale discretion of the City on any ground whatsoever. 7. Fiscal Year. All parties recognize that the continuation of any contract after the close of any fiscal year of the City (the City's fscal year ends on July 31St), is subject to appropriations and budget approval providing for covering such contract item as an expenditure in said budget. The City does not represent that said budget item will be actually adopted as that determination is within the sale discretion of the City Council at the time of adoption of each budget. S. Waiver. No waiver of any breach of any term or condition of this Agreement, or the Contractor's proposal to Request for Proposal No. BI-0057-11 waives any subsequent breach of the same. 9. Compliance with Laws. This Agreement is subject to all Federal laws and laws of the State of Texas. All duties of the parties will be performed in the City of Corpus Christi, Texas. The applicable law for any legal disputes arising out of this Agreement is the law of Texas and such form and venue far such disputes is the appropriate district, county or justice court in and for Nueces County, Texas. 10. Subcontractors. The Contractor may use subcontractors in connection with the work performed under this Agreement. When using subcontractors, however, the Contractor must obtain prior written approval from the Assistant City Manager of Community Services or her designee. In using subcontractors, the Contractor is responsible for all their acts and omissions to the same extent as if the subcontractor and its employees were employees of the Contractor. All requirements set forth as part of this Agreement are applicable to all subcontractors and their employees to the same extent as if the Contractor and its employees had performed the services. 11. Amendments, This Agreement may be amended only by written Agreement duly authorized by the parties hereto and signed by the parties. AG2210.009.ajr Rev. 9-96 12. Termination. The City Manager may terminate this Agreement for Contractor's failure to perform the services specified in Request for Proposal No. BI- 0057-11. Failure to keep all insurance policies in force for the entire term of this Agreement is grounds for termination. The Contract Administrator must give the Contractor five {5} work days written notice of the breach and set out a reasonable opportunity to cure. If the Contractor has not cured within the cure period, the City Manager may terminate this Agreement immediately thereafter. Alternatively, the City may terminate this Agreement upon twenty (20) days written notice to the Contractor. However, the City may terminate this Agreement on twenty-four (24) hours written notice to the Contractor for failure to pay or provide proof of payment of taxes as set out herein. 13. Taxes. The Contractor covenants to pay payroll taxes, Medicare taxes, FICA taxes, unemployment taxes and all other related taxes according to Circular E Employer's Tax Guide, Publication 15, as it may be amended. Upon his request, the City Manager shall be provided proof of payment of these taxes within fifteen {15) days .of such request. Failure to pay or provide proof of payment is grounds for the City Manager to immediately terminate this Agreement. 14. Drug Policy. The Contractor must adopt a Drug Free Workplace and drug testing policy that substantially conforms to the City's policy. The City has azero- tolerance drug policy. 15. Violence Policy. The Contractor must adopt a Violence in the Workplace and related hiring policy that substantially conforms to the City's policy. The City has a zero-tolerance violence in the workplace policy. 16. Notice. Notice may be given by fax, hand delivery or certified mail, postage prepaid, and is received on the day faxed or hand-delivered and on the third day after deposit if sent certif ed mail. Notice shall be sent as follows: IF TO CITY: City of Corpus Christi Attention: Assistant City Manager of Community Services or her designee. P.O. Box 9277 Corpus Christi, Texas 78469-9277 Fax No.: (361} 826-3220 e-mail: MargieR@cctexas.com AG2210.004.ajr Rev. 9-96 IF TO CONTRACTOR: Contractor Plante & Moran, PLLC Contact Adam Ruian Address: 27400 Northwestern Highway, PO Box 307 City, State, Southfield, MI 48037-0307 Fax No.: 248-352-2500 17. Month-to-Month Extension. If the City has not completed the procurement process and awarded a new Agreement upon expiration of the original contract period or any extension period, the Contractor shall continue to provide goodslservices under this Agreement, at the most current price under the terms of this Agreement or extension, on a month-to-month basis, not to exceed six months. This Agreement automatically expires on the effective date of a new contract. 18. Severability. Each provision of the Agreement shall be considered to be severable and, if, for any reason, any such provision ox any part thereof, is determined to be invalid and contrary to any existing or future applicable law, such invalidity shall not impair the operation of or affect those portions of this Agreement that are valid, but this Agreement shall be construed and enforced in a1I respects as if the invalid or unenforceable provision or part thereof had been omitted. CONTRACTOR AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, HOLD HARMLESS AND DEFEND THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI AND ITS OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES AND AGENTS (INDEMNITEES) FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL LIABILITY, LOSS, CLAIMS, DEMANDS, SUITS AND CAUSES OF ACTION OF ANY NATURE ON ACCOUNT OF DEATH, PERSONAL INJURIES, PROPERTY LOSS DR DAMAGE OR ANY OTHER KIND OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING ALL EXPENSES OF LITIGATION, COURT COSTS, ATTORNEYS' FEES AND EXPERT WITNESS FEES WHICHARISE OR ARE CLAIMED TO ARISE OUT OF DR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS CONTRACT OR THE PERFORMANCE OF THIS CONTRACT, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE INJURIES, DEATH OR DAMAGES ARE CAUSED OR ARE CLAIMED TO BE CAUSED BY THE CONCURRENT OR CONTRIBUTING NEGLIGENCE OF INDEMNITEES, BUT NOT BY THE SOLE NEGLIGENCE OF INDEMNITEES UNMIXED WITH THE FAULT OF ANY OTHER PERSON OR GROUP. CONTRACTOR MUST, AT ITS OWN EXPENSE, INVESTIGATE ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS, ATTEND TO THEIR SETTLEMENT OR OTHER DISPOSITION, DEFEND ALL ACTIONS BASED THEREON WITH COUNSEL SATISFACTORY TO INDEMNITEES AND PAY ALL CHARGES OF ATTORNEY AND ALL OTHER COSTS AND EXPENSES OF ANY KIND ARISING FROM ANY OF SAID LIABILITY, DAMAGE, LOSS, CLAIMS, DEMANDS OR ACTIONS THE INDEMNIFICATION OBLIGATIONS OF CONTRACTOR UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL SURVIVE THE EXPIRATION OR SOONER TERMINATION OF THIS AGREEMENT. SIGNED this day of , 2011. AG2210.OOA.ajr Ttev. 9-96 Contractor Flante & Moran, PLLC Adam R Title: Partner CITY C RISTI ("CITY") Mich Barrera Assistant Director of Financial Services APPROVED THIS '~.- `~ DAY OF ~~~~ , 2011. CARLOS VALDEZ, CITY ATTORNEY By: ~ Brian Narvae ASSlstant Clty Attorney Exhibit A: Request far Proposal No. BI-0057-11 Exhibit B: Consultants response to Request far Proposal No. BI-0057-11 Exhibit C: Insurance Certificate ~~a ~ `' ~~ ~IUT49 ~ ~lZi"D ~EC~~'T'~IRY /" 4~5?': ~~-.~ l~Pri~4iW70 Ch1A~',~ ~~~r ~~c~~e~~~ AG2210.004.ajr Rev, 9.96 h City of Corpus Christi RE VEST FOR PROPOSAL Business Case Analysis ~ Privatization BI-0057-11 Due Date : December 1, 2010, 5:OOPM 1,0 R~UEST FOR PROPOSAL The City of Corpus Christi is soliciting Pxoposal(s) (RFP'Sj from consultant firms whom are interested and qualified to perform and develop various business case analyses on the privatization of pre identified functions of City services. Services will include research and analysis of assigned city functions in relation to the strategic objectives of the overall function of the City; an economic analysis of the cost, benefit and risk of privatizing the City function; determination if a commercial source is readily available to assume the City function; identification of possible funding sources including the departmental budget and or other programs affected by the City function and an estimate of the timeline that would be required for fu11 implementation of privatizing such services. A single consultant and/or multiple consultants may be selected to accomplish the services outlined in this Request for Proposal. Z.0 SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL Proposers will submit one original and five copies of the response. All responses will be marked as Request for Proposal for RFP # BI-0057-11: Consultant Analysis on Privatization of City Services. Response packages will be accepted until 5:00 p.m. on December 1, 2010 and should be addressed to the following Procurement Officer: Michael Barrera Assistant Director of Financial Services City of Corpus Christi 1201 Leopard Street Corpus Christi, Texas 78401 mikeb@cctexas.com 3.0 SCOPE OF WORK 3.1 General Overview The City has identif ed four City functionslservices that are potential candidates for a privatization effort. See attached list of City Functions, Exhibit A. In order to assist staff in determining whether these City functions would make a goad business case for privatization, an analysis must be performed which encompasses a review of the City function as more fully described below. 3.2 Specific Requirements When building a business case for privatization, the City has identified five major tasks that should be performed in order to determine whether the City function will make a good privatization initiative. They are as follows: 1} Options Appraisal 2) Strategic Fit 3) Commercial Aspects 4) Affordability 5) Achievability The consultant will be required to perform an analysis of the assigned City function that will consider the above tasks in determining whether the City function should be privatized. Each of these tasks is more fully identified in the Attached Exhibits B and C. Although the City has determined the above tasks are one method of identifying whether a City function would make a good privatization initiative, the City is not bound to this business case model and are open to other models that the consultant may prefer to use to accomplish the services. The City reserves. the right to add other City. functions/services to be analyzed as deemed necessary. Additional work may be added to the scope of work described above to include 1) assistance with developing a Request for Proposal for privatizing a City functionlservice, 2) assistance with the evaluation of proposals received for privatizing a City functionlservice 3) assistance with the full implementation of privatizing a City function/service and/or 4) project management of the City functionlservice once it has been privatized. 4.U BELIVERABLES The Consultant will be required to deliver a final report of each assigned City function analyzed. Included in the report will be the supporting data and description of the methodology used in the analysis, A recommendation whether to privatize the City function will be included along with the reasons for making that determination. Consultant will be required to present such final report, and comprehensively support its findings before City Council on a date to be selected by the City. 5.0 EVALUATION Staff will evaluate the proposals on the following criteria. Proposers are requested to submit sufficient information on each criteria to allow staff to effectively determine their respective qualif cations and cost for services. 1} Experience of the firm in performing similar types of analysis. References shall be provided from at least three former clients. 2} Specifzc examples of government functions that have and/or have not been privatized at the recommendation of the consultant 3} Cost 3.1 Cost -Pricing should be submitted on a unit cost basis. Each unit is defined as the work required to accomplish a business case analysis of one city function. If price breaks are applicable for performing all four business case analyses, the City will consider such proposal as well. All costs, both direct and indirect, necessary to effect the work described herein shall be included in Proposer's proposal. Such costs include, but are not limited to; salaries, supplies, the cost of the proposal itself, postage, travel, per diem, transportation costs, etc. The proposer shall not invoice and the City shall not pay any costs other than those set out by the Proposer in its proposal and agreed to by the City. Exhibit A List ofpre-identified City Functions far privatization 1} Facilities Maintenance 2} Fleet Maintenance 3) Camprehensi~e Grounds Maintenance (mowing and landscaping) 4} Municipal Information Services (MIS) aka -Information Technology Services Please refer to the City's website at: www/cctexas.com for a copy of the City's Annual Budget. Departmental summaries, goals and objective are included in that document. See Exhibit D for additional information and budget details. Exhibit B Business Case Anal sis , Overview ~. Options appraisal: the economtc case This aspec# of the business case documents the wide range of options that have been considered wi#hin the broad scope identified in response to the City's existing and future needs. It aims to arrive at the optimum balance of cast, benefit and risk. Minimum cvnten# needed for this section: high level costlbeneflt analysis of (Ideally} at least three options for meeting the business need (where applicable); Include analysis of `sof#` benefits that cannot be quantified In financial terms; identify preferred option and any trade-offs. Note that options appraisal must be carried out in detail before selecting a preferred option. Questions addressed: • Has a wide range of options- been explored? • Have innovative approaches been considered andlor collaboration with other departments? If not, why not? • Has the optimum balance of cost, benefit and risk been identified? If not, what trade-offs need to be made e.g. foregoing some ofthe-benefits in order to keep costs uuithin budget; taking carefully considered risks to achieve more substantial benefits? 2. Strategic fit: the strategic case This aspect of the business case explains how the scope of the City functionlservice fi#s within the existing strategy of the City; and the compelling case for change, in terms of the existing and future operational needs of the City. Minimum contenf needed far this section: description of the business need and its con#ribution to the City's strategy and objectives, why it is needed, key benefits to be realized, key risks, critical success factors and how they will be measured; main stakeholders. Questions addressed: • How well does the.proposed way of mee#ing the requirement support the City`s objectives? and current priorities? • If it is a poor fit, can the scope be changed? • Is fhe City functioNService needed at a117 • Have the stakeholders made a commitment to the City functianlservice? 3. Commercial aspects: the financlal case Where there is an external procurement, this section outlines the potential commercial arrangement. Minimum content required for this section: proposed sourcing option, with rationale for its selection; key features of proposed commercial arrangements (e.g. contract terms, contract length, payment mechanisms and performance incentives); the procurement approachlstrategy wi#h supporting rationale. Questions addressed: • Can value for money exchanged be obtained from the proposed sources (e.g. partners, suppliers, service providers)? • If not, can the City functionlservice be made attractive to a wider market? 4. Affordability: the financial case Assessment of affordability and available funding. Links proposed expendi#urelailocatlons to available budget and existing commitments. Minimum content for this section: statement of available funding and broad estimates of projected whole-life cast of the Clty function/service, including departmental costs (where applicable). Questions addressed: - Can the required budget be obtained to deliver the City functionlservice? • if not, can the scope be reduced or delivered over a Sanger period? • Could funding be sought from other sources? 5 Achlevablllty: the project management case This section addresses the 'achisvability' aspects of privatizing the City functionlservice. Its primary purpose is io set out the City function/service organization and actions which will be undertaken to support the achievement of intended outcomes including procurement activity {where applicable) or detailed study with existing providers. Minimum content for this section: high level plan for achieving the desired outcome, with key milestones and major dependencies (e.g. interface with other city functionslservices); key tales, with named Individual as the project's owner; outline contingency plans e.g. addressing failure to deliver service on time; major risks identified and outline plan for addressing them; provider's plans for the same, as applicable, skills and experience required. Questions addressed: • Can the privatization of the City functionlservice be achieved with the City's current capability and capacity? • If not, haw can the required capability be acquired? • Can the risks be managed - e.g. scale, complexity, uncertainty? • Does the scope or iirnescale need to change? Exhibit C Business Case Analysis -Detailed OPTIONS APPRAISAL 1.0 dons ;a sisal To tc Areas to cartsldar 1.1 Long end short list of options Outline options identified for analysis (described more fully below); where approprlate, each subjected to SWOT analysis against contribution fo key objectives and critical success factors; includes a da minlmumoption - at least two but nc more {hen seven other options. 1.2 Opportunikiss for innovation andlor collaboration with others • Describe the opportunities for Innovative approaches such as a new way of praviding a par#lcular service ar exploiting new ways of saving ongoing casts on buildings. • Outline opportunities for collaboration with others - perhaps sharing the cysts of developing a new system or oollaborating with prlvake sector partners to share costs. • if no opportunities exist andlor there are essential reasons for avoiding Innovation andlor collaboration with others, outline the reasons: 1.3 Service delivery options -who wiEl deliver the project? • Investigate options ranging from in-house delivery to degrees of partnership wl#h the private sector and w8h others in the public sector. with brief description of each, advantagesldisadvan#ages and conclusions. Include options for collaboration where approprlate (sea 1,2 above). 1.4 Implementation options • ~xamine options forthe pace at which the protect could be implemented, In terms of the timescafes and degree of change required; conslderwhethar the protect could be broken dawn into more manageable components e.g. Impiemenfed in incremental phases or Introduced on e small scale to start and. then rolled out to a larger scale. 1.5 Detailed options appraisal • Provide an explanation of the general approach taken to the calculation of costs and benefits, togetherwith overview of the key findings that result from each of the short-listed options. Include details of 'soft' benefits; these are benefits that d0 na# have a direr{ financial value, such as improved quality of service. 1.6 Risk quantiTication and sensitivity analysis • Far risk quantlflcation, straw the cost of each risk, wherever possible--that is, the costs incurred in dealing with a risk if it materializes or putting in countermeasures to ensure that the risk does not occur. Identify who will be responsible for each risk and state why they are the party best placed to manage it, • For sensllivlty analysis, show the effect of changes in critical factors to each option. For example, what would be the effect of delayed planning pamtission for a new building?What would be the impact if a service came on stream much sooner or later than expected? 1.7 Benefits appraisal Show results of identlfying key benefits crlterla, weighing their relative importance, snoring short-I€sted epfions against those criteria; where required derive a weighted benefits scare for each option and undertake are analysis of the sensitivity of the assessment to changes In weighting and scoring. •~ 7.t3 Preferred option • Summarize findinge from economic apprai ais, benefits evaluation, sensltivlly anaiysis and overall ranking, STRATEGIC FIT 2. Strata iC fit Topic Areas to consider 2.1 Business need •Descnbe the business need that will be met by the project and why if is needed -e.g. a new building to accommodate acallcenter- to meet the needs of citizens requiring telephone support for inquiries; needed because current facilities cannot cope with demand. 2.2 Organizational overview • Describe fhe organization's main goals, organizational structure and key responsibilities, • Describe fhe main aspects of the strategy: strategic vision, strategic plan and continuing goals. • Outline the main themes, where relevant (such as delivericg information electronically to the public), key programs and projects. 2.3 Contribution to key objectives • baecrlbe how the funcElon will contribute tc key abjecfives - e.g. 'supports target for X by providing Y'; 'suppnrts modernization agenda by providing expert training for key staff In front line delivery', 2.4 Stakeholders Outine Ehe main stakeholder groups and their eantribution to the function; note any potential conflicts between different stakeholder groups and their demands. 2.5 Existing arrangements • Outline the current service delivery arrangements, major contracts with service providers, the in-house function, where applicable, Include details ofteclinical standards where relevant andlor #echniaal canstralnfs That need to be addressed (such as refurbishment of a building; requirement fo integrate with existing infrasfructure). 2.6 5cape: minimum, desirable, and aptionaE • Summarize the potential scope pf the function: o do minimum (the minimum scope to meet the Immediate Head) o intermediate options o full scope of proposed change (the widest potential change that would meet the need, perhaps taking a longer term view). • Suggested number of options: up to seven at a high. level, to ensure thalthe scope has been thoroughly explored. 2.7 Constraints • Summarize the main constraints, such as the willingness of senior management to absorb fundamental change, the affordability of proposals, existing contractual commitments. 2.6 Dependencies • Outline the interns! and external factors upon which the successful delivery of this function are dependent, such as other functions and programs already in existence. 2.9 Strategic benefits • Outline high-level srafegic and operational benefits such as be#ter use of workspace, more reliable service to citizens. Shaw how these benefits are linked tc key objectives - e.g. beier use of workspace is one of the contributory factors that suppor# more efficient workforce, which contributes to key objective of better services fo citizens. 2,10 Strategic risks • Outline the main risks such as conffnuing need for the function and changes in direction; service risks such as the lack of internal skills to implement the required function; external environmental risks such as changes in the supplier marketplace, 2.11 Critical success factors • Define the crliical success factors for the function =what will conatE#ute success? e.g., citizens will want to use the new service In preference to the previous way of delivering IL Determine howsugcess will be measured e.g„ percentage take up of a riew service aver x years, with milestones for each annusE Improvement In take up. COMMERCIAL ASPECTS 3. Commercial as ecft3 ro is areas to consider 3,1 putpuk Based Speciticaticn • Summarize the requirement in terms of outcomes and outputs; supplemented by full speciflcalion of need. 3.2 Sourcing options • Outline the aptians for sources of provision of services to meet the business Head - e.g. partnerships, framework, existing supplierarrangements, with rationale - for selecting preferred sourcing option. 3,3 Payment meohanisms buttlne the proposed payment mechanisms that wilhbe nego#lated with the providers - e.g. linked to perFom~ance and avallabHiiy, providing incentives for alternative revenue streams. 3.4 Risk allocetian and transfer Summarize an assessment of how the fyp®s of risk might 6e apporkioned or shared, with risks allocated to the party best placed to manage them. AFFO~.I?AB~~ITY 4. Affordabilit Topic Areas to consider 4.1 l3udget based on whole life costs . • Produce estimates of the whole Ilfe costs of the function Include the costs th&f will be carried by the customer as well as those that will be carried by the Clty. Note that savings or.benefits achieved in one part of the organize#ion may add to costs elsewhere in the organlzatlan or dslivery chain. 7hls is especially significant where the organizaifon has to maln#ain parallel channels for service dslivary. • Provide detaits of: o the expected costs o when they will occur o how they will be manltored a who will pay for each cast o any risk allowance that may 6e needed (In the evsnf of things going wrong). • Additional areas that may need to be considered in detail are outlined below. Gom letion rind Income and ex enditure account Balance sheet Cash slow ACHIEVABILITY 5. Achie~ahili Topic ~ Areas fa consider 5.1 evidence of slmllar projects, where available • If possible, provide evidence of similar functions that have been successfully implemented, to support the recommended approach. If no slmllar projects are available for comparison, outline the basis of assumptions for delivery of this function- e.g. comparison with Industry averages for this kind of work. b.2 Project roles • Set out key roles; o who wilt be responsible far making the investment decision (typically a management group rather than an . Individual) o the Sevier Responsible Owner (5R0} as the named Individual who will be personally accountable for the success of the project o the project manager o the main stakeholders o key members of the oversight committee, where applicable 0 oEher essential roles as required. • Confirm that the SRD and project manager have appropriate skills and experience for the protect, with access to specialist expertise to supplement their skills if required. 5.3 Procurement sErategy (where epplicable} + Set out indicative timetable and justification for the proposed approach, 6.4 Project plan • Outline the main phases of the project plan. ~~HIBY'T D Maintenance Services Fleet Maintenance is. a divislon of the General ServicQS (Maintenance Services) department of the City of Corpus Chrlstl. It is' a toil service entity that is charged with maintaining a centralized fleet wl##~ 1,85 vehicles with the capability of performing maintenance on all 2,154 vehicles in the entire City Fleet. Filet Maintenance ensures the availability of the police fleet, the refuse collection fleet, the brush collection fleet, and ail other Clty vehicles and equipment to 'include the utility fleet. There are 22 mechanics and 10 service technicians who accomplish this task. Also, included are parts, personnel, and adminlstratlve personnel, Despite the fact that 58% of the fleet [s past the service life, the operational ready rata for heat vehlc#es and equipment Js 90%, Fleet Operations is responsible for fuel contracts -($sm), parts purchases ~ ($2.5m?, outside repairs ($1.Om), and capital equipment speciflaatlons develapmen#, and purchases. Also, twa~ motor pools are managed, along with an accompanying refueling station, The organization performs both scheduled and unscheduled main#ertance on all City vehicles and equipment with the exception of Fire, CMS, and airport equipment. Facllity~ Maintenance . is a divislon of the General Services. (Maintenance -Services} department of the City of Corpus Christi.. It has a ~ email staff of 23 employees, consisting of custodial, clerical, electricians, carpenters, plumbers, painters, one HVAC technician, and one ~ mechanic. Facility Maintenance is in the, first phase of a preventative maintenance program. Staff performs maintenance in Corpus Christi and up to 90~ miles away at city facilities In the surrounding area (darns}. Over ~4b0 properties are maintained by Facility Maintenance. Mission Fleet Maintenanoc Servlcrs, Aleet Maintonanco Services' mission is to prov[dc customers with rho ltigitoat qual[ty repair, inspection, servicing atxi opernticnsl support set'vices in s safe, ef}Yclont, and oast-ot'fectiye manner, Facility Maintenance Setvlca. Facility Maintenance 5crvices' mission Is to p,nv'tdo internal and extereal cuatamora with tiro highest quaflty service and professionalism in a safe, eifioient, and coat-effeotlve manner'. ~onls Rlact Malutonence Servlccs • Aaquieldon of equlptnont based on lifeaycle cost model that maximizes ofCoienoies and t~eduaea cost to operating departntonts • i'ot'fot•nt anti estuhkish preventive maintenance schedules to surpass llfeeycle costs so that we may receive a higher salvage value when sold at auction, which perpetuate on going acquisition schedules. • ivlanage fliel program to ensure timely thol deliveries that eliminate downtime ibr users fueling at fltel atat[on and minimize dclivcry foes paid to the state. Facility Malntanence Services • Perfarnt preventive mainteuance schedules on all assets • Provide entargcncy and routine rnaintenanco of f~oilities Resale of electricity Vehicle Pool allocntlorrs Fleet repair fees Repair fees -non ricer Cns and al! sales Direct mart sales isuilding rnniutenance allocatfo Iiulldittg mnlntauancc E}cctrical ntalntarnuce AIC mnlntenance Interest on Investments Net }nc/Aec Itt ftV of }nvesttlrett Net galtt on sale of assets Recovery on slnmage claims Salo of scrnplcity prnpcrty Trnusf fr General LIaU 4td Transf fr Wor•Icuian's Comp Trnat'r cAp a/l•Gen 27d Trnstl• cap oli-Gas Trnsfr cap o/t-Wastotivnter Trnstl• cap ell-1}'rater Trnsfr• cap o/l-Storrnrrater Trnsfr cap replncetne+rt-i)ev Svc Trnsfr cnlr repinccrnartt-Water Trnsfr• cap repincetnent-Str•mwtr Trnsfrcnp replaccment-Wstewtr Trnsfr cap replacement-Gas Trnsfr cap repiacnnrt-Cq,crnlyd Traasfcr tY•on~ M}S >zttrtd Transfer fr Group I'lealtli ins ltund 'f'atal 10,621 14,000 8,354 11,001} 2,145,120 2,247,396 2,247,396 2,3D5,884 6,661,332 6,833,628 6,833,630 7,181,280 10,505 0 4,324 0 3,831,941 4,316,884 4,316,884 5,462,b1S 12,872 0 2,D30 0 2,655,948 2,744,580 2,744,580 2,912,]0(1 3,59b 15,4D0 1,071 4,OOD 1,813. 15,000 550 2,OOD 2,349 24,004 297 3,000 95,174 45,D11 17,040 15,440 (8.128) 0 (938) 0 0 0 266,627 D 97,663 SD,000 43,852 0 ] 5,652 100,000 3,651 0 0 115,379 115,379 0 0 10$,346 108,346 0 1,1<69,DOD 1,450,184 1,450,160 0 433,200 24?,824 x47,82+4 564,000 691,540 717,504 71'1,504 786,000 283,ODD 847,008 847,008 227,D59 D 390,000 390,D00 773,D04 26,400 26,DD0 2G,0t10 26,044 14,5DD 34,867 34,847 162,448 71,010 95,547 95,547 137,742 1 [3,001 184,001 184,D01 803,831 Sa,97G 88,577 $8,577 135,363 492,000 0 4 985,665 0 22,2118 22,168 0 D 15,493 ~, 18,493 ~ ~ 0 • 18,878,657 - 20,7D0,393 20,834,244 21,4G8,38d • Timely respond to war4t order requests Peraont-818ervlees ~ 3,766,210 4,343,927 x,110,301 4,370,054 Meter#nSsSupplles 7,05'f,283 8,283,746 8,239,067 8,975,131 Contr--etunl Se:vltes 4,326,127 ~ 3,512,5$7 3,861,645 2,984,915 Other C!-argos 2,9i2 Q ~3G8 0 Resa-we Ap[ll'Alltlrt{o~:s 0 0 0 b90,00fl debt Sors•#eo 82,598 0 , D 0 Sc#~ools/SombiarslTrnining 4,U4i 27,000 17,741 17,000 Y~-ter-~al Services Aliocr~tlai:s 780,842 $41,020 841,020 738,708 ~ Trat-5~er Out 4 60,858 60,658 fl Caltttnt Outlay 2,65 S53 4,542,067 4,923,453 2,354,ass ~ornt 16,870,sG5 x1,661,204 21,SSa,a73 zo,125,e67 I?`uil rl-~~a C~R:ilve~e:-rs: a7 87 as Avoiiabi[i-y of Req-:l-bd Marked Police Voltiiales l 19.84 1?A.OS ~=100.00 , Availabriity of Rcquirecl Solid Waste Side Loading Refi~ae 7Yualcs 87,46 112,69 >=100.00 AvaElabiflry of #tequirecl Wastewater Vacuum Tr-:cks 214.53 266,87 ~=100.00 Availpbility ~f Rcquleed Starm Wa#ee Mowers 104.81 93.04 >a I00.OD do-Time Response to Work Ordo:B lOD.00 100.00 ~= 95.00 MAINTENANCE SERVICE FUND {511p} ItEVX'aNUE DETAIL ACC©11NT ACCOUNT A.CTUALS BUDGET Et3TIMAT$i) ADOP'1'~)d lYUMDER I3[tSC1tIPfiION 2008 x409 2049.2010 2009•Z4f0 20]0.201] Uuresarved Reserved Yar 8ncnm6rauces Rcaervetl for CounniGnartks IIL~GIIVNI NG 13AI.AIYC1~, Op1wRA.TING RL~VCNUE 1~leek Management 326000 VehiclePaolaNacetions 326010 Fleetrepairfees 326020 Repair fete - rtan fleet 326040 Ces end ail sales 326050 Ait~ect pan solos 343390 Saie of seraplelty property Total I~lcet Man>tgetnant 13nf1ding il7nlntcnance 326070 AuilclGtgmaitttenanccallotaHo 326080 )3uilditag ntaintanancc 326090 $[ectefoal maintenance 326100 AIC msintenartce Toka113ulldhtg MaGttenal-ce .2,067,123 1,356,35& 783,57.6 1,473,222 776,441 p 525,214 1,440,$53 2,5b9,845 _.. _ A,065,SS9 . ¢ 4,073,G5D 3 353 421 2,145,120 2,247,396 2,247,396 2,305,884 6,661,332 6,833,628 6,833,630 7,151,280 10,505 4 4,324 0 3,$31,941 4,3lG,88~! 4,316,8B4 5,062,6!8 12,872 0 2,D3D 0 15 Gb2 0 3 651 0 12,677,432 13,397,908 13,407,91b (4,519,779 2,688,94$ 2,744,5$0 2,744,580 2,912,100 3,596 15,000 1,071 4,000 1,613 15,000 550 2,000 2,349 _ ~ 20,000 297 _ 3,000 2,663,706 2,794,580 2,746,496 2,921,100 Tt3'1'AL OPr1RA'PING RR'1~ENUE NO1V•bPEItAT1NG R>;VCNUC Interest Income 340900 fntarest on investments 340995 Net Inc/Dec in FV of lttvesunen Total Interest It-ennte E}tliel' RcVClillC 323030 Rasaie of electricity 3432D0 Net gain nn sale of assets 3433D0 Recovery on datnaga claims Total Other Rnveatte TOTAL NON-C)PEI7ATING RI;'VENUL~ 1N7'1WRFUNB CONTRII3UTCONS 350400 Trans( fr General Liab Fd 3SO4tS 7'ransffrWorkmart'sCantp 15,341,138 16,192,488 16,154,414 17,440,879 4S,17A 45,411 1T,040 15,440 (8,125) 0 _(938} 0 87,044 45,01! 16,103 18,440 !0,6x1 !1},000 B,354 [ 1,000 0 IOD,D00 264,627 0 97 663 10,000 45,852 0 108,284 12{1,000 320,B33 11,000 195,332 165,011 336,936 26,440 0 115,379 I (5,379 0 0 108,346 108,346 0 MAINTENANCE SERVICE FU1~D (510) REVENUE DETAIL ACCOI.IIV'C ACCOUNT ACTUAI;,S BUbG18T TsST1MAT1~I1 A,DppT~p tvUMB~R DESCIiIPTlO1V 2008.20(19 2009-ZQ1Q 7A09.2Q14 2p16 2011 3805134 'rrnsrt•capon•uanr<a 350520 9Ynsli•cRpoll-Oas 380530 Trnsfrespall•Westewntar 3SOS40 `t7•+IStt~ cap o11•Watee 3SOS50 'frnsfr cap oli•5tonnwator 3g07D4 'll'n~• cap r'opllrccemerlt-laev Sva 350710 `I~~nsfi• oap raplacernent•Watcr• 350720 ~ Trnsfr cap raplttcement-Silmwtr 350730 Trnsti' cap I~splsccnlant-Wstawtr 350740 TrnsA• Eap ropEacamat-t^C3ae , 350750 Trnsli• esp replaornu~tlaner~al Rd 3$2480 Transfer from MIS 1~und 352500 '15~anafar fl• Oroup Health lrts Pd TOTA1a I1~Tt;RFUIYD C0~1'I'ItIBUTIONS 'TOTAL RLrVL~NU>; b}. INT1aR1' CJ1Vla CC}i~fTRII3 TOTAL CiJNDS AVAILAI3I,Lt' l,IUY,000 1,yJV,lov [yR~4,ioV (1 433,2D0. ?~F7,B24 ~ 24?,824 544,000 491,500 717,504 717,344 786,000 283,000 847,DOB 847,006 227,459 4 390,OOD 390,000 773,x00 26,000 26,000 26,04D 24,000 10,500 34,847 34,$67 162,448 7L,010 95,547 95,547 137,7D2 113,001 184,001 ! 84,00 [ 203,831 SZy97G 88,577 86,577- 135,363 492,000 0 0 985,663 0 22,148 22,168 0 0 15 493 15 493 0 3,342,(66 4,342,B9A 4,342,894 4,ODI,OG7 1 B 878 457 20700 393 20 B3G 244 2f 448 386 22,944216 247D4393 24907,894 24,821,847 Dai3ni•tmantni 1,txl~a~itlitnres t 1030 7'MRS Retlremant 0 4~ 0 0 40050 Director of general Services 238;?'il x51,192 251,192 233,610 aolaa McaltianlCBiFC~Irg 1,942,4x? 2,no8,e88 1,?81,ses 1,914,G24 40110 Centralized flaet 1G3,~070 154,644 157,41E 150,219 40120 13qu1pment Purehese8 -Fleet 2,387,?52 4,400,453 4,400,453 2,3SO,OS9 40130 IVCtwork system ~naintenance ?9,153 10],SS7 ?7,852 9B,G93 g0i40 SOCViccstAtion 4,225,023 5,131,800 5,050,111 3,78b,510 401fi0 FleetQNC-'atiDlls 2,03G,GE3 1,911,429 1,912,92? 1,411,GG7 4glso Pkrta Raom ONeeetion 2,$28,875 2,914,278 2,905,546 2,941,581 q01?D C1tyHnll VelfiDiaPoDl 339,iG1 253,857 253,857 254,813 40200 Police/Naavyl3gUipu~ent Pao! 912,743 3,100,015 1,100,015 1,lpE,41S 40300 Facility Managc3nen# & Mai}1t 1,575,135 1,3G3,474 1,470,873 1,2G3,798 40305 Facility Mnint,-Dav Center/EOC G1G,~337 693,774 625,247 bG3,818 40310 Faciiitymain#enance-CitylIaEl 1,37?,124 1,3i5,48S ~ 1,286,267 !,265,044 BOOGS Raeerve Approp • Maivt Seen Fd 0 0 ~ 0 G~0,000 Totnt Dapatttnantnl L+xpendltnt~es 18,765,4$5 21,604,34E 2L,493,G15 20,12S,8G7 NOiI-Depnrdrlantal RxpenElitru'es 14729 1-lurricane lke • 2008 22,4$3 0 0 0 55010 Illterest SZ,S?8 0 0 0 60400 Tf~nsfer t0 Vi5itOY APeilitiRS 0 60,858 bD 856 0 fi'otnl NOn-1)epnrtrneutnl Exlrendlt~tres 105,0$0 69,858 b0,856 0 TOTAL i17A1ftTL+NANC~t3F.[tYiC6Si+U1VD(51it1) i8,870,5GS ~ 21,661,204 2],554,473 ~=~ 20,12S,SG7 ~.~~ tiES131tV~q rOli 11<1VCUM131tANC1;S 776,441 0 0 itCSBItVL~D T41t CUMM13`M>~NTS 1,940,853 2,SG9,845 4,420,833 t2Pilt>rSL~1tVBD 1,35G,35G ~ fi83,S7G _,^, 275,087.. CLUSING 13ALAlYCL~ 4,073,650 3 353,421 4 G9S 940 MAINTENANCE SEE.VICES FUND (5110} EXPENAITUIi.E AE'~AI~, BX URGANIZATION Domprehenaive Arounds Maintenance (Mowing & Landscaping) Camprahensive grounds maintenance Is .performed by several city departments Including, but not limited to the following: Parks & Recreation, Stormwater, Wat®r, and Wastewater. • Parks & Recreation staff perform parks mowing and landscaping of various parks and medians, Including ~ 99 sites plus additional easement, and right-o#-way maintenance as may be required. . The Stnrm Water Department Is responsi~ife #or mowing and maintaining approximately i,St6 acres of right-of-way (ROW). In addition, mowing under contract' is as follows: 5B8 acres of unimproved street RQW mowing; 2~2 acres of major ditch ROW mowing; and 'i 56 acres of improved street IOW rnawing. . Storm Water crews mow ~4~4q acres of minor ditch street ROW and 400 acres of major ditch ROW (all rough cut, minimal trim). Storm Water has six (B} slope mowers, five (5) flat mowers and two (2) bat-wing mowers --13 total mowers, Storm Water has two mowing contracts: • Rough Cut, Minlmai Trlmm€ng: Un-Improved street RQw mewing $191,000 year maior ditch RQW mowing~„~.Ofl01L $ 442,OOOyear (one contractor) • i.andscepe (finercut) witi~ Extensive 1"rimming: Improved street ROW mawinp $ 454,OOOyear (tour coMraotors) (cantrscta gave expired and the bid €s currently out) Storm Water (Pump Station staff) alga mows grounds at two downtown storm water drainage pump stations. Lister pick-up is done ahead of all mowing operations in- house or contracted. The Water Department performs mowing a# various treatment plants, and pump s#ations throughout the city, including two dams located approximately 40 and 9Q miles away near Mathis, Texas and Three Rivers, Texas, respectively. Mowing also .occurs along various water pipeline rights-of~way, including the f f 0-mile long Mary Rhodes Ripeline which begins in Lake Texans. Mary Rhodes Pipeline (MRP}: Mowing on the MRP 1s already contracted out, The contractor assumes all liability and risks. Mowing Is paid for by the acre mowed and mowed twice a year, (in the spring and fail). The contract terms allow cancellation of a cycle _ such as during a drought. No two mowing schedules are alike. Conditions on easements are evaluated prior to mowing -•- sa that mowing takes place only when necessary. The easement Is 50' wide and not all properties are mowed in the 101 miles of eas®ment where the average mowing Is 275 to 37v acres depending on conditions encountered. In addition to mewing, the contractor is required to weed-sat around ail ~ above ground appurtenances air release valves, test stations, and gates. The Rfncon Bayau easement Is also mowed, At the reservoirs all of the grounds maintenance 1s performed by Clty employees, When they are not mowing, these emplayees are either performing rnaintenanoa or operating the gates at the reservoir, Until March cf this year, the remainder of the Water Department's grounds rnalntenance was contracted out. In January of this year, the Water ©epartment began purchasing equipment; in March, temporary employees, supervised by a Cfty~ employee, began performing the work, Thls scenario allows for adjustment of the frequency of cuttings and minimizes labor casts. When the temporary labor is net cutting grass, they are uliiized to assist with maintenance, atherw[ss, the temporary labor Is released until they are needed again, • The Wastewater Department presently maintains six wastewater treatment plants, 95 Lift stations, and a few city lots. via mowing and string weeder. The amaunt of work depends on the season, amaunt of rain, and on ~ the work load that maintenance staff has at particular sites. riding mowers and push mowers are used at the treatment plants and lift stations, respectively. . Mlsston Ta caasislently meet tho saciat, physieai, and Ypcreaklonal needs afthc cnmmuu€ty Gon1a ~cnaral fleson-•cas ~ ] 1,416,771€ 11,S9i,536 11,166,035 11,432,272 Beach Pro'kitrg ]~armits 5]8,1141 300,400 654,914 573,400 Nueces Co - P & 1Z rehab 17,748 0 7,168 0 GC.O-bench cloaniug 73,279 75,DDO 73,40D 73,000 Cent01' 1ZBtItala 52,249 52,OD0 50,000 SS,OOD JHl',11 T£rruia Certtcr 34,4]8 33,000 33,617 36,1x1 HIaB Teen€s Ctt• pro shop antes IS,S94 I2,ODD 12,463 13,x35 AI Krltse Teuttis Cotter 16,412 13,840 15,9x4 17,404 A1lcrnso rI'41111€s Ct-° pro strop 6,130 6,DD0 4,353 7,1 i5 SFVintntlltg Pools 239,785 207,640 2€2,7x6 17S,ix7 SwimntJng iustroction fees 129,158 115,DD0 7xb,16ti 126,14b ~#tltlCtlC ev£nts 122,493 110,000 110,154 123,450 Ath€atic rentals 17,551 34,800 34,665 26,964 Atfllatlc iustrnction I'e£s 40,9b6 35,000 35,112 44,864 JRem'eation catttea' reutni5 6,132 11,282 14,076 10,535 CtecPeatto3l hrsti'uctlatt teas 38,7xD 44,071 37,760 39,957 5kntcJPat'Ic Con£csstone 1,725 0 1,750 3,5DD 1lntchlcay 2,328,359 2,430,910 2,434,660 2,569,035 11nt£illcey III5t1'll£t€0[l f£ea D O 354 O S;tmtner pra6rntu reg fees 13,995 4 24S 0 Heritage Park revenues 9,976 7,000 7,718 3,990 Tout•Ist c€1strJct rPntaJs 13,689 13,ODt3 13,585 79,050 Otltcl• recreation rovonuc 5,740 D 6,04D 4 13uc Dsys ~ liayrest 17,2b8 30,OD0 9,766 18,O4D Pltrit slid ite£l'cstion Cost reCOt~ 0 208,171 206,28'1 147,351 lntat•dclrarktnentttl Sorvlces 4D5,8G9 407 712 447 751 380762 'Coral 13,575,583 15,939,983 1S,G92,0~52 15,749,182 IIzpendlinres: Personu£I Scrt+iccs 8,449,31+1 9,178,996 8,$42,651 8,514,234 MAtcrial Supt-Ilcs 1,447,076 1,307,$23 1,370,D43 1,€64,545 t^ontrnctual Services 2,293,783 1,977,596 2,004,831 1,848,442 Other Ct~srgos 13,748 1,468 1,417 250 liesar•ve Apprnpriattons D 0 4 0 ]Do1bt 5erv€e£s D 0 0 D Sc€rOalslSetntn:trslTl•Rinhtg 21,479 6,247 4,$S6 0 Ltternnl5erti~iceA,llecntlous 2,566,778 3,145,336 3,1D5,33b 3,019,992 TrausfcrOut 1G6,dOD 166,600 166,600 1,]61,719 CApltsl pcltlRy 116,574 19317 w 196,317 0 Total 15,575,583 ]5,939,983 IS,692,052 15,709,182 ,Krill Tinte Gc}ulva€ents: 301 280 263 I+ro~ide progrents and services for ail residents and visitors; dc~eJap and msintafn public open spaces; and provida superior auatomar sarvice. q/ of Custotnera Satisfied wltii Latchkey Ptngrant. af' 3onkot~ Surveyed wiio wot+c Satisf~ccl with Sa~vices Provided of Maintenaitica Costs Spant on Proaotivo Maintenance Ratio of Actual Warkloed to I3udgeteti Labor 91,98 56,32 GA,BE 97.82 97.48 55.12 $0.G7 >- 911.00 » ~O.AO >~ 10.00 >=1 as JYiisslon (1) To opeinto a drainage system that provides safe, depeudablo surface drainage in each neighborhaoti that oan b@ maintained easily and ni a reasonnble cost; (2) to halve a p-nactiva planning process that will onsuro that new dov@laput@ttt does not lta~e a negative impact o-t existhtg nelgltborhonds; (3) to have a tTnnd protea#ion syafem that w}l1 proteat•the residents of our oantmunity; and (4) to lmprovc fife env}rontnent by itnpraving the duality of storm water runoff by rentaining in eompliasnce with Bnvitoumental Pt+otect[ots Aganey and TCBQ Regulations. Gonis ~ To prated homes, buinesses snd other personal and teal property born ilaodin$ during a prolong and intense • To employ at least the minimum level ntalntenaaae needed to keep inPlastaucture tlinotional and to si@6}lixe its tnateriai fFont deterioration due to back}og. ~ To maintain ettvJronm@ntal aontplianaa with TPD13S MSx pe-•tnit by employing best management practices to • ltnproveweter quality flowing into receiv4-g ureters. ttvvanuasa interest Income Sale of scrnttlcity property Peli'C1lOB@ (tJ8eat11t1S Tt•ansf t'r Ccnerai Llab Ircl Traust' Pr Worln-tan's Count Tint-ster t'r Wstet• J)Ivlt,lan Trnrtster f3•u-n 14t1S ]Flood '1'rA139I0P fi• Grotgt llealth ins Fll Total Expendltttres: Personnel Services Matcrinls Snia'p}tcs Cants'•aclttal Sarvlees Utl-er C1ta rges Reserve A pproln•Intlons Dcitt Scrvlce SchoolslScnllt-arsf Trst Ining Internal Sor'vices AItOCatianS Tt~tnsf@r Out cApirnl outlay Totn1 1<nlt Tints Lgnivate-tts: 30,7G3 0 32,442 0 0 8,899 8,899 0 18 o a 0 0 72;523 72,523 0 0 91,442 91,492 D 20,525,000 21,844,784 21,844,184 2x,940,981 0 39,111 19,717 0 t) 13,212 13 212 0 ?A,5S5,781 22,049,421 22,482,362 22,440,9D1 3,304,437 3,638,866 3,3GG,795 3,995,151 49x,349 567,031 540,637 734,645 x,948,741 4,260,125 3,900,518 4,285,'737 tl,zG2 0 25 0 0 1,012,876 0 200,D04 7d,OG7 68,362 50,697 17,542 14,647 22,363 7,861 17,413 1,850,489 2,08D,224 2,052,xib 2,090,892 7,786,509 9,583,463 9,583,463 17,735,473 127,885 347,307 ri _ 3x0,907 154,000 1656x,341 x1,588,617 19,843,120 '19,233,353 75 75 75 °1o Resitanses to Flood Water in Home ar J3usiness a 2 hr } 80.08 66.67 >¢ 95.00 On-tirtte Pollution Prevelttiolt [t.espnnses 66.67 3J,33 y~ 90.D0 of Actual LaUoa• that wns Planned and Scheduled GS.87 63.00 >= 7D 00 Ratio of Actual Workload to 13udgeled I.abw- 108.43 112.64 >~ 180AD GENERAL FUND (1020) RE'VENU'E DETA,XL IVUM~E~t ~ IaBSC PT1ON ~ zoae to4ry ~ 2uo~-io o I ~iDri9- oio~ ~ xo~o~2ui~ 1lnrese~'ve[i 27,1477,16 27,069,373 25,196,060 lteaerve[I for Lnct[mhe'nnces 3,168,444 1,978,239 0 Cteserve[EforCommltmcnta .~ -1332712 ,~ ~ _457,964_ _1,0G7,GOD 13>~GIHiVING BALANGCs ^.,T 31--_- G4- 8~~ -3Q OOS,S7G _ 25,2S3,GG0 t;engrnl P[•ope~•ty Taxos 300D 10 Advalorem taxes - crtrrent 46,860,765 48,065,776 48,679,109 48,979,10$ 300100 Advalorcrntaxcs-delinquent 1,168,412 1,100,000 1,20D,OOD 1,200,4D4 300200 Penalties & Interest on taxes 1,103,759 S13 673 925,329 925 329 Total Ptroperty Taxos 49,1329937 50,479,449 50,8D4,43B 51,104,437 Other Taxes 30D300 6tdust[•ialDistriat-In-lieu 6,002,640 6,110,453 6,104.418 G,i11,3B9 300450, Sp inve[ttary Tax 13scraw Refund 14,570 20,004 10,269 15,000 300GD0 City sales tax 44,416,163 38,3D1,98G 40,681,GS9 41,088,474 30D700 Liquor by thed[inktax 1,439,306 1,140,416 993,131 1,017,883 30080D C3ingotax 323,531 316,000 289,094 2$6,130 • 30097D ]dousing Anihvrity -lieu of taxes ~ 19,169_ 22,354 16,432 19,944 Total Qthcr Texas 51,815,379 45,911,409 48,095,023 48,538,819 r~•a[icitlso race 30D90D Electric kandrtse -CPL 8,988,D30 9,051,624 9,376,084 9,376,083 300910 131eatrie franchisa - lJuaces Coap 26D,154 254,091 338,056 338,055 300920 Telecvma~unicatians fees 4,485,384 4,517,204 4,137,576 4,220,298 30094D CATV franchise 2,337,720 2,958,000 2,814,997 2,892,108 300960 't'axicab franchises 53,S1G 48,000 48,OOD 48,000 3D098D AT&T ROW laasc fco 1,200 - ~,... , l~?AO , , , ~ • 1,200 1,200 Total I~'rauchlse 11ees 16,126,005 16,630,119 16,715,914 16,875,744 Solid 1~Vasto Sarvlees 300942 M$W S& Charge -BFI ],SS4,452 2,071,017 3,911,'717 1,912,000 300943 MS W SS Charge - CC I7lsposal SO 1,247 GG$,6GA 641,2$5 GD1,DD4 300948 M5W SS Chg ~ Traila'1'resh/SkidOKan 12,479 0 27,518 98,000 300945 MSW 55 Chaiga- Capixln 1•Iook 12,107 15,034 10,001 10,500 300947 MSW SS Cha~gcs-Misc Vandars 121,117 192,562 197,686 197,OOD 300948 MSW SS Charge -Absolute Indusu'ies 114,329 153,758 149,850 (44,000 304949 MSW SS Charges -Dawsan 68,702 68,000 102,917 B4,D00 309250 Residential 14,447.597 14,544,D00 14,438,146 15,770,537 30926D Commercial and industrial E,709,915 1,710,000 1,679,097 1,dE0,000 309270 MSW Service Charge -utility billings 3,436,495 3,414,700 3,434,08E 3,4SO,ODD 309300 Rofuse disposal oharges 1,754,366 1,754,336 1,754,366 1,754,336 309301 Refuse disposal charges -BFI 3,97G,32D 4,006,500 4,ODG,SOD 4,OD6,S00 3093D2 RetbsedisposAlcharges-CC Disposal 1,OSG,BBS 1,OS8,533 1,221,422 1,1D4,000 309303 Refi[se disposal - T[^ailet''I1•nshlSkiclO[fan 0 0 0 118,537 309304 3taftise dispassl -Captain Hook 36,326 37,000 30,849 33,DOD 3093DG 1;efi[se disposal -Misc vendors I,3G5,GS4 1,300,000 1,37I,4SG 861,000 309308 Rofuse disposal- Dawsan 373,9DG 352,000 474,620 386,000 309309 Refuse Disposal ~ Absolute Waste 0 0 4 329,230 309320 Rafi[sc collection pe[~[nits I9,4SS 19,000 IG,OOD 16,000 GE1~IERAL RUND (100} REVEN~7E~ DETAIL ACCquN'r 1!iUMIi~R ACCOUNT' IILSCItIp'rYON ACTUAFf3 2D08-x009 lii3AgET 2009-2D10 ~STCMATIaD 2009-x010 AbOi'TRl) 2010-2011 309330 Special clelrris pickup 314,248 322,500 322,500 354,b92 309331 SW-Mulch 12,983 la,o0a 10,000 23,6!6 30933$ SW - L3rush•Misc Vendors 27,636 15,000 15,000 1,000 304340 Recycling 30,474 30,000 48,000 50,000 309341 Raoyolittg oollection flse 0 0 0 450,000 309342 Recycling bank aetvieo charge 0 0 0 326,400 309343 Recycling bank incentive fee 0 0 0 120,000 309345 Recycling corttainetg 32,930 40,000 23,04D 6,250 309360 Unsecured load -Solid Waste 5 25 2S p 324220 Late Pees on retuned check payment ~~~• 1,530 T 0 _,1,423 ,~. 1_-~---425 To#nlSolidWasteStwvlces 30,98[,156 3L,7?8,625 31,847,469 33,$49,223 Otltar Pw~tnile & I~Icenses 3013!0 Atnusernentlicenses 14,029 18,000 i1,G85 $5,002 30131b Pipeline-license fees 38,164 38,164 3$,164 38,164 341340 Autowrcckerpermits 16,921 17,OOD 17,419 iG,988 30i34S Taxi At'iverPer+nits 4,250 7,G5D 7,650 5,000 301 600 Other E~ueiness license & permits 21,260 23,780 21,080 23,000 301650 Tax Inesnetlve App! Fees 5,000 D 0 0 302090 Oecupntley of public It-O-W ~ 3$,380 12,000 14,500 12,000 302150 Billboard fcc 12,044 12,200 0 0 302200 Vaoant t3nildittg Re-inapcctian Fee 80p 4,300 1,300 2,000 302330 Sd•eet blockage permits S,S.G4 0 4,500 4,000 302340 sannerpcnnits 525 400 406 400 302350 Special Ducat parmits 1,295 3,900 4,000 1,900 302360 13aachParkingPermits 518,141 500,000 654,914 575,000 302400 I'ipaline License Ag+~eemettts 448,650 0 0 0 309400 Pat licenses 74,514 70,000 50,054 52,000 30941 i Adopt a Konnel fees 0 375 3D0 22S 309413 Microchippittg ftses 9S 30D 760 960 3096 ] D Ambulance permits 3,675 2,OOD 2 7x5 2,500 TO#al Ae1'u11iS & Licenses 1,208,326 710,069 $29>452 819,139 Nlnnlcilral Court 329000 Moving vehicle fines 2,644,732 2,548,434 2,$71,542 2,871,542 329010 Parking fines 249,057 346,365 252,01 I 252,p11 329015 Redligltl Photo Bnfa~cement 1,062,048 a o 0 329020 General [inns 821,420 791,615 717,520 717,520 329030 Officers fees [89,208 196,710 220,787 220,787 329040 Uniform ~ra1#ic act Ones 77,352 81,7'50 95,346 45,346 32905fl Wart~tnEfees 235,P8G 325,133 274,639 274,839 329DG0 5chanf crossing guard peogt'atn 93,106 83,506 118,112 118,112 329070 Muni Court state fee discount 252,433 215,545 267,863 267,863 32907 ] Muni Court Time Pay Fee -Court 26,713 23,671 20,774 20,774 324072 Mtnti Court Time Pay I=ce -City 10G,$S2 94;946 83,354 83,354 329077 Muni Court -technology fee f 53,762 158,556 179,090 179,090 329060 Maori Coui•t -building security ~ 117,064 i 18,317 131,805 131,805 329085 Muni Court -.luveni]e Case Mgr Fund 46,769 142,449 144,5$2 1G4,~82 329090 Failure to appear revenue 694,357 863,159 614,383 614,383 329095 Muni Court-3uvenile Lxpungemcnt Fee 273 0 30 p 329100 Animal cotttroi Fines 9,014 24,766 11,377 11,377 32~ 110 Special parking enforcement 436 Sal 0 p 329120 Teen court city fees 1,351 2,374 2, l22 2,122 GENERAL ~`UN~ 04x0) ~tEVENUL DETAIL ACCal1NT ACCt7UIVT AC'1'Ue1~LS IIUDGET t1:6'TI[V1A2'1L~D AD41'~'>~D NUMIi>aR 1)13SCRII?TiON 2408-?AD9 x0091010 2009.2010 1x20-x011 329150 athor cout14ttvs 157,234 1 65,013 186,381 1 flG,3t31- 329160 Mun9 eoui~t ntisc revenue ._- _- 1,x$30 .,.,, 100w„~ _ 0 ~ p TotatMngictpalConrt 6,990,184 5,182,941 6,191,916 G,19I,88G Go»ot•al Govatvuneni: SQrvlca 306350 Attornoyfaes-demolition liens 29,159 19,296 41,518 28,779 308351 Attorney foes -}saving liorts 0 0 30 0 308390 Sale of City pnblicatlons 846 350 721 3,30D 308440 Nonprofitragletratlott fees 700 1,t28 1,128 1,235 308450 Candidate fil[og tees 2;150 0 0 2,50D 30$460 i)og ttaclc adtnlssion fees ~ - 53fl __6 _ _ 6,747 _ 7,355 _ Total Ganarnl Cavornmont Service 33,393 20,774 50,140 43,170 i~lcaltlt Services 307200 S/NDogSpny 18,389 15,000 17,680 17,500 307201 S1N CAt Shay 7,675 8,000 7,705 8,000 307202 SIN Dog 1JC11tcC li?,330 8,000 10,225 10,D00 307203 SIN Cnt l~iaptar 3,345 3,000 2,370 2,600 307204 S/9V Rabies 9,710 5,000 6,457 8,000 3072DS SIN Pnrvo/01st 7,4GS 6,OOfl 5,095 6,1]00 307206 5lI~ FVRCP 2,015 3,000 • 2,IOS 2,500 307207 Adopl Rog Spay 2,445 3,000 2,540 2,000 307248 Aclopt Cat Spay 870 1,000 3z0 SSO 307209 Adnpl Dog]Vantar 1,930 1,000 ],200 1,SD0 30729 0 Adapt Cnt l+lauter 5SD 400 340 400 3D7211 Adopt Ctabias 1,600 2,500 1,806 2,000 307212 Adopt Parvo/Dist 1,035 654 94S 1,000 30?zl3 AdoptFURCP 306 500 400 350 309420 Animal pound fees 8c itartdling chArges 49,433 46,000 25,651 30,000 30943D Animal trap teas 0 d 5G 0 30944D Shipping fees-lab 1,142 1,000 32$ 200 309550 Pest Contro] Services 0 ~0 D 1 15,850 309560 Past Control - intvrfitnd services 15,174 13,400 14,144 32,582 309580 Switnt»lltg pool inspections 37,500 40,000 40,925 40,000 309590 Food servino pormite 663,297 GS6,847 GS3,339 691,800 309615 Vital records otTice sales 8,899 7,OD0 7,1'10 7,260 309620 Vital statistics fans 585,209 Gz3,072 SGG,898 567,000 309421 Vital rccards retantiort fee 2,053 0 23,188 0 309625 Child Carc racllities Fcas 7,815_ __ 9,650 9,650 7,200 Totnl l[ea111t Services 1,437,784 1,456,619 1,400,236 1,SS4,292 Musetttn 303020 Schaal Dist • narseum education progi~tms 22,OD0 22,000 22,000 22,000 308471 Museum • admission fees 118,049 104,553 123,$41 171,657 308480 Museum - fnaility rentals 23,775 17,425 17,234 21,403 308490 Museum • special program fees 12,000 G,ODO 12,000 6,000 308491 Ednoation group prograi»s 1,664 77t L,5G1 1,56 1 308492 Parties And recitals 5,270 4,816 5,330 7,672 30$50D Museum -McGregor repr•od fees 8,019 3,131 4,763 6,002 308550 Columbus Ships • Adtt~issions 130,203 117_,927 135,64) 144,457 308552 Columbus Ships - Facility lterttal 1600 700 735 435 Totnt Masennt 322,629 277,323 324,1OS 341,187 G~NERA.L FUNA 0.024) REVENUE D~TAYL ~ i f~i]MI3~RT ! C3CSCRCIpTt(3N I 2008 ~OU9 ~ OD9-20 0 ~ X2004- 410D I 20 Qp Oln I i . Library Sarvlcas 309700 Library Iinas 309720 Lod goflk charges 309740 Copy ntaehine sales 309760 Other library revenue 'Total T.Ibrftry ServJces liect•catlan 8ervlees Foals: 3100D0 Swimming Pools 310150 Swimming instrnctian fees StrlttoMl T'ettr}Is: 3D9800 1•IBI3 Tennis Canter 309804 LiHB Tennis Cantor pro shop sales 309900 A! Kr'uae Tanuis Center 309904 AI Kl'1194TBi}>ifs C`eUier'pro shop SL1Vt9tftl Cltlter IZecreatlan lteventte: 306594 Center 1t8r1ta18 310300 Athlatlc cvcnta 314400 Athletict~¢ntals 31041D Athleticiustructionfees 31 OGOD Recrcntlort ccrttet• rentals 310610 Recreation iasteuctlan fees 310721 Skata Park Concessions 310800 Latchlccy 314801 l.tttvhkey insh'uation fens 3l 1250 Summer program trogistr•ation fees 311520 lierltage Park revenues 31200D Pavilion rentals 312410 Tourist tlistrici rentals 312030 Other recremlan revenue 343697 13uc Days / Bayfest 5ulatatal Tott;l ltacreatlon St;rvlces Ailtrtlnsh•ativc Charges 350000 Adm svcchg- Visitat~ Facilities' Fund 350030 Adtti svc citg - c3as l~lvision 350040 Adm svc ehg - Wastewater 17ivision 350050 Adut svo ehg -Water' Division 350040 Adtn svc ohg - Stormwater 350070 Adrn svc ehg -Airport Fund 350090 Admsvccltg-LazanoGolf 350100 Adn1 sve ehg - Oso Golf 350110 Adm svc ehg • Marina Ruud fi23,334 122,921 L16,133 118,133 20,011 21,911 IS,G97 24,698 32,351 33,009 34,167 34, lb6 .,.. ,,,, 5,599 _ - _ -, 4,368 5,689 5,688 181,291 182,249 173,687 178,685 259,7ss 2D7,6o1a 212,726 275,127 129158 1i5,40D l2G 1GG 128146 388,943 322,600 338,$92 403,273 34,418 33,000 33,517 36,122 15,594 12,OOD 12,463 13,135 1 G,4i2 15,$00 15,920 17,404 ~~,~ 6.,130 6,004 _ 6,353 _ _ -~ 7,115 72,554 66,800 68,253 73,776 52,209 52,000 54,000 55,000 122,493 110,000 110,164 123,450 17,551 34,800 34,665 26,966 ' 40,466 35,000- 35,112 44,864 6,132 11,282 10,D7G 1D,535 ~ 38,720 44,071 37,740 _ 39,357 1,725 0 1,750 3,540 ' 2,328,354 2,540,910 2,434,460 2,569,035 D o zso 0 17,993 0 245 0 9,976 7,000 7,718 3,990 150 0 0 0 13,689 13,OD0 13,585 79,050 5,700 0 G,ODO _ 0 60,281 _58,318 . __ 27,766 __ 46,400 . - 2,715,941 2,406,3 B 1 2 765,751 3,OU1,747 3,E77,438 3,295,761 3,172,897 3,478,796 $2,547 170,112 174,112 ]47,708 710,990 536,452 536,452 490,884 $56,592 749,945 749,945 745,380 1,48 G,b41 1,231,392 1,231,392 1,332,528 178,170 294,711 Z9A,711 406,636 240,870 229,630 229,630 296,748 109,962 129,938 (29,938 150,844 109,942 129,93 8 129,938 I Sfl,840 1 G3,7G6 120,323 120,323 80,628 GENERAL ~UNb (1~~0} REVENUE ATTA.IL I IVLIMI3~R b SC1vOP'x OA1 ~ x0 8 2009 I 009-2010 I ~ 2009•?A10p I z0 Op201 i 3SD 170 Aden avc chg • Dovclopmeut Service Fund 476,949 435,497 433,997 3ti8,712 356300 I+Idirectcoatreaovcry-grEtnte - ,.,' 171,539 172,153__ __ ___!52,812 _ 1GO~OD 'total Adminstrntivo Ch--rges 4,588,057 4,200,59! 4,181,250 4,332,904 luterest on Invesitnet-ts 340940 Iitterest Dn investmetlls 606,464 332,520 1$7,000 135,962 344995 Nat Inc/l)ea in FV of Investments 1,936 0 (15,938} 0 341004 h-torcatearnod-otllcrtllan iuvestmente 72,044 16,272 95,764 56,112 341020 Ilttet'est eareed - lntorfiind boti'owad 23,4x8 • _ 0 _.,4,550 0 TOta1 Illterc8f 011 1111VCSfE1le11tS 703,874 348,792 271,377 192,074 Public Snfoty Sn-vlcos 303065 Kingsvi]!e Polloe beet- CAD/RMS 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 304466 Scxuel Assault Exam 114;142 84,000 80,000 80,000 308510 Special Events Suppalt Services 11,465 D 6,043 0 308700 Police towing 8t storage charge 951,082 1,032,000 877,124 416,800 308705 Vehicle Impound Celtitied Mal] recovery 5$,034 6.2;440 61,831 58,800 30871 D Police accident reports 80,125 76,638 68,581 80,125 308715 Police Security Services 16,395 25,861 25,000 25,000 308720 P+'occeds of auction - ablrndoned vehicles 600,121 672,885 SBO,$G9 603,000 308725 DW1 ViciavTapitsg 1,511 G7S 1,126 700 30$730 PAri<i+tg meter collections 160,572 170,000 160,000 160,000 348740 Police open record rarluesfs 2,664 3,8 f 3 2,230 2,810 308750 Police subpae+ios 385 750 448 345 348764 Fingerprinting fees 5,277 5,076 5,076 5,076 308765 CastotnslpB) 162,218 218,$45 129,786 160,529 308766 Ott"ice o€.lustice Awa+d 4,970 4 0 0 308770 Ale+m systei-~ pcrntits and services 430,560 440,000 412,381 7?4,GG5 308804 800 Iv1Hx radio - interdcparttnet-ial 243,742 246,268 246,288 2A8,544 308814 800 MFJz Indio -outside city 191,339 1 BG,$25 166,825 194,369 308850 911 Wireless Service Itovenue 1,251,897 1,264,000 1,263,(+74 1,256,969 308851 911 Wircline Service Revenue ~ 1,395,015 ~ 1,398,174 1,519,148 1,476,000 308860 C,A.A.calls 312 200 321 274 308$80 Restitution 3,501 9,Ofl0 5,942 D 308900 Fire prevention pe~'tnlts 199,513 180,000 186,000 217,530 3118910 f•[az+~lat response ca11s 4,698 0 3,666 2,500 348915 Safety Education Reven--cs 4,284 2,500 3,L50 9,000 308920 Fire hydrant maintenance 327,472 327,472 327,472 327,472 348925 Honor C,uard 0 0 0 4,000 308935 Bmargeney Mgmt Alert Sys Fees 0 L4,000 15,000 0 30$950 Pipeline reporting administration 38,300 33,000 33,000 41,250 32!000 Emergency calls 5,693,132 6,600,000 6,550,000 6,946,000 3210! 5 [ntcrlasal Agree - Port A 10,000 10,000 14,000 10,000 321420 Na+eces County OCL cltargas ~,_ _24,682 7,004 7,000 7,000 '1'oful Fobiic Sat'ety Sorvlees ~ 12,002,405 13,082,403 12,7$2,986 13,619,759 I ntorgovcru n-entAi 343010 State of Texas-expressway Ilghting 384,992 204,000 204,000 204,000 303022 Crossing Guards 7,670 7,670 7,670 7,670 303030 Nueces County - Health Administration 129,796 172,454 107,732 IS [,677 303432 Nueces Co - P & >Z reimb 17,748 4 7,168 0 303035 N-leces County - Metrocom 979,210 1,066,255 1,066,255 1,138,081 GENERAL FUND (102x) REVENUE DETA,xL p,C:COUNT N[IMI3~R ACCOUN'1(' DCSC121PTIOIH ACTUAI~S 2008-2009 $tII:7~1Ei:1` 2ali~-2010 11aS3`1MATGD x409010 AT)4p'1'$p 2010.2D11 30307D RTA-straatselvlcasaontributione i,1S8,SSG L;089,612 1,0$9,612 1,089,612 303510 QGO • beach claanlr~g ~ 73,279 75,000 73,040 73,0{14 305710 13BOCcantribution 65,95D 59,300 60,800 G4,S$0 30571 S HUD Intrirn Agrectt~nt Iteim/prnts 47,400 112,500 129,40D p 327300 Bnginetring BvCB - atlticr gouts 329 - 0 0 0 327301 Unglnccringsvas~- t;IP po+ajects 84,132 84,796 84,798 84,798 327302 i3nginearingsvae-irtterdapsrlmental 40,21x 64,714 G9,71a 64,716 343585 HuYnzln l~clations -Nair 1-lousing 0 S,DDD _ __ __ __ 0 ___ _ 122,70D . 'r0talliltCl~0YC1'nltzClltfll 2,789,274 2,944,305 2,895,!51 3,000,834 QtlYCI' 1ZCVC11l+CS 303080 RTR - itus atlvartising revenues 305700 Fr>sMA - conlrlh to emergency management 307600 ~ All - Amt;rlca Taxable Solos 308722 Proceodsof auetion - amino 30928D Itocavery ofchargcd off accounts 311950 Nnmiag ltlghle Itavenue 320360 Autourstedleller machines 32920D Graffiti Control 340000 CotYtriUntions and donations 340D08 Time Wanter- Public Aceass Scluipment 343000 Reeavaly afyriar year expenditures 3431 AD Recovery of prior year oxpenscs 3433D0 Recovery on damago alniurs 343400 PY•opel'ty rentals 343535 ConveniallcaFae 343554 De+noiitian liens and scconnts 343560 Returned check rovenue 343590 Sale of scraplcity property 343610 Adminsp•atlvc Processing Charge 343G3D Copy sales 343650 Ptuchnsadisccunts 343664 VcYYdirlg machines sales 343670 Clty I•lall food se+•vice comn~issiott 343680 Fol'feited plans deposits 343690 Snbdivlslon street Ilght pet•ts 343700 Claim settie+nents 344004 Miscelianeaus 34411U Speed humps 344120 Street division cha+ges 344123 Sb~eet racavely foes 344320 Park and Recreation Cast Recovery Tatr71 t)thar licvetYnes 22,D64 i8,54D Zb,093 20,000 414,672 GO,OOD 71,962 7D,ODD D 0 0 30D 26,048 20,DOD 16,983 24,000 0 0 4,415 0 0 17S,00U 17S,DD0 175,000 1,2DD 1,200 1,2D0 1,200 465 0 1,983 0 142,891 G7,2S2 74,310 60,251 3,500 .3,SOD 7,000 3,SOD 0 400,OOD 389,925 0 9,150 0 0 0 89,914 192,138 212,162 90,OD0 151,299 146,438 192,43$ 204,238 180,85$ 127,873 158,I1S 160,000 152,471 85,600 173,262 2] 9,820 3,707 4,104 3,450 33,257 11,197 90;796 97,182 GS,DOo 16,796 17,004 17,417 24,990 8,7?9 5,117 6,313 6,000 140,691 1 G2,SG1 l 64,354 143,843 4,521 4,104 4,520 4,196 1,518 1,884 I,42A 1,335 15,325 6,000 6,000 ~ 3,000 12,646 50,000 50,000 50,000 166,124 D 0 0 132,472 36,876 37,947 47,126 5,295 6,OOD 6,000 G,OQO 715,223 640,573 6D8,811 555,575 880,67'7 77S,2tiiS 807,427 718,b80 0 206,172 __208,287__ _ ~ }97,351 3,309,722 3,307,957 3,52$,580 2,876,662 GENERAI,~ FUND (1020) RE~~NUE DETAIL ACCDUNT ACCOUNT' A,CTUA[.$ BUpC3~T' >EST[MRTEB ADU]pTTD NUM8,4R D~tCitlPTI[lN ao48 ~ao9 2049-x010 ZDD9-2010 2010-x411 mter~surn c:~trtrges 344170 '!Waffle 8nglneering Cast Recovery - C1P 344220 Capital ]3Eidget CostRecovery -CIP 344270 Finance Cost Reoovcry -CIP 344290 Hlrnlan RCIuti4ns Cosl Recovery C]I' 344400 Intordcpa~•tmental Services 350350 ]ndiractcastrccove~•y-CCCIC 350400 'fransfertl•om t3cnera] I.iabillty Fund 350415 Tranaferf+'orn Wortcors'Comp 35221 D Transfer Onrn City Bali CIP I;und 352280 'transfer }'i'om Street CIl' Puhd 35248D ~ 't"ransfarfl'orn Mi5 pond 3S250D Transfer fl'ortr }?naployee Dene#lts Fund 35252D 'tr'ansfer from Other Funds 7,330 6,000 G,000 6,000 177,307 24x,b34 242,G34 2Sb,i97 709,bT5 8G9,524 8b9,527 766,922 0 0 5,000 62,512 5,031,522 4,593,065 4,327,070 3,931,562 b,D39 5,80D S,SOD 3,500 0 2,858,492 2,716,737 0 0 ~ 2,483,525 2,483,523 0 129,073 D 0 0 0 340,944 170;472 p 0 •513,263 S ] 3,283 p 0 196,000 i9b,00D 0 a 575,DOa 575,DDD b,2aD oao xatel luterl~iixd Chargos Total Ttevenuas & ArteE'tUitd Ghnrges 6,DG0,945 12,664,287 12, l t f,048 11,2bs,~ 13 190 8bD 798 193,295,553 195 375 667 l98 2bfi 32,4 Total fonds Avallaule 222 509, l?0 193 295 653 225 38I 243 224 529 985 GENEX2AL FUND (~Q20} EXPENA~TUIiE DETAIL BY oRGA,NiZAT~UN UIiG OItGANI~A7'1QN ACTifALS 13C11)G1B'y >vSmIMATED A1DOpT£iD NUMB1(t1~ NAM)C 2408.2b09 2009.2010 2D09.201b 5010 x011 Gones•al Gavcrnmcnt iODDI Mnyos• 147,102 128,172 121,$18 125,212 10010 City Conncif 97,239 , 93,683 93,173 85,880 10500 Clty Attorney 2,133,499 2,242,984 2,215,816 2,1g4,S2D IO1D0 Clty Manager'sOfflce 759,799 469,513 4b1,409 46fl,612 10150 ACM of Adtssin 5crvices 183,697 162,292 166,543 157,572 Ifl25D lntcrgovcrnnscatalltatatlons 229,179 255,497 252,D00 253,925 10260 ACM - Connssunity Services 228,479 228,971 227,301 185,436 !0265 Clean City Initiatives 0 48,000 59,636 65,624 10270 Boona~tsia Qevolopnicnt pfFice 359,056 318,647 317,728 0 10350 13duca#iau Advisor 96,323 0 0 0 11470 Pubilc Frafomsatiots 526 507 487 442 ~ 436 908 290129 City Manager 2,378,041 1,970,322 1,923,526 1,413,297 30024 Clty Secsotasy 1,009,229 560,099 557,124 1,046,759 [titsnnce 1070D Director ofC'inanco 307,157 33D,349 321,693 358,687 10751 AccoantingOpct^ations 2,048,313 2,086,716 2,072,368 2,D77,337 10830 Cash MAnagetncnt 363,367 335,488 324,680 328,040 10840 Cenh•A1 Cashiering ~ 868,512 877,629 846,328 841,672 31000 Managctnettt & Budget 570,296 589,209 569,209 560,793 i 1010 Capital F3adgetirag 84,273 171,666 171,666 181,640 11030 Aosfarrnassce Opeinlions tteviews 0 ~ 0 0 (G4D,OOfl) 11D40 5alpry Savings 0 0 555 000 f'lnssnco 4,241,918 4,391,057 4,305,944 3,193,169 3 1454 Hassan Rclations 442,086 420,109 420,319 323,43fl 11451 1-iuman Relations -Fair Housing 0 0 0 63,980 E 1452 AI)A Conipllence 7S 662 78 343 83,836 86,$69 litssnnn Rolntlons 517,947 498,412 504,15b 474,279 11400 Hrunan Itesotures 1,294,970 1,149,132 1,131,223 1,149,242 11410 Strident Jntcrn Progress 26,745 0 D 0 11415 75•aining 235,313 211978 211,978 243,D89 Flumes Resources 1,558,029 1,361,110 .1,343,201 !,312,331 Mnnlcipn! Cotrrt ]0400 Muai Courl-Judicial 433,711 914,289 90$,354 925,196 10410 Bnvirosst~ental Cain 175,008 0 0 0 10420 1?clention Facility 1,345,345 I,137,548 1,155,958 1,129,765 1043D Municipal Juvcuile Cottrt 236,708 34,488 34,488 p . 10440 Muni Cotart • Adminisbatinn 2,353,639 2,427,35$ 2,4D0,038 1,991,502 10475 IvisttsiCourt-CilyMarshais 719,558 672,737 639,306 SG 1,492 32899 Assessnsent Center 177,273 48,348 31,872 0 I3G70 Velunteer Cantor 8,450 23,594 23 594 l0 OOD Mtmicil-st Conrt 5,449,6$8 5,254,362 5,193,410 4,617,954 G~NERA~, ~'UNb (1~~0) . ~Xl'ENDITURE D~TAZL BX UR~A,iV~ZATYON ORC ORGAIVIZATCOPI AGTUALS BCITICE'f' ESTIMATED ADOIPTED ~NUMB);R NAML 2008.2409 2t149.7A10 2009 2410 20T0.24I1 Muaet»rs 13490 Corpus Cht'istl Musctnn . 1,530,323 1,S74,OG6 1,SG7,695 1,527,636 13x93 CnlutnUusShlps 109465 160226 135329 1SDG14 Museums ~ 1,639,788 1,734,292 1,703,224 1,678,251 Tvtnl saeuernl Cavernmo~t 19,172,480 18,234,495 17,96],342 16,091,651 Public SnFety Flre 11950 13mergencyManagement 352,601 449,674 416,896 419,105 t 1955 Pipet€ne 7Yanspottation 36,028 0 4 0 1240D Fli'v Adminislraliou 1,402,717 1,533,837 ],60S,G40 1,440,834 12010 F1re Statians 31,363,566 33,263,714 33,169,833 36,658,543 12020 Pire 1~rcvcution !,318,8x3 1,378,886 1,364,925 1,440,1 SG 12030 F€re Training 1,163,443 1,140,828 1,090,508 1,101,168 12040 R€re Cotnrnwtieations 301,341 295,392 296,$40 29x,921 12050 Aire Apparatus & Slop 724,766 719,586 67x,868 679,156 12064 Firc I]cpt. Special Services 199,396 21$,771 207,510 226,169 12080 Firc Support Services 149,522 154,541 145,(77 129,294 35100 City Ambuiance Opnr:ltia-ts 1696,832 1,800,467 1979 409 2 020,422 hire 38,907,OSS 40,952,899 40,952,148 44,x09,768 Police 10495 Recllight Photo llnforcemeut 736,041 0 6 4 11700 Police Admix€slration 3,222,784 3,160,339 3,1S9,9D1 3,236,983 11720 Cc•iminaf Investigation 5,798,B96 5,968,139 6,206,273 G,OD5,422 11734 SpscEnl Services 2,784,633 3,399,822 3,388,40fl 3,270,x64 11740 Uniform d€visian 35,468,465 35,818,952 36;175,427 35,925,058 11750 t;entrallnt'armutior 1,403,866 i,GS1;x2S 1,578,888 1,6x9,620 11770 Vel2iele Pound Operation 990,248 9$7,747 873,OD4 883,334 11784 I:orenelca Servlcea Dit+isinn 1,364,475 1,395,209 1,316,981 1,x06,516 _ 11790 Pot€coTrcining 1,553,71D 1,322,263 1,340,316 1,2GI,DG6 118D0 MetroCont 4,G79,D7S 4,746,513 4,89D,770 5,107,526 11801 I'oliceCarpt~terSupport 755,965 726,x18 741,260 7xD,2S2 11802 9-1-I Cali Delivery WEteline 390,392 x03,324 413,617 403,093 118D3 9-1, I Call Delivery Wireless 233,903 497,431 4G7,29x 268,613 11830 Crintinallntelllgenee 7x5,758 981,895 938,124 1,0$1,333 11650 Sc]-ool Crossing Gunrds 842,237 781,197 655,397 510,138 11860 Pm'Itin$ Ccnlral 250,003 229,980 226,273 217,334 11870 Pa}ice Building Maint & Qpersttions 1,712,748 1,368,295 1,393,4$7 !,346,x41 11880 BeACh Safety 114,I9D 159,391 159,391 158,204 11885 Police Special Events Qvertitne 265,558 217,175 217,175 215,557 12335 'I~Affic Safety - SB 11 19 59,259 4 0 D 60435 Tianafer-Police 41•ants Cah Mstoh 133 75 69,412 G9 412 Gl 667 Police 63,444,983 63,T65,Ox6 64,165,691 63,748,624 Totnll?ublicSnfety 142,352,038 ]04,737,745 105,117,840 i08,~56,391 Hnnitk Services GENERAL FUND (1020) E~PrNDITURE bETAIL B`Y QItGANIZATION QIZG 41tCAI91ZAT]<pN ACl'UA1.S 13UlDGET ESTIMATE!] ADg1'T)~b NUMBER ]NAME 2pD8-2009 2009-7!010 2409-201~ 2010.2011 " 12600 Henitlt Administration 794,798 407,332 846,005 809,770 126 10 Health Of!]ce 13uifdin8 452,092 354,761 354,389 401,593 12615 TD Clinic-Health Deparhnent 80,464 101,391 101,422 70,161 12634 VitalStatiatics 148,403 161,314 149,236 158,503 12644 Bnvlronmcntal F{eaith Inspvctiotts 279,499 342,716 398,819 404,450 12654 STI) Ciinlc 102,486 113,039 113,129 110,733 12660 Gnn~unfzation 89,624 78,426 114,629 133,813 12670 YectorContro] 447,121 439,668 407,630 403,776 12680 Animal Control 1,3$1,290 1,402,396 1,442,231 ~ 1,315,880 12681 Low costspNyNaaterClinia 155,10s 154,872 1G3,?,62 192,889 12640 Nui~ing l4ealtlt SorvicEU 550,263 54I,594 515,069 417,506 12700 Laboratory 131,592 ... , 155,942 'T 1SGai_52 _ ___, 147,066 Henltls Seivlces 4,612,742 4,753,499 ~ 4,723,973 4,57G,i40~ Llbrnty Services 12840 centrall.ibi~+,y 2,5$8,289 2,327,158 2,242,932 2,094,349 12810 Anita & WT tVcyland 1'oblia Library 439,430 432,918 412,722 410,998 12820 Greenwood 13ranch 362,847 395,660 390,390 344,741 12830 NortliwestBspnch 34Q78$ 359,734 349,935 35$,443 12640 Janet F,13a~'te Pstl~lle Llbrnry 347,641 323,069 321,944 332,469 12850 Dr. C. P. Qarela Public Library ~ 224 384 297 196 294 GI2 313,494 LlbraryServlcos 4,263,580 4,I35,73G 4,012,514 3,944,453 rarlcs & Rccrentlors ]2070 1,sFeGaardinglFirstResponse 389,191 383,659 390,2D8 413,1 (G 12480 Beach Maintenence15a1'eEy 6,550 4,390 4,390 4,390 12900 Ot'Oce of pirecrar 805,447 911,468 884,439 881,819 12410 Park ppci~atians 5,336,490 4,962,448 4,961,660 4,664,681 12915 Tourist District 906,322 1,007,724 988,345 1,376,870 12924 Park Construotion 0 348,970 348,9?0 909,427 12940 Bench C)perntions 835,835 88b,078 874,214 789,533 12950 Beach Parking Permits 179,670 127,868 125,252 ]34,924 13005 Program Services Achs~inistration 1,033,144 465,2$9 464,824 487,dIG 13422 Osa >Zeor'eation Centcr 0 143,580 135,978 101,223 13023 l,,lndalo lteareation Center 0 124,968 118,669 123,784 13025 Oak Panic Cicct'Cation Center 0 102,095 71,646 22,913 13026 Joc C3a~xa Rcaroadon Canker 0 107,144 94,104 50,433 13028 Coles ftecrcatian Cutter 0 102,583 105,091 GI,G20 13030 Senior CommunityServiocs ],195,223 1,141,999 1,155,891 1,168,[60 13441 Atlsletics O~tsratfons 628,220 760,233 766,376 723,999 13145 Agnaties Operations 1,015,603 949,857 952,438 951,779 13127 Nalatoriusu Pool 161,694 150,535 !50,535 154,532 13210 113 Teruiis Center OpoE^atlaus 127,273 172,871 173,231 162,035 13222 Al Kruse Tennis Center Operatians 69,277 63,832 63,874 63,304 13310 Summer I~cngrams 4peratians 72,576 0 0 4 13405 Latchkey Operations 2,036,096 2,524,286 2,413,454 2,426,621] 13700 Cultimai Scrviccs 349,576 291,510 241,664 248,648 13825 Arts SubgrauEing 64,995 44,000 40,044 0 GD031 Transfer'forSeuiarCorolnuttity5erviees 166,644 166,600 166,640 166,719 Pa~'tcs & Itccreatian 15,575,583 15,939,983 ]5,592,052 15,539,898 Strcet Scrvkccs 12400 Strad Office & Yard 1,071,253 1,186,593 ],155,221 1,044,31$ GENERAL FU~]D (102Q) E7~PEN~7ITU~2E DETAIL ~'Y QItGANIZATION U1tG ORGANIZA'i'IONI ACTUAL$ BI}DGL~T BSTIMAT1TUD AD011'TJ~D 1`1UMl3L~lt NAiV1~ 2408.2409, 2049.201.4 2409-2410 2010-xp1! 12410 Strcat Ilea^nstructian 3,547,275 1,874,324 1,870,326 3,344,953 12424 St+xset UtilityCutRepairs 44$,147 384,275 .393,794 4GI,772 12430 Aapl>alt Maintenance G, i 1ar989 G74 4, 45 • _ G ._ • 6LG74 43~~ 6,OU4;35G Sq~cet Servlccs _ 11,201,445 ~ 11,342,923 11,338,6Q7 10,847,401 So11t1 Waste 1z50D Solid Waste Administration 1,039,364 l,IS1,030 1,357,775 1,412,595 12504 JC l3111ett'0'ansfer Station 993,589 1,700,494 1,698,042 2,323,789 12506 CcFo Valen2ucla Landf+ll Operations 708,798 4,583,575 4,480,836 7,741,821 12510 Refuso Collection 4,208,925 4,215,718 5,984,046 6,941,844 12511 Brusb Collection 2,282,533 2,404,841 2,404,688 2,416,914 12512 Recyclia$ Collection 1,D73,035 1,035,847 1,073,812 717,082 12524 itoFusaDispossl 8,128,874 5,467,674 5,499,743 1,775,817 12530 Elliott CloaurelPas#elosul~e expense 95,371 182;745 f 82,765 120,000 13$70 Graffiti Clean•ap Project 141438 243 490 243 495 282754 Solid Waste 20,671,926 23,285,197 23,]27,32) 23,292,437 13evelolunautSarvlcas Conununlly DCvelopmcnt 11500 NeigltGorltaod Services 11510 Haighburhoad 1~litlative Program 60470 Tt'nnstbr to Developntcnt Sorviccs Kunst Cornrntutity Davclopurcnt )rngiucarhsg Sctvtces 11135 Engineering Support Services 12300 Trsflic Engineering 12310 Traf7ic Signaia ]2320 Signs & Markings 12330 Resisfcntiai'lYaflia Management 12440 St+~set Lighting RnghrcnrHtg SCt~vlccs 1,524,402 1,407,408 1,452,218 1,417,445 457,251 348,580 317,339 301,317 2 324 D60 1 79.4 494 1,794 496 959 494 4,309,712 3,752,484 3,746,053 2,678,218 - 328,813 317,784 317,784 135,!52 S6Q792 540,305 523,233 587,801 1,154,402 1,2d9,42p 1,223,123 1,189,320 1,173,491 1,245,2$4 1,244,922 1,088,270 52,134 36,595 34,595 D 3,562,775 3,825 473 3 825 473 3 421 435 4,834,407 7,145,061 7,173,329 4,421,978 Total peYelopmont5er•vlccs 11,[44,320 10,897,545 10,939,382 ~,100,19G Non-Aeltar•tmental isxpendltures t7ri181de Ag@i1Ci48 10840 NCA75/NGAdtninisu'ativa 1,157,113 1,176,$00 .1,187,575 1,2+12,533 12720 Mentalllealth 54,000 54,000 54,D00 54,400 12890 Siater Gity 17,843 18,000 18,000 18,000 1385D CCISD Contract 3,489 50,400 50,000 50,004 14664 MajorMenlbarsitips 74,140 49,279 49,279 49,279 14490 Downtown Managalnent 13istrict 145,000 145,000 !45,000 145,000 14700 Bco+lomic Devclopntent 196 594 232,679 __ 232,479 352,328 Outside Agalcles 1,453,181 1,745,'!38 1,756,533 1,93(,144 Otitel• A,ctlvlties 11405 Incentive Pt'agl~eul 14,537 24,441 20,641 20,641 13420 Coliseum 2,117 13,248 922,219 0 14470 Vision 200D 132,330 0 0 0 14674 Cable pL~CI Access 0 1,232 1,232 0 G~N~~tAL FUNA (XQ20) ~~PENDI'~'~R~ A~TAIL ]3Y QRGANI~ATI4N ~QRG I OiRGATiIZATIOI~i iYUMD>Jlt _ _ 1VAMI~ 14729 Hurricane 1kc - 2008 1 S l00 13oonomla Dcvclapntent 7ncontives SOOID Uncollactihleaccounts GOD00 Olset•ating'franafcrspot 60020 7YRUS1'er~lo hotel Occupancy Tax Fund 50030 Transfst• to >7edat'sllSt orant Rund 60400 Trnnsfot' m Visitors Facilities' F~sncl 6041p Ta'anafsrto Srores Fund 60420 'f1•nnst$r 1a Mainlauanca Sat'vices Fund 80(103 Resorva Appropriatlons - Oonet~al Fund 80006 Reserve forAccruod Pay 90100 Refitga of fasl resort Othet• Activl#las ACTUALB li[1AGET Y£3T)<MA'CEA ADOYTEA X008.2009 2DOg-2010 2009.2010 2010 X421 0 575,000 5?5,000 ~ p 17x,555 0 D 0 33,337 36,000 36,000 348,675 Gb3,767 362,060 419,491 361,991 D 1x4,722 1x4,722 0 0 393,1$2 393,182 ]7U,OOQ 26,208 0 D D D 175,000 175,ODQ I75,OOQ 317,19b 310,212 31D,2i2 33Q,192 492,000 1,x54,18D 1,450,1BQ 985,665 0 41,98$ 0 632,751 0 0 0 1,800,OQ4 31 0 0 0 1,656,078 3,543,485 4,447,880 4,82x,x1G Totnl p[m~-Bcrino•tmcnta3lrxpctsciltnres TOTAI. G~N1tItA1. P'UNA 1t~SGlvtYGD i'0[t C+.NGUMBRANC~S • [211;S~RVl;1]FORCO_ MMl'1'MGiVTS Ufa Ii1~5ERV Gt p CL,DSING iBA1.ANCla 3,509,259 5,2$9,243 6,204,413 G,75S,557 192,503,594 198,636,365 199582 _~982GG,3.24 1,976,239 0 a 957,964 1,067,600 i,OG7,GOQ 27,DG9,373 25,19G,DGD~ 25,196 OGl ~~30,005,576 ____ 26~26~34,GGD 26,263,660 Mlesion (1) Ta operate a iiminage system that provides 9are, dapandabie stEtface drainage in each neighborhood that can be maintained easily and nt n ressanable coat; (2) to have a proactive planning process that w111 cnsare that new devolopmant does not have a nogatlvc impact on cxisting neighborhoods; (3) to have a flood proteoton system that will pruteot the residents of out' community; and (4) to EmprovB the environment by improving the quality of storm water runoff by iemal-ling in campllance with Environmental Protection Agenoy and TCBQ IZeguietlons. Gouts • To protect homes, i~uinesses and other parsons! and scat property ii'om flooding during a prolong and intense a 'To employ at feast tlic nsinimum level maintenance needed to keep infYasttucture fl3nctionai and to s#abllizc its ~nateriai fibtn detariorstion due to baoklog, • To maintain environmental compliance wltii'fPDBS MS4 peim{t by ernploying boat ntaaagemcnt practices in hnprovc wflter duality flowing Into ~caelving waters. interestlncome 30,763 Q 3x,942 0 Sake orecrngfcity i>roporty 0 &,849 8,899 0 Purchase discouttts 18 D' 0 0 Transf('i•Ge~eat'al Llnu Fri 0 72,323 72,523 D 'f'rmtsf fr Warlcman's Comp 0 41,442 91,492 D Transfer tY• Water Division 20,625,000 21,844,184 21,844,184 22,940,901 r~•nnsrcr fl•oin lairs >?attn 0 19,111 19,111 0 Transfer rr Grouts Health I»s rt] 0 13,212 13 212 0 Total 20,SSS,781 22,049,421 22,082,361 22,940,901 ~xpenditures: Personnel Scrvlcc3 3,304,437 3,538,866' 3,366,795 3,99'3,151 Materials SuP1lltes 442,344 567,031 340,63'1 730,643 Caudnctuai$ervlces 2,908,741 4,160,125 3,906,518 a,285,73T Other Clkarges 8,262 0 2S 0 Reserve Apir!•oprintions 6 1,011,876 0 200,000 DeUt Setwtce 74,067 68,362 56,697 17,S4x SCII00]BlbEllltllak~'I'C1'aining 14,b07 21,363 7,$61 17,413 )infernal Services Altoentlons l,s5a,a89 2,08D,224 2,052,214 2,D9D,892 '1'rnnsrer Out 7,78G,S09 9,583,463 4,583,463 17,735,473 Capital 4utlny. 121,885_ _ _347,307 340,9D7 • - ]SO,OpO Total 16,561,341 21,S8D,417 ]9,843,124 29,123,353 pWI Tints Gstuivnients; . 75 75 7S Rcatronses so Flood Water In Hame or Business ~ 2 hr 100.40 64.47 ~ 95,OD Qa-tin~c Pollution Prevention Responses GG.G7 33.33 ~ 90.00 °~ of AotuA) Labor that vas Planned Rod Scheduled 45.07 63.00 >= 76.40 Ratio of Actual Workload to Budgeted Labor l68.A3 ] 12.60 ~ 100.00 STORM 'SIVATER FUNA (4300) REVE~iUE DETAIL ,q,C~pUNT ACCi?UNT ACTUALS BUDGBT ESTIMAT>vB AAOPTCD NYlMBBB DL~SCRiPTiON 2008-x009 1009.20]0 2009-2010 2010.20] 1 Unreservccl Raserved far IInsumlurancas itese#`ve#I fvrCvtrtn3ltniants 4 8,833,075 11,475,589 D 403,271 0 4 0 0 BBC11VN1NC IIALANC~ D 4,236 34b 1 1475 589 NUN-OP~ItATING CiL~VLNIJL~ Cnte-•cst iRCVmo 340900 [ntoreat on urvestniants 340995 iVCt 1nclDvc in RV of Investments 341020 Interest aarncd-intarfuncl borrowing 'Cvtel lutatros# i~rcomv Otlic~• itevanne 343590 Sale of s4relrlci#y p~'operty 343GS0 Purcliasa discvrinis Total Otliet` Revenna 21,857 0 41,251 0 8,556 0 {B,iSG) 0 350 0 247 0 30,7G3 0 32,942 0 0 8,899 8,899 0. 18 4 0 0 18 $,899 8,899 ~ p TgTAI. NO]Y•01'>~It~iTING I2ICVTNU>s 30,781 $,899 41,840 0 IhlTtviZ1~U1VD CONT1tiHUT1ANS 350440 Transfcr from General LiabilEty Fund 354415 Transfer flnm Workn~an's Com}r 3524D0 '1'~'ans#'crA'omWater>aivls[on 352480 Transfer fi•on~ MIS Fund 35250D 7'ranafer fibrtt Group klcaltl~ Insurance Fund TOTAL INTL~ttlrUNp CQNTRiBUTIONS 0 72,523 72,523 p 0 01,492 91,492 0 20,525,000 21;844,1$4 21,844,184 22,940,901 0 19,111 19,111 0 0 13 212 13,212 0 20,525,000 22,040,522 22,040,522 22,940,901 TOTAL RCVCNUL & 1NTl;ltf~'UND C©NTRII3 20 SSS 781 22 449 42l 22 082,3G2 22 940 901 TO~'AL i'UNDS AVAiLABLL+ ~ _ 24,555,?8! 2~2,049,42I 3131$ 709 34,41 G,4~0 STORM WATER Ii'UN'I) (300) It)XI'ENDITURE DETAIL S'u' ORGANXZATION N MS R I ORGNA~ 1'}iON --' ~ 8 2009 D05.20 0 E2064-201DD 20 O ~O~D Dct~wrtutentnl l;xpentliltu'ea 32000 Storm Waror asln+iniskatlan 32014 StorntWatorMal»t&Operetiot+s 32020 Stonk+ Water 13nvik'on Svc 32030 Stornk Water T•.ducatfon Svc 32040 St4t'pt Watel' plnnP statlWk$ ago 1 s lZeserve APpro1~ - s+orur Water Tutwl AopartmanttEll;xhendltnros Non~Dol~artEarntnl D;xt+amlitu~•os 14704 }~C41Idlplc DowUd! Syst(St Wtr) 1x729 ~ Hurrlcan4lke-2008 30010 UtilityBnsinesa411~aeCost 55015 •Othcr Pinattcing G1+argas G0010 '['f`ill+sfor to l3cncral Pwnd GOi 34 'E'tslnsfcr to 1jeUt Servico G027D ~`k'R+i3 Fcr to 1)ebl Svc Resorva G0340 TkxtEESfer to Ufi! Sys Dcbt Fund G04] D Transfer to Stores Fd G042D TronsPor to Maint Services r+i Tptat NPII-1)E1)al'tlntilMt F:Xt10-Sllttln'CB TDTA14 B'1'QRl1+1 WA7•!aR i~UIYA (43D0) AdJnsinlnets t4 [Vet Assets RE5I:RVED I~OR L~IYCUMB17A1+ICE8 IiGSL~RVED FOR COMMITMCN'C3 UNRE'sS1~1tVC11 CLOSING t3ALAlVCi3 1,768,479 2,239,833 2,171,717 2,Oy0,2Sfl 4,480,$iD 6,267,OSfl 5,800,769 G,790,382 517,142 642,998 b27,231 SOl,b14 411,d1G 483;803 44fl,10D SG5,9i9 498,923 729,631 G07,3S2 711,$52 o I,a12 B7G D zoo o4D 8,17G,470 11,376,000 9,G56,1G9 10,840,tyzG 0 G5,284 6$,279 51,888 12,G05 D D 0 480,118 487,5 l2 -087,512 S?8,424 74,DG7 G8,3G2 50,697 17,542 178,170 294,711 294,711 6,G06,G3G 174,931 I33,G44 133,G44 98,1x5 0 -4 0 [98,387 7,340,378 8,GG9,5G1 8,G69,5G1 9,919,603 31,572 0 0 0 010 71 x85 Sal - 485,547 _ 910,702 • , ~~8,384,891 10,204,614 10,186,950 18,383,327 16,561,34E 2I 580 GI7 19 84312D 29,223,353 5 241,90b 403,271 ~ 0 0 0 D 0' $,833,475 _. 11_475,589 ,_ 5,193,137_ 9,236 4G 11,475,589 5193137 Municipal Information Systems The Municipal infarmatian Systems Department maintains, manages, and operates the City`s fiber and winless networks including a VGIP (voice over Internet pratacol)-phone system, in addition, MIS manages the City's personal computer leasing program and provides desktop support. AIf .enterprise applications are managed and supported- by M1S staff Including email, GIS, Maximo, PeopleSoft (HR & Financials},- eta The City's Call Center and Web Site is also managed by the City's MIS department. MlsslOn i,eads and supports fire inttrodtictlon end uaa oPinformat[an-based teahnologfes by clky departments and provides exaeptional customer servleaa to our aommunlty. chats s Continua to reduce Mlts costs and help others find ways ko use technology to reduce their costs • Leverage the City'e (3l5 system to pt•avide additional vAlue. • establish 300 WiFi wottcer accounts by the end of thaliscal year • Dovaiop and iinplauaent a lousiness warehouse to pt+ovldo greater access to data for reporting and anaiytias • Fund attd design a disaster recovery t~cility at the international ahport • Develop and implenton# a strategic teahnology~pian fbr the City Clrarges to Airport Rund 199,38D 174,232 17b,132 129,372 Charges to Llah 8c Bettoilts ird 39,p24 61,000 ~ 51,OD0 33,458 Charges ter Ceneral Futtd 7,050,576 9,x41,144 9,291,144 8,374,180 Charges to CGllC1DC 384,183 4 0 0 Charges to GaH'Cire F<tttd 37,560 34,332 34,332 28,068 Charges #a Vlsltar Fac Fend 514,342 323,592 323,592 332,088 Charges to 1.~1'C 854 9,8x8 1,140 864 Charges to Marhta [~'ti 25,604 29,80$ 29,848 29,688 Citnrgos to Mnhtt Svcs Rcl 248,536 3x5,480 345,48D 241,D68 Charges to >1ug Set•vlces Rd iS7,032 181,8D0 i81,B00 203,028 Chnrges to Stores hand 37,800 48,432 48,432 3ti,G24 Charges to Gas Division 1,325,184 1,3{#7,616 1,307,6!4 1,164,572 Charges to Wastetvntar Div 1,481,844 1,538,02$ 1,538,D28 1,408,920 Chat ges to Water Divisfan 2,274,?80 2,325,540 2,325,548 1,976,b8$ ~liAf $F,S t4 Starnt Water' Div 7Dg,3a8 831,876 831,876 795,428 Charges to laevelpnntl Svcs Tnad 554,808 564,156 554,15b 61x,'120 (irtarest on loves#mettts 34,132 40,660 11,481 11,539 1Vat)(uclDec in RV of ttrvestmeuts 938 D (938) 4 interest Earned-Fscra~v i?0 0 0 0 Recovery on dantagc claims 1,079 0 0 0 Sale of saraplcity property 0 4,205 4,205 0 Ta'anaf fr• GoaePal Ltab Fd 0 126,863 125,865 0 Tt~anaf t'r Woritmnu's Comp 0 131,219 131,219 0 Transfer firotn CGDCUC 0 0 0 19,186 Transfer Cr Gt~aup Health bts Fd _ __ 4 . ~ ~ '•' !9,_484 19 484 _ 0 Tota# R 15,127,234 17,381,297 17,341,492 16,401,b00 ~xltonditures: Personnel Services . ' 7,051,850 7,036,1 G2 6,949,531 6,717,724 114ntorfals Stggsiies 304,732 193,453 218,7x7 514,347 Cot:tractual Set•vlces 5,5D1,996 6,208,339 6,166,760 7,282,317 Other Charges 43,288 190,416 188,410 176,704 Reserve Approli'rlntlous 0 60,OOD 0 50,400 AeGt Se:'vice SchoalslSemhtarslTt'nining 0 46,945 4 17,402 0 17,0#!1 0 0 lutet•ttal Services Atlacatlons 3,544,749 3,145,x21 5,145,421 ~G5,068 Trnusfcr Out 4 768,570 758,570 0 CaltitalOtttiay 17,469 130,778 110,456 25,000 'Pots! 16,512,077 17,7x0,141 17,5G5,ODS 15,331,170 Full Tltne Cquivalents: 105 105 98 Qn•timc lulernal Sarvlce. Rb Holp Aosk Calis Rosoivcd on the Spot ~ 66,9q~ t,3~,8ts ~ SV.ov Dn-limo Jnternai Setvice: °~ Help)'?eslc Ca11s Rosalved in ~ 81SOUt~s • , 84,93 76, 50 ~ 84,04 ~qulpnient Availabilt[ty: Net~ork (Tatar Availability) ~ 99.70 - 94:01 ~ 45,00 k3quiptttent Availability: GroupWisa (Total Availability) 99,31 90.78 >= 45,00 >3ryu3}sn~+st+t Availability: Flione Systenl(Total AvaifabJlity) h9.G1 91,13 >~ 95,00 MCINTCTT'AL INF4RMATION'SYSTEIVI~It'UNA (52x0) REVENUE RETAIL ACCOUNT ACCOUIYI ACTUANLS BUDGET ESTfMATED ADOk'1`~la N1;JlVIR~R DESC1tIPTION 2DD8-2009 2009~2D10 2DD1.281D xDi0.2611 Unreset'ved Resarwad far Etreotntsranees Rasetwerl for Carunlttnottts •1,227,444 0 344,243 72+#,155 ~ 566,756 0 0 © O BEGINNING BALANCE OI?C1iAT1NG RCV~NUE Cltarges for Sr:rvlees 3Z700D Charges to Airport }7und 327015 CStarg~s to L[ab &Donoflta Fd 327030 Cltarges to [lanerat 1?un~d 327035 Cltarges to CCDCDC 327040 Cltarges to Qolf Ch's Fund 327050 Chargcs to Visitor Facillty Ftmd 327060 Chargcs to 1.I1FC 327070 Chargcs to Merina Fd 327080 Chargcs to Mslnt Svcs Fd 3270$5 Ci~argcs #o Brtg Services Fd 3271 DD Chargcs #a Stm•es tzuad 327110 Charges to Gas Division 327120 Chargcs to Wsstcwater Div 327130 Chargcs to taster Aivlslou 327131 Charges to Stm~ts Water Div 327140 Charges to i7evelprrtnt Svcs Fttnd Total Chst^ges for 5er'vloes TOTAI, OPL~ItAT1NG lt)CVCNUC NQN-OPERA'I'1NG RL~VLNUE htterest )ncante 340900 Interest on iuvesttnents 340995 [Vet 1ncfDec in FV of lavostmerit 3R l l45 Iutot'cst Bartted-Bscrow Total lrttcrast Income Otltar Revenue 343300 [recovery on damage claims 343590 Sale ofscrap/city property Total Otlr ct• Revenue T07'AI. NON-OPERATING RBVRNU& 1951 S~9 ~ 34b 756 344 243 199,380 1?6,232 17b,232 ]29,372 39,024 51,000 51,x00 33,468 7,050,576 9,291,144 9,291,144 8,379,180 ' 384,[$3 0 0 0 37,560 34,332 34,332 28,068 514,392 323,592 323,592 332,088 864 9,828 1,140- $G4 26,604 29,808 29,808 29,688 298,536 345,480 345,A80 241,068 157,032 181,800 L81,800 203,028 37,800 48,432 48,432 36,624 1,325,184 1,307,616 1,307,61fi I,1b4,672 1,48 [,844 1,538,028 1,538,028 1,408,920 2,274,780 2,325,540 2,323,540 1,976,688 708,348 831,876 831,876 796,428 554,808 564,1.5.6___ _ 564,156 G12,72p 15,090,915 17,058,664 [7,050,176 15,372,874 1 5,090,913 17,458,864 17,050,176 15,372,$76 34,132 40,660 11,481 11,539 938 4 (9387 0 1 ?0 0 ....,...~.. ~ ~ , .~,.... ~ 35,239 40,660 10,544 11,539 1,079 0 D 0 0 4,205 ~. 4,205 ~ 0 ---• _ 1,079 -" _' 4,205 ~ 4,205 ~ 36,319 44,865 14,749 11,539 IIVTERI4UNIl CONT1t1BUT[ONS 350400 ~ '11'anst'f]' +;eneral I.iab Fd 0 [26,865 126,$65 0 3504 t 5 Transf fi' Workman's Comp 0 131,219 131,219 O 352485 Transf D• CCDCDC 0 4 4 17,185 352500 Transfer fi• Grnup 1{ealtlt Ins Prl b 19 484 t9 484 0 'I'OTA4 IN'1'idtTUND COIV'1'It[BUTIONS 0 277,568 277,568 17,185 TOTAI. Iili;V~NUE & 1NTI;RBUND CONTRIB - 15,127,234 T 17,381,297 17,342,492 IS,40k,GOD TOTA1. 1+UND5 AVAILAI3i,E I7 078,833 17 381297 17,909,249 fS,745,843 ti.... ....., ._. iVIUNXCIPAL INFORMATXON SYSTEM ~52I4) EXPENDITUIt.E RETAIL BX OR.O,ANIZA,'~ION NUM ~R ~ t7RG ~AM~'CION ____ I 2008 2D9 I 2009 x01 R2DD9.2018~ 20 4 0~1 _I flepartmentAl Lrxpcnclinu•os 1 1475 8•Govarnment Services x}0404 MIS Adminiaiiaiion 4042D M15 GlratoinerServieea 40430 Wi J Fi - Atrro Meter Rending 48450 MIS teicphane sorviaos 4fl470 MI& operations 40480 CottnoctivitylHardwa~re ln>lasn•acturo 40490 M1S-Wirelosa . 40495 MiS-ApplicetianSupt•PolicelMC 80070 Rcaerve Approp- M1S Rund Total Dai}n~•tnionfnl)Gxtrel~~iiii2rps Non-Dehttr6nantal L~xl~e:aAitutcs 14729 1•iurricane l kc - 2008 GDOOD Qperating Transfers flat Total titan-Dcpnr'tnzentnl ~xt~cnQltures •. i,26S,833 i,49b,D3$ 1,370,603 I,3GS,13$ 72x,848 84x,348 842,348 802,GS8 1,451,01:5 2,$46,159 2,846,409 2,652,438 1,508,724 1,29x,134 i,293,D13 1,421,483 926,!37 1,083,163 1,D87,8i0 334,854 • 4,b75,Za*7 4,964,49D 4,964,659 4,217,49$ 1,451,028 1,17x,990 1,172,944 i,S53,G42 • 992,4DG © 0 4 3,518,570 3,204,049 3,x18,649 2,937,46,1 0 50,000 _ 0 30,000 _ ~~16,511,8lG SG,9S1,571 16,794,435 SS,331,17D z~l D D D 0 768 570 7b8 574 D 2Gi 768,570 7G8,57D D T07'AL MUNICIPAI.,INF'4. S'YS7'1!.M (5210) RRSCl2VCD FOR C~iYCUM1i1tAl~iC>13 R~SIi;ItVL~D FUR CUMMITML+IYT$ uri>zrs~l~v~n ~1G,512,~77__ 17,720,14 17,SGS 46S 13,331,170 566,756 0 a D 0 4 0 344,243 414 673 CLt7SING 13r1.LANCL 556 756 344,243 414 G?3 1 Consulting Analysis on Privatization of City Services "Proposal to Consider only Information Technology Services" RFP #BI-0057-1 ~ City of Corpus Christi, TX December 1, 2010 plat-e--- moran ~plante j moron Mr. Michael Barrera Assistant Director pf Financial Services City of Corpus Christi 1201 Leopard Street Corpus Christi, TX 78401 Plante & Moran, PLLC 2740D Northwestern Highway P.O. Box 307 Southfield, MI 48037-0307 Tel: 248.352.2500 Fax: 248.352.0018 pfantemoran,eom December 1, 2010 Dear Mr. Barrera: Plante & Moran, PLLC is pleased to respond to your request for proposals for business case analysis on privatization of city services. We are very excited about the possibility of assisting the City on this important project., Plante & Moran is among the 121argest accounting and consulting firms in t11e U.S. Our municipal services practice area is over 50 years old, and we have worked with several hundred municipal entities. We have performed numerous "make-buy" and outsourcing analyses over the years. We have elected to propose our services only for evaluation of Information Technology Services. Our _ reasons are two-fold: 1) Information Technology represents a unique investment For cities. lT is integrated and central to the operations of every major city department. IT is a strategic investment that significantly . impacts both the productivity of city staff, as well as, the satisfaction of constituents. Plante & Moran has developed an equally unique IT consulting practice Focused on municipalities. Our municipal clients span New York to California, with several located in Texas. We are confident that our subject matter expertise will add significant value to Corpus Christi's evaluation of aptians. 2) An IT outsourcing request will likely draw national firms, where as, the other services being considered are more likely to be locally based. We believe we have the skill to assist the City in evaluating outsourcing options for facilities, landscaping, and fleet services. However, we do not have a strong knowledge of the local vendor market. As such, we would prefer not to bid on these analyses rather than risk not serving the City properly. Plante & Moran is uniquely qualified to assist the City on this important project. As one of the largest consulting and accounting firms nationally, we have extensive experience in serving the public sector u1 all areas of municipal operations. During tl-tese difficult economic times, numerous municipal entities are seeking to maximize their investments including the evaluation of iri-sourcing or outsourcing of the various operational areas performed within the City. We offer the following benefits: ~~ Independence. Plante & Moran does not provide any IT outsourcing services and can provide a fair and objective analysis. ,Praxr~~~: MFM$ER =~ GEUBkL A4l.lAWCE OE lry DEPENDEiFt PINrA5 .Cc7Lasisltai~t. Anatysis o~? E'E s~~atiz~~i,~ioE~ of City Se~~iccas City of C:or~us Cf~~risti, Texas I~eceE-aber ~ , 2.t?1 J . , Recent experience in performing IT sourcing related projects for various organizations, including: a City of Carrollton, TX o Lorain Community College o Detroit Public Schools o Carson City Hospital o Charter Township of Shelby o L'Anse Creuse Public Schools o Ci#y of Auburn Hilis o Bay Medical Center o Karmanos Cancer Institute a St. Clair Community College ~z~ Significant expertise with municipal IT operations, have conducted numerous IT assessments, _ including: o Round Rock, TX o Ann Arbor, MI o Alexandria, VA - o Mesa, AZ o Flagstaff, AZ o Johnson County, KS - o Des Moines, IA o Santa Barbara Co., CA o Fayetteville, AR Significant experience in working with municipal clients for over 50 years in all facets of operational and technology Consulting including many that have outsourced a portion or all of their operations Assignment of project manager who has recent and relevant Managed Competition and Sourcing experience, IT far City of Carrolton, TX - ~ Significant experience in managing entire solicitation projects on behalf of our municipal clients including RFP development, pre-proposal meeting management, proposal analysis, due diligence activities related to finalist vendors and Statement of Work /Contract Negotiations f ~`~ Significant experience responding to public sector solicitations on a variety of technical and operational projects. Furthermore, one of our proposed staff members was a proposal manager and has been certified by the Association of Proposal Management Professionals (APMP) as a Professional Proposal Manager. Our project professionals are members of national and local organizativns dedicated to improving the IT operations of local governments, including Public Technology institute (PTI), Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) and Gover3.lmentManagement Information - Sciences {GMIS) Our proposed team blends t11e technology and municipal operations la~owledge with seasoned, management consultants to work on this important initiative. We believe that based upon these experiences and the quality of our proposed team, we are well qualified to provide an objective and comprehensive evaluation of the options available to the City of Corpus Christi. If you have any questions concerning this proposal, or need to contact any of the project team members, please contact meat 500-544-0203. Very truly yours, PLANTE & MORAN, PLLC ~~ Adam Rujan, Partner ~la~ nee moron ~ .Cc~~s~altant Araaiysis ova 1='!°ivasiz~~.ir~n of C;t r Services ~i€.y ai ~ori~~as Ch-ris~i, ~`exas [~eces-bea° 1, ~€~1~} 1 ~ l . , i " Table of Contents Section I. Project Approach ......................................................................................3 A. Project Narrative ............................................................................................................... .......... 3 B. Project Work Plan ....................................................................................................................... 9 C. Time Line ...................................................................................................................................22 Section Il. Farm Qualifications .................................................................................23 A. Overview .................................................................. .......23 .......................................................... B. Firm Background .......................................................................................................................24 C. Recent Municipal IT Engagements .................................................................... ...30 D. References ................................................................................................................................32 Section III. Team Qualiflcations ................................................................................34 Section IV. Project Costs ...........................................................................................46 Section V. Appendix .................................................................................................47 A. Terms and Conditions ...............................................................................................................4$ 2 p1a~me moran .Cans~~it:art Analysis an i'rivatizatir~n of Cifiy Services City cif C:orus Christi, ~`exas {~eceo-~~e~- 1, ~01~ . , Section I. Project Approach 1. Information Technology Outsourcing Overview The City of Corpus Christi has made a significant investment in Information Technology over the years. The City operates utilizing several large )Jnterprise systems (e.g. I'eopleSoft, Maximo, etc.) and myriad departmental applications. Annual IT expenditures were approaching $17 million through 2009, based on information provided by the City, The City has won numerous awards for the quality of its IT operations, including 1st place in 2009 from the Center far Digital Government for best in size class, nationally. The City, unfortunately, has not been immune to the recession gripping the country and has experienced the need for significant budget reductions. The IT budgeted expenditures have been reduced to $15.3 million and the intent of this RFP appears to be focused on the potential of further cost reductions through outsourcing. Information technology has become a very integral part of most City department operations. As a result, this relationship has raised the level of expectations as to how IT can enhance the business through operational improvements and efficiencies. Factors that are frequently noted as drivers for privatizing the lT function are outlined below. Obtain access to current technologies ~~ Obtain access to current "best practices" in the management of technology ~~ Reduce overall IT costs ~~~ Improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the IT function Fix an area that has struggled to provide value to the organization Allow the organization to focus its efforts on areas of core competencies versus areas that are now considered a "commodity service" To some degree, the reasons for outsourcing of 1T are specific and unique to each entity but, in general, the overall goal is to improve the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the IT function it1 order to better support the individual department and organizational goals. When outsourcing is discussed withal a public sector environment, Information Technology is frequently considered as an area for potential privatization. Examples of IT outsourcing are very prevalent within both the private and public sector marketplace which heightens the visibility and makes a ready case for city leadership to have this area evaluated. Information technology covers a significant number of activities that, despite the overall high complexity, can be segmented i~~to "Towers of Service" or distinct service areas that can be evaluated for potential outsourcing an an individual or combined basis. These towers of service frequently include the fallowing areas depending on the level of complexity and breadth of services under the responsibility of the IT support function: ~~ Technology Administration Data Center Services Application Services E-Mail Services p~a~- moran ~~or~s~rltar~t Analysis orr F~€-ivati~atioin of. City 5er-vices " City of Cori:ius Christi, Tz.ras Jecenrbe:~., "s, 2~i~ . , - Help Desk Services Radio Services Network Management Services " ~~ Field Services {i.e., fax, copy, print, workstations support services) Although these services are somewhat intertwined, a number of case studies exist in which only certairn _ towers of service are bid out or situations in which there are multiple vendors supporting one ar more - fowers of service. Additionally, the constantly changing teclnnoiogy landscape is driving opportunities for further evaluating the benefits of outsourcing as evidenced by the current "Cloud Computing" phenomenon that offers the opportunity to outsauxce entire application environments to an external source. 2.. Outsourcing Qptions The available options for outsourcing of the IT function are many and varied. The number of options appears to also be expanding with the rapid evolution of methods of delivering technology services and products, e.g. the Cloud. Among the options that are prevalent today are tine following: . Collaboration between municipal jurisdictiozns in which previously separate IT units wexe merged into a single IT unit either in whole or for specific areas of support (e.g., City of Ft. Wayne/Allen County, City of Indianapolis/Marion County) Outsourcing of one or mare IT towers of service to an external entity or entities ~~ Ou#sourcing of a single project to an external entity r~- Outsourcing of a single application (e.g., ERP} or service {e.g., Email) to an external entity that will provide all hardware, software and support services delivered through an Application Service Provider (ASP) or Software as a Service (Baas) licensing model The appropriateness of an outsourcing model varies greatly upon the unique goals and capabilities of each organization. The broad use of technology within the public and private sector allows for a significant volume of readily available metrics in which to conduct comparative analysis between like organizations. These metrics can be obtained through: Review of industry published research ~r Benchmarking against other comparable communifies and potentially the private sector through surveys or phone interviews Obtaining access to industry association white papers; surveys, etc. Facilitating a Request far Information (RFI} process IT metrics are available at the macro level (e.g., total iT spend/total organizational spend) as well as at the Tower level (e.g., help desk tickets/staff person) providing the ability to segment out and benchmark the entire organization as well as individual towers of service. Due to the broad scope and variability in what constitutes IT services, the competitive landscape can be segmented an a number of different ways. Additionally, the size and scope of TT operations being considered for outsourcing with will Inave a big influence on the competitor interest in managing an IT operation. Competitors can be segmented as follows: 4 pay moron y~o:rs~attar~t ~~~alvsis can i-'r~ivatizativr'~ of (~ity 5ervic~~s pity of Ce:r-a~~rs C:~~: isti, Texas €3ecer~'riaer 1, 2.i}1 ~ ~' Local vs. Regional vs. National Providers: Full service providers of IT services exist at the local, regional and national level. The size of the IT operation will have a large bearing on which types of competitors would be interested in managing a City's IT operations. ~~ Scope of Services: In addition to a geographic factor, many vendors are focused on providing specific towers of service versus providing afull-service offering of IT support. This is especially prevalent in the area of Help Desk Support and Managed Desktop Services for a broad spectrum of client sizes due fo the remote nature and leveraging that is available by the vendors providing these services. ~~ Availability of Competition: A significant majority of traditional IT support services are readily available in the vendor marketplace. Exceptions would be in areas in which IT support is not traditionally supplied such as Radio Services which is frequently viewed as a mission critical municipal support function that is not traditionally outsourced. A growing number of case studies exist for municipalities outsourcing a portion or all of their IT services to an external provider in all of the areas described above. We see this trend accelerating as the recent economic malaise is further challenging local municipal budgets and forcing them to look at alternative ways of providnng IT services that are embedded in ail areas of City operations. 3. Critical ~utsaurcing Success Factors IT is an area that is fraught with examples of highly publicized outsourcing failures that occurred for a variety of reasons. Some risks and causes for these failures are noted as follows: Lack of proper engagement of the sfakeholders who will be impacted by the outsourcing arrangement Lack of a strong and effective governance structure in which to manage the outsourcing arrangement =' Defining inappropriate metrics in which to measure the performance of the outsourcing vendor Lack of a strong but flexible contract with the outsourcing provider Additional risks exist that can be mitigated, to some degree, by using outside counsel to assist the City in evaluating and migrating to a new delivery model of outsourced services. One of the most important considerations is the development of key contract tenets that will protect the City both financially and legally should problems occur, or when changes to the IT environment arise. Due to the constantly changing nature of IT, these key contract tenets become even more important. Some of the more important contract provisions to consider are as follows: If multiple towers are service are being outsourced, ensure that pricing is provided individually for eac11 tower versus an overall price for all services being provided to allow for benchmarkilg against industry metrics for that tower. Ensure thak awell-documented transition and disentanglement plan is provided for situations in which the IT Outsourcing arrangement maybe transferred to a new providex or potentially be brought back in-house. ~'.~ Ensure that the contract addresses the provisions for adjustments in services provided (removal, addition, changing) aver the course of the contract which will be likely to occur. plate moron •Cok~si~ttar~t A~~alvsis o-~ Iss~ivat:izatioi~ of City SLrvic;es City of CC3r~sl#s C{iristi, Texas Qec~er{~f~er i , ~,Ql tl u~. Ensure that the contract addresses the concern of staff turnover particularly for those staff thaf are considered as critical components of the vendor's management team. Ensure the contract reflects the changing priorities of the City over the course of the contract. There are numerous other contract provisions that will also need to be considered if the decision to outsource is made. Another key factor for careful planning is the transition. When considering the transition of an IT function to a third-party provider, a number of areas will need to be factored i?Zto this planning process as follows: _ Staffing -how will existing staff fransition; should certain key staff be retained for a period of time; etc. - s~ Assets - what assefs will transfer ownership, if any; what about future asset procurement; etc. - ~~~ Service levels-what are the new service levels; how will they be measured and reported on; etc. ~~ Knowledge Transfer -how will knowledge be transferred to the new provider; Service Delivery Methodologies- what is the overview approach in which the new service provider performs the services; what tools are provided by the vendor to support this methodology; etc. ~~ Timeline -what is the timeln~e in which transition will occur; what will be the costs of the transition; etc. ~ Existing Projects -who will be responsible for the completion of existing projects; what about new projects that come up during the transition; etc. These and many other factors will need to be considered as part of a comprehensive transition plan if a new service provider is selected as well as for future situations u1 which service providers may change or the function maybe brought back in-house. 4. In -House Options As a firm, Plante & Moran has significant experience assisting clients in perfarming not only IT outsourcing evaluations, but also IT assessments which focus on improving the effectiveness and cost of existing IT operations. As a part of this analysis, we propose evaluating cost reduction options that may be available to the City, irrespective of the availability or appropriateness of outsourcing options. In past privatization studies, we have found that clients benefit from having the full range of information and options available when contemplating these types of decisions. As part of this review, we propose conducting a comprehensive assessment of the IT Department to identify possible cost reductions that can be realized in combination with, or in lieu of, outsourcng. Plante & Moran has been performing municipal-wide Information Teclulology Assessments for over twenty years for our public sector clients. Through these experiences we have developed specific tools, techniques and methods for performing these projects that are further detailed below. An IT assessment for an organization encompasses a review of the Organization, Administration and Technology as depicted below: 6 plate-- moron .Consr_rltar~t analysis ors i~riva#;ir~tic~~~ of Ctt~ Servit~es City cif Carpus C6irisri, l-e~:as Organization Do we have the correct number of staff with the right skills? Administration i ' it r~~ Do we properlymanage and administer the technology we have? '~, ;;;~; C Tech~o#ogy laece~~ber i , ~ C11 ~ Do we procure and support the most appropriate equipment and systems? To achieve the desired objectives, we believe it is essential to include the number of areas in the scope of the IT assessment. Our typical list of items reviewed is outlined below. In most cases, we focus most intently on the items of particular interest to each client. In the case of Corpus Christi, this would include I' areas that are significank cost drivers. ~ plate me moran •Cartst.ttai~t Analysis oi~ Frivatica'.:ioi~ of pity Ser~sicos _ City of Carus Christi, -1"~xas Governance: Organization structure: a Organization benchmarks R Succession planning ~~ Staff compensation ' _ Support: Staff complement ~~ Staff development Job descriptions - ~~ Staff competencies ~~~ Performance evaluations Recruiting External service providers User liaisons ~~ Steering Committee role = Service Level Agreements User Satisfaction: • ~~ Responsiveness Effectiveness ~~ Communication IT Leadership: Technical ~:3' Business ~':~ Behavioral [7ccehe~~ 'E , ~{? s ~ ~ _~ Technology Delivery: Internet: Project Mgmt approach ~ Remote access ~~ Service level agreements Web site & security ~~ Problem reporting ^~ Content mgmt Helpdesk Administration € Web strategy Network /workstation Data: management ~~` Software deployment Data ownership Performance reporting ?~ Data integrity ~ Vendor management Data security _~ Methods /tools Data warehousing Application development Data backup Patch management Network (LANIWAN): Outsourcing Servers Operating procedures NOS iT Strategy: ~~ Cabling laong range planning Network electronics ~~ Project prioritization Storage ~~ Technology procurement Security Budgeting AppIICa#ions: ~y~ Project portfolio mgmt Software applications -~~°= Business case development ~~ Security Standards Reporting Policy: ~~ lnterfaces ~~ User policies & procedures ~~ Databases ~ IT policies & procedures t,s Platforms and tools Business continuity End-User Computing: planning ~= Workstation strategy Security Management Office automation ~` Operating system `~ Refresh $ plate nte~ rnoran .Car~suitant; Analysis can ;'riva.ttra4:ioi-~ of City 5ervi~_es = City rat Cor~~us Ci~~-isti, Texas i~ecerne~- 1, Z,t71 ~J Phase 1: Project Initiation and Planning Phase Objective and Summary of Activities: The purpose of this phase is to conduct activities that are relevant to managing the project and enhancialg its success for the City. The major activities to be - performed will are as follows: - ~ Conduct project initiation activities ~~ Define a project organizational structure ~~ Develop a project charter ~~~ Develop a detailed project work plan ~~ Establish Project Collaboration Center ~ .Conduct status meetings to monitor project progress 'l. Conduct Project Initiation Project initiation activities will be conducted to introduce the project team, finalize the project scope, deliverables and timetables. These objectives will be accomplished through the development of a project organizational structure, project charter, detailed project plan, and regularly scheduled progress meetings. These steps are described below. 2. Define Project Qrganizational Structure Our approach to each consulting engagement is structured to provide the services and level of professional support required to meet the individual needs of the client. We will work jointly with the City Project Manager to design a process that will meet the overall needs of the City. As standard practice in the majority of our engagements, especially those related to teclulology and process transformation, we have designed a very collaborative approach to create a high probability of implementation success. - - 3. Develop Project Charter At the start of the project, a Project Charter will be developed t11at will provide a framework for the - following areas of focus: ~~ Project overview Project stakeholders Project influences ~~ Scope plan (both in and out of scope items) Project staffing 9 pla~~ moron .Co;ist~[tar~t A~7aiysis are r ~'i~Tatization of City services _ City of Corl~t~s Christi, l~exas ilece~t~e~-. 1, Z~?'f tJ r 4. Develop Detailed Project Plan ' We will incorporate the following into a detailed Microsoft Project TM Plan: ~`~ Major phases and milestones Work tasks and their due dates with assigned responsibility 5, Establish Project Collaboration Center Over the last few years, collaboration environments such as Microsoft SharePoint have become increasingly viable tools in which to establish project collaboration environments for large-scale projects. These environments can serve a variety of purposes including acting as a repository for documentation developed during the course of the engagement. As a firm, we have significant expertise in the use SharePoint as an overall project repository for our engagements. We will work with the City in fhe establishment of a project Collaboration environment usu~g SharePoint that will last for the duration of the entire project. - Should the City prefer to use an alternative document repository, we would be happy to accommodate. 6. Schedule and Moderate Project Status Meetings Continuous feedback is the key to a successful implementation. In this way, problems can either be avoided entirely, or addressed early on, to minimize wasted effort and keep the project on schedule. We will schedule meetings and/vr conference calls with the City to: ~~ Report on the status of the project work plan and timeline ~~ Re-schedule tasks as necessary "~ Discuss major open issues/risks and develop strategies to address them We anticipate fhe City's Project Manager will participate in these calls. o Plante moron •Cc~~~suts~ri~t Analysis ors i~rivafiraticsr-~ of Cii:y 5e,-vices City of Cor~GS Christi, -1-e~xas t~eeer~~ber 1, ~{~10 Phase Z: Business Case Analysis Phase Objective and Summary of Activities: The purpose of this phase is to conduct activities that are relevant to performance of the business case analysis. Plante & Moron's Business Case Analysis will - incorporate best practices from our experience conducting numerous studies with respect to Managed Competition initiatives for public sector organizations. Thus, in the work plan steps below, we map the specific requirements noted in the City's RFP with Plante & Moran's proposed activities based on our approach and metlzodologyfor conducting similar work. The major activities to be perfoxmed in connection with the City's requirements as outlined in the RFP as follows: Requirement 1: Options Appraisal Requirement 2: Strategic Fit ~ Requirement 3: Commercial Aspects Requirement 4: Affordability ~~ Requirement 5: Achievability Requirement 1-Options Appraisal This aspect of the business case documents the wide range of options that have been considered within the broad scope identified in response to the City's existing and future needs. It aims to arrive at the optimum balance of cost, benefit and risk. Mininnum content needed for this section: high level cost/benefit analysis of {ideally) at least three options for meeting the business need {where applicable); uulude analysis of 'soft' benefits that cannot be quantified in financial terms; identify preferred option and any trade-offs. Note that options appraisal must be carried out in detail before selecting a preferred option. Questions addressed: Has a wide range of options been explored? Have innovative approaches been considered and/or collaboration with other departments? If not, why not? ~~ Has the optimum balance of cost, benefit and risk been identified? If not, what trade-offs need to be made e.g. foregoing some of the benefits in order to keep casts within budget; taking carefully considered risks to achieve more substantial benefits? 9, Define Services With respect to the specific service area, develop a work package that will define the services in terms of the function's activities and tasks. This activity will also include an assessment of resources required to support the function. The definition will likely include the following: ~y Detailed scope of services that are currently being performed including frequency of service ~` Usage statistics related to execution of the work package _~ Locations in which staff are ]loused to provide the services related to the work package ~~ Locations serviced through the work package plate n~ moron ~Co~1s~.~Ita~~t t~i7atysis on ~t°ivatiz~i:iot~ cat City Seevic~es - City of C.or~~rc!s Ctlt~lstl, Texas i3ecernber 1, ?.~;~ - Revenues collected, if relevant (e.g., parks and recreation center) Related reimbursements from external entities associated with execution of the work package ~~ Strategic planning documents, if any - Results of any customer satisfaction surveys '~ Staffing, both internal and external, required to execute the work package including direct and indirect staff time ~`w Other City services that are directly impacted by the execution of the work package :~:~ Technologies, both direct and indirect, that are being used to support this work package ~ Equipment and services that are being used to support execution of the work package kr~ .Any laws, legislation, City ordinances, etc. that impacts the execution of the work package 2. Document Service Levels __._... Once the work breakdown structure is complete, the required service provided to customers is documented. The service levels will be based on the current status and/or what the City is required to perform per existing ordinances. The service levels will define the state of the desired outcome in addition to how that outcome is derived. 3. Document Work Load Data Compile a listing of specific work load data requirements, including transaction volumes. Work with the City to document this work load data for future use on the project. 4. Assess Performance With respect to the service levels and expected performance ieveIs, assess the City's performance relative to the function. Given the work Ioad data, prepare an assessment indicating the degree to which service levels are being met along with any opportunities for improvement. 5. Conduct Market Research Market research will be conducted to identify the potential vendors and assist the City in recommending the appropriate scoping and grouping of the functions. PIante & Moran will docurrient the results of the market research and utilize this information when determining the appropriate scoping and grouping of the function. T11e primary purpose of conducting market research related to the identified work package is as follows: ~`~ Determine whether there is a market for the work package being studied Determine the competitive landscape for the work package being studied r~: Identify cost metrics and compare those against related City baseline costs that have been developed ~~~ Identify potential changes in the scoping and grouping of ,function(s) being considered 12 I~~ay~- moran • Cc~r~:tir~ttar~t ~raa(ysis t~r3 tit°iaatizatiorz of City $~f'vicGS City of Corpus Christi, Texas i}ec~erral:~er 1, ~t11 G Dependu1g on the area under consideration, there are a variety of methods that can be used for conducting this research nlcluding: ~ Review of industry published research ~~ Benchmarkulg against other comparable communities and potentially the private sector through surveys or phone interviews Obtaining access to industry association white papers, surveys, etc. ~= Facilitating a Request for Information {RFI} process Frequently, we find many municipal organizations are very knowledgeable of available information sources for benchmarking their services. 6. Prepare Options Analysis Deliverable Based on the data collected and analysis performed in the previous activities, we will prepare a deliverable outlining available options for the City to consider relative to the particular function. For each option, we will identify the relevant strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats {SWOT), Plante & Moran will present this deliverable to the City and highlight potentially preferred options for the City to consider, along with the rationale for the preference. As is often the case, we will make certain assumptions as part of our analysis and will perform the necessary due diligence to validate these assumptions prior to compiling our deliverable. We will document these assumptions such that they can be discussed and further validated by the City after the release of a draft version of the options analysis deliverable. Requirement 2 -Strategic Fit This aspect of the business case explains how the scope of the City function/service fits within the existing strategy of the City; and the compelling case for change, in terms of the existing and future operational needs of the City. Minimum content needed for this section: description of the business need and its contribution to the City's strategy and objectives, why it is needed, key benefits to be realized, key risks, critical success factors and how they will be measured; main stakeholders. Questions addressed: How well does the proposed way of meeting the requirement support the City's objectives and current priorities? a= If it is a poor fit, can fhe scope be changed? ~R Is the City function/Service needed at all? Have the stakeholders made a commitment to the City function/service? '~F Can the City realize cost reductions on an in-house basis? 1. Develop Understanding of Business Need and Strategy We will meet with stakeholders from departments throughout the City to understand, define and document the business needs that are served by the work package. These meetings will likely include 3 pla~,._ moron 'Co€~suitar~g A€~a.Iysis c?n F'rivatizatie;n of City Se€-vices .. City cat t~.ort3us Christi, Texas 13ece~ber 1, 2~1 ~ department directors and other management personnel, Throughout the course of our discussions, we will develop an understanding of both currenf and future business needs and strategy. 2. Conduct IT Staff Interviews We will meet with a sampling of City IT Department staff to review their areas of support and other organizational, administrative and technology support components. We anticipate meeting with IT management and select IT department staff to gather information in the following areas: Job duties and responsibilities Services and programs offered Organization structure Work volume ~~ Service levels/metrics yo-.: Communication/working relationship Other comments/suggestions - Additionally, we will conduct interviews with IT staff who are not part of the City IT department that provide technology support. These interviews frequently include dispersed IT staff ia1 the following areas: Courts ~~ Police Department Fire Department ~~ Human Services €~ Public Works Recreation ~~ Others if appropriate 3. Review and Assess Technical Environment Numerous specific areas of focus to be assessed were identified in the RFP. Our approach will apply to each of these areas and the other assessment areas to include: ~~': Data collection and review ~~ Interviews with appropriate TT support staff, business groups, process owners and key process end-users ~~ Development of gap analysis Development and review of findings and specific recommendations for each of these areas including identification of near-term and long-term projects We will conduct an extensive review of fhe existing technical environment at the City including all aspects of hardware, software, networking, telecommunications and relevant security for all of the various components. Various components of the tecllnicaI environment will be further assessed as part of the interviews and assessment surveys conducted with City staff as well as through the web-based survey that will be distributed to all City staff. 14 plate, moron •Ccarrsu(~:ant laroatysis on arivatiz_aticsrr of City Services City of Cor;~us Christi, Texas [~ecerrrber 1, ?01(1 4. Conduct On-Line End-User Survey - We will distribute an online survey to identify satisfaction with services provided by the IT Department{s) and satisfaction with technologies in use within the City. This survey will be made available to all City staff and include questions in the fallowing topic areas: - ~ Direction and Leadership Communication ~~ Service & Support ~~ General City Technology Training A comprehensive analysis of the information will be provided to the City as part of our final report. From the survey results, we can identify gaps between current levels of service and desired levels of service as well as gaps where current technology is not meeting the needs of a particular department, area or City as a whole. Having conducted a similar survey with a number of other municipal-based clients will allow us the opportunity to perform comparative analysis to determine specific areas of strength and opportunities for improvement. The survey will be conducted concurrently with the management and end-users interviews so as to use the preliminary survey results to prompt discussion with departmental staff. 5. Conduct Comparative Research We will conduct comparative research with other entities similar to the City using a variety of sources. We will take the results from our "Best Practices" research and conduct applicable comparisons with the City to include the following areas: :_~ Departmental structure and staffing patterns Information technology funding levels and the allocation of those funds Alternate service delivery options that are being used Technology maturity in the use of various technologies (e.g., document imaging, e-government, CRM, etc.) Other areas deemed necessary 6. Conduct Visioning Following the dacumentation of business needs, benchrnarking and user feedback, we will meet the leadership at the City to understand, deflate and document how the business needs align wit11 the overall strategy at the City. We will present the assessment data collected to this point with City management. This will include comparative cost and service data, service levels, and user satisfaction. This will be conducted via a visioning session with leadership. Plante & Moran will prepare an agenda and materials prior to the visioning session and distribute to the leadership team in advance. 7. Prepare Strategy Statement Based on the outcome of the visioning session and preceding business needs analysis, we will prepare an executive summary presentation indicating the strategic need for the work package along with a description of the business needs it satisfies and the overall value it provides to citizens. ~ 5 pla~~ moran ~Cc~~~~s~€ltar~t An~~lvsis on Privatizati~~ri of Cit~r ~er~ricos - City cif Cc~rp~s Christi, Texas [)eccr;~iaer ~ , 2.C'i tl At this juncture, we will meet with leadership at the City to discuss the rationale for continuing to provide the service. It is possible that the City could decide to eliminate the service, in which case an appropriate transition plan would be developed. Requirement 3 -Commercial Aspects Where there is an external procurement, this section outlines the potential commercial arrangement. Minimum content required for this section: proposed sourcing option, with rationale far its selection; key features of proposed commercial arrangements (e.g. contract terms, contract length, payment mechanisms and performance incentives); the procurement approach/strategy with supporting rationale. Questions addressed: Can value for money exchanged be obtained from the proposed sources (e.g. partners, suppliers, service providers)? ~e If not, can the City function/service be made attractive to a wider market? 1. Review City's Existing Procurement Policies At this juncture, it will be important to understand the various commercial matters relative to the work package. Thus, we will request and review the City's existing procurement policies and procedures, including: Documented policies and procedures Standard contract terms and conditions 2. prepare Best Practices Terms and Conditions Based on Plante & Moron's experience in negotiating similar commercial arrangements between clien#s and vendors, we will prepare a model list of contract terms and conditions which maybe used in a future bidding and contract negotiations process. These terms and conditions will include: ~~ Contract terms Payment terms ~a I..engtln of service 3. Prepare Best Practices Service Level Agreement Based on Plante & Moron's experience, as well as, Corpus Christi service standards, we will prepare a model service level agreement (SLA) which may be used in future bidding and contract negotiations process. This SLA will include: ~Q Performance metrics Performance levels (minimum and standard) .°qti Performance incentives and penalties (i.e., credits) Monitoring mechanisms ?~~ Performance calculatigns 6 p~a~- moron •~or~rs~altarrt Ar3aly5is o~~? Ps~ivatizutioi~r of City ~ervir_os Ci{;y o• Cc~rpEas Cl~ri,fi, Texas 1lecerrrl~Er 1, ~t31 ~ Requirement 4 -Affordability Assessment of affordability and available funding. Links proposed expenditure/allocations to available budget and existing commitments. Minimum content far this section: statement of available funding and broad estimates of projected whole- life cost of the City funclion/service, including departmental cosls {whexe applicable). Questions addressed: ~~ Can the required budget be obtained to deliver the City function/service? If not, can the scope be reduced or delivered aver a longer period? ~~ Could funding be sought from other sources? 1. Collect and Analyze Cost Data We will collect, review and analyze detailed data with respect to the cost of providing the specific service/area at the City, To complete this activity, we will analyze the previously created work breakdown structure, work Toad data and service levels to compile a list of cost components. We will then work with the City to collect the necessary cost data for the current and previous year for each of the cost components, as well as identify any additional components and related costs. Based on previous models we have developed, costs are likely to include: Personnel Costs Other Department Costs Supplies and Materials Services Equipment/Minor Items ~a Rent/facility costs _"~~ Travel ;~~ Energy and Utilities ~Y Data 1'racessing Capital ~: Software Maizitenance ~~: Software "= Hardware 2. Develop Detailed Cost Made# We will create a Microsoft Excel-based cost model which identifies both past {previous two years) and future {projected five years) costs of providing the service given the current scenario. We will document our assumptions and conduct the necessary due diligence to validate these assumptions with City staff. „ plane moron •Cr~~~srittar}t. Analysis or: Privatx«tir9s'~ of Ci+~;~ Ser`~iC~~s -~ City of Cc7r~rus 4liristi, Texas l~ece~r~Paer '!, ~,~~Ef3 3. Develop Detailed Cost Projections J' Based on the preferred option, we will create Microsoft Excel-based cost projections which identifies both transition and operating (projected five years} costs of providing the service under the preferred arrangement. We will document our assumptions and conduct the necessary due diligence to validate `! these assumptions with City staff. ~. Compile Return on Investment Analysis - Under the preferred option scenario, we will prepare a return on investment (ROI} analysis that, along with identified cost savings and ROI, encompasses the costs of the current situation with the costs projections under the preferred option scenario. 5. Compile Cost / Bene#it Analysis After completion of the ROI analysis, we will prepare an executive summary presentation, along with a compilation of the detailed cast and ROI analysis. The cost/benefit analysis will also include soft benefits along with their respective impact on the organization. 6. Meet with City Leadership At the City's direction, we can either present the cost/benefit analysis at this juncture or postpone meeting with leadership until aftex the Requirement 5 -Achievability is met. Requirement 5 -Achievability This section addresses the 'achievability' aspects of privatizing the City function/service. Its primary purpose is to set out the City function/service organization and actions which will be undertaken to support the achievement of intended outcomes including procurement activity (where applicable) or detailed study with existung providers. Minimum content for this section: high level plan for achieving the desired outcome, with key milestones and major dependencies (e.g. interface with other city functions/services}; key roles, with Warned individual as the project's owner; outline contingency plans e.g. addressing failure to deliver service on time; major risks identified and outline plan for addressing them; provider's plans for the same, as applicable, skills and experience required. Questions addressed: ~~ Can the privatization of the City function/service be achieved with the City's current capability and capacity? ~~ If not, how can the required capability be acquired? ~~ Can the risks be managed - e.g. scale, complexity, uncertainty? ~~ Does the scope or timescale need to change? 4. Conduct Planning Session with City __ _. _ _ __ __ We will meet with the project management office (PMO) and/or project managers at the City to discuss the various activities and work plan necessary to complete the transition of services per the preferred 18 p~a~ moran ~Cans3_iitar~t Aral}rsis tx7 I~~-iuatizatic~n of C'it;, Se~~~~ices City of f<arpi~s C~l~~isti, ~i-exas llecerrii~cr 1, 2tI10 op#ion. During this meeting, we will discuss other initiatives that are currently underway, any potential resource constraints and any other factor which may impact the achievability of the project. ~. Prepare a Work Breakdown Structure __ Based on or meeting with the PMO and/or project managers, we will prepare a work breakdown structure and preliminary work plan for completing the transition of services per the preferred option. This woxk breakdown structure will be discussed and analyzed with the City's PMO and/or project managers. 3. Prepare Capita! Cost Projections and Identify Funding Sources __ . _. Using data from the ROI analysis and cost projections, along with the work breakdown structure, we will prepare a cash flow analysis (i.e., capital cost projections) and work with the City in identifying possible funding sources. 4. Identify Qther Resource Requirements _ __ We will meet with the project management office (PMO) and/or project managers at the City to discuss the resource requirements for implementing the transition and operational plans for the service. As part of this activity, we will also compile a roles and responsibilities matrix identifyng which activities the City will be responsible for along with a detailed estimate of the timing and magnitude (i.e., days) of the resources required. 5. Prepare- Risk Management Plan _- - We will meet with the project management office (PMO) and/or project managers at the City to discuss the various risk related to completion of the transition of services per the preferred option. We will also discuss risk mitigation strategies and compile a risk management plan to document the results. 6. Meet with City Leadership __. __. At the City's direction, we will present our final analysis including the results of the cost /benefit analysis and achievability analysis. The results of the risk analysis and risk management plan will also be presented. It is anticipated that these results, along with those compiled earlier, will provide leadership at the City to determine whether the business case is strong enough to pursue fhe preferred option, or whether various alternatives should be considered. 9 p~a~_ moron Ca€,sr€ita€~t l~n<a(ysis czn f'r°ivatizrt?~io€•r of City Ser~uices - City of Cori3u5 Cht isli, ~-axes I)c~cers~l~c~- ~ , ~,0 ~ ~ Phase 3: Business Case Analysis Report Phase Objective and Summary of Activitr'es: The purpose of this phase is to compile the previously completed deliverables into a Business Case Analysis Report. The major activities to be performed in connection with this phase are: Develop Draft Business Case Analysis Report • ~ Review Business Case Analysis Report and Finalize Conduct Implementation Planning 1. Develop Draft Business Case Analysis Report Information gathered from the previous steps will be used to develop aPre-Competition Assessment Report that identifies the feasibility of moving forward with a particular work package into a formal competitive environment. Information to be included in this report is as follows: k==.~ Recommendation an the scope and grouping of the work package that wi111ikeIy have evolved through the process of conducting the pre-competition assessment ~~ Assessment of the current operation of this work package being performed by the City ~' Metrics associated with current City performance of this work package to include baseline costs Competitive assessment of outsourcing this work package ~~ Cost estimates, including transition costs, for transitioning and opearating this work package ~", SWOT {Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats} associated wifh outsourcing this work package ~~ Benefits and risks associated with outsourcing this work package Identification of improvements, other activities or outside pressures that could result in an impact to the timing for moving the work package into managed competition Impact of outsourcing this wank package to: o The City itself o Staff executing the work package o Those affected by t11e work package o Those receiving the services generated by the work package Rationale for moving a function to competition that considers, among ether items, 1ega1 implications, public welfare impact, competencies of the City and other risks ~' Recommended approach to include: o Schedule of activities and associated timing o Resource needs o Roles and. responsibilities of participants 20 P~a~~.. moron •Co€~suifi~rt ~tr~~~lysis o~ ~rivatizGEtiar7 c?f C:ity services City of Cc~rnus Christi, texas [3ece€~~b~e 1, 7..t~i G 2. Review Business Gase Analysis Report and Finalize __ _.. _ We anticipate reviewing the draft report with the appropriate City staff and finalizing. A fi~1aI presentation will be prepared for City Council. 3. Conduct lmplementatian Planning _... _. __ Assuming thaf fhe decision is to move into the next phase of the managed competition process, we will then work with the City to design the next set of project activifies. 21 plate rnoran V V V c .~ hd • ~ L'ti ~ ~G .~• pp~-~ VY ,I~ ~m ~ r^ .,ems :f~ €_ ~. a-: ~ .~: r p E~ Ica C.) 4~_'"" ,~ y-. ~ CJ a: !-3 ~.i c l.J L.3 ~~~+~ 'y ' ', ~ r ~ '~ eA 1 r Y ;F ~ ~ ° L ° ~ V ' t lL ~ ~11 i- .A '~ N ~ . ~ r ,9 ; . ~ tJ ~ , . r C h li ^^. L r , ~ Y . , ~ . m : ; Q g ~„ . _ . ' m ~ ~~ c ~ ~, C ! : '~ a ~~ r ~ a~ ,' ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~' • f, m ,~ ,~ ~' ; ~ c~ ~ 3 , ' a m ' ~ ~ ro ~ ep ~ a ~ U ~ ~ QC ~ ~ ~ o p E ~ m ~ "'~ E c f r o(n _F U0.V ~ ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ?, ~ ~ E C ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ c1 roCm ~ ?' c a ~ ~ ~, m ~ ~ ~ a m ~ ~ b ~ ~ ~ +'w ~ aa~~ o I' N m A }v rn° C ~cn r ~ ~ D ~ i1 ~ N 1 ' ~ . C `o c , ~ ;a ' ~ i ~ ;; , , I ~6 • ~ i ~ ~ d ~ ~ °~~ U U U U U g ~ ' U U U V ~ U ° U C) U U ~ U, ' UU aaaG . '; ' Q aa a a a - a a a 0 . d 4 0. aa a ~. io a a a a a f G~. d 0. 0. a a' ',dd~ ~~ a~ ~ ~ i ~ n { i ~' ° ra~ # + - t n 9 " ' , i .`" ~ ~ C d C ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ - I ~ ~ C u ~ ~~ ~ $ Q ~ Z rn = ; C a Q ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ m '- N~ ~, w ~~ ^ S I ~~I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L N c ~ ~ Q N •- ~ ~ ~ 2 O ~ G Q N C S C ' N C ~7 IA V L ~ ^ f . C ~~ jtl] l0 ~~ ~ w ~ y~~f V ~ d S ~ ~ 4 Q NN ~ ~ ~~q ~ Gi ' ifl ~ lL. ~ P r ,C ~ d fn _ 01 s ~ ~ ~, ~ Q F' r~ ~ ~/ ~ ~ ~ U ~ I a N 5 C ~ .~ {~~ c ~ ~ g O 'C ~ y L ~ L- iQ() c ~ ~ ~ tl lC .~ QQ Ol C ~ ffi ro . ~ h• 9 ro~ Qj C U V ~ @ A QQ Q ~. m ~ 'j~' 7 py flj m ~¢ ~ ~~ g ' ~ ~ ' ~ ~ 0. 4 ~ J y~ ~ ro ~ m ° ~ m ~ ~~ ~; ~ ~ ~p ~ ~' ~ o ' ~: ~ m ~ ~ c . ~ ~ ~ o ~ 4 0. ~ ~ , f ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4~- C e ~ p ~ ~- ~ ~ . 0- 7 4 dOr~}~ Q a y '$ ''~ ~ ~ ~- ~ 4~ ~~ ~- ~ yy1 ~ 7 p ~ ~ ~ ~ pQ 7 M 7 ~ ~ O 7 (~ ~ ~ 7 j ~ ~~p E~ 4 11 V~ ~ ~ °~ ~ ~ E~ °c ~ O a n ~ a r9~ . ~ ~ . ~ ~ ' ~ i? W v U ~ ~ ~ ~ n ~ E d ~ V ' O ~ C w ' P q1 ~o 5 ~ .G m 444~~~ q nou~u~~ ~ ~ ~r w $ U U C D no Q !/~ c VVJJ ~ ~ F a ~' ~ T 5 m o (~ C7 ~ ~ O U ~ C c~ 4 G , L ~^J a'~ s ill ~ ti ~a ~ a m. ~r ~ ~ ~ o ~ nr ~ ~ O n ~ y C1 ~ ~;. O ~ ~ a ~ , a ~ ~ a y N 1 + ~ ~; ~~ ~^' N P Y 'T' IA lp f b ' ~ N c*i ~ l l'i f fl ~:. r- i V Nf R t (~ f C I ~ C. ~ {V trl a`.. - C V M d' ui { 0 r~ N M .. •f f l'i ( p ; ~'^ iV ih d~.3 _~ N 'Cc;ns«[t`.ant. Anaiysis ~;~~~ Pf-ivai:i~atic~~~ cif L;i~:y Sc:rviccs City of C..€ari3GFs C:h~ris€i, Texas Section II. Firm Qualifications Uece€I~er i , 20~ d The City of Corpus Christi, similar to municipal entities nationwide, is experiencing significant challenges as a result of the recent economic downturn. At the same time, demands from constituents including City staff and citizens continue to increase. As a result, goveznmental entities are looking at transforming their government in one or more of the following areas: ~.~ Improvements in financial management Improvements in executing municipal operations ~~ Improvements in managing real-estate and facilities Better leveraging existing technology while spending wisely on new technology One of the concepts that are gaining increased attention within the public sector is Managed Competition in which departments are being required to compete against the private sector for managvig their operations. The reasons for outsourcing may vary between the different entities but the overriding objective is still the same; achieving improved operational effectiveness and quality of service at the same or Iess cost. We have chosen to propose our evaluation of IT services only. Plante & Moran has been working with municipal clients far over 50 years and has been providing IT consulting services to our municipal clients for over 30 years. As a result, we have a deep understanding of municipal IT operations. The value that our projeck team brings to the project with the City of Corpus Christi can be summarized as follows: Linderstanding of Municipal Entities: Our proposed project team is solely dedicated to serving governmental entities and, as a result, we have a very deep understanding of all areas of municipal operations. ~~ Proposed Protect Staff.• Senior staff within our proposed project team has, on average, nearly 20 years of experience providing a variety of management consulting to our municipal clients. .Independence: Our firm is independent in that we do not provide or represent any IT outsourcing services or firms. ~:~ Expertise: Our proposed staf# have significant experience providing management consulting services on a national level to municipal governments in those areas required by the City such as: o IT assessment expertise o Execution of a Managed Competition program o Operational assessments and benchmarking of services o Development of detailed Statements of Work (50W} and Request for Proposals (RFPs) o Assistance in facilitating Outsourcing initiatives for governmental entities o Proposal development activities within the public sector '~-~~ Responsiveness: Our ability to effectively service our municipal clients is well known. As a result, we have a large number of clients who have used our services repeatedly due to our ability to deliver a quality result that exceeds their expectations. 23 Plante moron "Coi~sultarrt A~~alysis cn l~r~ivat.izatic~i: of (.:ii:y ~ei'~rice3 City at Coi~p~tns Christi, Texas 1)eceo'~ber 1, 2.0'; 0 ~G l~i~ ~~~~~~i~ Founded in 1924, Plante & Moran, PLLC is the twelfth largest management consulting and public accounting firm in the United States. Plante & Moran, PLLC operates as a partnership. Plante & Moron's staff of over 1,600 persons is organized into four major service areas: Management Consulting, Accounting and Auditing, Tax Consulting, and Personal Financial Planning Services. Over the past several years, Plante & Moran has continually expanded the scope and experience of its Management Consulting Services Group. The firm is committed to continuing this growth by retaining and attracting qualified professionals to provide the broad range of management and technical services that are necessary to effectively serve the needs of our clients.. Plante & Moran takes great pride in the quality of services it provides to its clients. We have a rigorous set of quality controls designed to provide assurance that professional standards axe followed and our clients receive a high quality product. Plante & Moran takes equal pride in our people and our professional work environment. Some of the facts about our firm that we are proud of include: Our partnership group is comprised of 19% women, which is the highest percentage of female equity partners among the nation's largest public accounting firms, according to CPA Persorunel Report, a national public accounting trade publication. ~~~ Staff turnover rate below 15% which is significantly lower than that of other national public accounting firms. ~= The firm has been named to Fortune Magazine's "100 Best Companies to Work for in America" for the last twelve years. s The firm is ranked 55th an list of Training magazine's "Top 100 Training Organizations" Plante & Moron's Management Consulting Group, consisting of over 150 dedicated consultants, is a versati]e, full service consulting organization with a proven track record for providing quality professional services. Our emphasis and commitment to management consulting has resulted in the extension of the consulting practice into all major aspects of goveriunent and education addressing our clients' unique needs related to information technology, security, compliance, and policy. Plante & Moran has become a leader in providing services to governmental organizations. We presently work with well Aver 200 County and local governments. Our professionals have made substantial commitments to working with local, County and state government agencies. Our extensive experience with governmental clients has enabled us to assemble a project team that we believe is uniquely qualified to perform the proposed project. Organization -Government Consulting Services Because of our broad governmental client base, we are able to devote the necessary time to specialize and thus provide maximum service. To assist us in this specialization, we are members of numerous municipal government professional associations that have a focus on the application of technology for government including: ~~ Public Technology Institute (PTI}, aNon-Profit organization created by and for cities and counties that works with a core network of Ieading government officials to identify opportunities 24 ~~a~ moron 'Coas~!,tant ~i~alysi5 ©rr Privati~afic~in of City Sei~vit;es . City of Cor~3o5 CliriSti, Texas E3cce~r!tser 1, 2f1'I d for technology research, share best practices, offer consultancies and pilot demonstrations, promote technology development initiatives and develop educational programming. ~? Government Management and Information Sciences (GMIS), an organization composed of municipal information technology directors with a primary goal to foster a unified effort among government entities to integrate and disseminate their respective research and design efforts in the area of automated information sciences. ~°> Government Finance Officers Association (GPOA), an organization whose purpose is to enhance and promote the professional management of governments .for the public benefit by identifying and developing financial policies and practices and promoting them through education, training and leadership. As a result of our continuing involvement with government organizations at all levels, we have acquired in-depth knowledge and experience in dealing with relevant technical, operational and procedural issues. This experience and knowledge, and our commitment to assure objectivity and a high level of independence, are fundamental to our proven and consistent ability to meet the needs of our governmental clients. To assure responsiveness to the needs of our clients, our consulting staff strives to maintain a high level of understanding of, and sensitivity to, tale key issues that affect the operations of government organizations. At the current time, such issues include: ~~ I7 Governance across complex organizations Increasing pressure to improve service despite shrinking budgets and diminishing resources ~~ Reduced state and local budgets due to the current economic slowdown Increasing competition from the private sector ~~ Lack of staff training that would be instrumental in organizational change Significant pressures from public interest groups i~ Increased Iegislative involvement in budgeturg, appropriating, and disbursing of funds ~ Emerging awareness of the need to measure the benefits as well as the costs of services (i.e., cost effectiveness as well as cost efficiency) Privatization of services to achieve more effective services at a lower cost Our professional staff, through training and experience, assists our clients in developing strategies far effectively coping with these, and other key management issues. Public Sector Services and products Plante & Moran has assumed a leadership role in providing consulting services to governmental entities. The range of services we provide includes the following: ~~ Technology Consulting & Solutions Human Capital Management and Communications & Networking Services Development ~~ Project Management and Oversight ~' Market Research Services Operations Analysis ~' 13usitess Planning and Feasibility Analysis z~ pla~_ moron 'C.o~=_,~altart At~a(ysis cry l~rivat:i~utic~~+r~ of C:it:y Se; vices City of Car{,us Christi, Texas ~~ Consolidation Studies Organizational Planning and Development E'inancial Management Services Decer~-fiber 1, 2.Q~ t3 Employee Benefits Analysis Assurance Services Real-estate, Design and Construction Consulting The following sections highlight those services that are relevant to the engagement with Chester County. Our approach to each consulting engagement is structured to provide khe services and level of professional support required to meet the individual needs of the client. Although we have developed well-defined methodologies far conducting consulting engagements, we do not attempt to impose a rigid structure onto each assignment. Rather, we attempt to tulderstand the fundamental challenges and opportunities of our clients and develop an approach that addresses those particular conditions. _ The relevant project references and staff backgrounds will highlight our expertise in providing solutions to our clients. An overview of the services provided by our firm that are relevant to this project are - described in detail in the Following subsections. Technology Consulting &t Solutions Services Plante & Moron's management consultants have made a significant commitment to assist governmental clients develop and implement appropriate technology. The services we offer address virtually all aspects of information systems including: Information Technology Assessments including: o Organization o Administration o Technology Strategic Information Technology planning ~~ Communications and networking including: o WAN/LAN architecture and development o Network analysis and optimization o Telecommunications o Voice/data/video integration o Performance assessmenf o Bandwidth utilization =~ Security assurance including: o Information system reviews a System trust services o Network security reviews o SAS/70 reviews F~ SoIution delivery including: o Needs assessment o Cost benefit analysis a Requirements definition z~ p~a~- moran •Ce~~sc~liant. ~.r~alysis an F'r'ivatizat.io~~ c;~f Ci.•y ~~~~°vic:rs - ~ City of Corpus C'.I~~-is+'i, Texas 1?ece€~~b~r 1, 201 Cl - o Software selection o Contract negotiations o Process improvement o Implementation management ~fY 'Outsourcing analysis ~~ e-Government Strategy and development Technology management - Project management - We have developed significant research capabilities to assist our clients in new and emerging technologies and issues, Our consultants have a variety of professional designations and are active - participants instate-wide government teclulology committees including the Government Management Inforrnatipn Society (GMIS). In addition, our consultants are very active in making presentations to a variety of governmental organizations on current issues. Our library of resource materials is readily available to our consultants to effectively satisfy our clients' unique needs. Communication f~ Networking Services Plante & Moron's Communication & Networking consulting specialists have assisted numerous public and private sector clients in many aspects of telecommunications management. Many of our activities and efforts u~ this practice area are devoted to helping clients identify and realize improvement oppartunities created by the dynamic and highly competitive telecommunications equipment and service industries. Our experience indicates that most governments have available to them opportunities to increase telecommunications service levels and/or reduce arulual expenditures. Specific services provided by our consultants are designed to develop these opportunities. They include: ~~ Large-scale network design and deployment ~~~ Identification of cost reduction opportunities in areas such as equipment, network, local and long-distance calling, cabling and maintenance • Identification of service and feature improvement opportunities in the existing system, or through implementation of more appropriate technology i~ Development of bid sped#ications through complete needs analysis for implementation of large- scale wide-area networks ~~'~ Product, vendor analysis and final recommendation Contract negotiation, implementation management and final payment audit Ongoing management support for move and change activity, multi vendor coordination and troubleshooting Additionally, Plante & Moran has a broad base of experience and expertise in related information technology areas including communication networks (LAN and WAN), cable television and wireless. Security Assurance Services Plante & Moron's Security team provides a variety of solutions to clients in many industries. Below is a list that highlights our available services. 27 p~a~ to moron '~onsi~ltant Analysts on I~riv~l:izatian of C~ii:y Services City of Ctarpus CI-~risti, Texas o~:en~l?er l , 7_~9 ~ Confidentiality issues - Confidentiality o IT risk and internal control assessment o Baseline network security assessments (layered approach -Internet, firewall, network, host, etc.} o Business I'racess/Application Security and Control Reviews ~~ Security Planning, Design & Implementation o Development of Policies and Procedures o Development of security awareness and training o Development of Overall Network Security Strategy and Plan o Specific security configuration (firewall, router, host and/or network servers, etc.} Security Administration & Monitoring o Internet /Perimeter monitoring o Critical systems monitoring o Enterprise monitoring GLBA & HIPAA o Gap Analysis o IT Risk Assessment o Network Security Assessment/Penetration Studies o IT Policies and Procedure Development ~~ Section 404 Sarbanes-Oxley Act o Documentation and testing of IT Internal Controls o Documentation and testing of Application Security and Controls €~ Recoverability/Availability o Risk and Service Level Profiling o Solutions Architecture o Implementation Management o Risk and Service Level Monitoring 1Neb and e-Government Services Plante & Moron's experienced web application development staff offers the services our clients need to be successful with their web application initiatives including: o Web strategy development o Custom web application development a Portal development o Internet branding and presence development o Innovative web design o Transport infrastructure design and analysis o Site promotion and traffic analysis 28 Plante moron 'Cc~r~s~_iitant Analysis ~ n Prr.vatizatiori of City Services City of Car~aus Christi, Texas - We use industry standard design, development, and database tools, and employ languages and technologies including: ASP.NET ~ Flash HTML/DHTML/XML ~`~ COM/ActiveX Controls AJAX i DCOM Visual Basic r~ Java Script and Applets ~~, Database integration using OLEDB, ODBC, s~ SQL Server and XML = Our developers average more than ten years of development experience, which is uncommonly high in today's industry. We pride ourselves on diligently expanding our knowledge base and continually ~' setting new goals to achieve certifications and awards as a measure of our expertise. 'The team assigned to your project has achieved the following individual and group recognition. Microsoft Gold Certified Parh~er Specific certifications include multiple instances of: o Microsoft Certified Database Administrator ~ o Microsoft Certified Solution Developer o Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer o Microsoft Certified Professional o Macromedia Certified Developer J -. o Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist w"3 Various web awards, including: ± o American Design Award ~ o Helen eWards o CUNA Diamond Award ~ o IABC (International Association of Business Communicators) Best in Show Award i o Apex Communications National Award of Excellence z9 pla~nte_ moron r~at~suitart A~aEysis can Prit~ai;izatiri~ cif City ~et-`aic~es . ~:ity of C:or~~us Ci~risti, 1-exas Dece3~~rb€~r 1, 2.010 ° Plante & Moran has a significant number of references that are directly relevant to t11is. Within the last few years, we have conducted assessments for the following public sector clients with the project title and periods of perfarnrtance noted. ~' ~ 1 ~ ~. E: ~ .. ,_ p _- , City of Flagstaff, AZ IT Assessment Ju12010 -Sept 2010 City of Fayetteville, AK IT Assessment Aug 2010 _ Present City of Carrollton, TX _ Gwinnett _- ~ , -..._,._.._. _ .._ _ County, GA - City of Alexandria, VA City of Round Rock, TX IT Sourcing only IT Strategic and 1-Year Tactical Plan Aug 2009--June 2010 .. ___.~.. _.,._ ~... __.. _. ---. __.w.... __.._....._ .._ Feb 2009 -July 2009 Spartanburg County, 5C Coconino County, AZ -....___. . _.__..__~.__m___...~.__...._._.~_. _ ..._. City of Des Moires, IA City of Lee's Summit, MO Johnson County, KS _ Waukesha County, WIT __._. _ Shelby Township, MI Van Buren Township, MI _. Lake Coun{~r,'___-.__._.~__....__.° --- IL DuPage County, IL Ottawa County, MI City of Ann Arbor, MI IT Assessment _ Assessment and Strategi _.__.__...._ ~_......__._-.°_. ___ IT c Technology Plan Oct 2009 -Mar 2010 _._._._ .Sep 2008 --Apr 2009 ~ _ . IT Assessment and Strategic Technology Plan Aug 2008 -Jan 2009 IT Assessment and Strategic Technology Plan Apr 2008 -Oct 2008 IT Assessment and Strategic Technology Plan Jan 2008 - Apr 2008 __ _. __._~.._._M..._..._ _____.__..._._.__._______ _..._._.__.___ __ _... IT Assessment and Strategic Technology Plan ___ _.__. _.. _.. ___ Apr 2007 .-_.._...___._ __._.__..__..r..,_. -Aug 2007 _IT Assessment and Strategic^ .°~.__,_ _... ~_,_. _.,_- .___ _._. Teclu~ology Plan __. ___.._ ._..._.__._ __ May 2006 _ _ ..___....~__ ___._.---- .--_..._-_- -- Jun 2007 ___.._.___..._____.__..____. __-_-- -_-.--____._.__._.______...__.__ IT Assessment and Strategic Technology Plan .__..__.___ .__m__ Dec 2006 __ _... __.._ .__.__~...___.__ -Jun 2007 Strategic Information Technology Plan 5pr 2006 - Fa112006 Strategic Information Technology Plan IT Assessment Strategic Technology Plan I'I' Assessment Strategic Information Technology Plan Aug 2005 -Jan 2006 V4u12005 -Nov 2 .__ __r. _..__..._..._. ~_ J o05 Jan 2005 -Oct 2005 Aug 2004 -Mar 2005 Dec 2004 -Jun 2006 30 plate moron 'Ca~~su!tarst ~rlalysis tart Privatization of City Ser~rices . City of Carpus Ci~risti, Texas [)ec:en7hct- I, 2010 In addition, we have assisted the following organizations with large enterprise projects involving all aspects of system selection, sourcing, and contract negotiations: ~. ~ . :. A , e ~~F~ g _ _ Borough of State College, PA Selection and Contract Negotiations Ju12010 -Present City of Miramar, FL - - __~_-~-'- -_ Selection and Contract Negotiations4 _..~~__...__..----- -May 2010 - . ~-~ --~- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~__._.... - Present City of Roswell, GA Selection and Contract Negotiations Jan 2010 -Present Ci of Mesa, AZ Selection and Contract Ne atiat~ons A r 2009 -Present 'T'own of Hempstead, NY City of Asheville, NC • City of Cleveland, OH Village of Mt. Prospect, IL City of VSheboygan, WI - - City of St. Charles, MO f ~ County of Hancock, OH t _ County of St. Louis, MO 'Tax System Selection and Implementation Mgt. Jan 2009 -Present Selection and implementatian Management .-.-..._~._.. __._ .._..._....... __--_...._ ._.w _....__~_.._..~__._.-..._.-. Selection and Implementation Management Selection and Contract Negotiations .._-.--_-.___.__.,____._._-_W_ .._.._.._ _.__-_.__._-... _..._.. Selection and Implementation Management Selection and Contract Negotiations _,__--~. __- .-__.._ .~ _..T_.__~-_.__ __._. _...- _..-. _._.. -..._ Selection and Contract Negotiations Selection and Implementation Management Oct 2007 -Present oct 2ao6 -Jul Zoos May 2009 -- Dec 2009 Mar 2007 -Dec 2008 Jan 2009 -Dec 2009 Jan 2004 -Dec 2004 Apr 2007 -Feb 2010 31 pia~- moran 'CoE~isuitaF~t tanaiysis ors I'r~ivat:i~:~ztic:3;'} cat Cii:y Se€~~~ic€as CiY.y cif Corlaus Christi, Texas t3ecer~~lx-~~° ~ , ?(31 Q The references below represent a sampling of recent Plante and Moran clients relevant to this project. City of Carrollton, TX City of Round Rock, TX IT Sourcing Selection IT Strategic Assessment and Plan ~~ Mr, Leonard Martin Mr. Daniel Saucedo City Manager lT Applications Manager 1945 E. Jackson Road 221 East Main Street _ Carrollton, TX 75006 Round Rock, Texas 7$664 Phone: (972} 466-3015 Phone: (512) 218-5439 i = Project Dates: August 2009 -June 2010 Project Dates: Sep 2008 - Apri12009 City of Alexandria, VA IT Assessment Mr. Tom Trobridge IT Director 301 King Street Alexandria, VA 22314 Phone: (703) 746-3001 Project Dates: October 2009 -Mar 2010 City of Ann Arbor, MI IT AssessrnenE and Strategic Plan Mr. Dan Rainey IT Director 100 North Fifth Avenue Ann Arbor, MI 48104 Phone: (734) 994-2794 Project Dates: Dec 2004 -June 200( Gwinnett County, GA IT Assessment and Strategic Plan Mr, John Matelski Director of ITS/CIO 75 Langley Drive Lawrenceville, GA 30045-6900 Phone: {770) 822-8953 Project Dates; January 2009 -July 2009 Coconino County, AZ IT Assessment and Strategic Plan Ms. Maureen Jackson IT Director 211 N. Agassiz St Flagstaff, AZ 86001-4603 Phone: (928} 679-7930 Project Dates: May 2008 -October 2008 Lake County, IL IT Assessment and Strategic Plan Mr. Barry Burton County Administrafor 18 North County Street Waukegan, IL 60085-4350 Phone: (847) 377-2228 Project Dates: July 2005 -November 2005 City of 1)es Moines, IA IT Assessment Mr. Michael Matthes Assistant City Manager 400 Robert D. Ray Drive Des Moines, IA 50309 Phone: {515) 283-40b0 Project Dates: Jan 2008 -April 2008 ~z pla~- rnoran 'Cai~rs~aitat7t. Ai~atysis an ~riv~t:izatioi~ c,f City Ser~~iccs City at~ Carpus Christi, eras Johnson County, KS Waukesha County, WI IT Assessment and Strategic Plan IT Assessment and Strategic Plan Mr. Jack Clegg Mr. Michael Biagioli TT Director IT Manager 111 S. Cherry Street 1320 Pewaukee Road Olathe, K5 66061-3441 Waukesha, WI 53188 Phone: {913) 715-1515 Phone: (262) 548-7610 Project Dates: May 2006 -June 2007 Project Dates: December 2006 -June 2007 Washtenaw County, MI IT Assessment and Strategic Plan Mr. David Behen Deputy County Administrator 100 North Fifth Avenue Ann Arbor, MI 48104 Phone: (734) 891-6489 Project Dates: Dec 2004 -June 2006 Town of Fempstead, NY System Selection Mr. Stephen Hallick IT Commissioner 1 Washington Street Hempstead, NY 11550-4923 Phone: (516} 4$9-3500 Project Dates: Jan 2009 -present 33 p~anfie moran t.€~i~sulta~~t ~ira[ysis ~:r~ t's-ivatizatioi~ of Cia:y~ 5eE~vices Y City of Cor{~u5 Christi, Texas [~ace~xtG}er 1, 1.O~d Section III. Team Qualifications Plante & Moran has been providing llformation Technology Consulting Services for more than 25 years. Throughout the years, we Have continually refined our methodology fo provide utmost value to our clients on these engagements. We will assign very experienced staff to this project who bring both IT expertise, as well as, operations/privatization experience. 'The consultants that will be assigned to this project are as follows along with their title and specific role on the project. All of the proposed consultants are employees of Plante & Moran. Adam Rujan Partner Engagement Partner who will be responsible for the overall success of the project. Over 25 years experience. __._._... _..._ _..._.. _.._ ._ ._ .. -- -- _ -._r... _ _.._.,_ _. --._...~.._,._ _ ____..__~ _.__.... _. __.. _..___ ..W.._ _.._ .._.~._ _ _.,._ __....._....._ Scott Eller Manager Responsible for project management and deliverables. Over 20 years experience. Mike Riffel Senior Consultant ^ Responsible for leading the technical components of this project including IT governance, organization, and best practices. Over 5 years experience. Sri Chalasani W_.. ~ __~, ..~_ __ Senior Consultant ..._. ~.._ Responsible far leading the IT infrastructur ^ _ ~. e review aspects of the project. Over 20 yeaxs experience. Laurie Zyla Consultant Consultanf who will conduct a number of the end- user interviews. Over 5 years experience. Our approach to the prajeck is designed to assign personnel to areas of the project where their expertise is required. ALL of the team members included on the project have worked together on a number of previous municipal clients. Communication, involvement and teamwork characterize our management philosophy and are extremely important an this project internally and with Corpus Christi. Specifically, our project-staffing plan is carefully tailored to assure that project team members are assigned tasks closely aligned to their experience and capabilities. With this management orientation, we believe that all project tasks can be effectively achieved and any issues or problems can be resolved effectively and expediently, resulting in the successful accomplishment of the project objective. Information regarding the qualifications, education and work experience of staff assigned to the project are Included in the following paragraphs and resumes. Again, all of the employees assigned to the project for the City have extensive experience in conducting similar work for other municipal clients. 34 Plante moron ~ai€si_~ii~~~~~t ~t~ai~~sis cis Pri~ratization of Cityr Sr~rvices City of C:ori~us Christi, Texas [lece~~~laes~ 1, ~~l G Project Director Mr. Adam J. Rujan, a Part~ler with the Government Consulting practice, has more than twenty five years experience consulting to goven~ment and public sector organizations. Mr. Rujan's experience includes assisting governmental units with organizational and operational analyses, productivity and cost studies, and system reviews. He has developed specific expertise in assisting organizations understand and implement new technology. Mr. Rujan has significant experience assisting clients redesign complex processes to improve performance. His clients have included a wide range of local municipalities, counties, agencies and authorities and state government. He is a frequent presenter and has authored numerous articles on improving operational efficiency and e#fectiveness. Mr. Rujan earned a B.S. degree in engineering from Wayne State University and an M.B.A. from the University of Michigan. Project Manager Mr. Scott Eller, a Manager within our Technology Consulting & Solutions Group, has aver twenty years experience assisting clients with various technology related needs and eleven years specifically devoted to serving public sector clients. He has extensive experience u1 providing numerous technology services for governmental clients including technology planning, system selection, technology assessments, IT organizational evaluations, and quality assurance and implementation management. He has managed recent IT Assessments and/or Strategic Technology Plans for Johnson County, KS; Lake County, IL; DuI'age County, IL; City of Ann Arbor, MI and Shelby Township, MI. Additionally, he was the Manager/lead consultant who recently assisted Carrollton, TX with their IT outsourcing intiative. Prior to joining the firm, he spent several years managing system development staff at a large system integrator. Mr. Eiler's educational background includes a BS u1 General Engineering from the University of Illinois and an MBA from the University of Michigan. He is a member of the 11linois Goveriunental Finance Officers Association (IGFOA}, the Illinois Chapter of the Government Management Information Sciences (GMIS} and the Project Management Institute (PMI) wit11 a Project Management Professional (PMP) certification. Project Consultants Mr. Mike Riffel is a Senior Consultant with Plante and Moran and has five years of experience in assisting the public sectar through the information technology assessment, selection and implementation process. Mike has Facilitated the RFP development, proposal analysis and system selection process far dozens of public sector organizations throughout the United States and has extensive lcnawledge of the functionality provided by public sector focused enterprise solutions. In addition, Mr. Riffe] is well versed in conducting information technology assessments as well as working in technology implementation advisory roles, reviewing integrator deliverables and assisting in the design of a post implementation support structure. ,Prior to joining the Plante and Moran team, Mike's recent enterprise information technology assessment, organizational assessment and technology selection projects included the City of New Orleans, LA; Fairfax County, VA; Charleston County Parks and Recreation Commissipn, SC; City and County of Honolulu, HI; City of Ketchikan, AK; Quinault Indian Nation (WA) and the Pasco County School Board, FL. Mike has been published numerous tunes on topics ranging From altenlative service delivery models to mitigating information technology project risk to recent enterprise resource planning (ERP) market changes. Mr. Riffel leas a Masters Degree ii Public Policy Analysis and Administration (MPA} from Michigan State University and is a member of the Pi Alpha Alpha National Honox Society fax Public Affairs and Administration. 35 pla,~-_ moron -Ca~~su(.t:~rr7t ~s~alysis on Pr~ivatizati©n al• Ci%y Services . City of Carpus C:I~ris~~i, Texas C3ecen~l~~ €- 1, ? 0 °~ 0 Mr. Sri Chaiasani, Senior Network Engineer for Plante & Moran, has aver 20 years of experience and specializes in the design, deployment, and troubleshooting of complex networks. He is well-versed in various LAN /WAN technologies and protocols, such as Ethernet, ATM, and TCP/IP. He has worked Frith the product Iines of all the major network and VoIP system manufacturers. Sri also has over six (6) years experience in the design. and implementation of broadband multimedia solutions across large networks. Multimedia designs include IP based video-on-demand systems, video broadcasting/streaming applications, video conferencing systems, video surveillance systems, arid Voice Over IP (VoIP} with unified messaging solutions. He has an MBA from Wayne State University, a MS in Computer Science from Western Michigan University and a BS i<~ Electronics Engineering from Bangalore University. Ms. Laurie Zyla, a Consultant with Plante & Moran, has several years of experience in E-Business and Internet Services. Ms. Zyla has significant experience with the full lifecyde of design and implementation of shared web services environments for a major global telecommunications organization. She also has experience working with local levels of government, dedicating her efforts to the Michigan Suburbs Alliance. At Plante & Moran, Laurie serves her government clients on a host of technology planning, selection and implementation issues, and works on their operational and organizational impact. Her clients have included City of Des Moines, IA; City of Lee's Summit, MO; Coconino County, AZ; St. Louis County, MO; City of Cleveland, OH and City of Sheboygan, WI. Ms. Zyla's educational background ineludes an MBA in International Business from Brandeis University, and a BS u~ Computer Science from the University of Michigan. 36 plate to moron 'Ccinsufta!~t. ~a!7afvsis can farivatizatio!-! of ~:ity ~e€`vices City of Coepus Christi, texas December 1, Z.~~O Adam Rujan Present Position: Partner Technology Consulting & Solutions Experiences include: Technology Planning: Experience in developing strategic technology plans and conducting information technology assessments for goven~mental clients that includes the establishment of technology strategies and recommended projects. Through these effoxts, he has gained a vast level of experience on technologies relevant to the various areas of government including ERP solutions, CRM solutions, imaging technologies, wireless technologies and others. Process Redesign and Information Technology Assistance: Projects typically include assisting clients realize the full potential of technology, including re-engineering, productivity improvement, benefits realization analyses and post implementation reviews. Experiences also include project management system implementation, planning and selection, and data processing internal controls reviews. Organization and Management Studies: Engagements have varied from analysis of specific functional activities to comprehensive studies of underlying operating policies, procedures, and organizational principles. Analyses have included reviewing resource utilization, future roles and levels of service to be provided, alignment of programs and services, communication channels and working relationships within and outside the organization, supervisory management styles and practices, position requirements and skill levels, administrative practices and training requirements. Operations & Financial Analysis: Project objectives typically focus on increasing efficiency, identifying and evaluating alternative methods for revenue enhancement, cost/benefit studies. Specific activities have included detailed review and analysis of operational policies and procedures, operational controls, reporting and administrative controls, fiscal and reimbursement practices, the identification of non-value added work activities, and process re- engineering. Change Management Assistance: Assisted various organizations in understanding and applying the concepts of Change Management and assessing readiness for Change. Engagements have varied from staff and customer surveys and assessments to modifying organizational structures and developing staff training programs. Critical components of our approach typically include empowering client work groups and coaching staff in evaluating various available options for change. 37 ~la~- moron Cor~si~li.ai~?t. Analysis cn Pr'i~~atization caf City Services City of Cc~rl:,~~s CltrisCi, l~exas J [~ece~~b~r ~ , 2i;1 s~ Adam Rujan resume, continued Prior Organizational Affiliations: Detroit Medical Center; Detroif, Michigan Manager of Consulting Services in the Management Consulting Group, experience included; ~ implemented and monitored ongoing productivity management systems. Developed and implerx~.ented nursing patient classification systems. ~° Conducted operational reviews for hospitals, ambulatory care and health care related organizations. Managed a small staff of computer and management engineering professionals Education: University of Michigan -Master of Business Administration Wayne State University -Bachelor of Industrial Engineering Professional Affiliations: ~~ Public Technology Institute (PTI) Metropolitan Affairs Coalition, Board member Michigan Government Finance Officers Association (MGFOA), past Board member ~e Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) 38 pla~- moran Car'ts~~ltant A61~1~i5iS ors i=t~ivatizaii~;s~ .,f C:it~a Services i~it~.y t~f Carpus Ch~tsti, Texas; Scott Ei ler Present Position: Manager, Technology Consulting & Solutions Plante & Moran, PLI.C Experiences Include: 13ecerrsl~€~r l , 2010 ERP Needs Assessment, 5yste3tn Selection -Experience in conducting ERP needs assessments and software selections for governmental clients in areas including financial, asset management and human resources applications. These projects frequently include the development of a needs assessment report, ROY calculations far implementing new technology, system specifications development, Request for Proposal development, contract negotiations and implementation planning. ERP Systems Implementation -Experience in providing project management assistance related to the deployment of large-scale ERP solutions for governmental clients. Strategic Technology Planning -Experience in developing strategic technology plans for municipal clients that include the establishment of teclutology strategies and recommended projects. Many of these projects have included apost-review of recently implemented ERP - solutions. He has also been involved in planning projects and studies to identify redundant applications supporting similar processes in large organizations. Quality Assurance -Experience in providing Quality Assurance services on large-scale systems development projects. Through these projects, standard templates have been developed for project reporting, project budgeting, change control management, risk assessment, deliverables tracking and others. Systems Development and Prvj ect Management -Experience in providing leadership to a group of systems engineers responsible for developing and maintaining computer system applications on a wide variety of hardware and software platforms. Guidance included the development of proposals, mentoring of project owners, development of standard processes and procedures and deployment of tools to improve efficiency or reduce costs for application development and deployment. As a programming manager, he has received extensive training and hands-on experience using various System Life Cycle tools in support of traditional "waterfall" and more current Rapid Application Development methodologies. He has been heavily involved in the use of metrics for estimating projects including Function Point Analysis. He has also been utvolved with divisional assessments performed by the Software Engineering Institute (SEl) to determine what is required for an organization to achieve repeatable, quality results as part of a systems development process. 3~ Plante moron C£~115LSi~'.i~C!#= As"9 t7~tiJ5?:~ X11°! [3~1E'2~.~~t~~1C:i~ U~ L.~~;j! ~~;"Vtf:C'S Cit'.y of Corpus C!-!,'isti, Toxas Dec~rnoer i , 7.0'~ t~ Scott Eller resume, continued; Systems Migration and Conversion: Experience in leading a number of prpjects through a migration and conversion. One such project involved the migration of an application residing in thirty different facilities to a central location including the migration of the application, database and supporting infrastructure which impacted approximately 2,500 users. As part of this process, a detailed migration document was developed which described iti detail the migration process for each facility. Prior ~r~anizational Affiliations: Electronic Data Systems; Troy, Michigan (1985 -1994) Advanced Engineering SE. Assisted in the definition, development, implementation and support o£ a large number of software applications residing on a variety of platforms. His range of experience has included systems development, project management and programming manager. Education: University of Michigan -Master of Business Administration University of Illinois -Bachelor of Science, General Engineering Professional Affiliations and Certifications: ~~ Public Technology Institute (PTI) _ . ~_~ Government Finance Officers Association {GFOA) Project Management Institute (PMI) Project Management Professional (PMP) since 2003 ITIL V3 Foundation Certified 44 Plante moron ;::onsuttant Ar~atysis on t~r~ivatiratioEZ of City 5vr:~it:cs t:ity of Cc~rPus F~.t~rivti, l~~:xas Mike Riffel Present Position: 5r. Consultant, Technology Consulting & Solutions Plante & Moran, Pl.,I.C Experiences Include: l?ecerr~t~er ? , 2'10 Software Needs Assessment: Specialization in analyzing the business case for enterprise system replacement. Experience in facilitating functional area process discussions acid identifying opportunities far technology to enable business process improvement. Extensive knowledge of the public sector enterprise system marketplace and published expert in regard to viable enterprise solutions. System Selection: Experience in leading the process of selecting and deploying enterprise systems. Developed best practice financial and management technology specifications for inclusion in public sector request for proposal for enterprise systems. Extensive experience in vendor proposal analysis and demonstration script development. IT Governance 1Zeview: Expertise in analyzing and designing organizational iT governance, specifically post implementation system support structuxes. Business Process Documentation and Reengineering: Experience in documenting as-is business processes and identifying areas for business process improvement. Specialization in implementing a results based budget methodology. Experience in implementing change management techniques to ensure user acceptance of new business processes and/or technology. Organizational Assessmen#: Experience in analyzing organizational staffing, business process and technology relationships. Knowledge of best in class public sector transaction detail and staffing levels. Expertise in identifying opportunities to enhance current policy and procedure to maximize existing staff expertise or technology infrastructure. Prior Organizational Affiliations: Government Finance Officers Association (2006 - 2010) Senior Consultant/Policy Analyst. Mike specialized in providing functional fit-gap analyses for technology and organizational needs assessments, facilitation of the system selection process and design of implementation support structures. Mr, Riffel authored various chaptexs in multiple GPOA publications on topics ranging from CIZM/311 to alternative software delivery models such as Software as a Service (SaaS). 4~ plane moron ~:ortstEltant .4s~a(ysis ~~~1 ~r°ivat€xat.ic7r~ of City Se; vice:, ' C2ty of Cori:~us ~ i~risti, Texas Deco, ~l~er 1, 1010 Mike Riffel resume, continued Prior to GFOA, Mr. Riffel worked as Community Development Agent in Van 13uren County, MI where Mike coordinated the implementation of a Homelessness Management Information System (HMIs) and drafted the 2005-2010 Van Buren County, MI Comprehensive Plan. In addition, Mike was a Project Coordinator with Azavar Technologies Corporation in Chicago, IL where he implemented a utility tax audit program for municipalities throughout the "Chicagoland" area. Education: Michigan State University -Master of Public Policy Analysis and Administration {MPA) Michigan State University -Bachelor of Science, International Relations Professional Affiliations and Certifications: ~~ Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) Pi Alpha Alpha -National Honor Society in Public Administration Experience: Year Started in the Public Sector: 2003 Year Stated in Public Sector Consulting :2005 r~ Year Started Working at Plante & Moran: 2010 Publications: Riffel, Mike; Bailey, Mike. "Understanding and Mitigating IT Project Risks." Government Finance Review; June 2010. ~~ Riffel, Mike. "Chapter 4 -Overview of the Current ERP Marketplace." The ERP Doak: Financial Management Technology from A to Z. Chicago, GFOA, 2010. Riffel, Mike; Kavanagh, S1layne and Melbye, David. "Mission Critical: Evaluating and Fwlding Business Application Projects." IT Budgeting and Decision Making; Maximizing Your Governments Technology Investment. Edited by Shayne Kavanagh. Chicago: GFOA, 2009. Riffel, Mike; Kinney, Anne and Taylor, Paul. "Strategies and Lessons." Revolutionizing Constituent Relationships: The Promise of CRM for the Public Sector, Chicago: GFOA. 42 Plante moron (,(?k'13l.1t`Ldll~ A~lc?{1!S:`s C1F7 ~E°i'~rat77_u~'i£)i1 C)1` ~1`l.~ Jw.i :~iCL-`S City of z:;or~~us f ~~"isti, T~~xps Sri Chalasani Present Position Senior Systems Engileer Technology Consulting & Solutions Experience includes: Strategic Planning: Participate in long term technology plan meetings for customers. Develop short and long term strategies (planning & budgets} to accomplish plan objectives. Collect and interpret quantitative and qualitative data for design considerations. Technical lead to develop high level network architectures and design standards that blends client requirements with industry best practices. Network System Design: Consulted on numerous projects involving needs assessments, design, specification {RFI/RFP/RFQ) and selection of Local & Wide Area Networks {LAN/WAN) ranging from single site to multi-site environments. Network design, specifications and analysis involved technologies such as: Wide /Metro Area Network (Fiber Infrastructure & Bandwidth Services}, Local and Wide Area Network Electronics (Ethernet & ATM), Voice Over IP (VoIP} Systems with Unified Messaging, Wireless Access & Security {hotzones & hotspots), Centralized Network Security Systems, Video Conferencing Systems (H.320 / H.321 / H.323), IP based Video Broadcast, Video-On-Demand, and Surveillance Systems, Server Farms, Desktop Systems & Peripherals, Networks Attached Storage (NAS} and Storage Area Network (SAN) solutions, Server Load Balancing, Network Management Systems & Software, and Support & Maintenance Services. Post equipment/services procurement responsibilities include participation and development of physical and logical network plans for client's internal or third party integration teams, establish equipment configuration requirements and guidelines, and performance requirements. Broadband Wireless Systems: Technical consulting on building, city, and county wide broadband wireless solutions {hotspots &hotzones}. Responsibilities are to translate the vision and goals of the client into technical solutions and specifications. lZesearch & Business Analysis: Conduct research and business analysis for system migration. -_ This involved researching multiple solutions, analyze solutions against client requirements, and provide business case analysis including budgeting, ROI, and migration timelines. Network & Security Auditing: Conduct technology audit on customer's network that uzvolved a detailed analysis and reporting of clients' network and system infrastructure. Conduct network performance analysis to identify and rectify network /application related issues. Conduct internal and external IT security audits using ethical hacking procedures to identify network vulnerabilities. Create detailed reports on identified vulnerabilities and associated remediation's. 43 Plante moron Cc~nsa.attar~t. A~~aljFsis can [~rival:izatiar~ of City 4ervic:e4 Cifiy al Corpus f~tarist:,i, Te xas [~ecPrra~aer ~, 2(]1f1 Sri Chalasani resume, continued Network Systems Project Management: Responsible for providing project management oversight on network implementation projects to include coordination across multiple vendors, establish and maintain schedules. Other responsibilities include progress tracking, evaluate project implementations to stated design specifications, conflict resolution, manage change order controls, conduct punch list audits, and eventual sign-off for the project. Prior 4r~anizational Affiliations Innovate Technology Consulting Group Technical consulting services on planning, design, project management and implementation of integrated technology solutions primarily for public sectar organizations. Education Wayne State University - Master of Business Administration Western Michigan University -Master of Science {Computer Sciences) Bangalore University -Bachelor of Engineering (EIectronics & Communications) Professional Affiliations and Certifications Advanced Networking Technologies .°~ Vo1P & Unified Messaging Systems Video Over lP Systems {video streaming and video conferencing) Metro Wireless Solutions Project Management ~4 Plante moron Cor~isr~ltart ~tiaalsrsis ors Privatizaiir~r, of ~ii-Y ~ r•vit~e:~ ~:ity~ of ~or~~us ~'h:~istt, ~ cx~~s Laurie Zyla Present Position Consultant Technology Consulting & Solutions Experience [)ece~~ber 1, 7.111 J Technology Planning: Experience with technology planning and assessment projects. Assists government clients with shart- and long-range technology planning; budgeting; project management; system selection; and vendor and staff management. Projects included needs assessments, requirements definition, vendor selection and contract negotiation. Aisa assists clients with strategic planning, including assessing and managing the impact of technology implementation pn client operations. Technology Implementation: Experience with t11e full lifecycle of design and implementation of network infrastructure for a major global telecommunications organization. Assists clients with management and implementation of software, hardware, operating systems, and network infrastructure. Implementation responsibilities include project management, selection, implementation pIannilg, budgeting, staffing, training, business process improvement and evaluation. Technology Support: Experience supporting e-Business infrastructure, including server configuration and maintenance, customer support, data security, system monitornlg, and project management. Assists in providing on-going network management and administration services to government clients. Government Prpgrams: Experience working with government and community groups to support initiatives like economic development, coalition development, collaborative solutions, and e-government. Assists clients with organization development, constituent research, community-based solutions, and establishing government partnerships. Prior Organizational Affiliations Motorola, Inc. Systems Engineer, Global e-Business Internet Strategies -Maintained both hardware and software components of corporate e-Business environment; designed project infrastructure/architecture; facilitated system monitoring and backups; and managed the full lifecycle of new website projects Education Brandeis University -- Master of Business Administration University of Michigan -Bachelor of Science, Computer Science Affiliations and Certifications: Net Impact -New Leaders For Better Business Michigan Suburbs Alliance 45 Plante moran CGnsuitar~t ~tr~a~ysis o~7 ~I~ivC~itiz~tiC:ll ui Ci~:y 5ei~v;c~s City of Cnrpus £:f~risti, Texas ecetrE(~er 1, 2U ~ ~ Section IV. Project Costs The total cost below includes all professional fees and expenses to provide the requested services as detailed in our proposal. Scope Nat to Exceed Additional services related to implementation of recommendations and/or assistance in outsourcing IT will be provided at an all inclusive, blended rate of $235/hour. ~6 Plante moran Cans€atk~nt A!~~Eysis ,!a i~y~ivati.zc~~i~~n cif City Sr!~~~icc~ . City ~i Cn!-~ass C[3!~isti, ~'cx~s [)rce~;~i_rr;~ 1, ~.~1`i0 Section V. Appendix ~~ Plante moran Cc~risi~ltant. ~r?~~lysi5 ~~rt F'r~ivatizai:ic~n cf C.it.;r ~ervir_es City of t:ori-»s C'i~risfi, Texas {)~eemher 7, 2C'I~# Professional Services Agreemen# --Consulting Services Addendum to Plante & Moran, PLLC Engagement Agreement Dated <Date~ This Professional Services Agreement is part of the engagement agreement for our consulting services dated <Date> between Plante & Moran, PLLC {referred to herein as "P&M", "we", "our' ar "us") and City of Corpus Christi (referred to herein as "Carpus Christi", "you" and "your"). 1. Management Responsibilities -The consulting services we will provide are Inherently advisory in nature, We have no responsibility for any management decisions or management functions in connection with our engagement to provide these services. Further, you acknowledge that Corpus Christi is responsible for all such management decisions and management functions; for evaluating the adequacy and results of the services we will provide and accepting responsibility for the results of those services; and for establishing and maintaining internal controls, including monitoring ongoing activities, in connection with our engagement. You have designated <Designated Project Supervisor, Title> to oversee the services we will provide. 2. Nature of Services -Our project activities will be based on information and records provided to us by Corpus Christi. We will rely on such underlying information and records and our project ac#ivities will not include audit or verification of the information and records provided to us in connection with our project activities. The project activities we wil! perform will not constitute an examination or audit of any Carpus Ghristi financial statements or any other items, including Corpus Christi's internal controls. This engagement also will not include preparation or review of any tax returns or consulting regarding tax matters. If you require financial statements or other financial information for third-party use, or if you require tax preparation or consulting services, a separate engagement letter will be required. Accordingly, you agree not to associate or make reference to P&M in connection with any financial statements or other financial information of Carpus Christi. In additipn, our engagemen# is not designed and cannot be relied upon to disclose errors, fraud or illegal acts that may exist. However, we will inform you cf any such matters that come to our attention. 3. Ilse of Report - At the conclusion of our project activities, we will provide you with a written report as described in the engagement agreement. Our report will be restricted solely to use by management of Corpus Christi and you agree that our report will not be distributed to any outside parties for any purpose other than #o carry out legal responsibilities of Corpus Christi. We will Dave no responsibility to update our report for any even#s ar circumstances that occur or become known subsequent to the date of that report. ~. Confidentiality, Ownership and Reten#ion of Warkpapers -During the course of this engagement, P&M and P&M staff may have access to proprietary information of Corpus Christi, including, but not limited to, information regarding trade secrets, business methods, plans, or projects. We acknowledge that such informs#ion, regardless of its form, is confidential and proprietary to Corpus Christi, and we will not use such information for any purpose other than our consulting engagement or disclose such information to any other person or entity without the prior written consent of Corpus Christi. in some circumstances, we may use local or international third-party service providers or P&M affiliates to assist us with our engagement. In order to enable these service providers to assist us in this capacity, we must disclose information to these service providers that is relevant to the services they provide. Disclosure of such information shall not constitute a breach of the provisions of this agreement. !n the interest of facilitating our sen+ices to you, we may communicate or exchange data by internst, a-mail, - facsimile transmission or other methods. While we use our best efforts to keep such communications and - transmissions secure in accordance with our obligations under applicable laws and pro#essional standards, you recognize and accept that we have no control over the unauthorized interception of these communications or transmissions once they have been sent, and consent to our use of these electronic devices during this engagement. Professional standards require that we create and retain certain workpapers for engagements of this nature. All workpapers created in the course of this engagement are and shall remain the property of P&M. We will maintain the confidentiality of all such workpapers as long as they remain in our possession. 4s Plante moron . . C~nsultar~t !~r?s~lysi tin ~~t~ivatizatic~i~€ csf (~:ity SErviccs e City of Carl:~us C6~i is~i, Tex~.s ~~cnn~Fi_?er 1, ~G'i~i Bo#h Corpus Christi and P&M acknowledge, however, that we may be required to make our workpapers available to regulatory authorities or by court order or subpoena. Disclosure of confidential information in accordance with requirements of regulatory authorities ar pursuant to court order or subpoena shall not constitute a breach of the provisions of this agreement. In the event that a request for any confidential information or workpapers covered by this agreement is made by regulatory authorities or pursuant to a court order or subpoena, we agree to inform Corpus Christi in a timely manner of such request and to cooperate with Corpus Christi should you attempt, at your cost, to limit such access. This provision will survive the termination of #his agreement. We reserve the right to destroy, and it is understood that we will destroy, workpapers created in the course of this engagement in accordance with our record retention and destruction policies, which are designed to meet all relevant regulatory requirements for retention of workpapers. P&M has no obligation to maintain workpapers other than for its own purposes or to meet those regulatory requirements. Upon Corpus Christi's written request, we may, at our sole discretion, allow others to view any workpapers remaining in our possession if there is a specific business purpose for such a review. We will evaluate each written request independently. You acknowledge and agree that we will have no obligation to provide such access ar to provide copies of our workpapers, witheut regard to whether access had been granted with respect to any prior requests. 5. Fee Estimates - In any circumstance where we have provided estimated fees, fixed fees or not to exceed fees, these estimated, fixed or not-to-exceed fees are based on Carpus Christi personnel providing P&M staff the assistance necessary to satisfy Corpus Christi responsibilities under the scope of services. This assistance includes availability and cooperation of those Corpus Christi personnel relevant to our project activities and providing needed informa#ion to us in a timely and orderly manner. In the even# that undisclosed or unforeseeable facts regarding these matters causes the actual work required for this engagement to vary from our estimates, our estimated fees will be adjusted for the additional time we incur as a result. _ In any circumstance where our work is rescheduled, we offer no guarantee, express or implied, tha# we will be able to meet any previously established deadline related #o the completion of our work. Because rescheduling our work imposes additional costs on us, in any circumstance where we have provided estimated fees, those estimated fees may be adjusted for additional time we incur as a result of rescheduling our work. Any fee adjustments will be determined in accordance with the Fee Adjustments provision of this agreement. 6. Payment Terms -Our invoices for professional services are due upon receipt unless otherwise specified in our engagement letter. In the event any of our invoices are not paid In accordance with the terms of this agreement, we may elect, at our sole discretion, to suspend work until we receive payment in full for all amounts due or terminate this engagement. In the event that work is suspended, for nonpayment or other reasons, and subsequently resumed, we offer no guarantee, express or implied, that we will be able to meet any previously established deadlines related to the completion of our consulting work or issuance of our consulting report upon resumption of our work. 7. Fee Adjustments -Any fee adjus#ments for reasons described in this agreement will be determined based on the actual time that P&M staff expend at the hourly rates stated in this agreement, plus all reasonable and necessary travel and out-of-pocket costs incurred, and included as an adjustment to our invoices related to this engagement. You acknowledge and agree that payment for all such fee adjustments will be made in accordance with the payment terms provided in this agreement. 8. Termination of Engagement -This agreement may be terminated by either party upon written notice. Upon notification of termination, our services will cease and our engagement will be deemed #o have been completed. _ You will be obligated to compensate us for all time expended and to reimburse us for all out-o{-pocket expenditures through the date of termination of this engagement. 9. Nald Harmless and fndemnitication - As a condition of this engagement, City of Corpus Christi agrees to hold i'&M, and all of its partners and staff, harmless against any fosses, claims, damages, or liabilities, to which P&M may became subject in connection with services performed in the engagement, unless a court having jurisdiction shall have determined in a final judgment that such loss, claim, damage, or liability resulted primarily from the willful misconduct or gross negligence of P&M, or one of its partners or staff. This hold harmless includes the agreement to reimburse P&M for any legal or other expenses incurred by P&M, as incurred, in connection with investigating or defending any such losses, claims, damages, or liabilities. This provision shall survive any termination of this engagement. 4g plane moron . , Consutfar3t ~natysis. on i~riuatiz~rcicsn cif City Se;vic~as a City cif Corpus Clirisri, Texas 10. Conflicts of Interest -Our engagement acceptance procedures include a check as to whether any conflic#s of interest exists that would prevent our acceptance of this engagement. No such conflicts have been identified. You understand and acknowledge that P&M may be engaged to provide professional services, now or in the future, unrelated to this engagement to parties whose interests may nat be consistent with yours. 11. Agreemen# fUot to Influence -Corpus Christi and P&M each agree that each respective arganiza#ian and its employees will not endeavor to influence the other's employees to seek any employment or other contractual arrangement with it, during this engagement or for a period of one year after termination of the engagement. Corpus Christi agrees that P&M employees are not "contract for hire." P&M may release Corpus Christi from these restrictions if Corpus Christi agrees to reimburse P&M for its recruiting, training, and administrative investment in the applicable employee. In such event, the reimbursemen# amount shall be equal to two hundred hours of billings at the hourly rate stated in this agreement far the P&M employee. iEnc! of Professional Services Agreement -Consulting Services ~o plante moron ~, ~ n ~R~ CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE oPIDAx °"`~'M~°°^~'" 02 14/11 THIS CERTIFICATE fS ISSUEp AS A MATTER OF INFORMATIDN ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY DR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSUBA,fyCE DDES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ESSUING INSURER{5}, AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. I O A t e cart cafe o der is an AD AL IN URED, t e po icy{ies} must a en onsed. I SUB AT I WAfVE ,sub act to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate doss not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsament(s}. PROWCE0. CONTACT Cambridge VnderTFri tars Ltd. E~L,ES[r: [ac, N4): P, p. Hox 511077 appRESa: Livonia MT 96151-7077 PR°pucER CUSTOMER IC R: PLANT-5 Phone: 734-525-0927 Fax: 734-525-0612 WSURER(8]AFFOAIIING COMRADE NAIL 8 INBUREG INBYRERA: F@der81 TnauranCe Company 2D261 P6M Bolding Group, LLP and Subsidiaries; WauRERa: am,ti,,,~L,,,mTe.e:,ree~- 203D3 Plante & Moran, PLLC INeuRERe: 2fi300 Northxestern Hwy,Ste 120 Southfield MT 46034 IxaGRERb: WBUREA E: IN811RER F COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NLINIBER~ THIS IS Tb CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE V87ED EELOW HAVE BEEN 168UEOTO THE IN6VRED NAMEOABOyE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INCICATEO. NOTVATHSTANIMNG ANY pEOUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT CR OTHER DOCUMENTYMTH RESPECT TO VAIICH THI6 CERTIFICATE MAV BE I5SUE0 OR Mf1Y PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED aYTHE POLICIE8OESCRIBEO HEREIN 18 SUBJECT TOALL 7HE 7ERM8, EXCW 810N8 AND CONDITIONS OF 6VCH POLICIES. VMRS SHDVyN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLMMS. INBR TYPEOFIkSURAMCE AppL bUBR POLICY EFF PGLICV EXP LTR Wglq L,,Yp POLICY NUMBER MMrOb f lYYYY) [MMIDDl1'1"/Y] LIMRa GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE S 1,000, DUD X COMMERWALGENERAL LWBIVTY 3575-fifi-13 U3/13/10 03/13/11 DAMAGE TO RENTED PREMISESIH 4KIAIeII4e] E 1, UUD,UDD CiAIMS#MDE ~ OCCUR MEOE%Pp~~y4nepamn) B 1D,DDD X PERSONALBADyINJURY 3 1 ,DDD , OO4 GENERAL AGGREGATE ~ 2 , QDD ,DDD GEN'LAGGREGATE UM3TAPPLIEb PERK PRODUCTS-CDM PNJPgGO 6 2,000, OQO PRO- POLICY JECT LOC F AUTO MOBILE LUIBILRY COMBINED SINGLE OMIT A ANY AUTO 7326-3D-I LEA ecaeenq T 1, 000, 000 ALL OMMEO AUTOS 7 03/13/10 03/I3/11 BWILY INJI7RY IPer person] 3 GCHEOVLEp AUTOS Qp SOO COMP BODRYINJURY (Pereocitlenl) 3 y PROPERTY DAMAGE X NlREDAUTCB $SOD O4~, (PerenlCeM) F X NONAVVNE^AVTO5 6 3 A VMBRELIALLLB ][ OCCUR 7963-33-30 03/13/10 03/13/11 EACNOCCURRENGE : 1,a4o,oo0 EAC~ba LIAR CIAIM8~M1LLCE AGGREGATE B 1, 000,OOD DEpUCTBLE 3 RETENTION E F g WGRNERBCOMPENBARpry 7165-30-87 03/13/10 03/13/11 X Y~srATU- DTH. AHD EMPLOMRB'LIABILITY TORY VMIT9 ER YJN ANY PAOPRIETORRARTNERrEXECUTIVE I~ OFF[CERrtAEMSER EJ(CLUDED7 I I lA E.L. EACH ACCIpENT S 1,,DDD,UDD LA-~-~I IMAntletory in kH] ELpIgFJIgE•EA EMPLOYEE 3 1, OD0, 400 Ilyes, tleeaihe under DESDRIPRON OF ppERFTION86eloW E.L. DISEASE-pOLICY LIMIT E 1, DDD, D4^ DE6CRIPROH OF OPERARGNB JLOCARONBI VEHICLES IAmee ADtIRb 741, AAtlBlen.l Relnne 8cledule, N mwe sped A nquintll The certi£ieate holder is included as an additional insured for commercial general liability insurance per the attached form #8D-02-2373. CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION SNOULb ANY OF THE AaOYE DEBCWBED POLiC1E9 BE CANCELLED SEFpRE CTCOCTR THE EAPIRaRON 00.7a TxEREOF, NpTICE YRLL BE OELNEREOW ACCOAl1ANCE YR7l1 THE POLICY PRGYIeIONb. City of Corpus Christi Attn: Mike Barrera AUIHORI~pREPREBENTRRYE 1201 Leopard Street Corpus Christi TX 78401 ~ ,=°F k ` j r..j . v - '09 ACORD CORPORATION. AEI rights reserved. ACORD 25 (2D09149} The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD ,'~,,, ~HU~ Lia~i~f#~r Insurance Endofsemeri# POff~y Psrtod M~1i2C it l:i, ~(Jit:i). 'i'~} :Ni;~4it~'ii 1`3, 2G~11 Effecfiue Date ~inttct i r~, 2(I l fl Polio IVum~er ~i5'T5~[ifi-i~ JVlIi[) lrtsut`ed J'. ~C lVI i-I[~t.rStNC, CTi2E3T 1(?:I:.Lf' ~tiNl!' Si_f.t35IJ)IAJtitaS. f~ar~e Qf.Company T I1~t..It/l:, tNSt~JIt~1N[,T' CC,)MF'ANY _.s- n-'3~zA~V1-. v.:..e :~.35. {3,'~lls{ii?, ~~ .L ,ri ~:1P :.~N'!551;1%W,\iWiwif}.`::X.>Y.:i\ eUr,),.,A;`t:.a'.OYSAtl#f. is. _, ~•A KW .i'bib,.N•?~,, .?ei h..,.. :~-~-4.3~"`.. Y~.Y)MY~ ~'dS,~rlF~},'.?~.:.. Ky.4Y.A.tt,..,4 .ij),~a X4.-....h.., ::.. ~•; )„y` Tlxis x;ndttr~cm~.nt apJzlies t~ th~fnJEo~ving fnrc~i~; Csl ~fll2AL T.~in~31F~I7'I' l~lank~t~ltdtit~n~l in.tinrecl ~?nr~ex' :.Who I;s An Tnsu~•ed,. 'the fo.~.law~.;n.g pro~visian ~::s ~tlela.d: 41hn ~'s An I`nsureci: sei?edu~.ed Parson or :t?rganl~at;gYi Suk~_je~t to .al.];. atr the terms and conditions of .t.his ;.nsur;ars~e, eny' :person or ox~garizatior~ shovrri in the ScheuuTe, aetn~ :: pursuant to a Wxitt,en oo~trae't o~• dgL`~gmer~t between you ,end. .suc'h person or ax:ganza.t:ion, is an insured; :but .they are. 1ri511Y'LC~-S t?n~37 With 'x~5p~~:t. td 1a]a21it3C ax'isin~ out of your ,operat.zotzs, .ter your grem.ses fyau are :nb~.crated, :pursuant. tb eur~_.:eontrae~ a..r agreem~riti., to provide- theme: aaith such iI3'~1ii;aZ~~. _aS %i-s afforded kay thir3 pal:cy. ~Ii~ivever, 'no each g.ersnsi or crganiza:t.iora •ia ari tisured with respect to an~r': ~:J ~ss:umption ::of Liability 1?Y them 'ri a :Contract .or a~reemenk. This l.in~;tation doeg. not :apply £e CYit l.i•abilit~r for damages =vr injury or damage, too ~rrhi.ch this. insu.ranc.e applied, -that. the pt-~Y'st32'! or argana.zation would 'ha`re: in the absence: of such contxact •ar agreement. 2} datnai~es arksing out of their sole negl].~azace. ;S eh edul s Persons or organ~.zatoris that ys~u ale obligated, pursLi~nt try uiritten con~ragt or agreement between you and such. person or a-rg~nizati~on; t.o provY.de with euc.h insurance as is af~ort~ed 'hy t.ha,s policy; but they ar zns'u~•eds ohly ~ aid tcs :~.hc:, min~.mum extent that such contract `o:r agreement requ:~res the '.person or orgarizati.on to be afforded status as aTi ~su~ed. However, n~ .person or crgar~izati:an is an nsurec3, under this pro6a..s;a..onwha i:s. i~s~re sped f'~.~a1lY descari:bed under any- ether provision o.f tie Who Is An Insured section of ths.poliey (.regardless of a.ny la.rnit.atian applicable ti~exetn} . Liatirlity Jnsuranc~ BLAIVl~E7 A111717'10NAL INSUFIED cor2tinusrl Form B(1-(J2-273 (~d. ~;9d} Enc(ofsemenY Pege 7 All other terms and conditions remain unc;hAnged. Authorized Rapresantsfive ~~~ Liability lnsurartce 9LANKE!'AODlTlO111Al. !lVSUR,EO lastpage Form 80.02-2373 (~d, 4-8aJ Endorsaraent Page 2