Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-07-12 - AGENDA REPORTS - SHOP LOCAL PREFERENCE STUDYAGENDA REPORT City Manager Approv Item to be presented CONSENT CALENDAR DATE: SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT: BACKGROUND July 12, 1994 Shop Local Preference Study Public Works As an action item from the City Council Team Building session on May 14, 1994, Council requested that staff investigate the possibility of increasing the local preference percentage. The local percentage preference is an informal policy whereby pricing from local suppliers is reduced, for calculation purposes only, by 1 % since the City realizes this amount in sales tax revenues from local sales. To better address Council's request, staff conducted a survey of 13 similar and nearby cities regarding their local preference percentages (Attachment "A"). Of the 13 cities, 10 indicated that they had neither a written (ordinance) nor an informal policy for local pricing preference. However, 3 cities (Palmdale, Burbank, and Glendale) indicated that they did have an informal policy allowing a 1 % local pricing preference and that the percentage was directly related to local sales tax revenues. Most research conducted by staff and other professionals in the field indicated that the preference given was typically related to the sales tax structure. The City of Bakersfield went through a similar fact finding process and provided us with the results of their survey (Attachment "B"). Their survey indicates that the majority of cities that offer a preference offer a 1 % preference, which illustrates that local suppliers in Santa Clarita are receiving the same benefits as local suppliers in most other cities referenced in the study. Based on staff's survey and the one performed by Bakersfield, the following issues are being submitted for Council consideration. Increasing the local preference percentage may: • inhibit fair and open competition amongst otherwise qualified suppliers. • invite retaliatory measures such as "No Bids" which would not be beneficial to the City. APPROVED Age," Item: **E Shop Local Preference Study July 12, 1994 Page 2 • provide an artificial, economic "crutch" for local suppliers. • invite criticism from citizens who own businesses outside of Santa Clarita yet pay property/sales tax to the City. Concerns are that their companies are being indiscriminately rejected in favor of local suppliers yet more of their tax money is being spent in order to support the local suppliers. Additionally, Section 20162 of the Public Contracts Code prohibits City Council from awarding a Public Works Project Contract to the second lowest bidder because of locale, even if the bids are close in pricing. Although most research conducted by staff and other professional in the field indicated that the preference given was typically related to the sales tax structure, a few cities went a step further to help local suppliers by increasing the local supplier preference percentage above the 1 % they would receive in sales tax. For example, the City of Alameda has enacted an ordinance to implement a local supplier preference and a resolution urging local shopping (Attachment "D"). The 5% local supplier preference is not specified in the ordinance as doing so would decrease the Council's flexibility in increasing or decreasing the percentage as they feel necessary. The format and wording of the ordinance may be useful in implementing a similar ordinance/resolution in the City of Santa Clarita. It should be noted, however, that the use of the "Alameda" approach would be more confusing for suppliers since it is limited to the purchase of non-professional services, supplies, and equipment. All federally-, state-, or gas tax funded projects are exempt as well as professional or consultant services. Using the "Alameda" approach may transform the current process of awarding bids into a highly political process and would subject Council to intense local supplier lobbying efforts whenever their bid is, in their estimate, close enough for Council to invoke the "Alameda" approach. It should also be noted that the current (1 %) percentage preference is revenue neutral in that the City receives the money back as sales tax. Increasing the preference percentage will have a negative impact on the City's revenue in direct proportion to the number of local contracts awarded. In essence, if the preference percentage is 5 %, then the City will be spending 5 % to receive 1 % in sales tax revenue, thus generating a negative revenue flow of 4% each time a local purchase is made. The City has made great strides in meeting its philosophical goals of operating like a business and shopping local whenever possible. Shopping local remains a priority for staff as evidenced in Attachment "C". Further, in an effort to help local suppliers do business with the City, another supplier seminar is tentatively scheduled for the month of October. Shop Local Preference Study July 12, 1994 Page 3 RECOMMENDATION In order to maximize limited funds yet encourage our local economy, staff recommends maintaining the 1 % local supplier preference, continuing with and enhancing the supplier outreach programs as outlined in Attachment "C", and further encouraging City departments to shop local whenever possible. ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF SANTA CLARITA LOCAL PREFERENCE SURVEY - JUNE 1994 LOCAL PREF. AGENCY AMOUNT AUTHORITY COMMENTS City of Bakersfield 0 n/a n/a City of Santa Rosa 0 n/a n/a City of Simi Valley 0 n/a n/a City of Thousand Oaks 0 n/a n/a City of Pasadena 0 n/a n/a City of Calabasas 0 n/a n/a City of Santa Barbara 0 n/a n/a City of Beverly Hills 0 n/a n/a City of Glendale 0 n/a n/a City of Torrance 0 n/a n/a City of Palmdale 1% informal no plans to increase/ formalize City of Burbank 1 % informal " w City of South Gate 1 % informal " " T 1 ATTACHMENT KERN COUNTY LOCAL PREFERENCE SURVEY- APRIL, .1992 LOCAL PREFERENCE AGENCY AMOUNT AUTHORITY COMMENTS COUNTY OF ALAMEDA 5% COUNTY ORDINANCE ENACTED 1/15/91 NO. 0-91-4 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO NONE HAVE MINORITY GOAL ONLY COUNSEL ADVICE - ILLEGAL: COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO NONE NONE NOW, BUT BD. OF SUPV. BEING ASKED TO INSTITUTE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA NONE S.B. COUNTY GEN'L LAW COUNTY VS. CHARTER - ILLEGAL FOR GEN'L LAW COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA NONE INFORMAL TIE BID TO LOCAL VENDOR - ONLY COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO NONE INFORMAL TIE BID TO LOCAL VENDOR - ONLY COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE NONE - COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ NONE COMMITTEE STUDY BY BD. OF SUPV. COMM. REJECTED PREFERENCE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO NONE - COUNTY OF MERCED NONE INFORMAL HAD, IN THE PAST, 5% PREFERENCE. NOW, ONLY TIE -BREAKER TO LOCAL COUNTY OF BUTTE $5.00 TO INFORMAL IF TOTAL ON BID IS $10.00 WITHIN $5.00 TO $10.00 DIFF. ON LARGE BIDS "TIE" GOES TO LOCAL COUNTY OF TULARE NONE TIE BID TO LOCAL VENDOR - ONLY COUNTY OF VENTURA NONE BD. OF SUPV. REQUESTED STUDY - REJECTED CONCEPT AFTER STUDY COUNTY OF KINGS NONE - 1 ATTACHMENT B Page 2 LOCAL PREFERENCE AGENCY AMOUNT AUTHORITY COMMENTS COUNTY OF FRESNO TIE COUNTY CHARTER (SEE CHARTER STIPULATES "BUY COMMENTS) FROM LOCAL VENDOR IF ALL OTHER CONDITIONS ARE EQUAL" COUNTY OF KERN NONE INFORMAL 1% SALES TAX REBATE USED. AS "TIE BREAKER" ON LARGE TRANSACTIONS COUNTY OF ORANGE NO RESPONSE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS NONE INFORMAL TIE BID TO LOCAL VENDOR - ONLY CITY OF OAKLAND 5% ORDINANCE 1979 CITY OF SACRAMENTO 1% SALES TAX REBATE CITY OF FRESNO NONE TIE BID TO LOCAL VENDOR CITY OF PALO ALTO NONE 10% FOR RECYCLED PRODUCTS "A REAL HEADACHE" CITY OF CERRITOS 1% INFORMAL SALES TAX REBATE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 5% ORDINANCE, 1989 PART OF MBE/WBE FRANCISCO LEGISLATION - REQUIRES APPLICATION - INSPECTION CITY OF LOS ANGELES CITY ORDINANCES 153, 1980, AMENDED 1983, 662, 157, 595, 165973 AMENDED 1990 CITY OF LAKEWOOD NONE - CITY OF SANTA BARBARA NONE - CITY OF SAN JOSE NONE ISSUE HAS BEEN ADDRESSED AT CITY COUNCIL MTG - IN "TALKING" STAGE CITY OF FREEMONT NONE CITY OF ALAMEDA 5% CITY ORDINANCE CAN BE INVOKED, AS NECESSARY, BY CITY COUNCIL UP TO 5% 2 ATTACHMENT "C" CURRENT OUTREACH/SHOP LOCAL PROGRAMS • 1 % Price Break - The City grants local suppliers a 1 % price break for competitive pricing purposes. Although the City is invoiced for the full amount quoted/awarded, this price break assists local suppliers in being more competitive while at the same time, produces revenues for the City by means of sales tax collections as well as an "funneling funds back into" the local economy. • Employee Training - Employee training has been and will continue to be conducted on several occasions throughout the year, involving all employees who make purchases on behalf of the City. This training included not only City Purchasing Policies and Procedures but also the philosophy/importance of shopping local. While these educational seminars are a great benefit to employees, modifications can be made to the current system to better ensure shopping local occurs. Implementation of a Purchasing representative in each department is an example of a possible modification. • Minimum of one local quote per purchase - In an effort to promote local businesses, Purchasing attempts to solicit a quote from at least one local supplier when possible. As mentioned above, often circumstances do not permit this practice. • Blanket Purchase Order Ratio - Blanket purchase orders are issued to local suppliers for the purchase of commodities throughout the fiscal year when the total amount to be purchased is unknown. Purchasing currently maintains a ratio of 95 % local/ 5 % non -local blanket purchase orders. The reason for 5 % being awarded to non -locals is due to the lack of availability of local suppliers. 0 DBASE Supplier Files - Purchasing is currently computerizing all supplier commodity files and information. There are currently 750 suppliers entered into the DBASE program. The main purpose of this program is to provide all departments with listings of local suppliers by commodity. This listing will be updated continuously with new reports distributed to departments quarterly. Attachment "C" Page 2 • Eliminate Bid Fee - Many local suppliers objected to the bid fee collected for the purchase of specifications for supplies, services, and equipment. This objection often resulted in lack of local supplier involvement in the City's bid process. To encourage local participation in this process, the City eliminated the bid fee requirement for the purchase of supplies, services, and equipment. • City Seal On All Bid Advertisements Local suppliers complained of the difficulty in easily identifying City bid advertisements in local publications. This resulted in the implementation of the City seal on all bid advertisements for the purchase of supplies, services, and equipment. • Computerized Business Card Reader - Purchasing is currently working with Information Resources to explore the feasibility/costs of purchasing a Computerized Business Car Reader which would scan business cards and automatically down load the scanned information into the DBASE Supplier Files. This would enable local suppliers to be placed into the City's supplier base immediately following the submittal of a business card to Purchasing. • "Supplier Seminar - Partners for the Future" - The City of Santa Clarita, Santa Clarita Valley and Canyon Country Chambers of Commerce, and Valencia Industrial Association developed and presented a "Supplier Seminar - Partners for the Future" program on October 22, 1993. There were approximately 50 attenders who received information on such topics as the Legal Aspects of Purchasing, Public Works Projects, Formal Bids, and the purchase of Supplies, Services, and Equipment as well as other topics related to Purchasing. The responses/evaluations from suppliers were positive with a request for the seminar to be presented annually. Based on this request, the next seminar has been tentatively scheduled for Thursday, October 13, 1994, • Outreach Team A team consisting of members from General Services, Santa Clarita Valley and Canyon Country Chambers, Valencia Industrial Association, and an additional local business owner meet regularly to brainstorm new ideas to improve relations with local Attachment "C" Page 3 suppliers. Members of the team also serve as a conduit for local supplier concerns as well as a source of information to assist local suppliers in developing a business relationship with the City. • Mixer. and Luncheon Attendance - The General Services Manager regularly attends Santa Clarita Valley and Canyon Country Chambers' Mixers as well as presents information regarding City Purchasing Policies and Procedures at group luncheons. • "How To Do Business With The City" brochure Supplier confusion caused by the City's decentralized system is still often a major point of contention. Locating the person responsible for the purchase of a certain commodity proves to be a challenge for many suppliers. To aid the supplier' circulating information pertaining to his business, Purchasing created a brochure entitled, "How To Do Business With The City." The brochure provides information regarding the City's Purchasing Policies and Procedures. It also indicates the City Purchasing Agent as the official contact for the City. The Purchasing Agent then ensures the supplier information is computerized and distributed to all departments. At that point, the department may choose any supplier from the list to request quotes (if needed.) PROJECTS IN PROGRESS • Bid Hotline Purchasing is currently in the process of implementing a "Bid Hotline" which would enable suppliers to make one phone call to find out what projects or commodities the City is currently bidding. This line will also be used to notify suppliers of the upcoming annual "Supplier Seminar" and any other Purchasing information which may be of interest to local suppliers. • Supplier Seminar - "Partners for the Future" The success of the supplier seminar presented for the first time on October 22, 1993 prompted suppliers to request that the seminar be presented annually. Therefore, Attachment "C" Page 4 Purchasing will present the seminar in October 1994 to promote a mutual understanding of both supplier and City requirements. The seminar represents an opportunity for key Purchasing personnel to meet with local suppliers in an informal setting to discuss mutual concerns as well as update suppliers on policy changes. • Minimum/Maximum Two Local Supplier Quotes Purchasing would like to implement a "two local supplier quotes" minimum/maximum for every purchase requiring quotes when local suppliers are available to provide such services, supplies, and/or equipment. This policy would increase local supplier participation in the competitive quote process. • Modify Current Purchasing Policies/Procedures to Increase Checks and Balances The current Purchasing Policies and Procedures can be modified to increase fair and adequate local supplier participation. Often the Purchase Requisition reaches purchasing with quotes already obtained/attached and the item is required immediately, allowing no time for correction if adopted policies were not followed - such as local supplier participation. Requiring Purchasing or a department representative's approval on all purchases over $500 prior to placement will ensure the City avoids potential legal problems. • Modify System to Include One Purchasing Representative In Each Department The current system allows each employee in each department to make purchases as required. Appointing a representative in each department to monitor purchases would enable the City to ensure that the adopted Purchasing Policies and Procedures are being followed. Each representative would attend Purchasing training regularly to keep up to date on current policies and guidelines. GS.ftr .94 17<07 FAX 605 286 4186 SNTACLRTA GENSVC �005 .] U tJ - 5- y 4 T tA l-1 1 6 p 5 'e - C. L.. E. WK A L n ht r- D A ATTACHMENT D CITY OT AtAMDA ORDINANCE No. 227a Nov series AMENDING THE ALA)a DA MUNICIPAL CODS 8Y ADDING CHAPTER 8 TO TITLE lI THERYOF RELATING To LOCAL PAxrERENCE IN AWARDING 8ID5 TOR GOODS AND CE1tv1C86 8E ;T ORDAINY.O By THE COUNCIL Or TIM CITY Of ALAMPDA thati by addingeCCaeptis.sTht o TWO 11 tthereof toCrtadis hereby amended PRTFtR"cz WAS29 A. N finitions a. ell. ■Local Susiness" shall mean a person or f 5— irh, for sore than one year continuously praeeding the makinq Of a City bid, had an established place of business in the city manufacturing, procacvinq wholesaling, retailing or providing materials, supplies or services required by a City bid. ■cif aids shall mean any purchase or er or contract for goods and services over five thousand dollars ($% 000.00) Vhich may be acquired from local business. eo. 813, • om etitivee shall moan equal or lower in price and ab a to pro- da equal or better goods or asrvices. Article rchasa■ See. 2- 21. dotifleation. Local businesses shell not a exelu ed from notification of City bids, ec. 2-Prtforoncy. City officers administer Mrs bids $ al award them to local businesses Mrs competitive. ea. 0 t022ids shad mare written finding: why a participating local business was not Competitive when an outside business is selected, 6uch findings shall be submlttod to the City Manager. $/I8/86 06/0"J/94 17 08 FAX 805286 4186 SSTACLRTA (,ENS -VC 006 Jut"— THU 10:51 CITY4CLERK ALAMEDA P.04 ATTACHMENT: D (continueQ) •!Lett troatan a' This ordinance ohsll Aa .".n full tort• and date of its fin*, Vassals. the aYplratlon o! thirty (30) day troy the peeeaq•, 4 06- A Attoptl praa n9 � ear of • Counci'i yt•r Z B05..,_P6 4=36 06�09,94 17'09 FAX 805 286 4186 SNTACLRTA CEhSVC aoI .J U f4 -- 3— 9 4 T H U 10 - 3 2 CITY ^°� C L 6 R K p L A h !_. D n P 0 5 p ATTACHMENT D (Continued) 1 wasthe dulynand regularlyAdoptedPassedhbyftheOCouncildofathe City of Alankda in regular meetfng assembled on the lit of April, 1986, by the following vote to wit: AYES: Councilmembers Corica, Hanna, Lucas. 1lonsef an4 President Dfamant - S. NOES: None. ABSENT: Nane. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set a� hand and affixed the Official seal Of said City this 2nd day of April, 1986. CTty' er O t e ty o? hl`Amei i STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES } CITY OF SANTA CLARITA } I, Donna M. Grindey, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of 19_, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEM 3ERS NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS City Clerk