ITEM:		CONSENT CALENDAR
4.	CONSIDER RETENTION OF FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE CONSULTANT
Meeting Date:			December 12, 2016	Budgeted:	N/A
From:			David J. Stoldt	Program/
			General Manager	Line Item No.:	N/A
Prepared By:			David J. Stoldt	Cost Estimate:
General Counsel Approval: N/A
Committee Recommendation: The Legislative Advocacy Committee reviewed this item at its December 12, 2016 meeting and has made a recommendation to the General Manager
CEQA Compliance: N/A

SUMMARY: At its April 18, 2016 meeting the District Board adopted the 2016-17 Legislative Advocacy Plan to establish District legislative and government affairs priorities for FY 2016-17. The first of six items with respect to the District’s Federal strategy was to evaluate hiring a Washington DC consultant that offers a deep understanding of the federal budget, legislative process, funding opportunities, and regulatory setting. The consultant needs established relationships with both Congress and regulatory departments related to water, including but not limited to BLM, NOAA (NMFS), USBR, USDA, and EPA.

An amount of $30,000 was included in the FY 2016-17 General Manager’s professional services budget as a placeholder to represent approximately a half-year expenditure. This amount may be insufficient, based on statements of qualifications received.

On November 1, 2016 a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) was issued, with the following proposed scope:

Scope of work will include, but is not limited to:

· Identifying legislation or proposed regulatory changes that may impact the District.

· Consult with staff to develop positions on relevant legislation.

· Advocate the District’s position on bills and matters of interest.

· Represent the District in meetings with staff, directors, or independently with congressional members and staff, administration officials, regulatory agencies.

· Coordinate federal outreach with District’s State governmental outreach

· Identify funding opportunities and notify of timing, requirements, and advocate on behalf of District

· Direct contact with associations including ACWA, WateReuse, etc.

· Prepare materials for briefing – talking points, briefing books, letters, as necessary

· Coordinate with other water district lobbyists and organizations

· Maintain close relationships with Monterey legislative delegation

· Organize timely trips as needed, but at least once a year separate from ACWA trip.

· Provide similar services for the District’s project partner(s), as needed and at the direction of the District.

· Periodic reporting of activities

The full RFQ is attached as Exhibit 4-A.

The RFQ was sent to 3 firms: The Ferguson Group (Roger Gwinn), The Furman Group (Hal Furman), and Nossaman LLP (Brent Heberlee). All three firms responded. Their responses are summarized in the “DISCUSSION” section below.

RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board authorize the General Manager to enter into an agreement with the consulting firm recommended by the Legislative Advocacy Committee at its December 12, 2016 meeting.

DISCUSSION: The respondents were told that their statements of qualifications would be evaluated with equal weight in 4 criteria as shown in the summary table below. The General Manager performed his evaluation shown below, but each of the Legislative Advocacy Committee members were asked to perform their own evaluation, to inform the Committee recommendation. Additionally, qualitative factors such as professional appearance of the submittal, overall quality of the submittal, consultant familiarity with the District, outside third-party references, and so on were considered. Finally, the proposing firms’ cost proposals were considered.

Summary of General Manager’s Evaluation

Criteria	Nossaman	The Ferguson Group	The Furman Group
Experience - with municipalities, special districts, agency’s & other governmental entities	15	20	25
Experience - with specific federal agencies	15	20	20
Experience - with specific water-related issues	7	25	25
Personnel	10	20	15
Total Points	47	85	85

Qualitative Overview:

The submittals by The Ferguson Group and Nossaman were clearly more professional looking. Nossaman has a solid foundation on Monterey County issues and some knowledge of the District, but very limited water experience. The Ferguson Group has the strongest familiarity with the District, but the Furman Group did a very good job of researching District needs and activities. The Ferguson Group and The Furman Group clearly outpace Nossaman on water issues, but The Furman Group looks small compared to The Ferguson Group’s resources. All three firms were supported in conversation with a California water association governmental affairs representative, but references for The Ferguson Group were very strong from a General Manager of another California water agency with projects similar to Pure Water Monterey. The Furman Group references were also strong. No references for Nossaman were contacted because no water agency references were provided – however, the County of Monterey has been satisfied with Nossaman and Directors Potter and Brower had a very positive experience with them in February 2016 on a Washington DC visit. The District General Manager had other qualitative factors that were discussed with the Committee.

Fees:

	Nossaman	The Ferguson Group	The Furman Group
Fee Proposal	$60,000 (no hourly option)	$96,000 (or hourly)	$150,000 - $180,000 (no hourly option)

Out-of pocket expenses billed at cost by all three respondents.

EXHIBIT

4-A Request for Qualifications – Federal Legislative and Agency Lobbyist

U:\staff\Boardpacket\2016\20161212\ConsentClndr\04\Item 4.docx