The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAppointment - Coachella Valley Animal Campus Analysis CITY OF PALM DESERT ' �11 �i OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER 4.21 tof STAFF REPORT TO: Carlos L. Ortega, City Manager FROM: Pat Conlon, Special Projects Administrator DATE: September 27, 2001 SUBJECT: Coachella Valley Animal Campus Analysis ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit V (3) Projected Animal Services Facility Construction and Development Costs (Page 28 of Hughes, Perry, and Associates Consulting Report 7/7/01) Exhibit VI (3) Illustrative Formula for Allocating Operating Costs Reduced Scope Operations—Riverside County not Participating. (Page 35 of Hughes, Perry, and Associates Consulting Report 7/7/01) Background The Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) has been working over the last 18 months on a strategy for building a new animal shelter for use by multiple local jurisdictions. In April 2001, after several site visits to Southern California Animal Shelters by members of CVAG's Human Resource Committee, and after WLC Architects prepared the shelter's preliminary space needs analysis, the first phase of the CVAG study was completed. In July 2001, the second and final phase of the study was completed by the consulting firm of Hughes, Perry, & Associates. There were four principal objectives of this final study are as follows: • Evaluate and validate facility capacity projections, and adjust them as required. • Evaluate capital cost projections and adjust them as necessary to reflect any modifications in facility size as well as the design, construction and construction cost estimates for developing a joint animal care facility. G:\CityMgr\Monica O'Reilly\wpdocs\Pat Conlon\Memos\AnimalAnalysis2.wpd Coachella Valley Animal Campus Analysis September 27, 2001 • Develop and evaluate alternative operating models including refining the multi- tier structure identified in the CVAG report and prepare annual operating cost estimates. • Develop and evaluate alternative cost allocation formulas for both capital and operating costs and illustrate specific impact on potential participating jurisdictions. This staff report is based on the conclusions set forth in the Hughes, Perry, & Associates study as it pertains to the City of Palm Desert. Discussion Palm Desert's current FY 2001/2002 animal control costs for shelter and field services are $111 ,200 per year. If the Coachella Valley Animal Campus project is approved by the cities of Desert Hot Springs, Cathedral City, Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, and Indian Wells, the yearly cost for Palm Desert's animal control services will increase as shown below. Shelter design for 10-day animal holding period and a 20-year payback on shelter capital cost: 1) If only the five above cities are joint participants in the Coachella Valley Animal Campus, the estimated annual cost to Palm Desert will be $337,415 which is $226,215 more than we currently budgeted for animal control. 2) If the County of Riverside decides to participate in the Coachella Valley Animal Campus (eq. leave Indio shelter open to serve only the cities of La Quinta, Indio, Coachella, and far eastern unincorporated areas) the costs to the five above jurisdictions can be reduced. The estimated annual cost to Palm Desert will be $270,902 which is $159,702 more than we currently budget for animal control. An alternative which is lower in animal cost to the City of Palm Desert would be a shelter design for a 5-day holding period with a full up front payment on shelter capital cost (saving 20 years of interest): 3) With the above five cities without Riverside County, the annual costs to the City of Palm Desert will be $200,873, which is $89,673 more than we currently budget for animal control services and requires an up front cost of $1,494,533. G:\CityMgrVvlonica O'Reilly\wpdocs\Pat Conlon\Memos\AnimalAnalysis2.wpd 2 Coachella Valley Animal Campus Analysis September 27, 2001 4) With the above five cities including Riverside County, the annual costs to the City of Palm Desert will be $163,612, which is $52,412 more than we currently budget for animal control services and requires an up front cost of $1,069,009. Benefits to the City of Palm Desert from the Coachella Valley Animal Campus are as follows: 1) Palm Desert will have 23 to 33% ownership of a modern animal shelter facility. 2) Palm Desert will have a reduction in animal shelter expenditures by cost sharing with four to five other jurisdictions. 3) A facility designed for double the minimum holding time set forth by state law (i.e., 10-day holding period) 4) A facility which when combined with the adoption, education, and support services of the Animal Samaritan facility planned to be built next door, will result in higher animal adoption rates and fewer animals euthanized. 5) There will be an elimination of citizen concerns on the current animal facility in Cathedral City. Cost Breakdown for Palm Desert Utilizing the most likely scenario of joint participation in the construction and operation of a valley-wide animal campus, five jurisdictions will participate. They are the cities of Desert Hot Springs, Cathedral City, Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, and Indian Wells. At the time of this report it is unclear if Riverside County will participate in the construction and operating costs due to the status of the existing county shelter in Indio. A reduction in capital and operating costs will occur if Riverside County participates along with the above jurisdictions. G.\CityMgr\Monica O'Reilly\wpdocs\Pat Conlon\Memos\AnimalAnalysis2.wpd 3 Coachella Valley Animal Campus Analysis September 27, 2001 The breakdown of costs for Palm Desert in joint use with the four above jurisdictions (excepting Riverside County) is as follows: Assume: Reduced scope alternative Five jurisdictions 10-day holding period Shelter Project Cost (Exhibit V (3) Page 28): $4,805,599 Palm Desert Share of Shelter Cost 33.05% (Exhibit VI (3) Page 35): 1,588,237 Annual cost for payback 6% @ 20 years for $1,588,237: 136,542 Annual cost for shelter service--county contract (Exhibit VI (3) Page 35): 130,873 Annual cost for field operations Private contractor or staff 2124 service hours: 70,000 Total annual costs to Palm Desert: 337,415 Current California Animal Care contract: 111,200 Additional cost to Palm Desert above what we currently pay: $ 226,215 G.\CityMgr\Monica O'Reilly\wpdocs\Pat Conlon\Memos\AnimalAnalysis2.wpd 4 Coachella Valley Animal Campus Analysis September 27, 2001 If Riverside County decides to move its shelter operations from the existing Indio shelter to the new facility, we will have six jurisdictions involved in cost sharing which will reduce the capital and operation costs to Palm Desert as follows: Assume: Reduced scope alternative Five jurisdictions and Riverside County 10-day holding period Shelter project cost (Exhibit V (2) page 27: $ 5,279,000 Palm Desert's share of shelter cost 23.64%: 1,247,955 Annual cost for payback 6% @ 20 years for $1,247,955: 107,290 Annual cost for shelter service--county contract: 93,612 Annual cost for field operations Private contractor or staff 2124 service hours: 70,000 Total annual costs to Palm Desert: 270,902 Current California Animal Care contract: 111,200 Additional cost to Palm Desert (Above what we currently pay): $ 159,702 G.\CityMgr\Monica O'Reilly\wpdocs\Pat Conlon\Memos\AnimalAnalysis2.wpd 5 Coachella Valley Animal Campus Analysis September 27, 2001 The above cost break down can be reduced as shown in the alternatives No. 3 and 4 shown in the above discussion by the elimination of the yearly capital costs expenditures and the reduced cost of the shelter construction. Please call me if you have any questions. Submitted by: PAT)CONLON SPECIAL PROJECTS ADMINISTRATOR mo Approval: • CARLOS L. ORTEGA CITY MANAGER *By Minute Motion, approved: 1) Participa- CITY COUNCIL ACTION: tion in the formation and service as an APPROVED ��/ DENIED Executive Advisory Member of a Valley-wide RECEIVED OTHER animal campus; 2) appointment of Council- member Jean Benson to serve as Palm MEETINq DATE AYES: ,41-1 Desert's representative on the NOES: �l► AV o Executive Advisory Committee ABSENT: A4 P) ABSTAIN: /1+ _a___ VERIFIED BY: Original on File with City C .erk's Office G\CityMgr\Monica O'Reilly\wpdocs\Pat Conlon\Memos'AnimalAnalysis2.wpd 6 EXHIBIT V(3) Projected Animal Services Facility Construction and Development Costs Description Reduced_Sclope Alternative 5 Day lO Day Space Holding Holding Projected Square Feet • • Admin.Projected 5,549 5,549 Adjustment 2QQ -200 Admin.Total 5.349 5.349 Shelter Projected 15,675 15,675 Adjustment -2.964 -836 Shelter Total 12,711 14.839 Clinic Area 2.687 2.687 Building Total 20 47 22.875 Construction Cost Dollars Admin.And Shelter $140 Per Square Foot $2,528,400 $2,826,320 Clinic @$65 Per Square Foot 174.655 174.655 Building Total $2.703.055 $3.000.975 Site Improvements /" From CVAG Report $635.000 $635.000 Total $3,338.055 $3.635.975 Contingency @ 10% 333,806 363,598 Construction Total $3.553,055 $3.850.975 Soft Costs from CVAG Report 215,000 215,000 Soft Cost Adjustments -47,150 19,350 • Fees(Architect, Engineers,Testing and Inspection, Permits)at 19% 634,230 570,185 Construction Mgmt. at 5%of Construction Cost 166.903 150.049 PROJECT TOTAL $4.522.038 $4.805,559 Hughes,Perry Associates Page 28 EXHIBIT VI(3) Illustrative Formula for • Allocating Operating Costs- Status Quo Alternative 3.Reduced Scope Operations-Riverside County Not Participating As A JPA Member County Contract Shelter Operations Allocation Factors Participating Jurisdiction Population Shelter Intakes Allocation Percent Cost Factor Total Share Share Cathedral City 44,650 1,416 48,898 37.02% $146,601 Desert Hot Springs 17,000 1,416 21,248 16.09% 63,703 Indian Wells 4,020 17 4,071 3.08% 12,205 Palm Desert 42,350 434 43,652 33.05% 130,873 Rancho Mirage 13,900 105 14,215 10.76% 42,618 Total 132.084 100.00% $396.000 Allocation Factor Percent Cost Field Operations Service Hours Share Share Palm Desert 2,124 26.93% $115,786 Indian Wells 104 1.32% 5,669 Cathedral City 2,124 26.93% 115,786 Desert Hot Springs 3,536 44.83% 192,759 Total 7,888 100.00% $430.000 b DC) w Hughes,Perry Associates EXHIBIT VI(4) Illustrative Formula for Allocating Operating Costs- Status Quo Alternative 4, Reduced Scupe Operations-Riverside County Participating As A JPA f for the Shelter County Contract Shelter Operations Allocation Factors Participating Jurisdiction Population Shelter Intakes Allocation Percent Cost Factor Total Share Share Cathedral City 44,650 1,416 48,898 26.48% $104,862 Desert Hot Springs 17,000 1,416 21,248 11.51% 45,566 Indian Wells 4,020 17 4,071 2.20% 8,730 Palm Desert 42,350 434 43,652 23.64% 93,612 Rancho Mirage 13,900 105 14,215 7.70% 30,484 Riverside County 46,040 2,178 52,574 28.47% 112,745 Total 184,658 100.00% $396.000 Allocation Factor Percent Cost Field Operations Service Hours Share ,share Palm Desert 2,124 26.93% $115,786 Indian Wells 104 1.32% 5,669 Cathedral City 2,124 26.93% 115,786 Desert Hot Springs 3,536 44.83% 192,759 Total 7,888 100.00% $430.000 b A oa co w ON Hughes,Perry Associates