Independent Contractor - 2020 - Fiscal Impact Analysis Tool / Evaluation Of Comp Plan / Land Use / Development - 1/14/2020CHANGE ORDER 1
Date of Request 10-8-2020
TischlerBise- Fiscal Impact Tool
Notice_ This contract was approved with an approved scope of work and a negotiated Not -To -Exceed amount of $50,000, The Eagle
City Council did nor approve contingencies to this contact, ail changes in program, materials, timeline and cost must be approved by
the Eagle City Council. Staff does not have authority to approve changes. All Change order requests must be submitted in writing
including this form for approval by the City of Eagle. Eagle City Council meets the 2nd and 4th Tuesdays of each month, change orders
must be received no later than the Wednesday prior to the meeting.
The contract documents are modified as follows upon execution of this change order:
FY 21 Budget Update: $4,500
City Council Training/Presentation: $1,000
Change Order Total: 55,500
Changes to Final Completion Date:
YES NO
CHANGES TO CONTRACT PRICE: TIMELINE to Complete Additoanl Work:
Original Contract Price: Notice to Proceed: 10/9/2020
$50,000.00
Increase From Original Contract :
55,500.00
Contract price Prior to this Change Order:
$55,500.00
Final Completion: 11/13/2020(30 days)
(30-days from Signature)
Contractor Requestin Change: Staff Review:
.
By: Byk 1,4..
Nichoel Bafrd Spencer
Date: Lehi (, „Q2wJ Date: Oil
City Approval:
By:
Jason Peirce, Mayor
w
® C THE CITY OF
CHANGE ORDER 1
Date of Request 10-8-2020
TischlerBise- Fiscal Impact Tool
Notice: This contract was approved with an approved scope of work and a negotiated Not -To -Exceed amount of $50,000. The Eagle
City Council did not approve contingencies to this contact, all changes in program, materials, timeline and cost must be approved by
the Eagle City Council. Staff does not have authority to approve changes. All Change order requests must be submitted in writing
including this form for approval by the City of Eagle. Eagle City Council meets the 2nd and 4th Tuesdays of each month, change orders
must be received no later than the Wednesday prior to the meeting.
The contract documents are modified as follows upon execution of this change order:
FY 21 Budget Update: $4,500
City Council Training/Presentation: $1,000
Change Order Total: $5,500
Changes to Final Completion Date:
YES NO
CHANGES TO CONTRACT PRICE: I TIMELINE to Complete Additoanl Work:
Original Contract Price: Notice to Proceed: 10/9/2020
$50,000.00
Increase From Original Contract :
$5,500.00
Contract price Prior to this Change Order:
$55,500.00
Contractor Requesting Change:
By:
Date:
City Approval:
Final Completion: 11/13/2020(30 days)
(30-days from Signature)
Staff Review:
B
Date:
Jason Peirce, Mayor
Nichoe Bard Spencer
10i°t J 2-0 2D
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF EAGLE, IDAHO
AND
TISCHLER BISE, INC.
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into on the date indicated herein, by and between
THE CITY OF EAGLE, an Idaho municipal corporation ("hereinafter referred to as "CITY"),
and TISCHLERBISE, INC, a Washington, DC corporation (hereinafter referred to as
"TISCHLERBISE"). Collectively the City and TISCHLERBISE shall be referred to as "the
Parties".
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the CITY is a municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the
laws of the State of Idaho; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Idaho Code §50-301 et seq., the CITY is empowered to contract
and be contracted with; and
WHEREAS, the CITY desires to amend the City's comprehensive plan, specifically the
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Chapter; and,
WHEREAS, the CITY recognizes TISCHLERBISE as having the necessary
qualifications, experience and capabilities to draft a Fiscal Impact Analysis Tool for the City of
Eagle able to evaluate comprehensive plan land use changes and site -specific development
applications.
NOW, THEREFORE, for the consideration recited herein below, the CITY and
TISCHLERBISE enter into this Agreement according to the following terms and conditions:
1. Appointment of Contractor. TISCHLERBISE, 4701 Sangamore Road Suite
240, Bethesda, MD 20816 shall be the appointed contractor for Fiscal Impact
Analysis Tool for the CITY subject to the terms of this Agreement.
2. The Scope of Work. TISCHLERBISE shall provide services as follows:
Scope as outlined in "Exhibit C"
3. Contract Documents: The Contract Documents consist of this Agreement and
the City's request for proposal (RFP) (attached hereto as Exhibit "A"), the
Response to Request for Qualifications proposal from TISCHLERBISE, dated
NOVEMBER27, 2019, (attached hereto as Exhibit "B") and updated and revised
on DECEMBER 19, 2019, (attached hereto as Exhibit "C") and other documents
referred to in this Agreement, and in any modifications and/or change orders
issued after execution of this Agreement supersedes prior negotiations,
representations or agreements, either written or oral. If anything in the other
Contract Documents is inconsistent with this Agreement, the specific provisions
SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EAGLE, IDAHO AND TISCHLER BISE, INC - 1
K:\Capital Facilities Planning\Fiscal Analysis\Service Agreement_Tischlerbise Inc_fiscal Impact tool- final.doc
of this Agreement shall govern.
4. Subcontractors, Suppliers and Professionals. There are no subcontractors
identified for this contract. In the event TISCHLERBISE contracts with or
employs any subcontractors or suppliers during the term of this Agreement,
TISCHLERBISE shall immediately give notice of such additional subcontractors
and suppliers to the City.
5. Commencement and Completion. The commencement date of contract shall be
JANUARY 15, 2019 ("Commencement Date"). TISCHLERBISE shall achieve
substantial completion of the Project not later than FEBRUARY 28, 2017.
6. Changes in the Work. Changes in the Project which are within the general
scope of the Agreement may be accomplished by a Change Order without
invalidating this Agreement. A Change Order is a written instrument issued after
the execution of this Agreement signed by the City and TISCHLERBISE, INC
stating their agreement upon the change in the Project and, if necessary, an
adjustment to the Contract Sum and the completion date. Any adjustment to the
Contract Sum or the completion date required by the Change Order shall be
expressly set forth in the Change Order and, if no such adjustment is expressly set
forth in the Change Order, there shall be no implied agreement for changing the
Contract Sum or the completion date.
7. Compensation of TISCHLERBISE, INC. The Compensation of
TISCHLERBISE shall be based upon the proposal submitted by TISCHLERBISE
dated NOVEMBER 27, 2019 (attached hereto as Exhibit "B"), and updated and
revised on December 19, 2019, (attached hereto as Exhibit "C"), for a total
contract price of $48,040.
8. Independent Contractor. The City and TISCHLERBISE hereby agree that
TISCHLERBISE shall perform the services exclusively as an independent
contractor and not as employee or agent of the City. The Parties do not intend to
create through this Agreement any partnership, corporation, employer/employee
relationship, joint venture or other business entity or relationship other than that
of independent contractor. TISCHLERBISE, its managers, members, directors,
officers, shareholders, agents and employees shall not receive nor be entitled to
any employment -related benefits from the City including without limitation,
workers compensation insurance, unemployment insurance, health insurance,
retirement benefits or any benefit that the City offers to its employees.
TISCHLERBISE shall be solely responsible for the payment of all payroll and
withholding taxes for amounts paid to TISCHLERBISE under this Agreement and
TISCHLERBISE'S payments for work performed in performance of this
Agreement by TISCHLERBISE managers, members, directors, officers,
shareholders, agents and employees; and TISCHLERBISE hereby releases, holds
harmless and agrees to indemnify the City from and against any and all claims or
penalties, including without limitation the 100% penalty, which in any manner
SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EAGLE, IDAHO AND TISCHLER BISE, INC - 2
K;\Capital Facilities Planning\Fiscal Analysis\Service Agreement_Tischlerbise Inc_fiscal impact tool- final.doc
relate to or arise from any failure to pay such payroll or withholding taxes.
9. Indemnification. TSCHLERBISE agrees to indemnify and hold the City
harmless from and against all claims, suits, damages (including without
limitation, damages to persons and property including deaths), costs, losses, and
expenses, in any manner related to or arising from the negligent acts or omissions
of TISCHLERBISE, its managers, members, directors, officers, shareholders,
agents and employees.
10. Copyright. Ownership and Use of Materials. THISCHLERBISE hereby assigns
to the City all right, title, and interest, including, but not limited to, copyright and
all copyright rights, in all materials created by TISCHLERBISE in its performance
under this Agreement and/or delivered to the City hereunder and shall execute any
documents necessary to effectuate such assignment, with the exception that
TISCHLERBISE hereby grants to the City an irrevocable, fully -paid up, royalty -
free license to use any document provided to the City including without limitation
any document known as a "detail." TISCHLERBISE warrants that it has the lawful
right to grant the forgoing license to the City. In the event TISCHLERBISE uses
any individual who is not a full-time employee of TISCHLERBISE or entity to
perform any work required of it pursuant to this Agreement TISCHLERBISE shall
require said individual or entity to sign an agreement containing identical wording
as the foregoing with the exception that word "TTSCHLERBISE" is to be replaced
with the individual's or entity's name. Materials constitute all written and other
tangible expressions, including, but not limited to, drawings, documents, reports,
surveys, renderings, exhibits, models, prints, photographs, etc. All materials
furnished by TTSCHLERBISE hereunder shall be and shall remain the property of
the City. In the event of Agreement termination by either party for any reason, as
provided under this Agreement, the City will have the right to receive, and
TISCHLERBISE shall promptly provide to the City, all drawings, documents,
reports, surveys, renderings, exhibits, models, prints, photographs, etc., and other
materials prepared by the TTSCHLERBISE for the services under this Agreement.
In the event of termination, and any dispute regarding the amount to be paid and er
this Agreement notwithstanding, the City retains the right to receive and use any
such documents or materials. The foregoing provisions shall survive the term and
termination of this Agreement.
11. Legal and Regulatory Compliance. TTSCHLERBISE shall perform all services
and prepare documents in compliance with the applicable requirements of laws,
codes, rules, regulations, ordinances, and standards.
12. Insurance. TISCHLERBISE shall maintain professional liability insurance in the
amount of $1,000,000.00 and workers compensation insurance from an insurance
carrier licensed to do business in the State of Idaho, and furnish proof of said
insurance to the City prior to performing any of the services or being entitled to
any pay therefore.
SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EAGLE, IDAHO AND TISCHLER BISE, INC - 3
K \Capital Facilities Planning\Fiscal Analysis\Service Agreement_Tischlerbise Inc_Sscal impact tool- finaLdoc
13. Compliance with Laws/Public Records. TISCHLERBISE, its managers,
members, directors, officers, shareholders, agents and employees shall comply
with all federal, state and local laws, rules and ordinances. This Agreement does
not relieve TISCHLERBISE of any obligation or responsibility imposed upon
TISCHLERBISE by law. Without limitation, TISCHLERBISE hereby
acknowledges that all writings and documents, including without limitation email,
containing information relating to the conduct or administration of the public's
business prepared by TISCHLERBISE for City regardless of physical form or
characteristics may be public records pursuant to Idaho Code Section 9-337 et
seq. TISCHLERBISE further acknowledges that, subject to certain limitations,
the public may examine and take a copy of all such public writings and records.
Accordingly, TISCHLERBISE shall maintain such writings and records in such a
manner that they may be readily identified, retrieved and made available for such
inspection and copying.
14. Notice. All notices, requests, demands or other communication required or
provided for under this Agreement, other than instructions given by the City
pursuant to Paragraph 2 herein shall be in writing. Notices to the City and
TISCHLERBISE shall be addressed as follows:
City of Eagle
660 E. Civic Lane
Eagle, ID 83616
Telephone: (208)939-6813
TischlerB ise
4701 Sangamore Road Suite 240,
Bethesda, MD 20816
Telephone: (301) 320-6900
15. Non -Assignment. TISCHLERBISE hereby acknowledges that the City has
agreed to enter this Agreement based in part on TISCHLERBISE unique skills
and reputation for professional work. Accordingly, TISCHLERBISE may not
assign or transfer in any manner this Agreement or any of TISCHLERBISE right,
title or interest in or to this Agreement without the prior written consent of the
City which may be withheld for any reason.
16. Amendments. This Agreement may only be changed, modified, or amended in
writing executed by all parties.
17. Headings. The headings in the Agreement are inserted for convenience and
identification only and are in no way intended to describe, interpret, define, or
limit the scope, extent, or intent of this Agreement or any provision hereof.
18. Attorney Fees and Costs. In the event that either party hereto is required to
retain the services of an attorney to enforce any of its rights hereunder, the non -
prevailing party shall pay to the prevailing party all reasonable costs and attomey
fees incurred in such enforcement, whether or not litigation is commenced and
including reasonable costs and attorney fees on appeal.
SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EAGLE, IDAHO AND TISCHLER BISE, INC - 4
K:\Capital Facilities Planning\Fiscal Analysis\Service Agreement_Tischlerbise Inc_Sscal impact tool- final.doc
19. No Presumption. No presumption shall exist in favor of or against any party to
this Agreement as the result of the drafting and preparation of the document.
20. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws and decisions of
the State of Idaho.
21. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement between the
parties respecting the matters herein set forth and supersedes all prior Agreements
between the parties hereto respecting such matter.
22. Execution and Fax Copies and Signatures. This Agreement may be executed
simultaneously in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an
original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.
23. Authority. The parties executing this Agreement warrant, state, acknowledge,
and affirm that they have the authority to sign the same and to bind themselves to
the terms contained herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties execute this Agreement as of this 14 day of
January , 2019.
CITY OF EAGLE
Ada County, Idaho
BY:
Stan Ridgeway
ITS: Mayor
A 1"LEST:
(
K->^�/Y/ •.r�.r ,
Sharon K. Bergmann,
Eagle City Clerk/Treasurer
TISCHLERBIS, INC.
BY:
--- 1. Carson rise II
ITS: President
SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EAGLE, IDAHO AND TISCHLER BISE, INC - 5
K:\Capital Facilities Planning\Fiscal Analysis\Service Agreement_Tischlerbise Inc fiscal impact tool- final.doc
ExhibitA
Fiscal Impact Analysis and Tool
Scope of Work
Overview
The City of Eagle, Idaho is seeking proposals from firms to conduct analysis and
prepare a fiscal impact tool ("fiscal tool") for the City. The analysis will estimate public
revenues and expenditures associated with land uses decisions within the City of Eagle
(including comprehensive plan changes, annexations, rezones and subdivision
approvals). Fiscal impacts considered should include city funded services- police,
library, water, parks and recreation, prosecution services and administration as well as
regional services including but not limited to transportation, public education, sewer,
fire, and emergency services.
As the proposal is for less than $50,000 in professional services, the City is not required
to undertake a formal RFP process, but is preparing a scope of work and evaluation
process in order to fairly and equitably evaluate potential providers.
City Fiscal Analysis
The City of Eagle, population of 32,000, is a first -tier suburb of Boise, Idaho. The City
of Eagle has seen significant growth over the past 20 years, with 1 in 3 citizens moving
to Eagle since 2010, and 2 in 3 citizens moving to Eagle in since 2000. The City plans
for an annual average growth rate of 4.5%. The City of Eagle utilizes contract services
for engineering, police and attorney services and is provided sewer, fire, some water
services, and transportation services from either independent/single purpose districts or
private providers. The City of Eagle relies largely on property taxes for revenue and
hosts one of the lowest property tax levy rates in the State of Idaho. The City of Eagle's
share of a typical tax bill within the City is approxinaley 18% of the property taxes
collected. The balance of the property tax revenue is distributed to single purpose
districts - emergency services, highway, public schools, and more. Sales tax is
redistributed to local jurisdictions based on population and market share. The City does
not currently maintain a capital improvements plan and uses permit fee (building and
zoning) to supplement the general fund.
The City's 2017 Eagle is HOME Plan plans includes over49,000 acres in the Eagle
Foothills north of the City, including lands within three (3) Counties and two (2) judicial
districts. The City leaders have recently considered the removal of 70% of the foothills
planning area due to the Tong -term impacts on the City's budget and ability to maintain
current levels of service. City is seeking a fiscal analysis and tool that address
geospatial factors associated with discontinuous growth and response times.
As the City grows, there is increasing concern about the fiscal sustainability of the City
and the ability to fund services when the City reaches build out or there is slowing in
the economy resulting in a lack of one-time fees. The City is seeking both a fiscal
analysis and a tool for ongoing site -specific evaluation.
p. 1
The analysis phase will gather relevant financial data and assumptions from the City,
Ada County, Boise and West Ada School Districts, and other agencies to provide
meaningful inputs into the fiscal impact tool, as well as conduct planning -level cost
estimates for above -mentioned public infrastructure and services. The analysis should
build upon existing data and integrate the results into a fiscal tool. These local data and
assumptions may come from a variety of sources, including the City, Ada County,
COMPASS, the Ada County Highway District, the Idaho Transportation Department, and
individual service providers. The tool development phase will result in a tool that City
can use to evaluate the fiscal impact of land uses decisions within the City of Eagle
(including comprehensive plan changes, annexations, rezones and subdivision
approvals), using the data gathered in the "analysis" phase.
Regional Efforts/Coordination
The Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho (COMPASS) recently sought
proposals to conduct analysis and prepare a fiscal impact tool for Ada and Canyon
Counties, Idaho, otherwise known as the Treasure Valley, for the development of an
updated regional long-range transportation plan, Communities in Motion 2050 (CIM
2050). This analysis and tool should be able to interface with and compliment this
analysis while providing City -specific impacts.
Proposals
The budget for the fiscal impact analysis and fiscal tool is $50,000. Interested firms
must demonstrate knowledge and experience in fiscal impact analysis, proforma
valuation, property tax policies, and development of analysis tools. Preference will be
granted to firms demonstrating experience in developing geospatial tools and user-
friendly interfaces. Proposals will be evaluated based on their ability to meet the
qualifications and selection criteria.
Proposals must be prepared and submitted in accordance to the guidelines and
requirements outlined in this Request for Proposals (RFP).
Time is of the essence. While the City does not have an established completion date,
proposals should identify a reasonable timeline for completion.
p. 2
Study Area
The Study area is the City of Eagle's 2017 Eagle is Home Comprehensive Planning
Boundary.
Proposed Project Framework
Oversight. The project will be managed by the Eagle Planning and Zoning Department
with oversight from the Mayor's office and the City Council, as deemed appropriate by
the Mayor and the project manager.
P. 3
Deliverables
1. Final workplan
2. Data inventory status report
3. Data analysis status report
4. Fiscal tool
5. Presentation to the City Council, if requested
6. Final report, tool, and data
Submittal Requirements
Minimum components of a responsive submittal:
1. Cover letter with a brief narrative describing :
a. Respondent's understanding of the project, and
b. Project manager and/or point of contact for the team.
2. A brief description of the firm(s) that constitute the team.
3. A brief description of the qualifications of team members who would be
performing the work, their roles, and their relevant experience - key members of
the team are to be noted. Principals of the involved firm(s) may be listed, but
only in the context of their anticipated level of involvement in the project.
4. A list of relevant project -specific references, and the team members' role in these
projects, including a brief description of the services provided and client contact
information. Only completed projects should be included.
5. A summary description of the proposed cost and revenue analysis process,
including a description of the approach to prioritizing input factors, receiving
required data, interpolating missing data, if necessary, developing a fiscal tool,
and maintaining the tool. Please include:
a. Budget. Task -level, line item for the major sub -tasks.
b. Schedule of tasks for the duration of the project. Should include a Project
completion date.
6. Statement that all firms included on the team are not barred from federal
contracts.
In addition to the above list, respondents are advised of the following requirements and
guidelines:
1. Responses - 12 pages maximum:
a. Report cover and table of contents (not subject to page limit)
b. Cover letter
c. Project team, consultant qualifications, and experience
d. Work plan and schedule
e. Budget. Labor hours and cost per task (not subject to page limit)
p. 4
2. Submit one (1) PDFfile of the complete submittal via email to
nbairdc citvofeaale.ora
3. Responses must be received before 5:00 nm MDT on Tuesday. December
3, 2019
Selection Criteria
A selection committee comprised of City staff and members of the Eagle City Council
will evaluate all proposals.
Submitted proposals will be evaluated using the following key criteria:
• Demonstrated ability to deliver high quality, innovative work
• Consultant experience with real estate development analysis, proformas, and
economic analysis relevant to the Treasure Valley
• Ability to write and deliver clear and concise written reports and organized and
intuitive proforma templates
• Ability to program fiscal impact tool(s) for ease of use and ability for COMPASS to
update data as needed
• Completeness and clarity of proposal, and
• References
After selection of the most qualified firm, the City will negotiate a final fee for the
project based on a detailed scope of service developed by the City and the selected
consultant. If the City and that firm are unable to negotiate a contract, negotiations will
be terminated with that firm and the next most qualified firm will be selected until a
contract has been negotiated with a qualified firm.
The City wishes to have a consultant under contract by December 17, 2019.
Criteria
Responses will be scored as follows Maximum Points
A. Demonstrated ability to deliver high quality, innovative 20
work
B. Consultant experience with real estate development 20
analysis, proformas, and economic analysis relevant to the
Treasure Valley
C. Ability to write and deliver clear and concise written 15
reports and organized and intuitive proforma templates
D. Ability to program fiscal impact tool(s) for ease of use and 15
ability for City to update data
E. Completeness and clarity of proposal 10
F. References 10
G. Cost 5
H. Timeliness of project 5
Total Points Possible 100
P. 5
Schedule
As the proposal is for less than $50,000 in professional services the City is not required
to undertake a formal RFP process but is preparing a scope of work in order to evenly
evaluate potential service providers. For documentation purposes, questions should be
directed to the City's Project Manager via email at Nbairdna citvofeaale.ora
In addition to the above, respondents are advised of the following:
• DBE firms and non-profit entities are encouraged to respond.
• The City reserves the right to request additional information from a respondent.
• The City reserves the right to reject any and all responses and waive any
irregularities. Issuance of this RFP does not constitute a commitment to proceed
to a guaranteed contract.
• Questions and communication regarding the project described in the RFP will be
directed solely to Nichoel Baird Spencer, Planner III:
• Questions are encouraged to be submitted via email to nbairdCa citvofeaale.ora
in order to ensure consistent and equitable distribution of information.
• Firms that may be interested in a proposal are strongly encouraged to submit
their contact information upon receipt of this scope of work to be sure they
receive relevant updates.
• Responses to questions and additional information will be posted on the on the
City's Bids, RFPs, and RFQs webpage: htto://www.citvofeaale.ora/Bids.asnx
p. 6
TiEhIeFise .-
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
Exhibit B
Proposal for
Fiscal Impact Analysis
and Tool
City of Eagle, Idaho
December 3. 2019
Table of Contents
Section 1: Cover Letter 1
Section 2: Qualifications and Expertise 2
Section 3: Work Plan and Schedule 8
Section 4: Project Budget 12
TischlerBise
Section 1: Cover Letter
December 3, 2019
Ms. Nichoel Baird Spencer, Planner III
City of Eagle
660 East Civic Lane
Eagle, Idaho 83616
RE: Proposal for Fiscal Impact Analysis and Tool
Ms. Spencer,
TischlerBise is pleased to submit the enclosed proposal to provide a Fiscal Impact Analysis Tool for the
City of Eagle. In summary, we feel that our firm brings several distinct advantages to the process of handling
this important assignment:
■ No other firm has the depth of experience that TischlerBise brings to this assignment.
TischlerBise is the nation's leading fiscal/economic impact, impact fee, and infrastructure financing
consulting firm. We have completed over 900 fiscal impact studies across the country —more than any
other firm.
• TischlerBise has successfully prepared and assisted with the implementation of over twenty
fiscal impact models over the five years, all of which are similar in complexity and scale to this
assignment. Additionally, since TischlerBise was the firm selected by COMPASS to develop a similar
fiscal tool, the City is assured there will be seamless interface and integration into that larger work effort.
■ TischlerBise's project team for this assignment is comprised of two nationally recognized
experts in the area of fiscal impact analysis. Carson Bise, who will serve as Project Manager for this
assignment, has developed and implemented more fiscal impact models than any planner in the country
and is widely regarded as the leading national practitioner in the field.
We look forward to the possibility of working with the City and are committed to providing cost-effective,
high -quality support for this assignment.
Sincerely,
L. Carson Bise II, AICP, President
TischlerBise
4701 Sangamore Road S240
301.320.6900 x12
carson@tischlerbise.com
Tisch re Bise 1
Section 2: Qualifications and Expertise
Firm Experience
TischlerBise, Inc., was founded in 1977 as Tischler, Montasser & Associates. The firm became Tischler &
Associates, Inc., in 1980 and TischlerBise, Inc., in 2005. The firm is a Subchapter (S) corporation, is
incorporated in Washington, D.C., and maintains offices in Bethesda, Maryland, with a Boise office opening
in the Spring of 2020.
TischlerBise is a fiscal, economic, and planning consulting firm specializing in fiscal/economic impact
analysis, impact fees, market feasibility, infrastructure financing studies and related revenue strategies. Our
firm has been providing consulting services to public agencies for over thirty years. In this time, we have
prepared over 900 fiscal/economic impact evaluations and over 1,000 impact fee/infrastructure
financing studies — more than any other firm. Through our detailed approach, proven methodology, and
comprehensive product, we have established TischlerBise as the leading national expert on revenue
enhancement and cost of growth strategies.
The graphic depicts our vast
fiscal/economic impact experience with
clients nationwide.,
As our proposal demonstrates, no other firm
can match the depth of our experience in
the area of local government fiscal impact
analysis and model development. Our
Principal in Charge, Carson Bise, AICP, is
widely considered the leading national fiscal
impact practitioner in the United States. The
core services provided by TischlerBise all
involve:
■ Determining existing and projected residential and nonresidential growth for 10-, 20-, and 30—year
periods
• An examination of local government budgets to determine fixed and variable costs and revenues
as well as the true costs of service
• Evaluations of departmental operating structures and determination of existing levels of service as
well as the most appropriate method of projecting future costs (including staff) and revenues
• Developing meaningful and realistic capital improvement plans
• Determining the fiscal impacts of different land uses and physical forms
■ Evaluation of alternative revenue sources and financing mechanisms for achieving fiscal
sustainability
• Developing user friendly fiscal software
• Presenting fiscal/economic findings in a variety of forums
• Evaluation of zoning and land use policies from a market perspective for consistency with stated
fiscal and economic goals
2 Tisch!e Bise
ra,
■ Providing recommendations to ensure fiscal/economic sustainability
Idaho Experience
An important factor to consider related to this work effort is our previous experience in the State of Idaho,
which makes us quite familiar with the local government revenue structure, as well as the planning issues
facing Idaho and Ada County jurisdictions. A listing of our previous fiscal and economic impact clients in
Idaho is provided below.
State of Idaho
Boise
Canyon County
COMPASS
Hailey
Hayden
Kellogg
Nampa
Payette
Post Falls
Sandpoint
Treasure Valley Partnership
Victor
Project Personnel Qualifications
Our TischlerBise project team has successfully implemented numerous fiscal impact models for many
communities similar in complexity and scale to this assignment. The majority of assignments included
understanding local and regional context and evaluating multiple scenarios reflecting differences in
absorption and phasing, geographic service areas, variations in levels of service, infrastructure life cycle
costs, and density and physical development patterns, all of which affect the factors used in development
of the fiscal impact model for this assignment. The organizational chart shows our project team for this
assignment.
City of Eagle
Carson Bise. AICP
Project Manager
1
Julie Herlands, AICP
Principal Analyst
Colin McAweeney
Project Analyst
TischlerBiserBise
3
;-r
Detailed discussion of each team member's qualifications is discussed below.
L. Carson Bise, II, AICP, President
Carson Bise has 29 year of fiscal, economic and planning experience and has conducted
fiscal and infrastructure finance evaluations in 39 states. Mr. Bise has developed and
implemented more fiscal impact models than any consultant in the country. The
applications which Mr. Bise has developed have been used for evaluating multiple land
use scenarios, specific development projects, annexations, urban service provision, tax -
increment financing, and concurrency/adequate public facilities monitoring. Mr. Bise is
also a leading national figure in the calculation of impact fees, having completed over 350
impact fee studies. Mr. Bise has also written and lectured extensively on fiscal impact
analysis and infrastructure financing. His most recent publications are Next
Generation Transportation Impact Fees and Fiscal Impact Analysis: Methodologies
for Planners, both published by the American Planning Association, a chapter on fiscal
impact analysis in the book Planning and Urban Design Standards, also published by the
American Planning Association, and the ICMA IQ Report, Fiscal Impact Analysis: How
Today's Decisions Affect Tomorrow's Budgets. Mr. Bise was also the principal author of
the fiscal impact analysis component for the Atlanta Regional Commission's Smart
Growth Toolkit and is featured in the recently released AICP CD-ROM Training Package
entitled The Economics of Density. Mr. Bise is currently on the Board of Directors of the
Growth and Infrastructure Finance Consortium and recently Chaired the American
Planning
Association's Paying for Growth Task Force. He was also recently named an Affiliate of the National
Center for Smart Growth Research & Education.
EDUCATION
M.B.A., Economics, Shenandoah University
B.S., Geography/Urban Planning, East Tennessee State University
B.S., Political Science/Urban Studies, East Tennessee State University
Julie Herlands, AICP, Vice President
Julie Herlands is Vice President with TischlerBise and has fifteen years of planning, fiscal, and economic
development experience. Prior to joining TischlerBise, Ms. Herlands worked in the public sector in Fairfax
County, Virginia, for the Office of Community Revitalization and for the private sector for the International
Economic Development Council (IEDC) in their Advisory Services and Research Department. For IEDC,
she conducted a number of consulting projects including economic and market feasibility analyses and
economic development assessments and plans. Her economic and fiscal impact experience includes a
wide -range of assignments in over fifteen states. She is a frequent presenter at national and regional
conferences including serving as co-organizer and co -presenter at a half -day AICP Training Workshop
entitled Fiscal Impact Assessment at the APA National Planning Conference. A session on impact fees and
cash proffers presented at the APA National Conference is available through the APA training series, Best
of Contemporary Community Planning 2005. She is the immediate past Chair of the Economic
4 Tisch e(rl ise
Development Division of the APA and chaired the APA Task Force on Planning and Economic
Development.
EDUCATION
Masters of Community Planning, University of Maryland
B.A., Political Science, University of Buffalo
Colin McAweeney, Fiscal and Economic Analyst
Colin McAweeney is a Fiscal and Economic Analyst at TischlerBise with specialties in finance and economic
development planning. Mr. McAweeney specializes in preparing fiscal and economic impact analyses, as
well as developing fiscal software. Mr. McAweeney has conducted fiscal and economic evaluations in over
10 different states. Prior to joining TischlerBise, Mr. McAweeney completed his M.S. at Erasmus University
Rotterdam where he specialized in economic development. Here, Mr. McAweeney became knowledgeable
in planning that involves fiscal, social, and environmental sustainability. In Rotterdam, Mr. McAweeney
conducted several field studies of local at -risk neighborhoods and presented planning solutions to city
leaders. Additionally, he brought together a team of academics and consultants to plan a biking corridor in
Kenya. He finished his degree with a thesis surrounding the urban aspects that attract investment. Before
pursuing his M.S., Mr. McAweeney worked in the finance sector for several years. While performing at a
high level, he was able to become very familiar with financial markets and business financing.
EDUCATION
M.S., Urban Management and Development, Erasmus University Rotterdam
B.S., Economics with an emphasis on Mathematics, University of Wisconsin - Madison
Relevant Project Examples
Below are references of work performed for local governments and projects that involved substantial
technical assistance with the client and others. We have listed only projects with which our Project
Team members were associated.
City of Fairfax, Virginia — Fiscal Impact Models (2016)
Project Contact: Nicole Hange, Economic Development Director
Phone: (703) 385-7851
Email: nicole.hange@fairfax.gov
Project Staff: Carson Bise, Principal in Charge; Julie Herlands, Project Manager
TischlerBise developed two fiscal impact models for the City of Fairfax. The City desired a tool capable of
to conduct fiscal evaluations for specific development projects, as well as to evaluate municipal -
wide scenarios. It has been our experience that it is extremely difficult to develop one model that does
both types of analyses well. Therefore, we developed two distinct models for the City to be used for
different purposes —a Development Project Fiscal Impact Model and a Citywide Fiscal Impact Model. The
models were calibrated appropriately with the Project Model calibrated with recent development projects
and the Citywide model was calibrated to long-term growth scenarios. The assignment included detailed
Tischl re Base
EC ,oM,c '.�.NNI14G
5
analyses to establish current demand assumptions (e.g., student generation rates, household sizes,
property valuations, and demand for public safety services), operating and capital impacts, as well as an
economic impact module.
City of Falls Church, Virginia — Fiscal Impact Model (2018)
Project Contact: Becky Witsman, Economic Development Division Chief
Phone: (703) 248-5224
E-mail: bwitsman@fallschurchva.gov
Project Staff: Carson Bise, Principal in Charge; Julie Herlands, Project Manager
Dates of Service (Separate Engagements): 2003; 2008, 2011; 2014, 2016, 2018
TischlerBise developed the Fiscal Impact Model used by the City of Falls Church to evaluate new
development proposals. TischlerBise developed the first model for the City over a dozen years ago,
has conducted several periodic updates in the interim, and has just recently updated and expanded
the model for 2018. The model is an average cost/case study marginal hybrid fiscal model that is used by
the City's Economic Development Department to test development programs particularly for mixed use
projects. Most recently, TischlerBise expanded the model to include a more robust capital module as well
as revised methodologies for some revenue categories based on new and better data availability. The City's
fiscal model has the capability to test a wide range of residential and nonresidential land uses, which have
been modified and expanded in the recent update, to keep up with the ever -changing types of development
being proposed in the City. As a small City that funds its school system through property taxes, the City's
goal is to ensure that redevelopment generates sufficient revenues to cover the resulting costs while
maintaining current levels of service.
City of Georgetown, Texas — Fiscal Impact Models (2017-2018)
Contact: Wayne Reed, Assistant City Manager
Phone: (512) 819-3118
E-mail: wayne.reed@georgetown.org
Personnel: Carson Bise, Principal in Charge; Julie Herlands, Project Manager
Dates of Service: February 2017-February 2018
The City of Georgetown, Texas, retained TischlerBise to develop two Fiscal Impact Models: One to evaluate
Development Proposals and the other to evaluate Citywide Growth scenarios. TischlerBise worked in close
collaboration with the City to deliver flexible yet structured Fiscal Impact Models. The City is a fast-growing
area outside the City of Austin and had two separate needs and desires:
1. To analyze a range of development proposals on a case -by -case basis to test alternative scenarios:
Addressed with the Project Level Fiscal Impact Model.
2. To utilize for longer -term planning analyses, such as their upcoming Comprehensive Plan update:
Addressed with the Citywide Fiscal Impact Model.
6 Tlsehl re se
CAL '.:'DINpM+C ALgHY�i :^
/14
The Citywide Fiscal Impact Model was developed using sub -geographies using a case -study marginal
approach. The Project Level Fiscal Impact Model uses the marginal findings as the foundation with
modifications to allocate costs to the project under study. The Project Level Model provides a custom -
designed user input page that uses dropdown menus and default values but also allows the user to override
those values temporarily. Color coding provides visual cues for the user where default values have been
overridden (blue) and where user input is still needed (red).
Type of units
Total number
of units
Single-family Detached Starter (SFDS)
Single-family Detached Middle (SFDM)
Single-family Detached Estate (SFDE)
Single-family Detached Age Restricted (SFDAR)
Single-family Attached/Condos
Multi -family
Number of Number of units
Years to Build Start Year Land Use Type absorbed each
[dropdown] [dropdown]
Out year [calculated]
100 1.0 1 Single Family 100.0
25 0.0 n/a Single Family 0.0
O 0.0 n/a Single Family 0.0
O 0.0 n/a Single Family 0.0
O 0.0 n/a Single Family 0.0
O 0.0 n/a Multifamily 0.0
Taxable value
per unit
$420,000
$495,000
$273,000
$220,000
$155,000
The Project Level Fiscal Impact Model is currently being used by the City to evaluate development projects
to report findings to City Council. The Citywide Fiscal Impact Model is anticipated to be used in summer/fall
2019 during the update of the City's Comprehensive Plan, as was intended when the model was scoped
and developed.
Frederick County, Virginia — Capital Impact Study and Model
Project Contact: Mike Ruddy, Director of Planning
Phone: (540) 665-5651
Email: mruddy@fcva.us
Dates of Performance: 2003; 2008; 2018-19
TischlerBise recently completed development of a Capital Impact Model and Study to allow County staff to
evaluate rezoning applications for impacts on capital facilities. This Model is a modification and update to
an existing Fiscal Impact Model that TischlerBise had developed (with frequent updates) for the Winchester -
Frederick County Economic Development Commission. A key feature of our previous and current
engagement is our interaction with a public/private sector working group who review level of service and
cost/revenue assumptions.
For the current assignment, TischlerBise developed a Capital Impact Model and Study to address the
impacts to the range of capital facilities Public Schools, Parks and Recreation, Sheriff, Fire and Rescue,
Animal Protection, Library, General Government, Courts, and Environmental Services. Facility capacity
triggers are programmed into the model to automatically calculate a development's impact if it were to
exceed the County's capacity. Further detail was included into the model after meetings with a stakeholder's
committee, Development Impact Model Oversight Committee.
TischlerBise 7
Section 3: Work Plan and Schedule
Project Approach
The fiscal impact model TischlerBise is presently developing for COMPASS has to be designed to
accommodate data and methodologies for a variety of jurisdictions of differing sizes and sophistication. As
a result, this regional model will lack the level of detail and sophistication that a model we develop for the
City of Eagle will offer. From a methodological perspective, the City of Eagle can go in two different
directions. We can develop a pure case study -marginal fiscal impact model or a model that reflects
incorporates an average cost -hybrid methodology. The discussion below will discuss the two approaches.
As part of Task 1, we will discuss this further with City staff, as well as present examples of models
with each methodology.
The two most commonly used fiscal impact methodologies are the average cost and the case study -
marginal approach. The average cost approach is the most popular and frequently used method for
evaluating fiscal impacts. Since this approach focuses on the average cost per capita or in some cases,
per capita and job, it doesn't consider the available capacities of existing capital facilities. In addition, it
masks spatial relationships and the timing of additional facilities required to serve new growth. However,
this approach does lend itself extremely well for evaluating specific development proposals and economic
development/public incentives. This is because specific development proposals tend to be viewed in
isolation, and depending on the size of the project, may not trigger required thresholds for capital facilities
and/or "lumpy" operating costs under the case study -marginal approach.
The case study -marginal methodology is the approach most reflective of fiscal reality. Utilizing the Fire
Department as an example, the average cost approach would divide the expenditure for fire services by
population and possibly employment to arrive at a figure, say $21 per person. This cost would occur
regardless of any spatial distribution. The case study -marginal approach would reflect whether the Fire
Department required additional space and apparatus to meet level of service times and responses. If new
growth were primarily infill versus leap -frog development, the cost differential could be significant since in
the former case there would be no additional cost for capital and associated personnel while in the latter
case there might be a need for a new station with associated apparatus and personnel. As discussed above,
depending on the size of the jurisdiction and the size of the specific project being evaluated, cost and facility
thresholds may never be triggered.
In response to the advantages and disadvantages of these two methodologies, TischlerBise has developed
numerous fiscal impact models that utilize a hybrid of these two methodologies. In a nutshell, the average
cost components of the model (particularly public safety, parks/recreation and public works elements) are
developed so that there is an option to reflect whether the area being evaluated is greenfield versus infill,
or whether sufficient capacity exists, and/or whether there are locational differences that should be
accounted for (i.e., average response times or variations in trip lengths, etc.). This allows the model to
utilize cost information but still account for spatial relationships. We also provide the ability to add
"marginality" to the average cost components by allowing for an adjustment to account for fixed costs and
revenues, which improves the accuracy of the analysis. In addition, TischlerBise develops these models to
accept direct entry of marginal costing data for specific operating and capital costs. For example, if it is
8 Tischier use
=rORCMIC
known that a particular development will trigger the need for a community policing officer, the user can
select to enter the entire cost of the position in a specific year.
Model Design
An important consideration relative to this assignment is the fact that all the fiscal and economic impact
models developed by TischlerBise are developed from the ground up, with the specific needs and
desires of the client considered before beginning the development of the application. This includes
a thorough understanding of the types of the analyses the City of Eagle believes the model will be used for,
as well as the intended audience.
The fiscal impact model designed for this assignment will be developed in a user-friendly environment,
using Microsoft Excel and Visual Basic. The result is a powerful and flexible application that allows the user
to decide the level of detail, as well as sophistication, reflected in the model. Levels of service, cost data,
funding terms and other similar factors, which define fiscal expenditures, can be easily modified and
updated. The model structure is also transparent and will allow all users to clearly see the methodology,
data, and algorithms utilized to verify the correct application of the data, thereby avoiding "black box"
concerns.
During the development of the fiscal impact model, likely users of the model will be surveyed for their input
into the design of the model including user interface, worksheet design for individual departments, desired
outputs, etc. Features that TischlerBise feels are essential to the success of the model designed for this
assignment are discussed in turn. Since the models we develop contain proprietary information, we ask
that Clients enter into a standard license agreement, the terms of which can be negotiated with the City.
Essential features of a fiscal impact model designed for the City of Eagle are discussed below.
Land Use/Scenario Inputs. Alternative growth scenarios and specific development projects are
represented in the model by demographic projections, which can easily be substituted to test different
alternatives. Inputs include projections of residential and nonresidential development, construction
values, sales per square foot, and other demographic characteristics of new development. Base year
demographic and demand base data is entered in this module as well. The numbers of land use
categories and socioeconomic/demographic factors that can be entered into the model are virtually
unlimited. The scenario inputs are then used by the model to calculate annual demand generators such
as population, jobs, nonresidential building area, and income, as well as the annual and cumulative tax
base increases for the scenario/project being analyzed.
Infrastructure/Capital Facilities. Capital facilities and infrastructure needs can be factored in the
model through a combination of ways. First, the user can elect to have the model forecast additional
capital facility needs for the particular scenario/project being evaluated using predefined criteria for
each category of facility. This can be done by the marginal consumption of the available facility capacity
or by defining levels of service. The second option is for the user to input capital projects directly into
the model. This is usually based on adopted capital improvement or facility master plans. A third option
is a combination of both. Regardless of the selected approach, the user will be able to factor lag/lead
time of construction, useful life of the improvement, and financing mechanisms. This module can also
be designed to apply specific revenue streams to specific facility types, as well as provide information
that can be used in exaction negotiations with prospective developers.
Tlschl re gllse 9
Operating Costs. The fiscal impact model analyzes the impact of changes on the demand for services
and programs and on future operating budgets. The model will be structured by department or program
area, with the ability to reflect several layers of operating costs. For example, the parks department is
likely to have program -related operating costs that are impacted by population growth, whereas other
costs may be impacted by the incremental expansion of park facilities. Furthermore, it is desirable to
separate growth -related staffing requirements that may be incurred at specific thresholds versus facility -
related costs for mowing and maintenance.
Revenues. The fiscal impact model will include both annual and one-time revenues. TischlerBise will
determine the appropriate projection methodologies. In addition to standard General Fund revenue, the
user will have the option of applying program -related revenues such as recreation fees against
expenditures.
Scope of Work
The following scope of work provides detailed steps to ensure that the project is completed successfully.
We have designed this work plan to be responsive to the City of Eagle and its needs.
TASK 1: DEVELOPMENT OF MODEL PARAMETERS
In this task, TischlerBise will work with City of Eagle staff to develop parameters that will guide the
development and design of the Fiscal Impact Model.
Discussion of Model Design. As part of the Project Initiation activities, TischlerBise will meet with relevant
City staff to discuss several items. The first is agreement on the idealized structure, methodology and
potential applications of the fiscal impact model. The second item for discussion relates to potential
development projects and/or citywide land use scenario that will be used to develop and calibrate the model.
TischlerBise recommends evaluating recent or proposed development projects. These real -world examples
will ensure that the model has full capabilities as it is designed.
Development of Land Use Profiles (Prototypes). To ensure the optimum inputs for the Fiscal Impact
Model, TischlerBise will develop specific assumptions for various land use types that may be evaluated as
part of development projects. For residential land uses (e.g., single-family detached versus multifamily),
these factors include person per household, student generation rates, lot size, street frontage, vehicle trip
and trip adjustment factors, average trip length, construction values, income, and discretionary spending.
From a nonresidential perspective this will include employment densities, vehicle trip generation rates and
adjustment factors, trip lengths, street frontage, etc. These factors will serve to refine the costs and revenue
factors by geographic location. For example, the amount of residential street frontage added to the City's
roadway network is likely to be Tess per unit as density increases.
Our team will work with City staff to formulate criteria (land use character, development intensity, potential
for intensification, etc.) to be used to delineate potential geographic service areas for the Fiscal Impact
Model. This will allow for meaningful comparison of service and infrastructure costs relative to the
geographic location of development. For example, the model will be able to distinguish between assessed
1 o TischlerBise
=ISGssL ECO«OP11G
r
r a
values, density, development character, trip lengths and many more variables. Otherwise, land use types
will have to be treated homogenously for the City.
TASK 2: DEVELOPMENT OF LEVEL OF SERVICE, COST & REVENUE FACTOR DOCUMENT
TischlerBise will review budget documents (annual budget, capital improvement plans, CAFRs) for the City.
As part of this Task, we will determine the fixed, variable, and semi -variable operating and capital costs for
all relevant services and facilities. We will also determine levels of service for each department or service
and determine the service relationship to each land use type in terms of costs and revenue factors.
Information obtained during this Task will be prepared in a Level of Service and Cost/Revenue Factor
Document. This document will show the different cost components for the various service providers,
including both facility and non -facility related operating expenses, methodologies for forecasting future
capital facility needs, associated operating expenses, and discussions of current versus preferred levels of
service where appropriate.
TASK 3: DEVELOP FISCAL IMPACT MODEL
We will develop the Fiscal Impact Model for the City of Eagle to reflect the existing development base,
current budget data, level of service assumptions, and capital facility inventories and costs as determined
from the previous tasks. The model will include all information relative to land use profiles, geographic
service areas assumptions, etc. The models will also reflect cost/revenue projection methodologies as
mutually agreed upon with City staff as part of the previous task.
TASK 4: IMPLEMENT FISCAL IMPACT MODEL
User Documentation. TischlerBise will provide Model User Documentation that will include a training
manual that discusses the use and technical aspects of the model. This will include a discussion of the
different cost methodologies the various service providers, including both facility and non -facility related
operating expenses, methodologies for forecasting future capital facility needs, and associated operating
expenses.
Implementation. In this subtask, TischlerBise will conduct two onsite training sessions with appropriate
City staff. In the first training session, staff will be trained on the structure of the model, data inputs, how to
incorporate different methodologies/demand factors, and how to develop additional modules. A second
training session will be provided at a mutually agreed upon time. The focus of these sessions will be to
encourage various "hands on" applications and to answer questions.
TischlerBiserBise
EC +OP t a4 20,4 tis
Project Schedule
The following table provides our proposed project schedule for this assignment. Assuming an early January
start date, we estimate a four month schedule.
PROJECT SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS MODEL
Task 1: Development of Model Parameters
Task 2; Development of LOS, Cost & Revenue
Factors/Document
Task 3: Develop Fiscal Impact Model
Task 4: Implement Fiscal Impact Model
'Some meetings are assumed to overlap with other Task meetings
January, 2020 1 Technical Memorandum Discussing Land Use Profiles for
the Fiscal Impact Model.
January -February, 2020 2 Technical Document Outlining Level ofServiceand
Cost/Revenue Projection Methodologies
February- March, 2020 1
March -April, 2020 2 Final Fiscal Impact Model and User's Manual
Section 4: Project Budget
Draft Fiscal Impact Model
The following figure provides our fixed fee cost proposal that reflects hours for each team member, as well
as the hourly rates.
PROPOSED COST FOR CITY OF EAGLE FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS MODEL
Project Team Member: Bise Herlands McAweeney Total
Hourly Rate* $210 $195 $180 Hours Cost
Task 1: Development of Model Parameters 16 0 16 32 $6,240
Task 2: Development of LOS, Cost & Revenue Factors/Document 16 24 32 72 $13,800
Task 3: Develop Fiscal Impact Model 24 16 40 80 $15,360
Task 4: Implement Fiscal Impact Model 16 24 0 40 $8,040
Expenses: $4,600
Total Cost: 72 64 88 224 $48,040
12 TischlerBise
-FSCAL :.::CNoMIr.
TischlerBise
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
Principal Office
4701 Sangamore Road, Suite S240 1 Bethesda,
MD 20816
301.320.6900 x12 (w) 301.320.4860 (f)
carson@tischlerbise.com
TischlerBise
FISCAL ECONOMIC I PLANNING
Exhibit C
Modified Timeline
t _
Proposal for
Fiscal Impact Analysis
and Tool
City of Eagle, Idaho
Exhibit C
Modified Timeline
Table of Contents
Section 1: Cover Letter 1
Section 2: Qualifications and Expertise 2
Section 3: Work Plan and Schedule 8
Section 4: Project Budget 12
Trschl re Bise
la.
Section 1: Cover Letter
December 3, 2019
Ms. Nichoel Baird Spencer, Planner III
City of Eagle
660 East Civic Lane
Eagle, Idaho 83616
RE: Proposal for Fiscal Impact Analysis and Tool
Ms. Spencer,
TischlerBise is pleased to submit the enclosed proposal to provide a Fiscal Impact Analysis Tool for the
City of Eagle. In summary, we feel that our firm brings several distinct advantages to the process of handling
this important assignment:
• No other firm has the depth of experience that TischlerBise brings to this assignment.
TischlerBise is the nation's leading fiscal/economic impact, impact fee, and infrastructure financing
consulting firm. We have completed over 900 fiscal impact studies across the country —more than any
other firm.
• TischlerBise has successfully prepared and assisted with the implementation of over twenty
fiscal impact models over the five years, all of which are similar in complexity and scale to this
assignment. Additionally, since TischlerBise was the firm selected by COMPASS to develop a similar
fiscal tool, the City is assured there will be seamless interface and integration into that larger work effort.
■ TischlerBise's project team for this assignment is comprised of two nationally recognized
experts in the area of fiscal impact analysis. Carson Bise, who will serve as Project Manager for this
assignment, has developed and implemented more fiscal impact models than any planner in the country
and is widely regarded as the leading national practitioner in the field.
We look forward to the possibility of working with the City and are committed to providing cost-effective,
high -quality support for this assignment.
Sincerely,
L. Carson Bise II, AICP, President
TischlerBise
4701 Sangamore Road S240
301.320.6900 x12
carson@tischlerbise.com
Tischie Bise
Section 2: Qualifications and Expertise
Firm Experience
TischlerBise, Inc., was founded in 1977 as Tischler, Montasser & Associates. The firm became Tischler &
Associates, Inc., in 1980 and TischlerBise, Inc., in 2005. The firm is a Subchapter (S) corporation, is
incorporated in Washington, D.C., and maintains offices in Bethesda, Maryland, with a Boise office opening
in the Spring of 2020.
TischlerBise is a fiscal, economic, and planning consulting firm specializing in fiscal/economic impact
analysis, impact fees, market feasibility, infrastructure financing studies and related revenue strategies. Our
firm has been providing consulting services to public agencies for over thirty years. In this time, we have
prepared over 900 fiscal/economic impact evaluations and over 1,000 impact fee/infrastructure
financing studies — more than any other firm. Through our detailed approach, proven methodology, and
comprehensive product, we have established TischlerBise as the leading national expert on revenue
enhancement and cost of growth strategies.
The graphic depicts our vast
fiscal/economic impact experience with
clients nationwide.
As our proposal demonstrates, no other firm
can match the depth of our experience in
the area of local government fiscal impact
analysis and model development. Our
Principal in Charge, Carson Bise, AICP, is
widely considered the leading national fiscal
impact practitioner in the United States. The
core services provided by TischlerBise all
involve:
c,
eriir
• Determining existing and projected residential and nonresidential growth for 10-, 20-, and 30—year
periods
• An examination of local government budgets to determine fixed and variable costs and revenues
as well as the true costs of service
■ Evaluations of departmental operating structures and determination of existing levels of service as
well as the most appropriate method of projecting future costs (including staff) and revenues
• Developing meaningful and realistic capital improvement plans
• Determining the fiscal impacts of different land uses and physical forms
• Evaluation of alternative revenue sources and financing mechanisms for achieving fiscal
sustainability
■ Developing user friendly fiscal software
■ Presenting fiscal/economic findings in a variety of forums
• Evaluation of zoning and land use policies from a market perspective for consistency with stated
fiscal and economic goals
TischlerBise
■ Providing recommendations to ensure fiscal/economic sustainability
Idaho Experience
An important factorto consider related to this work effort is our previous experience in the State of Idaho,
which makes us quite familiar with the local government revenue structure, as well as the planning issues
facing Idaho and Ada County jurisdictions. A listing of our previous fiscal and economic impact clients in
Idaho is provided below.
State of Idaho
Boise Hailey Nampa Sandpoint
Canyon County Hayden Payette Treasure Valley Partnership
COMPASS Kellogg Post Falls Victor
Project Personnel Qualifications
Our TischlerBise project team has successfully implemented numerous fiscal impact models for many
communities similar in complexity and scale to this assignment. The majority of assignments included
understanding local and regional context and evaluating multiple scenarios reflecting differences in
absorption and phasing, geographic service areas, variations in levels of service, infrastructure life cycle
costs, and density and physical development patterns, all of which affect the factors used in development
of the fiscal impact model for this assignment. The organizational chart shows our project team for this
assig nment.
City of Eagle
1
Carson Bise. AICP
Project Manager
1
Julie Herlands, AICP
Principal Analyst
Colin McAweeney
ProjectAnalyst
TischlerBise 3
.41111111111111
1 rl .
Detailed discussion of each team member's qualifications is discussed below.
L. Carson Bise, II, AICP, President
Carson Bise has 29 year of fiscal, economic and planning experience and has conducted
fiscal and infrastructure finance evaluations in 39 states. Mr. Bise has developed and
implemented more fiscal impact models than any consultant in the country. The
applications which Mr. Bise has developed have been used for evaluating multiple land
use scenarios, specific development projects, annexations, urban service provision, tax -
increment financing, and concurrency/adequate public facilities monitoring. Mr. Bise is
also a leading national figure in the calculation of impact fees, having completed over 350
impact fee studies. Mr. Bise has also written and lectured extensively on fiscal impact
analysis and infrastructure financing. His most recent publications are Next
Generation Transportation Impact Fees and Fiscal Impact Analysis: Methodologies
for Planners, both published by the American Planning Association, a chapter on fiscal
impact analysis in the book Planning and Urban Design Standards, also published by the
American Planning Association, and the ICMA IQ Report, Fiscal Impact Analysis: How
Today's Decisions Affect Tomorrow's Budgets. Mr. Bise was also the principal author of
the fiscal impact analysis component for the Atlanta Regional Commission's Smart
Growth Toolkit and is featured in the recently released AICP CD-ROM Training Package
entitled The Economics of Density. Mr. Bise is currently on the Board of Directors of the
Growth and Infrastructure Finance Consortium and recently Chaired the American Planning
Association's Paying for Growth Task Force. He was also recently named an Affiliate of the National
Center for Smart Growth Research & Education.
EDUCATION
M.B.A., Economics, Shenandoah University
B.S., Geography/Urban Planning, East Tennessee State University
B.S., Political Science/Urban Studies, East Tennessee State University
Julie Herlands, AICP, Vice President
Julie Herlands is Vice President with TischlerBise and has fifteen years of planning, fiscal, and economic
development experience. Prior to joining TischlerBise, Ms. Herlands worked in the public sector in Fairfax
County, Virginia, for the Office of Community Revitalization and for the private sector for the International
Economic Development Council (IEDC) in their Advisory Services and Research Department. For IEDC,
she conducted a number of consulting projects including economic and market feasibility analyses and
economic development assessments and plans. Her economic and fiscal impact experience includes a
wide -range of assignments in over fifteen states. She is a frequent presenter at national and regional
conferences including serving as co-organizer and co -presenter at a half -day AICP Training Workshop
entitled Fiscal Impact Assessment at the APA National Planning Conference. A session on impact fees and
cash proffers presented at the APA National Conference is available through the APA training series, Best
of Contemporary Community Planning 2005. She is the immediate past Chair of the Economic
4 Tischer ise
•
Development Division of the APA and chaired the APA Task Force on Planning and Economic
Development.
EDUCATION
Masters of Community Planning, University of Maryland
B.A., Political Science, University of Buffalo
Colin McAweeney, Fiscal and Economic Analyst
Colin McAweeney is a Fiscal and Economic Analyst at TischlerBise with specialties in finance and economic
development planning. Mr. McAweeney specializes in preparing fiscal and economic impact analyses, as
well as developing fiscal software. Mr. McAweeney has conducted fiscal and economic evaluations in over
10 different states. Prior to joining TischlerBise, Mr. McAweeney completed his M.S. at Erasmus University
Rotterdam where he specialized in economic development. Here, Mr. McAweeney became knowledgeable
in planning that involves fiscal, social, and environmental sustainability. In Rotterdam, Mr. McAweeney
conducted several field studies of local at -risk neighborhoods and presented planning solutions to city
leaders. Additionally, he brought together a team of academics and consultants to plan a biking corridor in
Kenya. He finished his degree with a thesis surrounding the urban aspects that attract investment. Before
pursuing his M.S., Mr. McAweeney worked in the finance sector for several years. While performing at a
high level, he was able to become very familiar with financial markets and business financing.
EDUCATION
M.S., Urban Management and Development, Erasmus University Rotterdam
B.S., Economics with an emphasis on Mathematics, University of Wisconsin - Madison
Relevant Project Examples
Below are references of work performed for local governments and projects that involved substantial
technical assistance with the client and others. We have listed only projects with which our Project
Team members were associated.
City of Fairfax, Virginia — Fiscal Impact Models (2016)
Project Contact: Nicole Hange, Economic Development Director
Phone: (703) 385-7851
Email: nicole.hange@fairfax.gov
Project Staff: Carson Bise, Principal in Charge; Julie Herlands, Project Manager
TischlerBise developed two fiscal impact models for the City of Fairfax. The City desired a tool capable of
to conduct fiscal evaluations for specific development projects, as well as to evaluate municipal -
wide scenarios. It has been our experience that it is extremely difficult to develop one model that does
both types of analyses well. Therefore, we developed two distinct models for the City to be used for
different purposes —a Development Project Fiscal Impact Model and a Citywide Fiscal Impact Model. The
models were calibrated appropriately with the Project Model calibrated with recent development projects
and the Citywide model was calibrated to long-term growth scenarios. The assignment included detailed
TischlerBise 5
analyses to establish current demand assumptions (e.g., student generation rates, household sizes,
property valuations, and demand for public safety services), operating and capital impacts, as well as an
economic impact module.
City of Falls Church, Virginia — Fiscal Impact Model (2018)
Project Contact: Becky Witsman, Economic Development Division Chief
Phone: (703) 248-5224
E-mail: bwitsman@fallschurchva.gov
Project Staff: Carson Bise, Principal in Charge; Julie Herlands, Project Manager
Dates of Service (Separate Engagements): 2003; 2008, 2011; 2014, 2016, 2018
TischlerBise developed the Fiscal Impact Model used by the City of Falls Church to evaluate new
development proposals. TischlerBise developed the first model for the City over a dozen years ago,
has conducted several periodic updates in the interim, and has just recently updated and expanded
the model for 2018. The model is an average cost/case study marginal hybrid fiscal model that is used by
the City's Economic Development Department to test development programs particularly for mixed use
projects. Most recently, TischlerBise expanded the model to include a more robust capital module as well
as revised methodologies forsome revenue categories based on new and better data availability. The City's
fiscal model has the capability to test a wide range of residential and nonresidential land uses, which have
been modified and expanded in the recent update, to keep up with the ever -changing types of development
being proposed in the City. As a small City that funds its school system through property taxes, the City's
goal is to ensure that redevelopment generates sufficient revenues to cover the resulting costs while
maintaining current levels of service.
City of Georgetown, Texas — Fiscal Impact Models (2017-2018)
Contact: Wayne Reed, Assistant City Manager
Phone: (512) 819-3118
E-mail: wayne.reed@georgetown.org
Personnel: Carson Bise, Principal in Charge; Julie Herlands, Project Manager
Dates of Service: February 2017-February 2018
The City of Georgetown, Texas, retained TischlerBise to develop two Fiscal Impact Models: One to evaluate
Development Proposals and the other to evaluate Citywide Growth scenarios. TischlerBise worked in close
collaboration with the City to deliver flexible yet structured Fiscal Impact Models. The City is a fast-growing
area outside the City of Austin and had two separate needs and desires:
1. To analyze a range of development proposals on a case -by -case basis to test alternative scenarios:
Addressed with the Project Level Fiscal Impact Model.
2. To utilize for longer -term planning analyses, such as their upcoming Comprehensive Plan update:
Addressed with the Citywide Fiscal Impact Model.
6
TtschlerBise
The Citywide Fiscal Impact Model was developed using sub -geographies using a case -study marginal
approach. The Project Level Fiscal Impact Model uses the marginal findings as the foundation with
modifications to allocate costs to the project under study. The Project Level Model provides a custom -
designed user input page that uses dropdown menus and default values but also allows the user to override
those values temporarily. Color coding provides visual cues for the user where default values have been
overridden (blue) and where user input is still needed (red).
Type of units
Total number
of units
Numberof Numberof units
Start Year Land Use Type Taxable value
Years to Build absorbed each
Out [dropdown] [dropdown] year [calculated] per unit
Single-family Detached Starter (SFDS) 100 1.0 1 Single Family 100.0-
Single-family Detached Middle (SFDM) 25 0.0 n/a Single Family 0.0 $420,000
Single-family Detached Estate (SFDE) 0 0.0 n/a Single Family 0.0 $495,000
Single-family Detached Age Restricted (SFDAR) 0 0.0 n/a Single Family 0.0 $273,000
Single-family Attached/Condos 0 0.0 n/a Single Family 0.0 $220,000
Multi -family 0 0.0 n/a Multifamily 0.0 $155,000
The Project Level Fiscal Impact Model is currently being used by the City to evaluate development projects
to report findings to City Council. The Citywide Fiscal Impact Model is anticipated to be used in summer/fall
2019 during the update of the City's Comprehensive Plan, as was intended when the model was scoped
and developed.
Frederick County, Virginia — Capital Impact Study and Model
Project Contact: Mike Ruddy, Director of Planning
Phone: (540) 665-5651
Email: mruddy@fcva.us
Dates of Performance: 2003; 2008; 2018-19
TischlerBise recently completed development of a Capital Impact Model and Study to allow County staff to
evaluate rezoning applications for impacts on capital facilities. This Model is a modification and update to
an existing Fiscal Impact Model that TischlerBise had developed (with frequent updates)forthe Winchester -
Frederick County Economic Development Commission. A key feature of our previous and current
engagement is our interaction with a public/private sector working group who review level of service and
cost/revenue assumptions.
For the current assignment, TischlerBise developed a Capital Impact Model and Study to address the
impacts to the range of capital facilities Public Schools, Parks and Recreation, Sheriff, Fire and Rescue,
Animal Protection, Library, General Government, Courts, and Environmental Services. Facility capacity
triggers are programmed into the model to automatically calculate a development's impact if it were to
exceed the County's capacity. Further detail was included into the model after meetings with a stakeholder's
committee, Development Impact Model Oversight Committee.
Tischle ise 7
Section 3: Work Plan and Schedule
Project Approach
The fiscal impact model TischlerBise is presently developing for COMPASS has to be designed to
accommodate data and methodologies fora variety of jurisdictions of differing sizes and sophistication. As
a result, this regional model will lack the level of detail and sophistication that a model we develop for the
City of Eagle will offer. From a methodological perspective, the City of Eagle can go in two different
directions. We can develop a pure case study -marginal fiscal impact model or a model that reflects
incorporates an average cost -hybrid methodology. The discussion below will discuss the two approaches.
As part of Task 1, we will discuss this further with City staff, as well as present examples of models
with each methodology.
The two most commonly used fiscal impact methodologies are the average cost and the case study -
marginal approach. The average cost approach is the most popular and frequently used method for
evaluating fiscal impacts. Since this approach focuses on the average cost per capita or in some cases,
per capita and job, it doesn't consider the available capacities of existing capital facilities. In addition, it
masks spatial relationships and the timing of additional facilities required to serve new growth. However,
this approach does lend itself extremely well for evaluating specific development proposals and economic
development/public incentives. This is because specific development proposals tend to be viewed in
isolation, and depending on the size of the project, may not trigger required thresholds for capital facilities
and/or "lumpy" operating costs under the case study -marginal approach.
The case study -marginal methodology is the approach most reflective of fiscal reality. Utilizing the Fire
Department as an example, the average cost approach would divide the expenditure for fire services by
population and possibly employment to arrive at a figure, say $21 per person. This cost would occur
regardless of any spatial distribution. The case study -marginal approach would reflect whether the Fire
Department required additional space and apparatus to meet level of service times and responses. If new
growth were primarily infill versus leap -frog development, the cost differential could be significant since in
the former case there would be no additional cost for capital and associated personnel while in the latter
case there might be a need fora new station with associated apparatus and personnel. As discussed above,
depending on the size of the jurisdiction and the size of the specific project being evaluated, cost and facility
thresholds may never be triggered.
In response to the advantages and disadvantages of these two methodologies, TischlerBise has developed
numerous fiscal impact models that utilize a hybrid of these two methodologies. In a nutshell, the average
cost components of the model (particularly public safety, parks/recreation and public works elements) are
developed so that there is an option to reflect whether the area being evaluated is greenfield versus infill,
or whether sufficient capacity exists, and/or whether there are locational differences that should be
accounted for (i.e., average response times or variations in trip lengths, etc.). This allows the model to
utilize cost information but still account for spatial relationships. We also provide the ability to add
"marginality" to the average cost components by allowing for an adjustment to account for fixed costs and
revenues, which improves the accuracy of the analysis. In addition, TischlerBise develops these models to
accept direct entry of marginal costing data for specific operating and capital costs. For example, if it is
8
Tisch! re Rise
known that a particular development will trigger the need for a community policing officer, the user can
select to enter the entire cost of the position in a specific year.
Model Design
An important consideration relative to this assignment is the fact that all the fiscal and economic impact
models developed by TischlerBise are developed from the ground up, with the specific needs and
desires of the client considered before beginning the development of the application. This includes
a thorough understanding of the types of the analyses the City of Eagle believes the model will be used for,
as well as the intended audience.
The fiscal impact model designed for this assignment will be developed in a user-friendly environment,
using Microsoft Excel and Visual Basic. The result is a powerful and flexible application that allows the user
to decide the level of detail, as well as sophistication, reflected in the model. Levels of service, cost data,
funding terms and other similar factors, which define fiscal expenditures, can be easily modified and
updated. The model structure is also transparent and will allow all users to clearly see the methodology,
data, and algorithms utilized to verify the correct application of the data, thereby avoiding "black box"
concerns.
During the development of the fiscal impact model, likely users of the model will be surveyed for their input
into the design of the model including user interface, worksheet design for individual departments, desired
outputs, etc. Features that TischlerBise feels are essential to the success of the model designed for this
assignment are discussed in turn. Since the models we develop contain proprietary information, we ask
that Clients enter into a standard license agreement, the terms of which can be negotiated with the City.
Essential features of a fiscal impact model designed for the City of Eagle are discussed below.
Land Use/Scenario Inputs. Alternative growth scenarios and specific development projects are
represented in the model by demographic projections, which can easily be substituted to test different
alternatives. Inputs include projections of residential and nonresidential development, construction
values, sales per square foot, and other demographic characteristics of new development. Base year
demographic and demand base data is entered in this module as well. The numbers of land use
categories and socioeconomic/demographic factors that can be entered into the model are virtually
unlimited. The scenario inputs are then used by the model to calculate annual demand generators such
as population, jobs, nonresidential building area, and income, as well as the annual and cumulative tax
base increases for the scenario/project being analyzed.
Infrastructure/Capital Facilities. Capital facilities and infrastructure needs can be factored in the
model through a combination of ways. First, the user can elect to have the model forecast additional
capital facility needs for the particular scenario/project being evaluated using predefined criteria for
each category of facility. This can be done by the marginal consumption of the available facility capacity
or by defining levels of service. The second option is for the user to input capital projects directly into
the model. This is usually based on adopted capital improvement or facility master plans. A third option
is a combination of both. Regardless of the selected approach, the user will be able to factor lag/lead
time of construction, useful life of the improvement, and financing mechanisms. This module can also
be designed to apply specific revenue streams to specific facility types, as well as provide information
that can be used in exaction negotiations with prospective developers.
TischlerBise
9
Operating Costs. The fiscal impact model analyzes the impact of changes on the demand for services
and programs and on future operating budgets. The model will be structured by department or program
area, with the ability to reflect several layers of operating costs. For example, the parks department is
likely to have program -related operating costs that are impacted by population growth, whereas other
costs may be impacted by the incremental expansion of park facilities. Furthermore, it is desirable to
separate growth -related staffing requirements that may be incurred at specific thresholds versus facility -
related costs for mowing and maintenance.
Revenues. The fiscal impact model will include both annual and one-time revenues. TischlerBise will
determine the appropriate projection methodologies. In addition to standard General Fund revenue, the
user will have the option of applying program -related revenues such as recreation fees against
expenditures.
Scope of Work
The following scope of work provides detailed steps to ensure that the project is completed successfully.
We have designed this work plan to be responsive to the City of Eagle and its needs.
TASK 1: DEVELOPMENT OF MODEL PARAMETERS
In this task, TischlerBise will work with City of Eagle staff to develop parameters that will guide the
development and design of the Fiscal Impact Model.
Discussion of Model Design. As part of the Project Initiation activities, TischlerBise will meet with relevant
City staff to discuss several items. The first is agreement on the idealized structure, methodology and
potential applications of the fiscal impact model. The second item for discussion relates to potential
development projects and/orcitywide land use scenario that will be used to develop and calibrate the model.
TischlerBise recommends evaluating recent or proposed development projects. These real -world examples
will ensure that the model has full capabilities as it is designed.
Development of Land Use Profiles (Prototypes). To ensure the optimum inputs for the Fiscal Impact
Model, TischlerBise will develop specific assumptions for various land use types that may be evaluated as
part of development projects. For residential land uses (e.g., single-family detached versus multifamily),
these factors include person per household, student generation rates, lot size, street frontage, vehicle trip
and trip adjustment factors, average trip length, construction values, income, and discretionary spending.
From a nonresidential perspective this will include employment densities, vehicle trip generation rates and
adjustment factors, trip lengths, street frontage, etc. These factors will serve to refine the costs and revenue
factors by geographic location. For example, the amount of residential street frontage added to the City's
roadway network is likely to be less per unit as density increases.
Our team will work with City staff to formulate criteria (land use character, development intensity, potential
for intensification, etc.) to be used to delineate potential geographic service areas for the Fiscal Impact
Model. This will allow for meaningful comparison of service and infrastructure costs relative to the
geographic location of development. For example, the model will be able to distinguish between assessed
1 o TischlerBise
values, density, development character, trip lengths and many more variables. Otherwise, land use types
will have to be treated homogenously forthe City.
TASK 2: DEVELOPMENT OF LEVEL OF SERVICE, COST & REVENUE FACTOR DOCUMENT
TischlerBise will review budget documents (annual budget, capital improvement plans, CAFRs) forthe City.
As part of this Task, we will determine the fixed, variable, and semi -variable operating and capital costs for
all relevant services and facilities. We will also determine levels of service for each department or service
and determine the service relationship to each land use type in terms of costs and revenue factors.
Information obtained during this Task will be prepared in a Level of Service and Cost/Revenue Factor
Document. This document will show the different cost components for the various service providers,
including both facility and non -facility related operating expenses, methodologies for forecasting future
capital facility needs, associated operating expenses, and discussions of current versus preferred levels of
service where appropriate.
TASK 3: DEVELOP FISCAL IMPACT MODEL
We will develop the Fiscal Impact Model forthe City of Eagle to reflect the existing development base,
current budget data, level of service assumptions, and capital facility inventories and costs as determined
from the previous tasks. The model will include all information relative to land use profiles, geographic
service areas assumptions, etc. The models will also reflect cost/revenue projection methodologies as
mutually agreed upon with City staff as part of the previous task.
TASK 4: IMPLEMENT FISCAL IMPACT MODEL
User Documentation. TischlerBise will provide Model User Documentation that will include a training
manual that discusses the use and technical aspects of the model. This will include a discussion of the
different cost methodologies the various service providers, including both facility and non -facility related
operating expenses, methodologies for forecasting future capital facility needs, and associated operating
expenses.
Implementation. In this subtask, TischlerBise will conduct two onsite training sessions with appropriate
City staff. In the first training session, staff will be trained on the structure of the model, data inputs, how to
incorporate different methodologies/demand factors, and how to develop additional modules. A second
training session will be provided at a mutually agreed upon time. The focus of these sessions will be to
encourage various "hands on" applications and to answer questions.
TischlerBise 11
fir..
1 /J.
Project Schedule
The following table provides our proposed project schedule for this assignment. Assuming an early
February start date, we estimate a four month schedule.
PROJECT SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL DAPACT ANALYSIS MODEL
An+Iraciated Timelrame Meetings I delWprdble
Task 1: Development al Model Parameters
Task 2: Development of LOS, Cost t Revenue
Factors/Document
Task 3: Develop Fiscal Impact Model
February, 2020
February -March, 2020
1
2
Mach -April, 2020 1
Technical Memorandum Discussing Land ItseProfiles for
the Fiscal Impact Model_
Technical [taco meat n.t4ni.:-...Level Senrke and
Cost/Revenue Projection Methodologies
Draft fiscal Impact Model
Task 4: Implement Find Impact Model April -May, 2020 2 Final Fiscal Impact Model and User's Manual
..a...a...a.�.-.���-.a:Z.,overlap vrdhotherTaskmedings
Section 4: Project Budget
The following figure provides our fixed fee cost proposal that reflects hours for each team member, as well
as the hourly rates.
PROPOSED COST FOR CITY OF EAGLE FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS MODEL
Project Team Member: Bise Herfands McAweeney Total
Hourly Rate* $210 $195 $180 Hours Cost
Task 1: Development of Model Parameters 16 0 16 32 $6,240
Task 2: Development of LOS, Cost & Revenue Factors/Document 16 24 32 72 $13,800
Task 3: Develop Fiscal impact Model 24 16 40 80 $15,360
Task 4: Implement Fiscal impact Model 16 24 0 40 $8,040
Expenses: $4,600
Total Co:st72 64 88 224 $48,040 I
12 Tisch reschl re BEse
TischlerBise
FISCAL I ECONOMIC I PLANNING
Principal Office
4701 Sangamore Road, Suite S240 I Bethesda,
MD 20816
301.320.6900 x12 (w) 1301.320.4860 (f) 1
carson@tischterbise.com
FISCALS Licensing Agreement
Between TischlerBise, Inc.
and The City of Eagle, Idaho
AGREEMENT made as of January 14. 2020 by and between TischlerBise, Inc. a corporation
organized and existing under the laws of the District of Columbia, the principal office of which is
located at 4701 Sangamore Road, Suite S240, Bethesda, Maryland 20816 (hereinafter referred to
as "TischlerBise"), and the City of Eagle, Idaho, an independent political subdivision of the State of
Idaho. (hereinafter referred to as "Customer").
RECITALS
A. TischlerBise is owner of the customized computer program known as the Fiscal Impact
Calculation System (hereinafter referred to as FISCALS) that is constructed for each individua I
client's needs.
B. TischlerBise is authorized to sublicense FISCALS for the use of the Customer.
C. Customer is interested in becoming a sublicensee for FISCALS, subject to the terms and
conditions set forth in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings set forth below, the parties agree as
follows:
1. Subject to the condition precedent set forth in Paragraph 3 below, TischlerBise shall grant
Customer a non-exclusive and non -transferable perpetual license to use the computer
program known as FISCALS. In conjunction with this license, TischlerBise shall provide to
Customer the following:
a. Two licenses for the FISCALS model designed for the City of Eagle, Idaho.
2. TischlerBise shall correct errors or malfunctions in the FISCALS program that are brought to its
attention in writing by Customer. Written notification by Customer shall specify the ma nner
in which the FISCALS program does not perform fiscal impact analysis associated with the
review of development projects. In the event that, after investigation, it is determined by
TischlerBise that the reported error or malfunction was not caused by a defect in the FISCALS
program, TischlerBise may charge Customer at TischlerBise's regular daily rate for time spent
by it in investigating the alleged error or malfunction.
1
3. All marketing and distribution rights in FISCALS are reserved by TischlerBise. TischlerBise
authorizes Customer to use FISCALS for its own normal activities and not for distribution to or
use by others, provided that any such copy shall retain the same notice concerning the
copyright by TischlerBise, Inc. with full rights for distribution held by TischlerBise. Customer
agrees not to provide or otherwise make available FISCALS in any form to any person other
than personnel of Customer. Customer shall be exclusively responsible for the supervision,
management and control of the use of FISCALS delivered pursuant to this Agreement.
Customer also agrees that it will take appropriate action, by instruction, agreement, or
otherwise, with its employees, to satisfy its obligation under this Agreement with respect to
use, copy, modification, protection and security of FISCALS. Customer also agrees that only its
employees and agents are specifically authorized to use FISCALS.
/1 TiorhlorQico. .++r+6. ++L.., FISCALS ,..J and developed
_.J L... TischlerBise
_..n:
z. TischlerBise ..I Bice warrants that the 1 ISCALS program was conceived al ld developed by 1 IsLI llel DIJC
and that the FISCALS program does not infringe any copyright, trade secret or trademark.
TischlerBise also makes the following representations and warranties concerning the
capabilities and performance of FISCALS:
a. The program can provide a methodology that facilitates data gathering for conducting
a fiscal impact analysis for the review of development projects.
TischlerBise makes no other representations or warranties concerning the performance of
FISCALS. TischlerBise shall not be liable to Customer or anyone claiming through Customer i n
contract or in tort (including negligence).
5. TischlerBise shall not be liable for any Toss, damage, detention, or delay resulting from causes
beyond its reasonable control, or from fire, strike, or other concerted action of workmen, act
or omission of any government authority or of the Customer, insurrection or riot, embargo,
materials shortage, car wreck, or delay in transportation, or inability to obtain necessary
labor, materials, or equipment from usual sources. In the event of delay in performance due
to any such cause, the date of such performance shall be postponed by such length of time as
may be reasonably necessary to compensate for the delay.
6. Customer shall not, without the prior written consent of TischlerBise, assign or transfer this
Agreement or permit the use of the FISCALS program or any materials furnished under this
Agreement by any persons other than those in Customer's direct employment and subject to
its direct supervision.
7. Customer acknowledges that the FISCALS program and proprietary rights to any materials
supplied to Customer by TischlerBise pursuant to this Agreement are, and at all times shall
remain, the property of TischlerBise, and Customer shall have no right, title or interest
therein, except as expressly set forth in this Agreement. Customer is authorized two (2) site
licenses of the City of Eagle FISCALS model for use on its own computer. Customer will keep a
record of which of its computers the program resides. Customer shall indemnify TischlerBise
for any loss in revenues resulting in the unauthorized use or reproduction of FISCALS.
2
8. Customer shall not, without prior written consent of TischlerBise, assign or transfer this
Agreement or permit the use of FISCALS or any materials furnished under this Agreement by
any persons other than those in Customer's direct employment and subject to its direct
supervision.
8. Customer agrees that any modification to the FISCALS program developed by Customer with
any advice or support by TischlerBise, or by TischlerBise for Customer, whether or not
reimbursed by Customer and whether or not developed in conjunction with Customer's
employees or agents, shall be exclusive property of TischlerBise. Customer further agrees that
modified versions of the FISCALS program do not constitute a program different from the
FISCALS program and, as such, fall under the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
9. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of Idaho.
10. This is the entire Agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter except
for the contract entered in between TischlerBise and Customer on January 14, 2020. There
are no other understandings, agreements, representations, or warranties, expressed or
implied, respecting this Agreement and the services provided hereunder. This Agreement
may be modified only by written amendment, signed by both parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above.
ATTEST:
TISCHLERBISE, INC.
By:
L. Carson Bise II
City of Eagle, Idaho
. By:
Stan Ridgeway, Mayor
3