Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Full - Finance Committee - 11/06/2024 -Finance Administration 215 N. Mason nd Floor Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6788 970.221.6782 - fax fcgov.com AGENDA Council Finance Committee Hybrid Meeting Wednesday November 6, 2024 4:00 - 5:30 pm CIC Room Zoom Meeting https://zoom.us/j/8140111859 Approve Minutes from the September 5, 2024 and the October 3, 2024 Meetings. 1) DDA Line of Credit Renewal Presentation: 10 mins. M. Robenalt Discussion: 10 mins. A. Halvorson 2) Licensing, Permitting & Code Enforcement (LPCE) Project Funding Presentation: 15 mins. M. Martinez Discussion: 30 mins. K. Wilkins K. Kleer 3)Informational Attachments; A)Appropriation of Unanticipated Benefits Revenue for 2024 City Benefits Funding B)Appropriations from Unanticipated Revenue in Community Services Page 1 of 230 Council Finance Committee 2024 Agenda Planning Calendar Revised 10/22/24 ts November 6th 2024 DDA Line of Credit Renewal 20 min 45 min K. Kleer December 5th 2024 SE Community Center 30 min V. Garfield Financial Policy review, incl. 2050 Tax and General Fund 45 min R. Bailey W. Elizabeth Matching Funds 15 min M. Martinez January 2nd 2025 Future Topics: E. Mulberry Threshold Analysis CCIP: Affordable Housing Revolving Loan Fund (February) CCIP Updates (February) 2023 Audit Report – Staff Correction Plan Fleet Management Policies and Practices CCIP Updates (April) Page 2 of 230 Page 3 of 230 Finance Administration 215 N. Mason nd Floor Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6788 970.221.6782 - fax fcgov.com Council Finance Committee Hybrid Meeting CIC Room / Zoom September 5, 2024 4:00 - 6:00 pm Council Attendees: Kelly Ohlson, Emily Francis, Tricia Canonico Staff: Kelly DiMartino, Tyler Marr, Travis Storin, Ginny Sawyer, Jenny Lopez Filkins, Travis Walker, Cory Snowdon, Lawrence Pollack, Joe Wimmer, Dave Lenz, Brad Buckman, Peggy Streeter, Mallory Gallegos, Monica Martinex, Jo Cech, Josh Birks, LeAnn Williams, Jeff Rochford, Adam Halvorson, Rachel Rogers, Randy Bailey, Nina Bodenhamer, Wendy Bricher, Zack Mozer, Max Valdez, Carolyn Koontz Other: Kevin Jones, Chamber Meeting called to order at 4:00 pm Approval of minutes from July 3, 2024, and the August. 1, 2024 Council Finance Committee Meetings. Tricia Canonico made a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Kelly Ohlson seconded the motion. Approved via roll call A. Status of Fund Balances Travis Storin, CFO EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The attached presentation gives a status of fund balances and working capital. Fund balances are primarily considered for funding one-time offers during the Budgeting for Outcomes process. To a lesser extent, available monies are also used to fund supplemental appropriations between BFO cycles. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED General update to Council Finance Committee BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION To aid in answering the question of what funding is available to support emerging issues and initiatives in the next budget cycle. In each fund the balances are shown vertically by the accounting classifications. The amounts are then additionally categorized into Appropriated, Available with Constraints, and Available for Nearly Any Purpose. Page 4 of 230 Appropriated, Minimum Policy or Scheduled is comprised of minimum fund balances established by policy, funds from the 2023 balance that have been appropriated in 2024, and amounts for projects specifically identified by voters. An example of the latter is Community Capital Improvements Plan. Available with Constraints are those balances available for appropriation but within defined constraints. An example are donations received through City Give. They are restricted for the purpose of the donation, but still available for appropriation. Available for Nearly Any Purpose are balances that are available for appropriation at the discretion of the City Council. Page 5 of 230 DISCUSSION / NEXT STEPS GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED General update to Council Finance Committee Page 6 of 230 Kelly Ohlson; Benefits Fund - pretend that is called for a 7% increase in employee contributions, but we are able to do 5.5% by gradually buying down the amount in reserves (which I support doing). We can use our reserves to offer a 5.5% increase instead of 7% increase. Do we let employees know we are doing this? Kelly DiMartino; We do communicate to employees about their role in keeping those investments and costs lower both for the organization and for employees. Kelly Ohlson; and that we are using reserves slowly and appropriately in a prudent manner so that their rate increases are as high. Kelly DiMartino; and that we are doing that in a gradual and methodical way. There are always variables that comes into play. Emily Francis; No questions Tricia Canonica; No questions Page 7 of 230 B. 2024 Annual Adjustment Ordinances Lawrence Pollack, Budget Director SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION First Reading of Ordinance No., 2024, Making Supplemental Appropriations in Various City Funds. First Reading of Ordinance No., 2024, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Authorizing Transfers in Various City Funds. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of these Annual Adjustment Ordinances is to combine dedicated and unanticipated revenues or reserves that need to be appropriated before the end of the year to cover the related expenses that were not anticipated and therefore, not included in the 2024 annual budget appropriation. The unanticipated revenue is primarily from fees, charges, rents, contributions and grants that have been paid to City departments to offset specific expenses. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED • What questions or feedback does the Council Finance Committee have on the 2024 Annual Adjustment Ordinances? • Does the Council Finance Committee support moving forward with bringing the 2024 Annual Adjustment Ordinances to the full City Council on the Consent Agenda? BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION These Ordinances appropriates unanticipated revenue and prior year reserves in various City funds and authorizes the transfer of appropriated amounts between funds and/or projects. The City Charter permits the City Council to appropriate unanticipated revenue received as a result of rate or fee increases or new revenue sources, such as grants and reimbursements. The City Charter also permits the City Council to provide, by ordinance, for payment of any expense from prior year reserves. Additionally, it authorizes the City Council to transfer any unexpended appropriated amounts from one fund to another upon recommendation of the City Manager, provided that the purpose for which the transferred funds are to be expended remains unchanged; the purpose for which they were initially appropriated no longer exists; or the proposed transfer is from a fund or capital project account in which the amount appropriated exceeds the amount needed to accomplish the purpose specified in the appropriation ordinance. If these appropriations are not approved, the City will have to reduce expenditures even though revenue and reimbursements have been received to cover those expenditures. The table below is a summary of the expenses in each fund that make up the increase in requested appropriations. Also included are transfers between funds and/or projects which do not increase net appropriations, but per the City Charter, require City Council approval to make the transfer. A table with the specific use of prior year reserves appears at the end of the AIS. Funding Additional Revenue Prior Year Reserves Transfers TOTAL General Fund $801,293 $292,582 $0 $1,093,875 Page 8 of 230 GRAND TOTAL $3,453,232 $2,730,877 $26,930 $6,211,039 A. GENERAL FUND 1. EPS - Weld County Reimbursement for CERT Purchase City's EPS applied to a FEMA funded program ran through the State's Northeast All Hazard Region. Weld County serves as the fiscal agency for the State's Northeast All Hazard Region, reporting all FEMA funds used for selected projects on its financials (Weld County = grant recipient). The workings of the program provide Weld reimbursing the City in upwards of $4,998 for emergency related equipment/supplies. Based on the City not deemed as a grant recipient of FEMA funds, the $4,998 in funds to be reimbursed by Weld are not grant funds. City's EPS will spend the $4,998 in 2024. Unanticipated $4,998 2. Municipal Court - Constitutional Requirements This request is to add additional funding for Court Appointed Defense Counsel attorneys and interpreters to the Municipal Court's 2024 budget. The Municipal Court's enforcement caseload has increased 21% in 2024 over 2023 case filings, and 33% over case filings in 2022. The number of scheduled interpreter hearings has doubled in 2024 as compared to 2023 (90 in 2023, 201 in 2024 through July 31st of each year). Because of these caseload and hearing increases, the Court needs additional funds to continue to provide these constitutionally required services to Court defendants. 3. Municipal Court - Contractual Obligations This request is to add funding to the Municipal Court's 2024 budget to pay for Jail Services. Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins annually review the intergovernmental agreement (IGA) relating to the City's use of the Larimer County Jail for municipal defendants and bonding services. The agreement includes the costs for bed spaces, bonding services, and in-custody video hearings held three (3) a week to meet new State Law requirements. All of the costs associated with these services and this contract have increased. The Court and the City Attorney's Office work closely with the Larimer County Jail to review and update procedures and apply efficiencies where possible. Page 9 of 230 4. Fort Collins Police Services (FCPS) has received revenue from various sources. A listing of these items follows: a. $140,691 – Police Miscellaneous Revenue: Police Services receives revenue from the sale of Police reports along with other miscellaneous revenue, like restitution payments, evidence revenue and SWAT training. b. $34,800 – 2023/2024 BATTLE Grant Supplemental (Beat Auto Theft Through Law Enforcement): 'The Property Crimes division of Police Services has been awarded an additional $34,000 on top of the original $18,000 grant to fund additional overtime to help investigate auto theft in Northern Colorado. c. $29,387 - 2024 CRISP Server Storage Upgrade: Police Services needed more server space to allow the CRISP system to function properly. This clean up appropriation is equal to Larimer County's contribution to the server upgrade. d. $29,517 - 2020 JAG Grant Supplemental Award: Larimer County is the Recipient of the JAG grant and at the end of the 3-year grant period in 2023, the county had excess grant funds to award and instead of sending them back to DOJ, the city accepted the funds to offset overtime expenses in 2023 for the Drug Task Force for drug investigations e. $43,750 - 2024 Police Radio Used Radio Sale: Police Services sold off old radios that are no longer being used and the revenue will be used to purchase new radios. f. $265,534 - Police Reimbursable Overtime: Police Services help schedule security and traffic control for large events. Since these events are staffed by officers outside of their normal duties, officers are paid overtime. The organizational who requested officer presence and then billed for the costs of the officers' overtime. FCPS partners with Larimer County to staff events at The Ranch. Police receives reimbursement from Larimer County for officers’ hours worked at Ranch events. g. $69,684 – 2024 Police School Resource Officers Overtime: Police Services have a contract with Poudre School District to provide Officers on location at a majority of the schools for safety and support. The school district pays Police Services based on a predetermined contract amount and also partially reimbursing for overtime incurred. This request is for the previously billed overtime and anticipated overtime for the remaining year. h. $8,912 - 2024 DUI Enforcement: Proceeds that have been received for DUI enforcement. i. $1,847 - ICAC SFY 2023-24 Grant: Cyber Crimes received a supplemental award of 1,847 to help fund additional travel for training purposes. j. $19,000 - 2024-2025 HVE Grant: The Pollice Traffic Unit was awarded $19,000 to help fund Police overtime expenses in order to monitor DUI compliance on targeted enforcement days. TOTAL APPROPRIATION Page 10 of 230 5. Digital Inclusion - Connexion Discount Program Dedicated revenue from Fort Collins Connexion's PILOT (Payment in Lieu of Taxes) are paid to the General Fund to support the City's Digital Inclusion Program. The Digital Inclusion Program reimburses Connexion for customers enrolled in the income-qualified digital inclusion discount program. Increased enrollment in the program will result in the discount reimbursement to exceed budget at year-end. PILOT revenues to the General Fund are projected to cover the increase in discounted customers and is requested to be appropriated in 2024. 6. Radon Kits Environmental Services sells radon test kits at cost as part of its program to reduce lung-cancer risk from in-home radon exposure. This appropriation recovers kit sales revenue for the purpose of restocking radon test kits annually. 7. Work for Others and Program Fees for Conflict Transformation Works The Conflict Transformation Works (CTW) program earns revenue from 2 main sources: providing workplace mediation for other City Departments and charging fees to the youth who are involved in the conflict programming and resolution. These revenue dollars primarily support the programming costs. We are requesting appropriation of Mediation revenue of $3,000 ($1,462.50 has been received in 2024 and the remaining $1,527.50 is projected to be earned in 2024) and fee revenue of $2,600 ($1,620 has been received in 2024 and the remaining $980 is projected to be earned in 2024). Page 11 of 230 8. Restorative Justice Grant Award A grant in the amount of $40,428 was awarded from the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice Juvenile Diversion fund for the continued operations of Restorative Justice Services programs that provide a community alternative to the justice system for youth who commit crimes in Fort Collins. No match is required, and it is a reimbursable grant. Grant period is July 1, 2024 - June 30, 2024. This grant helps fund youth referred from the 8th Judicial District Attorney's Office or referred in lieu of a summons to that office. Since 2004, the City has received grant funding for Restorative Justice Services from this grant funding agency. 9. Land Bank Operational Expenses This request is intended to cover expenses related to the land bank property maintenance needs for 2023. Since expenses vary from year to year, funding is requested annually mid-year to cover these costs. Expenses in 2023 include general maintenance of properties, raw water and sewer expenses, electricity, repairs, and other as applicable. 10. Manufacturing Equipment Use Tax Rebate Finance requests the appropriation of $97,918 to cover the amount due for the 2023 Manufacturing Equipment Use Tax Rebate program as established in Chapter 25, Article II, Division 5, of the Municipal Code. B. CULTURAL SERVICES & FACILITIES FUND 1. Pianos About Town Grants The purpose of this item is to appropriate prior year grant funds from the Bohemian Foundation to Art in Public Places for the Pianos About Town program. Cultural Services received grants in 2017, 2018 and 2020 totaling $128,414 and those funds were never appropriated. This item seeks to ensure that the funding is correctly and legally budgeted and accounted for. 2. Creative District Grant Funding The purpose of this item is to appropriate current and prior year grant and miscellaneous funds for the activities of the Downtown Fort Collins Creative District in the amount of $170,050. Of $185,905 in total funding awarded to the Creative District since it started in 2014, $15,855 has been appropriated. This activity will have a net Page 12 of 230 neutral impact on the City's bottom line and is required by City Charter and will ensure that the funding is correctly and legally budgeted and accounted for. 3. Southridge Golf Irrigation Project APP contribution (refer to item G3) Ordinance numbers 100 & 101, to be reviewed and passed by Council on August 20, 2024, should have included a contribution to Art in Public Places in the amount of $5,630. This is based on the amount of $563,000 for the irrigation system replacement at Southridge Golf Course. C. CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 1. King Soopers 146 -- Midtown Gardens Marketplace Payment-In-Lieu (Drake and College Intersection) As part of the development agreement for King Soopers 146 -- Midtown Gardens Marketplace at the northwest corner of Drake and College, the developer's traffic study shows an impact to the College Avenue and Drake Road intersection that would have required the construction of an eastbound to southbound right turn lane from Drake Road to College Avenue. In-lieu of the developer constructing this right turn lane, the development agreement required the payment of $243,300 to the City as part of the College and Drake Capital Project. The Engineering Department is currently designing the Drake and College intersection improvement. 2. Union on Elizabeth Payment-In-Lieu (W. Elizabeth St.; refer to item K1) The City received a payment in lieu of construction from the Developer of the Union on Elizabeth project. The payment was for required roadway frontage improvements of W. Elizabeth St., per their development agreement. This payment was collected in 2018 and deposited into the Transportation Capital Expansion Fee Fund. D. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FUND 1. Open Streets Vendor Fees Open Streets is an annual FC Moves event that promotes active modes of transportation and invites folks to experience a street without cars. At Open Streets, participants can expect 1-2 miles of car-free, family-friendly streets. Participants are encouraged to Ride the Route and explore areas called “Activity Hubs”- temporary clusters of activity provided by local businesses and organizations. Vendors for Open Streets are charged $50 if Page 13 of 230 they are a non-profit, $100 if they are a private business. For our Fall 2024 event, we have 38 private businesses and 10 non-profits already signed up as vendors, in addition to 10 food trucks. Our request includes $1,200 in vendor fees from 2023 that were not appropriated (so this would be coming from Transportation Reserves), $4,000 in fees that have been collected to date in 2024, and a projection of another $500 we expect to collect for the remainder of 2024. It is important that we are able to offset our costs with these fees, since our operating budget is not large enough to support this event without incoming revenue. 2. Spin Annual Payment Per the contract between the City and Spin, Spin pays an annual fee of $10,000. These funds can be used at the City's discretion, and typically are used for projects related to the Spin program. In 2024, funds were used to install bike/scooter boxes for better parking options, and to support the Which Wheels Go Where project to update City code regulating what types of micromobility can be used on what facilities. 3. Streets Department Work for Other Program The Planning, Development and Transportation Work for Others program is a self-supported program for all “Work for Others” activities within Streets. Expenses are tracked and billed out to other City departments, Poudre School District, CSU, CDOT, Larimer County, developers and other public agencies. The original budget of $3.2M was an estimate based on prior years budget with allowed growth rate. Due to unanticipated projects and equipment/parts needs, and higher cost of materials, additional funding of $715K is requested to cover projects through the end of 2024. Revenue for performing the work will offset the expense (expense will not be incurred if revenue is not received). 4. Traffic Department Work for Other Program The Planning, Development and Transportation Work for Others program is a self-supported program for all “Work for Others” activities within Traffic. Expenses are tracked and billed out to other City departments, developers and other public agencies. The original budget of $752K was an estimate based on prior years budget with allowed growth rate. Due to unanticipated projects and equipment/parts needs, and higher cost of materials, additional funding of $700K is requested to cover projects through the end of 2024. Revenue for performing the work will offset the expense (expense will not be incurred if revenue is not received). Page 14 of 230 E. SELF INSURANCE FUND 1. Self-Insurance Fund Insurance expenditures City insurance premiums and claim settlements are projecting to exceed the 2024 budget within the Self Insurance Fund. 2024 Fund revenues in the amount of $970,239 are available for appropriation to cover excess insurance expenditures. Self-Insurance Fund reserves exceed the City's target reserve level and surplus revenues are not needed to contribute to fund balance at year end. F. CONSERVATION TRUST FUND 1. Correct lapsing to non-lapsing ORD 33 Fossil Creek Trail Spur Project Ordinance #33, adopted by Council on March 19, 2024, should have been non-lapsing. This was not clearly indicated in the AIS, so the amount needs to be moved from a lapsing to a non-lapsing business unit since this is for the Fossil Creek Trail Spur Project. G. GOLF FUND 1. Golf Course Superintendent Association of America (GCSAA) Grants First Green GCSAA Grants (Golf Course Superintendent Association of America) were awarded in early 2024 to all three golf courses for Poudre School District community outreach. With these grants, we engaged with STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) students and taught them about how it applies to a golf course. We've received $1,500 for these grants. 2. City Park 9 Pump station repairs The City Park 9 Pump Station is showing signs of imminent failure and will need to be replaced prior to the 2025 season in order to maintain the current level of service provided to its patrons. Without this station, irrigation of the course is not possible. In 2024, repairs were made in order to get the station through the end of the season, but if the pump were to fail in 2025, it would lead to subpar course conditions and reductions in rounds revenue. These repairs take around 8-12 weeks and need to be completed prior to the start of the 2025 irrigation season in early March. Total cost of these repairs are estimated at $25,130. Page 15 of 230 3. Southridge Golf Irrigation Project APP contribution (refer to item B3) Ordinance numbers 100 & 101, to be reviewed and passed by Council on August 20, 2024, should have included a contribution to Art in Public Places in the amount of $5,630. This is based on the amount of $563,000 for the irrigation system replacement at Southridge Golf Course. H. CEMETERIES FUND 1. 149 Grandview repairs The Parks Cemeteries division manages a rental house at 149 Grandview that is in desperate need of repairs due to missed inspections. These repairs include gutter cleaning/repairs, deck repairs/painting, roof repairs, window sealing, and more are estimated at $50,000. 2. Grandview pump station electrical repairs/upgrades In April Cemeteries made necessary electrical repairs/upgrades to the Grandview pump station due to an outdated source that was not up to code and unsafe. The total cost of these repairs is $34,720. 3. Purchase of Backhoe in 2023 invoiced in 2024 Cemeteries was approved for the purchase of a Backhoe during the 23-24 budget cycle (Offer 57.2). PO 9240355 was issued for this purchase 2/23/2023; however, it was not delivered until February 2024. This PO was missed during the PO Carryforward exercise. We are asking for $123,150 to cover these expenses that should have hit in 2023. I. URA PROSPECT SOUTH FUND #801 1. Transfer of Urban Renewal Authority (URA) Fund Equity 801 to Fund 800 The URA districts were consolidated into one fund in 2024, Fund 800. This transfers the residual assigned fund balance in Fund 801 (Prospect South) & Fund 803 (Foothills Mall) to Fund 800. Subsidiaries have been assigned in the new fund structure and funds will be transferred accordingly. Page 16 of 230 J. URA MALL FUND #803 1. Transfer of Urban Renewal Authority (URA) Fund Equity 803 to Fund 800 The URA districts were consolidated into one fund in 2024, Fund 800. This transfers the residual assigned fund balance in 801 (Prospect South) & 803 (Foothills Mall) to fund 800. Subsidiaries have been assigned in the new fund structure and funds will be transferred accordingly. K. TRANSPORTATION CEF FUND 1. Transfer to the Capital Projects Fund for the Union on Elizabeth Payment-In-Lieu (W. Elizabeth St.; refer to item C2) The City received a payment in lieu of construction from the Developer of the Union on Elizabeth project. The payment was for required roadway frontage improvements of W. Elizabeth St., per their development agreement. This payment was collected in 2018 and deposited into the Transportation Capital Expansion Fee Fund. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS This Ordinance increases total City 2024 appropriations by $6,211,039. Of that amount, this Ordinance increases General Fund 2024 appropriations by $1,093,875, including use of $292,582 in prior year reserves. Funding for the total increase to City appropriations is $3,453,232 from unanticipated revenue, $2,730,877 from prior year reserves and $26,930 from transfers from reserves or previously appropriated funds. The following is a summary of the items requesting prior year reserves: Page 17 of 230 DISCUSSION / NEXT STEPS GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED • What questions or feedback does the Council Finance Committee have on the 2024 Annual Adjustment Ordinances? • Does the Council Finance Committee support moving forward with bringing the 2024 Annual Adjustment Ordinances to the full City Council on the Consent Agenda? Item #Fund Use Amount A2 General Fund Muni Ct - Constitutional Requirements $47,288 A3 General Fund Muni Ct - Contractual Obligations 46,059 A4d General Fund Police - 2020 JAG Grant Supplemental Award 29,517 A9 General Fund Land Bank Operational Expenses 71,800 A10 General Fund Manufacturing Equipment Use Tax Rebate 97,918 B1 Cultural Services Fund Pianos About Town Grants 128,414 B2 Cultural Services Fund Creative District Grant Funding 162,650 D1 Transportation Services Fund Open Streets Vendor Fees 1,200 G2 Golf Fund Golf - City Park 9 Pump station repairs 25,130 H1 Cemeteries Fund Cemeteries- 149 Grandview repairs 50,000 H2 Cemeteries Fund Cemeteries - Grandview pump station electrical repairs/upgrades 34,720 H3 Cemeteries Fund Cemeteries - Purchase of Backhoe in 2023 invoiced in 2024 123,150 I1 801-URA - Prospect South TIF District Fund Transfer of URA Fund Equity 801 to Fund 800 1,873,927 J1 803-URA - Mall Fund Transfer of URA Fund Equity 803 to Fund 800 17,804 K1 Transportation CEF Fund Engineering - Union on Elizabeth Payment-In-Lieu (W. Elizabeth St.)21,300 Total Use of Prior Year Reserves:$2,730,877 Page 18 of 230 Kelly Ohlson; King Soopers – page 93 (see above) in lieu of the developer constructing the right turn lane College & Drake - They are only required to pay $243K for a right turn lane – what does that cost? Brad Buckman; that is not the total cost, but it is a proportional impact of the development. They don’t bear the entire cost – we look at proportional impact from a traffic analysis study and that is what we deem to be a fair and reasonable amount for the developer as payment in lieu. Tyler Marr; if they had constructed the right turn lane – they would be eligible for some level of reimbursement for the opposite - proportionality of that. Emily Francis; Municipal Court - #3 page 89 (see above) to pay for the jail services. Lawrence Pollack; I am not aware of any additional money we have paid in 2024. They are not known until later in the year. Emily Francis; didn’t we just have an appropriation to pay for extra beds? How are those things different? Lawrence Pollack; reappropriation – we had the expenses, but we didn’t utilize all of the budget / approved spending in 2023. So, the reappropriation is asking, can we have that budget back and then we can finish that intended purpose? This is proactive, looking at what our use is YTD and what our contractual obligations are for the year. Let’s do this now. Page 19 of 230 Emily Francis; so, we are not paying more and more money for the jail services. Emily Francis; #7 (see above) Work for Others and Program Fees for Conflict Transformation Works I am curious as it says that we charge youth who are involved in conflict program, I am wondering why and how much we charge them to patriciate. Lawrence Pollack; that is determined within Municipal Court. There may be costs associated with that but we are not forcing individuals to pay to be part of the mandated program. Emily Francis; it does say we charge fees for those involved. Travis Storin; If acceptable, we will expand on that and include the response in the AIS that comes to the full Council, so it is very clear. C. Electric System Appropriations Travis Walker, Interim Light & Power Director Cody Snowdon, Electric Engineering Director SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION: Light & Power Bond Issuance and Capital Planning EXECUTIVE SUMMARY L&P Management wishes to inform the Council Finance Committee on the use of funding to date and future use of the issuance. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED - Inform Council Finance on use of funds and future capital plans. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION (details of item – History, current policy, previous Council actions, alternatives or options, costs or benefits, considerations leading to staff conclusions, data and statistics, next steps, etc.) Current and future use of bond issuance: - Transformer purchases for development and supply chain issues- catch up from pandemic - Cable and Transformer Replacements- replacing aging infrastructure to maintain reliability and facilitate electrification Page 20 of 230 - Back-to-front yard conversions to facilitate Beneficial Electrification- enables larger service capacity for heat pumps, electric vehicles - Technology that supports the electric system and the Virtual Power Plant- Advanced Distribution Management System - Limited Equipment Purchases to facilitate cable replacement projects - Substation Planning/system studies to support electrification DISCUSSION / NEXT STEPS GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED - Inform Council Finance on use of funds and future capital plans. We have used $11M of the issuance – transformers – our inventory greatly reduced during Covid – build stock backup and supply current development projects that are under way Equipment to enable the cable pulling to happen – truck and cable puller Kelly Ohlson; Back lot conversion - $23M for 1000 lots. How does this shake out in relation to all of the projects you could be doing for reliability and safety? Travis Walker; it is super expensive - it comes out to approximately $23K per lot, so it takes a bit to recover. That is why we are doing this pilot, to see exactly what it will be per lot and to see -how many of those we can and want to do. We run into the expense versus return on annexations also. It is a bit of an experiment right now. Back to front would not be our #1 priority to spend the entire $23M on. Kelly Ohlson; what is beneficial electrification? Travis Walker; it is the effort that all of us have brought into the city where more electrification is better because renewal power will allow us to move away from natural gas. It could be a heat pump at your house, solar panels, batteries, getting rid of your gas-powered car and moving to an EV, getting an electric water heater versus natural gas. The hope is to move away from natural gas and to be as carbon free as possible. Page 21 of 230 Cody Snowdon; with these back lot to front lot conversions (see above), not only safety, it is beneficial electrification, Because a lot of these panels only allow a small service size until they get maxed out. When people are looking at even solar panels, they are needing a larger service size to adequately handle energy coming back onto the system. In most of these areas, it will exclude them helping us head toward achieving our 2030 goals. Kelly Ohlson; I am glad you guys are studying this. I am just hung up on what we are not doing for $24K per unit that we could be doing for beneficial electrification. Is that still a work in progress? Travis Walker; It is still a work in progress. We don’t have the exact amount we will spend on back lot to front lot versus transformers versus cable. It will be a bit of everything while we get grounded and figure things out. We want to revamp our CIP to be better able to dictate what rates might be versus future bond issuances. This is a significant expense. Emily Francis; I understand that back to front is convenient, but what else does it do? Travis Walker, four houses worth of main breakers in one box and the wires that go from the back yard to the house are too small to handle loads for EVs, heat pumps, solar coming back onto the system. In addition to the convenience and safety of front yard access, it is giving those residents the capacity to electrify. Emily Francis; they want to be able to upgrade Page 22 of 230 Travis Walker, correct, there is no infrastructure – when this was put in during the 1950’ and 1960’s that wasn’t a thing. We can’t just put a bigger wire into that. When their power goes out, it could be those breakers and could take out all four homes. We will help them any way we can, but technically, that is their service. It also takes a lot of that knowledge and understanding where their service is out of date. That one box of breakers services up to four homes. Emily Francis; my friends have one in their back yard – for four houses Travis Walker; they call them widow makers for a reason– boxes with multiple breakers Emily Francis; I understand what Kelly Ohlson is saying that this is a really nice thing to have, but for over half of the bond issuance Travis Walker; we would not spend the whole thing. We are trying to future out what it does costs. Kelly, to your other question, we kind of see this like a little bit like the overhead to underground conversation projects back in the day - piecemealing it out over time. Cody Snowdon. A lot of these estimates are just the overall, to see what it would be throughout the city and not what we are planning to spend right away. We have $400K in BFO slated for the start of this program. We are not looking to spend $23M. Tricia Canonico; what period of time are you looking at to do this project? Cody Snowdon; we are researching that – these estimates are overall– understanding the 2030 goals – things we need to evaluate and getting a new CIP. Tricia Canonico; decarbonization grant $139M – is that something we might be grant programs for? Tyler Marr; this is fairly recent announcement - the Colorado Energy Office - it is my sense that, yes either at the generation level or the distribution level there will be some pass through on that, we will need to dig into that and get back with Tricia on how the state is going to structure some of that awarding. Travis Walker; if I had to look into a crystal ball, I would say that we would keep the back to front lot at the $400K per year level that we have in the budget and ride it out because cable replacement and transformers are going to be part of this. We will see what the demand is for folks to electrify. Emily Francis; I appreciate the slow approach and trying it out. Travis Wallker; it is definitely good to understand it first. Every project is different and will have different obstacles but having a good pilot project base that we can move forward with is critical. Page 23 of 230 Travis Storin; as a staff, we aren’t used to getting a $40M appropriation that is generalized for Light & Power projects. We usually operate with more granularity and specificity when bringing an appropriation to the Council. So, part of this is seeking, is the level of detail that just shared, is that something the Council would wish to get in writing or was this a sufficient preview that we could defer it to the CIP process on a go forward basis which is shared with the Council in two years intervals. We want to open up a dialog on what the forum and delivery for updates on the use of these funds. Kelly Ohlson; a lot of great information. This a whole lot of exciting stuff – some very basic, but incredibly important. Delivery and reliability and moving more in the sustainability direction – but isn’t this a lot of stuff that we should have been doing over the past 10-15 years? Travis Walker; there are certain pieces that could have been. We have been replacing cable – maybe we could have accelerated that a little bit, so we didn’t find ourselves with 24% over 45 years old because that is going to be a big expense. As far as electrification, I think we could have done better with load diversification. We could have optimized things better in that way. To your point, it is super exciting stuff, and we are excited to be involved with it, and it is going to be an ongoing process as we start working through updating our CIP. Kelly Ohlson; I think you should come to us from time to time and we need to get it to the Full Council in a timely manner. It is absolutely important to go deep for Council Finance but maybe here are the 8-10 categories we are using the bond money and the duration - over the next how many years and what the progress is - maybe a one or two pager to update the full Council. They voted for the bond issuance. I would say a yearly basis at the outside to update us in a complete, simple and understandable manner. Tricia Canonico; I agree with what Kelly Ohlson said. This was a great presentation. You are making this accessible to folks who don’t know a lot about this. Emily Francis; I think after having more information on the transformer replacements, being able to present maybe at a Work Session back to the community -there is a lot of disconnect between folks wanting to electrify. It would be good to update the community on what that requires. Tyler Marr; it flags for me the dual cost pressures we are facing right now; one, to green the portfolio mix on the generation side (PRPA), which is a significant portion of our own rate pressure, and then the pressure to not only keep up with asset management to expand capacity in the system to allow for electrification to take advantage of the diversified IRP so right now, it is an area of high cost Page 24 of 230 OTHER BUSINESS Travis Storin; we are seeking an appropriation out of the 2050 Climate funds. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 included a tax credit program (see above). This is a series of programs that we have not had access to until now. IRA basically turns this into a grant type function and we can apply for these tax credits that were previously inaccessible. The request would be for up to $100k from the 2050 money would be to hire a third-party consultant service to evaluate all of the city’s projects to determine if the City has sufficient eligible projects to justify pursing these tax credits. Fleet Management with electric vehicles. Facilities with actual building electrification. Light & Power and our Energy Services on community facing measures like chargers and batteries We have several areas in the city who might be eligible, but we don’t want folks to apply all at once. We would like to run this as a portfolio – this program will last for eight years. We want to make sure that our highest and best use projects are getting the allocation. The idea behind the firm would be to take all of our projects from those areas above and evaluate them for eligibility as well as how ideal and attractive they might be for the tax credit programing. We would emerge with a roadmap for the eight-year life of the tax credits on which projects we would be applying for and when, how much local seed money would we need in that grant type function. Basically, stand up a program for us for IRA money. We think there is a nexus for us with the Climate money in the 2050 tax and there is a reserve there. Page 25 of 230 Emily Francis; I am fine with it - we are good with this coming to the full Council Kelly Ohlson; I am good with it coming forward. Tricia Canonico; some additional context, I along with others met with the federal grant concierge earlier in the week and she was talking about this. Colorado is standing up an enterprise for this as Dale Blaney is the person who is going to be running this. They are holding a webinar on September 26th around this. It is 30-70% back on projects based on if you have a coal plant closing, labor standards. Exciting. Travis Storin; we very much appreciate the support, and we will prepare this for two readings for the full Council as soon as practical. We have a selection of qualitied vendors we can choose from. This appropriation will run in parallel, and we will get this work stood up quickly. Kelly Ohlson; thank you to Lawernce for his normal excellent work of laying out the supplemental appropriations better than anyone has in the last several years. Meeting Adjourned Page 26 of 230 Page 27 of 230 Finance Administration 215 N. Mason nd Floor Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6788 970.221.6782 - fax fcgov.com Council Finance Committee Hybrid Meeting CIC Room / Zoom October 3, 2024 4:00 - 6:00 pm Council Attendees: Mayor Arndt, Emily Francis, Kelly Ohlson Staff: Kelly DiMartino, Tyler Marr, Travis Storin, Denzel Maxwell, Teresa Roche, Jenny Lopez Filkins, Ginny Sawyer, Terri Runyan, Max Valadez, Joe Wimmer, Nina Bodenhamer, Drew Brooks, Monica Martinez, Kaley Zeisel, Brad Buckman, Dana Hornkohl, Dean Klingner, Victoria Shaw, Jill Wuertz, Zack Mozer, Randy Bailey, Trevor Nash, Garrison Dam, Jordan Granath, Logan Bailor, Renee Reeves, Dave Lenz, Jen Poznanovic, Jo Cech, Carolyn Koontz Other: Josh Yde, CPA, Plante & Moran, PLLC Timothy St. Andrew, CPA, Plante & Moran, PLLC Meeting called to order at 4:00 pm NOTE: The minutes from the September Council Finance Committee meeting will be distributed with the November meeting packet. A. Audit Results Randy Bailey, Accounting Director Trevor Nash, CPA, Controller Josh Yde, CPA, Plante & Moran, PLLC Timothy St. Andrew, CPA, Plante & Moran, PLLC SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Independent Auditors’ Report on 2023 Financial Statements Independent Auditors’ Report on Compliance for Major Federal Programs EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Plante & Moran will be presenting an overview of the Results of the 2023 Financial Statement Audit. This report covers the audit of the basic financial statements and compliance of the City of Fort Collins for year-end December 31, 2023. Page 28 of 230 NOTE: The Annual Comprehensive Financial Report is available in print on request, and accessible online here: https://www.fcgov.com/finance/files/fy23-acfr-final-web-version.pdf?1724173021 GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED Staff seeks input on areas of priority or concern, other than those established in this Report to the City Council, for matters of recordkeeping and/or the City’s internal control environment. Otherwise, there are no specific questions to be answered as this is a 2023 year-end report. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION In compliance with Government Auditing Standards, the City undergoes an independent external audit on an annual basis. Plante & Moran finalized its financial statement audit and compliance report on June 29, 2024, and the firm is required to report the results of the audit to those charged with governance. Attachment 1 to this agenda item contains the full report, findings of note are summarized below: Identified Deficiencies (Attachment 1, pages 3-5): Other findings/deficiencies identified by the auditors but not rising to the level of a significant deficiency can be found in the Report to the City Council. Staff will provide a written response to the audit findings at a fourth quarter Council Finance Committee meeting. The final 2023 Single Audit report on Compliance for Major Federal Programs is expected to complete by the third week of October and will be provided to Council Finance Committee at that time. DISCUSSION / NEXT STEPS; GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED Staff seeks input on areas of priority or concern, other than those established in this Report to the City Council, for matters of recordkeeping and/or the City’s internal control environment. Otherwise, there are no specific questions to be answered as this is a 2023 year-end report. Kelly Ohlson; I remember in the past, there were suggestions and ideas shared after previous audits. Travis Storin; in any given year, we will receive between two and seven verbal comments on things we can improve. These don’t rise to the level of a finding. It is a question of materiality. It is a judgmental position that we might take. We defer to our auditors if it is a material issue. Page 29 of 230 Kelly Ohlson; slide 4 (see above) the last bullet – Does that mean there are things you are recommending but they don’t rise to a certain level? Are those things staff will end of doing? Tim St. Andrew; these are things that as we were going through the audit and testing, we noticed balances were off a little bit on these three items, but we did the analysis, we concluded that it didn’t rise to the level that was significant, but it is high enough that we needed to report it to you that we did have uncorrected adjustments. They are not reflected on the financial statements. Kelly Ohlson; so, what happens to these ideas – asking staff? Travis Storin; it would be kind of textbook that we are posting these. If you had a ‘no hitter audit’, there would be no findings on these schedules. A big lens for us is if it is going to affect a fund balance or not. That is a big determinant on whether it is something that would want to create some urgency around fixing. Tim St. Andrew; these are not findings – they are unrecorded adjustments but not significant enough balances to be findings. Randy Bailey; we prioritize all of these things. For example, the Tourism Improvement District, that was something that we did not include in any of our prior ACFRs. Because of this finding and the consult That we had, we included it in our FY23 ACFR starting this year. Going forward, we will operationalize that and it will be in our ACFR going forward. Page 30 of 230 Kelly Ohlson; slide 6 (see above) – what is the specific definition of a Federal Single Audit? Page 31 of 230 Does that mean you pulled out some things as we had more expenditures that $29.4M from the federal government in 2023. Josh Yde; this is money that was spent -you may have received some advanced funding such as APRA that hasn’t been spent yet. Any city or any entity that spends over $750K would be subject to a single audit. As part of the process, we receive a schedule of federal expenditures. There are strict guidelines that we must follow. The CIFA is our single audit plan and roadmap. We look at based on dollar amount, what the major programs are and then if they have had any issues in the last two years, that is how we decide which programs we are testing. We make sure we have the right coverage, depending on the facts of any year, we either have to do 20% or 40% coverage. Out of the $29M, we need 40% coverage. It is the same process every year, really grant specific and dollar specific which programs we test. Kelly Ohlson; if you were to grade how the organization is doing compared to other local governments. I just want to make sure we dot the I’s and cross the T’s. Josh Yde; I think you are doing very well, and you have a great team in place. Keep in mind that there has been a lot of change this year, on your end as well as a new audit firm and new auditing standards (GASB) that had a major trickle-down effect. The bar is low for findings, and it is more common than not to have findings. I would say overall, you are doing very well from a compliance to audit, preparation and readiness standpoint. Mayor Arndt; thank you. It is healthy to have audits. The Tourism Improvement District is new – this is our second fiscal year. That is why we switch auditors; you see new things and it is a healthy process that shows us ways to improve. Thank you for helping us be better. B. CCIP Project Options Travis Storin, Chief Financial Officer Ginny Sawyer, Project Manager Joe Wimmer, Financial Analyst SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Capital Improvement Quarter-Cent Tax Renewal EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to update the Council Finance Committee (CFC) on continued development into building a package of projects for the capital tax renewal. This renewal is targeting the November 2025 election. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. What questions do committee members have regarding the current projects and/or timeline? 2. Are there projects the committee would recommend to remove or add? BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The current Community Capital Improvement Program (CCIP) tax will expire on December 31, 2025. Staff is currently working to create a package to offer voters as a renewal in November 2025 for a tax that would run from January 1, 2026, to December 31, 2035. To date staff has: Page 32 of 230 • Demonstrated the traditional use of this tax being implemented at approximately 50% transportation- related projects and 50% identified capital projects. • Shared lessons learned from previous tax measures. • Confirmed the desire that package projects serve a diversity of needs throughout the community and focus on projects identified and vetted by the public through planning processes. • Compiled and vetted potential projects submitted by departments. Timeline to date has included Council touch points at a February 2024 work session, March 2024 CFC, April 2024 work session, and July 2024 CFC. Proposed Council timeline going forward includes: October 3, 2024, CFC (scheduled) - November 12, 2024, Council work session (scheduled) - January/February 2025 CFC (to be scheduled) - May work session (to be scheduled) - July work session (to be scheduled) - July/August 2025 ballot referral (to be scheduled) This schedule also anticipates public outreach and engagement starting in early 2025. Potential Projects The proposed project list to date is attached. The list represents project costs far over what the quarter-cent tax would collect. Continued refinement on the list will include prioritization of projects through Council direction and public input, identifying scalable projects, and cost refinement. This list includes transportation-related projects and newly identified projects. A few specific projects and details of note:  Following the last CFC meeting, staff took feedback to look at which funding sources and which projects truly align in the parks and recreation area. Council also recently had a work session specifically focused on the use of 2050 tax. Based on these discussions, the Mulberry pool project remains in the 2026-35 capital sales tax list ($10M) with an understanding that multiple funding sources will ultimately be needed.  Staff has continued to vet the potential use of a $10M Affordable Housing Fund as the seed money for an on-going revolving loan fund. The overarching goal would be to create sustainable affordable housing funding and provide an ability to go “narrow and deep” with funding as opposed to “wide and shallow.” There are still many details to be determined and based on work and conversations to date it seems feasible to: - Issue a sales tax revenue bond against the $10M affordable housing fund dedication. - Bond proceeds of approximately $7.5M would be available in year one to loan to an affordable housing developer(s) at a favorable below-the-market interest rate. - Developer would pay back loan creating money for future loans and projects.  Further discussions with Operation Services, Culture Services, and the Museum of Discovery have potentially narrowed the scope of the downtown trolley building improvements into two specific activities: 1. Identify and complete necessary improvements to make the downtown trolley building “ready” and feasible for a yet to be determined use; and Page 33 of 230 2. Find temporary storage for the Museum artifacts to allow for downtown trolley barn improvements and the inventory and auditing of the objects. There is still work and refinement to be done on this project.  Additional project list changes since July CFC: o The following projects are no longer listed: - Lincoln Center Kitchen Renovation - Community Shared Commercial Kitchen - LaPorte Avenue Re-design o The following projects have been added - Timberline Recycling Center Improvements Naming Having common nomenclature on tax measures can be beneficial during public outreach and throughout the term of the tax when describing funding sources. Previous programs have included: Designing Tomorrow Today Project RECAP Choices 95 Building Community Choice Building on Basics And the current program: Community Capital Improvement Program (CCIP) Considerations for the renewal are listed below. Capital by Design Capital Improvement Tax Quarter Cent Capital DISCUSSION / NEXT STEPS; GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. What questions do committee members have regarding the current projects and/or timeline? 2. Are there projects the committee would recommend to remove or add? Page 34 of 230 - Page 35 of 230 Kelly Ohlson; naming ideas - names matter – the morale of the story – my history POST 2001 – 1994 tax- lost 60/40 – changed called it Open Space passed 65/35 - People don’t know what capital is – Community is far better than Capital - Community By Design Ginny Sawyer: at this point in the game, are projects all scalable. The work that we will continue to do is in identifying how much scalability will still leave a project viable. We will try to refine for Council as we go. Prioritizing and understanding is our march forward as we go…. Emily Francis; I would like to see Soft Gold Park refresh on the list for this – it needs to be redone Dean Klingner; can you share your vision? There are improvements at Soft Gold that could be 2025 eligible. Emily Francis; it is a poorly designed park. It is not user friendly and how it abuts to the natural area has caused a lot of environmental issues with for example, folks camping there. It is conducive to illegal behavior due to its location - no homes close. The design and environment - Dean Klingner; the team has been hearing that feedback – even in the 2050 conversation, we have heard a lot about the taking care of what we have component as parks age. What you are saying about Soft Gold resonates with our team in terms of there are enough changing factors going on that it will rise to the top. We are confident in that. What I would say today is that one way or another, we will do some thinking around whether 2050 or CCIP is the best option or a combination strategy. It may be that we just extend what we are thinking about for the north side of the river. Emily Francis; Hickory Spur is practical but is kind of depressing - except for when the goats are there Page 36 of 230 Emily Francis; am I correct that at one time we adopted a plan for a new City Hall? Travis Storin; the Civic Center Master Plan is adopted. Emily Francis; are we considering any funding for that? Ginny Sawyer; I would say that we are, and the removal of the downtown park shop is a key chess move in advancing the Civic Center Master Plan and the Trolley Barn as well but not to such a large extent. We have to move the park shop. Emily Francis; I know that is a gap in funding for Elizabeth Max. Was that considered as part of this since it did not have an identified funding source? Kaley Zeisel; we are still trying to identify all of our funding sources; as Travis said, the 2050 tax is one, also having conversations with CSU about partnering and looking at other grant funding opportunities. In terms of CCIP, we have 88 bus stop upgrades Travis Storin; it may be fair to characterize CCIP as kind of a backup plan. I think we are in the $2-4M gap range depending on how much 2050 contributes. Monica Martinez; we do think 2050 will cover a lot of it –there is also this question around timing. We have not yet received the Small Starts funding, our application is in but if we do not get that funding, that will also change the picture. Emily Francis; could we put it on the list just so I know it is on the radar. Emily Francis; did we do Linden St? Monica Martinez; yes Emily Francis; as we talk about 15-minute communities. I know we have spent a good amount downtown, but I would also like to see investment in community centers. Have we thought about CCIP as a way to do that? Mayor Arndt; a large share of that pie chart (slide #8) is Active Modes Travis Storin; our precedent has been that roughly 50% of the tax going into the transportation system. I would applaud our engineering team – they have allocated that almost entirely around active modes and accessibility concepts. Page 37 of 230 Kelly Ohlson; slide 5 (see above) Capital Tax - Lessons Learned Why are we now allowing flexibility? We have never needed flexibility because we built what was promised every single time. Travis Storin; when we talk about flexibility, let’s just say we penciled in $5M for the trolley barn and then a historic foundation produces a grant for us and – the ballot binds us to that $5M, even if we don’t need it anymore - so we don’t have flexibility for spend in that type of use case. Kelly Ohlson; maybe you refine the final language that would allow you to do those things so that future staff and Council will know that that flexibility means. Dean Klinger; if you look at the current 2016-2025 and look at the mix in there and you have a specific named projects like SE Community Center, and another half if pedestrian programs like bike overpasses and underpasses – not naming a specific project – we have a really impressive track record of taking that specificity and going out and matching grants, doing as much as we can with that money. So, it is a balance between naming the types of improvements – not detailed – balance between having some projects on there that are very clear in name versus some projects that are more like programs. Affordable Housing is the other one on there. Page 38 of 230 Kelly Ohlson; the pie chart slide #8 (see above) Culture is 7% which is almost as large as Housing and Environment - they got a small percentage. Then, if you look at Transportation / Active Modes and Parks and Recreation that equals 82% Big problem for me Travis Storin; know that the common denominator for that is $166M, so a $10M investment in Housing is going to reflect on there at 6% - If it were to remain at $10M, when we narrow this down with the full Council to $100M then it is 10% investment Mayor Arndt; it is a capital tax, so besides the Carnegie Center, do we have more capital Cultural expenses – in general I don’t associate Cultural Services with capital projects Emily Francis; the point that Ginny is trying to make is that larger capital expenses are seen in Transportation and Parks and Recreation – I see your point Kelly that it takes up a lot of the pie chart especially when we just passed a tax for Parks and Transportation. Kelly Ohlson; my concern is just where the money is being spent – for me it is too heavy there Wildlife and wildlife habitat-less habitat damage because you are allowing controlled access - there is no reason in 2024 and beyond that we cannot have a net gain in wildlife and habitat and doing these same things about access. We should have a net gain on habitat and wildlife. Thank you for looking at the Timberline Recycling Center – that was a good idea to take that inhouse. Tough when it is seven people plus staff – going to get challenging and difficult. Streetscapes – prioritization – for this amount of money – scalable – if I had to cut, Streetscapes don’ t make it through the sieve for me. Something else would fall off, a dog park, a bike part, the other park that was mentioned, etc. Mulberry Pool, the housing fund – this is going to get tough. Page 39 of 230 Emily Francis; streetscapes, are lower for me as well. Mayor Arndt; I did have a question about dog parks. Have we ever tried to reimagine what they should be like? So many other cities have great dog parks Central Park in NYC – Cherry Creek in Denver ($20 tags). Gravel and fencing - I can’t go there. Dean Klingner; that is good feedback. We are definitely aware of the importance of dog parks. They are very popular and there is a demand for more. Emily Francis; they are heavily used as it is the only place to take them. Kelly Ohlson; 10% off of the big chunk items in transportation which would still be enough to fund 3-5 more projects. Travis mentioned that is historical precedent, but it not required by any rule or law. To consider for future Work Sessions – what 10 – 20% off would look like and what it would free up. Things like the Farm, dog parks, the Trolley Barn would never get money through a budget system. This is how that gets funded. Things that fall out of the normal process. Consider trimming some of the ‘fun projects’ down too. It is about what we choose to prioritize – final decision comes down to the 7 of us. If we do a good job, it will reflect the community. Mayor Arndt; I am so appreciative of the careful work, the intentionality, transparency, internal rigor that are part of this process. That is what makes this successful – the trust you build over time is impressive. I am very proud. C. Transfort Appropriation Monica Martinez, Sr. Manager FP&A SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Transfort Supplemental Appropriation EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This supplemental appropriation request addresses a clean-up of grant budget projections to align with confirmed award amounts as well as an anticipated need for additional budget in order to continue current Transfort service levels through year end. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED • Does Council Finance Committee support an off-cycle appropriation of federal grant revenue? BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION Yearly Transfort Reconciliation Process The BFO cycle requires that revenue be projected up to three years in advance of actual receipt of revenue. For Transfort, this means that yearly FTA grants such as the main 5307 operational grant and the paratransit 5310 grant, are projected using estimates based on prior year amounts, anticipated trends, or anticipated changes to the federal funding bill. Confirmed award amounts for each grant then typically become available in the spring of the award year. Due to this timing, Transfort will require a yearly reconciliation process that appropriates confirmed award amounts for grants used to reimburse that City fiscal year’s expenses. This supplemental appropriation will update award amounts for 5307 and 5310 grant amounts. Notably, the amount to be Page 40 of 230 appropriated for the FTA’s FY23 5307 represents the entirety of the grant. This grant had previously been anticipated for use during the 2025/2026 BFO cycle but will now be used for the 2024 City fiscal year. This places Transfort on a healthy reimbursement track wherein one 5307 operational grant is used per year and that FTA grant year is lagged one year behind the City fiscal year requesting reimbursement. Transfort Budget Update Transfort’s 2024 operational budget is currently appropriated to $22.3M. This includes the $1.2M in 2050 Tax that was approved during the 2024 Mini-BFO process. At this time, it is anticipated that to end the year at current service levels Transfort will need an additional appropriation of $1.3M. This additional appropriation will be funded by approximately $900k in grant revenue that is available due to award amounts increasing significantly since initial budget estimates. The remaining $400k will be funded by unanticipated grant revenue from prior year reimbursements. The main drivers in expense increases are listed below: 1) $250k: 2023 hourly bus operator conversions and the addition of a transit supervisor position. These increases were made once staff identified the availability of grant funding in both 2023 and 2024 due to low budget projections. 2) $350k: increases to vehicle repair services costs including and $85k repair on a bus damaged three years ago 3) $200k: snow removal costs due to the loss of the advertising contract 4) $400k: bus-stop-to-bus-stop due to continued discontinued service on routes 11 and 12 5) $100k: contingency It is anticipated that the 2050 tax portion of Transfort’s budget will see savings of approximately $.6M. This is because the appropriated budgets represented a full year of expense while the necessary updates to salaries were not effective until July of 2024. As the mini-BFO offers outlined specific costs intended for the 2050 tax, staff intends for unused funds to drop back into 2050 reserves instead of allowing them to fund other Transfort operational expenses. DISCUSISON / NEXT STEPS: GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED Does Council Finance Committee support an off-cycle appropriation of federal grant revenue? The committee supports the off-cycle appropriation of federal grant revenue. Other Business 2025 Council Finance Committee Meeting schedule. Committee confirmed that we are to continue with the same meeting cadence for 2025. Hybrid meetings will take place on the first Thursday of the month from 4-6 pm. Meeting Adjourned Page 41 of 230 Page 42 of 230 COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Staff: Matt Robenalt, Executive Director, Downtown Development Authority Kristy Klenk, Finance & HR Manager, Downtown Development Authority Adam Halvorson, Sr. Analyst, Treasury, City of Fort Collins Date: November 6, 2024 SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Downtown Development Authority (“DDA”) Line of Credit (“LOC”) Finance for 2025-2030 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The current LOC established in 2012 and renewed in 2018 by the City on behalf of the DDA is scheduled to expire at the end of 2024. The City and DDA began taking steps earlier this year to renew this debt instrument with First National Bank for another six-year term, as it will be needed by the DDA to execute its projects and programs in budget year 2025. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED Does Council Finance recommend bringing an IGA forward to accommodate the renewal of the bank authorized Line of Credit to be used by the DDA and satisfy compliance with C.R.S. §31- 25-807(3)(a)(II)? BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION Background The DDA Act (C.R.S. 31-25-801, as amended) has inherent processes that require the City and the DDA to work collaboratively to achieve the purpose of the legislation. Among these expected collaborations is the process for financing DDA activities. In 2012, Council adopted Ordinance No. 089, 2012 and the City and DDA established a line of credit (LOC) with First National Bank to satisfy the statutory requirement to generate proceeds from debt to be used by the DDA to execute its projects and programs and implement the DDA’s Plan of Development. The tax increment revenues created each year by the private investment that has occurred downtown is used to pay off the debt. In 2018, Council adopted Ordinance NO. 066, 2018 to renew the LOC for another six-year term from 2019 – 2024. The current LOC is scheduled to expire at the end of 2024. The DDA and City began taking steps earlier this year to renew this debt instrument with First National Bank for another six-year term, as it will be needed by the DDA to execute its projects and programs beginning in budget year 2025. Page 43 of 230 Additionally, in 2012, Council approved Resolution 2012-081 and the DDA and City created an intergovernmental agreement (“IGA”) that established the process by which the two organizations would: • initiate requests for a draw from the LOC • verify tax increment revenue cash available to repay the debt • account for the loan proceeds released from the LOC, and • execute repayment with tax increment within 7 days of the initial LOC draw The Second IGA Governing a Line of Credit for Financing Downtown Development Authority Projects and Programs was approved by City Council by Resolution 2018-046 to reflect the terms of the renewed LOC in 2018. What is New for 2024? In 2023, SB23-175 was signed into law, and this amendment to the DDA Act provides a new hybridized option for meeting the statutory requirements for financing debt of downtown development authorities. This amendment makes it possible for development authorities to obtain their own debt, and have it paid off with tax increment revenues provided there is an IGA between the municipality and development authority authorizing this arrangement. Prior to the amendment, the statute required that all debt issued for the benefit of the development authority be exclusively the debt of the municipality. Many of the downtown development authorities in the State use the same line of credit financing approach as the Fort Collins DDA and City of Fort Collins. Because the approach has some steps that amount to busy-work for municipal finance staff, there was wide support to create an option to transfer much of the administrative burden to development authorities by allowing them to obtain their own debt, which is what SB23-175 now offers. Since this was a new concept enacted into the DDA Act, the DDA and City Finance staff have conferred with appropriate legal counsel, and based on that began working together to discuss a new line of credit that will be obtained by the DDA from a bank, and also the process steps that would be embodied in an IGA to achieve compliance with the DDA Act and clearly define procedural steps between the City, DDA and bank. A flow chart defining these procedural steps is provided in the last slide of Attachment 1 Slide Presentation. It is planned that the intergovernmental agreement, and the line of credit loan promissory note from First National Bank of Omaha will be presented to the DDA Board in February 2025 for approval, and the intergovernmental agreement then advanced to the City Council for approval shortly thereafter. This schedule for adoption is several months ahead of when the 2025 tax increment revenues are released by the County Treasurer that would be used to pay off draws on the DDA's new line of credit, and this timing is supportive of the DDA's cashflow timing needs for projects it will be funding in 2025. Benefits and Impacts of the LOC When the DDA and City began using the LOC financing approach in 2012, it provided benefits and positive impacts over the much more expensive forms of financing such as issuance of traditional revenue bonds or private-placement financing with banks and other investors. Using Page 44 of 230 the LOC approach to finance DDA projects and programs results in a significantly shorter period of time in which the debt incurs interest. This means that more funding is available to invest directly into projects and programs in the downtown, and less is spent on finance fees and interest expenses. DDA staff analyzed the savings from this approach used between 2012-2024 against that of the other forms of traditional financing used by the City and DDA in the past. The financial savings is significant. Since 2012, the LOC total interest and financing fees for $46,671,468 of principal debt was $17,098. In contrast, the total interest and finance fees for the City/DDA financing approach that traditionally used certificates of participation and private placement bonds for $15,279,063 of principal debt was $3,412,065. Other benefits and positive impacts using the LOC include: • Strong expression of fiduciary stewardship of public funds • Recognition that investment of tax increment funds, derived from property tax assessments of overlapping tax entities, creates positive growth in assessed value and thereby increased the value of the property tax base for all overlapping entities. (82% of the DDA tax increment comes from tax entities other than the City such as Larimer County and Poudre School District) • Funding partnerships of the DDA undertaken with the City and private sector have no cost of capital charges assessed to the projects • Every draw made on the LOC is paid off within seven (7) days, which means no effect at the end of the calendar year on the City’s fund balance or City Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Next Steps & Key Dates The DDA has met with First National Bank of Omaha and is coordinating with the bank to provide the promissory note and final term sheet. The following key dates outline the remaining steps in the schedule to implement the LOC renewal: DDA Board – Approval of IGA & LOC Promissory Note 2/13/2025 City Council – Approval of IGA 3/4/2025 ATTACHMENTS 1. Slide Presentation Page 45 of 230 Council Finance Committee November 6, 2024 City of Fort Collins Finance and Downtown Development AuthorityRenewal of Line of Credit Page 46 of 230 Purpose of why we are here: Line of Credit is to fund DDA projects and programs approved by the DDA Board and consistent with C.R.S. §31-25-807(3)(a)(II) and the mission of the organization DDA and City Finance are preparing for DDA Board and City Council authorization to renew a revolving Line of Credit: established in 2012 with local bank last renewed in 2018, expires 2024 renewal term - six (6) years per draw limit continues at $5,000,000 2 Page 47 of 230 Projected Tax Increment Revenue 2025 – 2030 Depicted projections are after TIF shareback with overlapping tax entities 3 $0 $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000 $14,000,000 5.45% (Historical) Actual 2018-2023 Forecast 2024-2031 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Page 48 of 230 Benefits of Line of Credit Line of Credit financing method allows more DDA funds to be invested in projects and programs Line of Credit 2012-2018 Line of Credit 2019-2024 4 Page 49 of 230 New for 2024 •SB23-175 signed into law in 2023 provides new option for financing. •DDA may have its own debt. No longer just limited to City debt issuance anymore, provided an IGA authorizing this arrangement is adopted between the two entities. •City and DDA pursuing new option provide by SB23-175. •Benefit is simply less steps for Finance Staff as DDA picks up responsibility for management of relationship with bank and administration of Line of Credit . 5 Page 50 of 230 6 Desired Outcomes Maximize amount of tax increment funds invested in downtown projects now and in future by minimizing cost to deliver tax increment investments Fiduciary stewardship of public funds Recognition that investment of tax increment funds, derived from property tax assessments of overlapping tax entities, creates positive growth in assessed value and thereby increases value of property tax base of all overlapping entities (82% of DDA’s tax increment comes from overlapping tax entities other than the City) DDA is able to maintain long-standing funding partnership approach with the City with no cost of capital assessed to City projects DDA’s line of credit draws will be paid off within seven (7) days with available DDA tax increment funds, with no effect to City fund balance or Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Page 51 of 230 7 Proposed Schedule for Approval Council Finance –11/6/2024 –Approval of IGA & LOC Promissory Note 2/13/2025 – Approval of IGA 3/4/2025 Page 52 of 230 8 General Direction Sought Does Council Finance recommend bringing an IGA forward to accommodate the renewal of the bank authorized Line of Credit to be used by the DDA and satisfy compliance with C.R.S. §31-25-807(3)(a)(II)? Page 53 of 230 9 Questions for DDA or City Finance staff? Page 54 of 230 10 Page 55 of 230 Page 56 of 230 Council Committee Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 11 November 6, 2024 STAFF Wilkins, Chief Information Officer SUBJECT Licensing, Permitting, and Code Enforcement System Appropriation EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Planning, Development, and Services to implement and modernize a new licensing, permitting, and code enforcement existing funding for this project was originally allocated as part of the 2023/2024 Budget n almost two-year procurement process, the City has selected Tyler Technologies (Tyler) as the of Choice’ (VOC) and is currently in contract negotiation. This appropriation request will provide anticipated funding needed for software deployment, testing, training, temporary staffing backfill and approximately $3,7M. This includes: • Software as a Service 19-month Implementation • Software as a Service two-year Subscription Costs • City Staff Backfill for two-year Implementation • Sole-Source Third Party Professional Implementation Services • Change Management during the first quarter of 2025 and be fully Fall 2026. modernize current business processes, improve efficiency, reduce errors, customer experience, and save staff and customer time. critical infrastructure Page 57 of 230 Council Committee Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 11 authorizing an exception to the competitive for implementation professional services? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommend that the Council Finance Committee provide a recommendation of support to City Council. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Summary of Original Budget Offer In FY2023/2024, City Council approved a $2.1 million enhancement offer to initiate the transformation of current permitting, licensing, and development review processes and software. The City's legacy platform, Accela, will reach end-of-life service of the on-premises system December 2025 and requires either a significant upgrade to a cloud-based version of their system or conversion to a new system. The consequences of not modernizing include IT security risks, falling behind increasing demands from businesses and residents, inability to integrate new business processes, and increased operational inefficiencies. This initiative aims to modernize business processes and adopt a more sustainable software ecosystem through simplification, standardization, and a customer self-service approach. This is envisioned as a transformational project that will set the stage for the next 10-20 years on how the City provides services to our business and development community. Key outcomes cited from the 2023/2024 Budget, InfoTech Strategy Roadmap (Attachment A), and the Discovery Phase of Change Management (Attachment B) include: • Streamlined, Standardized Processes: Simplify, consolidate, and automate licenses and permits to eliminate redundancies and improve staff efficiency. • Self-Service for All: Empower residents and businesses with low-touch, self-service options, advancing community digital equity. • Smart Digital Workflows: Transition from paper to digital, ensuring accessible, sustainable, and simplified services. • Scalability & Speed: Accelerate processing times to meet rising demands consistently across all service areas. • Unified, Cohesive Platform: Implement a citywide, integrated system that enhances collaboration and responsiveness. • Modernized Legacy Systems: Shift to a future-ready solution that supports a more accessible, equitable, and efficient digital government, adopting leading industry solutions. Actions Since BFO Approval Following the City Council's support of the FY2023/2024 enhancement offer, City staff initiated the procurement process by conducting a three-day Development Review, Licensing, Permitting, and Inspections Digital Strategy Workshop which was facilitated by Info-Tech Research Group. The workshop results were used to create a business model, identify current challenges, document the rationale for issuing an RFP, and provide key recommendations (Attachment A). Page 58 of 230 Council Committee Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 11 Based on this work, TMG Consulting and City staff developed and issued an RFP in January 2024. During the first half of 2024, City staff evaluated eleven RFP respondents, narrowing respondents down to three finalists. These finalists were invited to demonstrate their products over a three-week period. After product demonstrations, staff scored each vendor and selected an initial Vendor of Choice (Accela). However, after a subsequent week-long workshop, months of scope of work development, and clarifications regarding staffing and implementation timelines, the costs of the original proposal escalated significantly while the modernization objectives embodied by the vision and goals of the project were greatly reduced. These changes virtually eliminated Accela’s competitive advantage around pricing and ease of implementation causing the City to re-engage in conversation with the second place Vendor of Choice (Tyler Technologies). Discussions with the second-place Vendor of Choice (Tyler Technologies) were conducted under an abbreviated 60-day methodology facilitated by TMG Consulting, where a core team of City staff worked with Tyler to clarify costs for implementation, scope of work, subscriptions, optional products, and refine staffing needs for the project. The result of these conversations resulted in a competitive package that provided full alignment with the City’s requirements of a future system. Today, staff have been able to reach a firm estimation of all costs associated with the full scope of the solution, including data migration, software interfaces, business process mapping and modernization, organizational change management, staff backfill, implementation professional services, as well as the direct implementation of the selected product. The funds being requested for this appropriation are described in greater detail below and are summarized in table format at the end of this section. FY23/24 Enhancement Funding and Original Assumptions ($2.1M) The original budget development of this offer was based on feedback from the industry solution providers who examined the scope of the City’s vision for change and provided rough cost estimates as guidance for writing the offer. Although the original $2.1 million could adequately cover implementation costs, the original budget offer lacked considering other components that would need funding to mitigate project risks. These components can be characterized as lessons learned from initial unsuccessful procurement and implementation of the CIS Utilities project as well as risk and mitigation strategies that were also highlighted by the July 2023 Info-Tech Research Group Report (Attachment A). These additional cost considerations are meant to ensure project success by pairing the implementation with organizational change management, adequate internal staff backfill, and Tyler specific third-party professional services. Strategy Roadmap & Procurement Process ($475K) The City of Fort Collins contracted with TMG who conducted six of seven phases of the procurement process. The following diagram illustrates the three distinct parts (strategy, selection, and contracting) of the process and describes TMG’s methodology within each phase of the procurement process: Page 59 of 230 Council Committee Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 4 of 11 Staff have worked with TMG to complete 6 of 7 phases of the project with the final phase being conducted internally, utilizing Tyler-specific implementation specialists to review the final contract package. This approach is intended to get vendor specific resources to evaluate the project for risks during the implementation phase of the project. Today, Phase 7 is largely complete and hinges on the project's ability to secure additional funds as requested from City Council. Vendor of Choice Software as a Service Implementation ($2M) Tyler’s implementation services include approximately 9,200 hours of professional services for a period of 19- months. Primary resources allocated to the project include the following roles and responsibilities: • Project Manager: Oversees the project, manages budget and schedule, coordinates resources, and is the primary point of contact. • Consultant: A team of 4-6 resources that will develop and configure the product. This team completes all Tyler related tasks assigned by the project manager, provides support during go- live, and facilitates training. • Change Management Lead: The Vendor’s change management expert will work to integrate with the City’s organizational change management resources. The City is operating under the following assumptions: o The City will continue contracting with Prosci who will lead and develop a multi-phased plan to implement changes successfully. o The City will need to resource an internal Change Management Lead (.50 FTE) who will execute the plan and act as a liaison between Prosci, City, and Tyler’s team. Software Licensing ($1.34M or $670K annually) Tyler’s software offer includes the configuration and go-live of the following components: • Enterprise Permitting & Licensing Core Software Page 60 of 230 Council Committee Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 5 of 11 o Enterprise Permitting & Licensing Foundation: Acts as a central hub to the different suites GIS, civic access, dashboards, cashiering, all configuration tools, report toolkit, and standard reports. o Business Management Suite: Provides functionality such as electronic license requests, automated routing, and responses. The suite manages licensing types, including business contractors, environmental, alcohol, and marijuana. It provides tools for revenue collection, business tax management, and regulated services. The suite will be able to provide GIS capabilities to track business locations and visualize business distribution within the city. o Community Development Suite: Platform that manages all aspects of the City's planning, permitting, and development processes. Integrates with the Business Management Suite for streamlined operation i.e., centralized property information, centralized contacts, and centralized Dashboards across the suites. o Rental Management Module • Enterprise Permitting & Licensing Extensions (extensions that add functionality to core software) o eReviews: This is required to facilitate the City's electronic plan review process. This component of the system manages the routing, distribution, versioning, and integration into either DigEplan or Bluebeam. o Decision Engine: A digital permit guide that seamlessly integrates with Tyler’s Enterprise Permitting & Licensing software to navigate applicants through the development entitlement, permitting, and licensing application and approval processes. Through a simple interface, applicants can navigate through a series of questions or selections to arrive at the appropriate permitting or licensing task, whether it’s applying, renewing, paying, requesting a meeting or inspection, or just providing more information. o Enterprise Permitting & Licensing Civic Access Payment Toolkit: This allows the City to take online payments through Civic Access. o Enterprise Permitting & Licensing Document Management API Connector: This allows the City to plug our existing Laserfiche application into the overall solution so that documents can be passed into our permanent records when completed. o Enterprise API Connector w/ Selectron: Allows contractors to call in and schedule appointments from an automated system. o SSRS Reporting Access: This is access to the Vendor’s data dictionary + data redundancy for inhouse reporting needs. Selected Optional Components • Enterprise Permitting & Licensing Extension o Citizen Connect – Community Development: Allows the community to monitor development locations and trends through an interactive map and set up notifications if a project is created within a customizable search area. This tool is intended to enhance transparency into the development review and permitting process for everyone in the community. • Integrated Plan Review o DigEplan Pro: Allows all reviewers to use a centralized toolset for the collaboration, review, and markup of plans. This tool is seen as a ‘game changer’ by City Building Services staff due to the system’s ability to allow slip-sheeting, overlay from previous rounds of review, and ability to select multiple sheets from separate rounds of review to create one final ‘approval’ plan set that can be stamped and signed by the plan review department. o These tools will streamline communication between staff and applicants, enable customers to independently update their project plans without having to reprocess entire plan sets, and significantly reduce the review process and project backlogs for building permit plan review and development review staff. Page 61 of 230 Council Committee Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 6 of 11 Organizational Change Management ($386K) The City of Fort Collins has not made organizational change management (OCM) standard practice in project implementation and therefore was not reflected in the original appropriation request for this project. Through the challenges of the Utilities Customer Information System project and additional work during strategy development for this project, the City recognizes the importance of this methodology in ensuring successful outcomes OCM is a structured approach to helping individuals, teams, and organizations adopt change successfully. It involves planning, communicating, engaging stakeholders, providing training, and monitoring progress to minimize disruption and maximize benefits. The goals of OCM are to understand the impacts and scope of change, ensure adoption and usage, and increase employee understanding and engagement throughout the project. OCM increases the likelihood of successful outcomes. Enterprise OCM is being proposed as part of the baseline offering from the Vendor, however, it does not provide the level of support and resourcing that is anticipated for this project. As part of this agenda item, staff are recommending a .5 FTE Change Management Lead (internal City resource), and services provided by Prosci for a Change Advisor and team. Below is a diagram of how OCM will be resourced and anticipated responsibilities of each party. Third Party Professional Services ($864K) The City of Fort Collins issued an RFP for professional implementation services to migrate from Accela and implement Tyler’s system. While three vendors responded to the RFP, upon thorough evaluation, it was determined that none possessed the requisite expertise to successfully execute the complex migration and implementation process. Through extensive research and vendor identification efforts, staff have identified a single qualified vendor, Park Consulting Group, that possesses the necessary skills, experience, and resources to deliver the project to the City’s satisfaction. Based on this assessment, staff recommend proceeding with a sole source contract with Park Consulting Group to ensure the timely and effective implementation of the new licensing, permitting, and code enforcement system. •Will train City of Fort Collins staff on change management. •Develop toolsets for sponsor messaging, process change tracking, resistance management, and after-action review. Prosci Change Management Advisor •Provide toolsets •Provide project support for 3-days during project kick-off •1-day a week check-in with project team •Provide support for 3-days during project 'go-live' Vendor Change Management Lead •Act as a liasion between the vendor change management lead and City. City of Fort Collins Change Management Lead Page 62 of 230 Council Committee Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 7 of 11 Hiring a third party project implementer with specific expertise with migrations from Accela to Tyler Technologies will backfill gaps in system knowledge that City staff does not currently possess, ensure that the project stays on schedule and within scope, configuration, follow’s industry best practices, and hold the Tyler Technologies accountable with the technical deliverables of the project, with the project’s configuration, hold the Tyler Technologies responsible, mitigate risks, prevent scope creep, and ensure timely delivery of the system. Staff assume a 20% contingency on this item bringing the requested total to $864k and is noted in the table below. City Staff Backfill for 19-month Implementation Period ($721K) A key finding of the Info-Tech Report highlights the importance of resourcing and staff bandwidth. Insufficiently addressing this aspect of the project poses a significant risk to its success. The proposed backfill strategy aims to provide departments with the necessary resources to support their anticipated project involvement. A contractual entry-level position is suggested to help alleviate the day- to-day workload of functional team members from Code Compliance, Permitting, Development Review, and other departments as assigned. Several other leadership positions will be needed from internal City Staff which include a part time project manager, communications lead and change management lead. In addition, Human Resources has estimated "Supplement Pay" for departments that will have short-term involvement in the project beyond their regular duties. As part of internal backfill, staff is also requesting funding for 24-months as a contingency should timelines slip during implementation. Summarized Estimated Costs $475,106 $2,522,040* $1,342,912 City backfill for the two-year implementation period (4 FTE) • Business Support I • Business Support I • Building Technician I • $539,532* City, Change Management Lead .50 FTE City, Communications Lead .25 FTE Page 63 of 230 Council Committee Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 8 of 11 City, Project Manager .50 FTE Third Party Implementation Professional Services • Project Manager • Integration Developer • Training Manager • Test Manager • $864,000* Prosci Change Management Professional Services • Phase 1 - $110,200 • Phase 2 – $106,000 • $386,640* Total Estimated Project Cost Previously Appropriated Funds Supplemental Appropriation Request: *Items assume a 20% contingency. For FTE items, contingency is represented by assuming a 24- month implementation period as compared to the 19- month planned implementation period. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The financial impact of implementing a new software system involves both upfront costs over the 19- month implementation period and subsequent ongoing expenses. Initial investments include the software license, professional services, and internal staffing backfill/support. After the first two years, there will be fixed annual subscription costs for a 3-year period which will then increase at an anticipated 3% rate annually starting year 6. Implementation Period Suggested Funding Previously Appropriated Funds Amount (reserve generated by $700,000 General Fund Reserves – 2023/2024 BFO $1,400,000 Change Management Funds $40,000 Total Previously Appropriated Funds $2,140,000 Suggested Funds to be Appropriated Amount General Fund Unanticipated Revenue $1,417,005 Page 64 of 230 Council Committee Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 9 of 11 (CEF Administrative Allowance) Total Funds to be Appropriated $3,696,424 Total Estimated Project Cost $5,836,624,000 *These sources are comprised of multiple funding streams that fall within the category. The exact breakdown within categories is still to be decided. Tyler Technologies also offers managed professional services for on-going system support that will require additional consideration from City IT Leadership. This is an optional cost and could mitigate the need for hiring additional personnel for ongoing maintenance and servicing of the software. System Funding for Ongoing Subscription Costs The system will require a yearly subscription cost which is estimated to be approximately $700k for the first five years. At the conclusion of five years, a yearly inflationary rate of 3% will be applied. At this time, subscription cost is estimated to $700K as there are Tyler support add-ons that could increase prices by approximately $200k. The necessity of these add-ons continues to be evaluated. The ongoing subscription cost is anticipated to be managed in one or two ways: 1. Reinstatement of a 1.5% fee on all eligible transactions for system payment. There is historical precedence for this fee as it has been previously assessed to pay for the existing legacy system. The exact percentage of the fee could be adjusted to meet and not exceed cost recovery. Certain items such as capital expansion fees would not be subject to the fee due to concerns surrounding the legality of capital expansion fee usage. 2. A model that assigns cost based on system usage. The two implementation years will allow for further development of a suggested methodology. In both scenarios, it is anticipated that at a minimum the General Fund, Utilities Funds, & the Transportation Fund would contribute to ongoing subscription costs. As part of the scope of the project, the system is anticipated to fold in departments who have had a limited use case under the existing legacy system. The scope identified providing functionality to the following user groups: • Environmental Services • Community Development and Neighborhood Services • Poudre Fire Authority • Engineering • Utilities • City Clerk’s Office • City Manager’s Office • Natural Areas • Parks • Information Technology • External Agencies Tyler Technologies will bring expertise and experience to the project. The documented business processes will serve as the basis for testing, training, and future process improvements. Page 65 of 230 Council Committee Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 10 of 11 PUBLIC OUTREACH Over the years, the City has conducted numerous surveys centered around external customer experience with the development review process and most recently, the evaluation of our Current State of Customer Service that is being led by the City Manager’s Office. Development Review Public Outreach The Development Review Group has conducted numerous surveys that have consistently identified pain points in our development review process. These surveys revealed that staff struggled to keep pace with the administrative demands of reviewing development projects, and inefficient tools further contributed to lower-than-expected satisfaction within the development community. Since the introduction of Development Review Coordinators in 2018, a significant administrative gap has been filled. However, several key pain points exist, which include: • Excessive Review Cycles and Subjective Reviews Respondents frequently cited too many rounds of review, overly lengthy processes. • Ineffective Meetings: Poorly organized and unproductive meetings wasted valuable time and resources. • Need for a Simplified Process for Small Projects: Respondents suggested streamlining the review process for smaller projects to reduce administrative burdens. • Limited Electronic Options: A lack of robust online tools hindered efficiency and user experience. This project is anticipated to help re-engineer processes, streamline tasks, and introduce more automated workflows to significantly reduce the administrative burden on staff, and free up time to focus on critical discussions with our community. We also anticipate greater emphasis on self-serve workflows and tools for customers which will save time, walk customers through the process, and identify the status of their project without exchanging emails or calls with staff. Below is a high-level summary of the most recent surveys and studies completed. Current State of Customer Service The current state of customer service report gathered information from 43 participants from departments such as finance, utilities, community services, police services, planning, development, and transportation. The implementation of this project aims to align the City’s objectives by modernizing our technology, providing a standardized level of service to customers, unifying the customer experience, and breaking down departmental silos that impede collaboration. Page 66 of 230 Council Committee Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 11 of 11 Future Communications Plan As part of this appropriation request, staff proposes to fund a communication lead who will develop a communications plan that will include a public outreach component. A significant shift in how customers interact with the City is anticipated, requiring a clear and concise communication strategy to inform residents and businesses about these changes. This strategy will include a variety of channels, such as the City's website, social media, email newsletters, and traditional media outlets. Additionally, public meetings and training workshops may be held to provide opportunities for direct feedback and input from the community. ATTACHMENTS 1. InfoTech - Development Review, Licensing, Permitting, and Inspection Strategy and Roadmap Workshop Report 2. Prosci – Discovery Report Page 67 of 230 Development Review, Licensing, Permitting and Inspection Strategy and Roadmap Workshop Report Info-Tech Research Group Inc. is a global leader in providing IT research and advice. Info-Tech’s products and services combine actionable insight and relevant advice with ready-to-use tools and templates that cover the full spectrum of IT concerns. © 1997-2023 Info-Tech Research Group Inc. July 21, 2023 City of Fort Collins Disclaimer: This is a typical report expected from an engagement. Final results may vary depending on the statement of work (SOW) between Info-tech & the client.Page 68 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 2 Executive Summary •Engagement overview •System description •Business model •Challenges •Future state •Strategy roadmap Alignment and Scope •Vision & guiding principles •City goals & benefits •Scope •Competing Priorities Development review, licensing, permitting and inspection definition •Operating model •Capability maturity description •Process inventory •Process prioritization •Application portfolio Project Plan •Stakeholder analysis •Risks and mitigation strategies •Critical Success Factors Contents •Level 1 Decomposition: •Land Management •Permits and Licensing •Code Enforcement •Customer Service and Shred Functions Use Cases Key Success Indicators Current Pain Points Future State Requirements •Vendor landscape •Related Info-Tech research Appendix Page 69 of 230 INFO-TECH RESEARCH GROUP | 3 Engagement Overview Info-Tech Research Group (ITRG) conducted a three-day Development Review, Licensing, Permitting and Inspections Digital Strategy workshop with the City of Fort Collins during the period of . The stakeholders who participated in the three-day engagement provided valuable organizational knowledge and subject matter expertise. These stakeholders came from the following departments within the City of Fort Collins. Participating stakeholders contributed towards furthering the following objectives during the workshop: •Holistic view of Development Review, Licensing, Permitting and Inspections concepts and set expectations •Understanding of departmental capabilities and processes •Understand current state, gaps and opportunities •Validate and high-level Development Review, Licensing, Permitting and Inspections requirements •Identify desired target state and develop Development Review, Licensing, Permitting and Inspections Operating Model •Determine Development Review, Licensing, Permitting and Inspections guiding principles and critical success factors •Understand stakeholders and identify risk mitigation strategies •Discuss and agree upon future state options •Align the Development Review, Licensing, Permitting and Inspections roadmap with organizational needs and capabilities 0 •Environmental Services •Community Development and Neighborhood Services •Poudre Fire Authority •Engineering •Utilities •Customer Support •Planning Services •Meter Division •City Clerks Office •City Mangers Office •Information Technology Page 70 of 230 INFO-TECH RESEARCH GROUP | 4 •Development review, licensing, permitting and inspection systems facilitate the flow of information across business units. It allows for seamless integration of systems and creates a holistic view of the enterprise to support decision making •In many organizations, these systems are considered the lifeblood of the organization. Lack of functionality around these functions will have a dramatic impact on the ability of the city to provide services to their customers. •A licensing, permitting and inspection system: •Supports these processes through technology •Automates workflows •Streamlines processes •Allows for digital enablement •A development review, licensing, permitting and inspection system does NOT include CRM (Customer Service Management) capabilities Development review, licensing, permitting and inspection system use cases: USE CASES 0 PERMITS & INSPECTIONS Streamline and automate permit approval and inspections process. Keep track of planning applications and milestones and adhere to comprehensive development plans. Track and manage enforcement incidents from citizen complaint to case resolution. Automate business licensing from application and approvals to payments and renewals. Uphold community standards by providing easily accessible mechanisms for constituents to make requests, complaints, and inquiries. Page 71 of 230 INFO-TECH RESEARCH GROUP | 5 Development review, licensing, permitting and inspections are about much more than just technology Enablers Business Needs Technology Drivers Environmental Factors Organizational Goals •Increasing populations •Housing – attainability, affordability •Workforce Issues – lack of resources, turnover •Need for hybrid/remote capabilities •Changing customer service models •Funding •Regulations •Elections •Change Fatigue •Exceptional service for an exceptional community. •Systems that promote a thriving and engaged community through the lens of operational excellence and culture of innovation •Themes: •Digital Transformation •Recovery to Resilience •Complexity to Simplicity – Customer Focus •Talent 0 •Holistic customer experience and approach •Support internal and external communications •Modern robust platform - integrated across city •Transparency for external and internal users •Dashboarding – operational excellence, measure service delivery, volumes, metrics and KPIs •Compliance and security of system and data •Robust platform - integrated across a broad areas •Configurable and able to handle special requests •Innovation and employee enablement •Ability to see beginning to end and historical data •Prioritization of tasks •Responsive vendor •Support staff with up-to-date tools •Fee Management – understanding actual costs and setting these effectively to recoup costs •Automation and workflows •Document and Record management •Standardize the data model •Holistic integrated application portfolio •Analytics & metrics •Improved IT Service Delivery •Freeing up time for value work •Work within short and long-term goals and constraints •Empower our internal users •Drive efficiencies •Employee and end user-self service •Standard APIs for integration with other systems •Credit Card processing •No product or process owners •Competing priorities •Decision Making •Cultural shift •Customer resistance •Resourcing ,skill set •Participation across depts •Training & documentation •Customization requests •Code / council approval •Ancillary funding – ongoing •service delivery model Barriers •OCM champion •Owner and decision maker •City Mangers Office support •Partnership across org •Cross functional team •Regular check-ins with staff •Resourcing Requirements •Build Trust / Move ahead •Project timeline to plan to Development review, licensing, permitting and inspections Strategy Business Model and Aligned Strategy Page 72 of 230 INFO-TECH RESEARCH GROUP | 6 The City of Fort Collins discussed and identified their development review, licensing, permitting and inspection related challenges •Manual processes – many processes are manual and not being facilitated by the current tool. •Gaps in technology - some processes are not able to be supported within current tools and software. •Lack of centralized customer information (CRM)– Lack of CRM system hinders visibility and communication channels for supporting departments. •Lack of product ownership – product ownership lack centralization creating lack of knowledge and enablement with current tools. •Minimal transparency and visibility across and within business capabilities – lack of visibility across city functions and within capability areas (for example status and requirements across different departments difficult to see) •Lack of process ownership and governance – gap in overarching strategic process ownership, design, and metrics. Process design is often reactive and approached with guard rails rather than from a proactive customer- centric perspective. •No single source of truth - data residing in multiple systems and formats across city departments •Varying customer service delivery models – customer service requirements currently vary across the organization from high-touch to desiring self- service. Alignment across departments and services would be beneficial. •Disjointed digital experience for consumers of city services – varying methods and levels of customer engagement create a confusing and difficult to navigate experience for customers of these processes •Voice of the customer not understood (unified vision in progress) •Lack of digital enablement - gaps in technology for those who cannot make it into the office in person •Confusing website navigation and content •Disjointed Metrics - lack of operational “metrics that matter” •Reporting and Analytics –reporting and analytics is cumbersome and difficult. •No common data model – efforts are in motion to correct this. •Lack of integrations – enterprise architecture has been identified as playing a critical role in this initiative. Current State Challenges 0 Page 73 of 230 INFO-TECH RESEARCH GROUP | 7 The City of Fort Collins explored options and decided to replace their current system to achieve their ideal future state Strategy Potential future state description Maintain current system Augment current system Optimize: Consolidate & current systems Replace current system The existing application satisfies both functionality and integration requirements. The processes surrounding it likely need attention, but the system should be considered for retention. The existing application is, for the most part, functionally rich, but may need some tweaking. Spend time and effort building and enhancing additional functionalities or consolidating and integrating interfaces. The development review, licensing, permitting and inspection application portfolio consists of multiple apps serving the same functions. Consolidating applications with duplicate functionality is more cost efficient and makes integration and data sharing simpler.The current configuration does not meet the long term needs of the organization. It would likely be more cost and time efficient to replace the application and its surrounding processes altogether. Replace current system Replace the system to address gaps in the existing processes and various pain points Indicators Potential solution Technology pain points •Existing implementation and software version lacks functionality •Poor integration in place with other applications. •Not aligned with technology direction or enterprise architecture plans. •Evaluate the development review, licensing, permitting and inspection technology landscape. •Determine if you need to replace the current system with a point solution or an all-in-one solution. •Align development review, licensing, permitting and inspection technologies with enterprise architecture. Data pain points •Limited capability to store, retrieve data. •Understand the data requirements. Process pain points •Insufficient tools to manage workflow.•Review end-to-end processes. •Assess user satisfaction. Development review, licensing, permitting and inspection Option Selection (Future State) 0 Page 74 of 230 INFO-TECH RESEARCH GROUP | 8 Info-Tech recommends that the City of Fort Collins undertake the following steps to improve its development review, licensing, permitting and inspection effectiveness Key Recommendations •Develop a cross-functional team with strong governance. This will include a steering team, a selection committee and implementation resources. Leadership and key positions are imperative to push vison and coordinate change from the top down. •Establish product and process governance. Include the city roadmap and overarching goals and objectives. •Build out a resourcing plan. This is a significant effort that will require input from stakeholders and subject matter experts (SMEs) in many areas of the city departments. Develop an approach to handle the additional workload to avoid employee turnover and burnout. Look to ensuring success by including the following roles: •Team leads and decision makers •Subject matter experts •External resources including - organizational change management champion, project manager, process engineer, and training resources •Backfilling and cross training for key internal positions. •Bring in external resources to move the initiative forward including the roadmap and project plan selection and implementation phases. •Allow adequate time for selection and implementation. This will be a multi-year implementation. Given the high number of affected users and participants, participation, training and change management will be essential for the success of the future state. •Take a broad approach to business process reengineering. View processes across the city as they interact with each other and refrain from siloed thinking. Encourage senior leadership to push changes down from the top. Be proactive in process design and avoid reactive changes •Start with the end in mind and take an agile approach to this initiative. Include the customer journey, customer service delivery models, departmental and technical needs to inform the project, and forge ahead with implementing systems that offer exceptional service and operational excellence. •Clarify Metrics that Matter. Clearly define and understand metrics around customer service, efficiencies, resourcing that will deliver on excellence. •Embrace Organizational Change Management. This is a large effort that is going to affect many parts of city processes. Develop an OCM strategy to ensure that employees support rather than resist the changes to systems and processes. •Consider the needs around CRM and customer information. Customer Relationship Management has been identified as a gap in scope and will need to be addressed. •Find the best fit solution for city processes and embrace native best in class functionality with minimal customization. •Encourage across the city. •Document Use Cases attached to Mega Processes and departmental functions. •Continue to build out requirements and identify high-priority requirements. •Develop an integration strategy including the data model and enterprise architecture. •Include Master Data Management Strategy: Continue to develop and enforce a master data management and data strategy to improve data availability and retention schedules. 0 Page 75 of 230 INFO-TECH RESEARCH GROUP | 9 As per the chosen option, the City of Fort Collins developed a future state roadmap to operationalize development review, licensing, permitting and inspection Strategy Initiative Owner Others Start Date Duration Target Completion Date Complete Homework slides SMEs Dept. Teams July 11, 2023 3 days July 14, 2023 Create final workshop deliverable Lisa Jerry July 12, 2023 1 week July 21, 2023 Establish Governance Alyssa Malinda, Paul, Denzel others as needed/project team July 19,2023 2 weeks July 28, 2023 Engage with third party resources to define scope of work and preliminary costs for the project facilitation. (Determine PM Role and requirements) Alyssa Malinda July 19, 2023 2 weeks July 28, 2023 Refine the project team Alyssa Malinda, Paul, others as needed July 17, 2023 1.5 weeks July 21, 2023 Put together initial Communication Plan Alyssa Malinda, Paul, Denzel July 17, 2023 2 weeks July 28th, 2023 Draft of the Project Charter Alyssa Malinda, Paul, Denzel others as needed/project team July 17,2023 1 weeks July 28, 2023 Review Workshop Deliverable with ITRG Lisa Alyssa Malinda July 24, 2023 1 week July 28th, 2023 Meet with executive sponsors and CMO office to debrief on the initiative. Alyssa (to coordinate) Malinda, Paul, (utilize existing team for this) ~Mid-August Strategy Roadmap 0 Page 76 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 10 Executive Summary •Engagement overview •System description •Business model •Challenges •Future state •Strategy roadmap Alignment and Scope •Vision & guiding principles •City goals & benefits •Scope •Competing Priorities Development review, licensing, permitting and inspection definition •Operating model •Capability maturity description •Process inventory •Process prioritization •Application portfolio Project Plan •Stakeholder analysis •Risks and mitigation strategies •Critical Success Factors Contents •Level 1 Decomposition: •Land Management •Permits and Licensing •Code Enforcement •Customer Service and Shred Functions Use Cases Key Success Indicators Current Pain Points Future State Requirements •Vendor landscape •Related Info-Tech research Appendix Page 77 of 230 INFO-TECH RESEARCH GROUP | 11 The City of Fort Collins’s development review, licensing, permitting and inspection Vision & Guiding Principles “The City of Fort Collins, will select and implement an integrated software suite moving toward an efficient, user- friendly system that meets our standards for excellence and allows staff to focus time on the most valuable activities.” Operational Excellence and Agility Support our team with process and tools that enable innovation and excellence. Take and agile approach adopting standard practice wile allowing room for unique needs. Uphold transparency as a value through the design of process and systems that support internal and external stakeholders and their access to data. Future State Process Engineering Take a proactive approach to process configuration focusing on a holistic customer journey. Organizational Change Management Actively include change management throughout the initiative, communicating early and often. Equity & Diversity Understand the diversity of the communities we serve and strive to meet people where they are at. 1 Transparency Ease of Use and Self-Service Support process and systems that enable our users and customer allowing for effective outcomes. Committed at all levels of the organization to strategically align around this initiative. This includes strong leadership, clear roles and responsibilities, through full execution. Resourcing Adequately resource the project throughout to ensure success. This includes an agile forward- looking approach. Be mindful of staff capacity and bandwidth. Coordination and Integration Work collaboratively across city initiatives and leverage opportunities to successfully implement design and system outcomes. Governance Page 78 of 230 INFO-TECH RESEARCH GROUP | 12 The City of Fort Collins’s development review, licensing, permitting and inspection benefits directly support its corporate goals Mission: Exceptional service for an exceptional community Vision: Systems that promote a thriving and engaged community through the lens of operational excellence ​​​​​​​and culture of innovation Digital Transformation •Meet the need of a diverse customer population - allow the city to meet the expectations of a diverse community through digital services •Transparency and visibility – ease of use, integrated operations across city departments, clear understanding of who to go to, what the process is and status •Automate and create efficiencies - create bandwidth for staff to focus on high-value services •Embrace best in class technology and industry standards – commitment to business process engineering and adoption of technology with minimal customization •Ease of use – support our staff and customers by developing easy to use and navigate systems • – offer our customers strategic service delivery models •Access to information – allow our internal and external stakeholders easy to access information around processes •Integration across departments and systems– reduce handoffs between departments and integrate systems across the city •Compliance – ensure compliance and checkpoints are built into the system and processes. Test automation and learn what will work best. •Efficient and Timely Service – create automated efficiencies to help ease the burden on staff to deliver on tight targets. Allow the system to handle agile processes. •Data and Reporting –pull reports easily and efficiently. Allow for more self-service and access to data. •Established Data Model and Architecture including retention policy. •Usability - Consistent and streamlined service experience •Documentation and Training - support city wide system and software documentation and training •System Access – across departments and enabling field employees •Customer Information and History – (CRM needs) one source of truth for customer data including historical records and case management. •Operational Support – consistent SAAS systems and support services across the city. Benefits 1 Recovery to Resilience Complexity to Simplicity – Customer Focus TalentGo a l s Be n e f i t s Page 79 of 230 INFO-TECH RESEARCH GROUP | 13 The City of Fort Collins formulated scope statements to decide which people, processes, and functions the development review, licensing, permitting and inspection strategy will address Scope statements In scope In scope (integration perspective) Peripheral scope •Accela Replacement •All Licensing, permitting and code enforcement processes across various city departments including: •GIS - ArcView •Bluebeam •Citizen Portals •Website •Future CRM •CRM •Citizen Portals •Website Scope definition 1 •Environmental Services •Community Development and Neighborhood Services •Poudre Fire Authority •Engineering •Utilities •Customer Support •Planning Services •Meter Division •City Clerks Office •City Mangers Office •Information Technology •Crystal reports, •NCR (Credit card processing), •MuniRev (Sales Tax), •Tungsten (refunds), •{Adobe (markup, need for plan review software) •Citizen Porta, Access Fort Collins •Selectron - Text Message and phone IVR system. •Paper Files & Shared Folders •Laser Fiche •Microsoft Office Suite – Word, Excel (Spreadsheets), Microsoft Access (Zoning) •Encampment software, CIS (VerTexOne) •Utilities System •Power BI •NetMotion (field service) •Arial imagery Integration or consolidation of a number of systems including: All Licensing, permitting and code enforcement processes across various city departments including: Page 80 of 230 INFO-TECH RESEARCH GROUP | 14 The City of Fort Collins identified competing priorities to ascertain appropriate resources and attention from business and the IT organization Project Timeline Implications Departmental Specific Projects Ongoing Resourcing bandwidth CX, Website and Content management, Etc.Ongoing There are some dependencies, but we cannot wait. -Resourcing Requirements -Purchasing Department / Legal bandwidth will be important Land Development Code (CDNS team)Ongoing Process design engineering, resourcing impacts Rental Registration Program Ongoing Process design engineering, resourcing impacts Utilities Billing Ongoing Integrations impacted Building Code Adoption Bi-Annual Process design engineering, resourcing impacts GIS Modernization Project Ongoing Integrations impacted Other enterprise with system replacements and integrations (example ERP upgrade, credit card/finance processes) Future State Process design engineering, resourcing impacts Integrations impacted Competing projects 1 Page 81 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 15 Executive Summary •Engagement overview •System description •Business model •Challenges •Future state •Strategy roadmap Alignment and Scope •Vision & guiding principles •City goals & benefits •Scope •Competing Priorities Development review, licensing, permitting and inspection definition •Operating model •Capability maturity description •Process inventory •Process prioritization •Application portfolio Project Plan •Stakeholder analysis •Risks and mitigation strategies •Critical Success Factors Contents •Level 1 Decomposition: •Land Management •Permits and Licensing •Code Enforcement •Customer Service and Shred Functions Use Cases Key Success Indicators Current Pain Points Future State Requirements •Vendor landscape •Related Info-Tech research Appendix Page 82 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 16 Development review, licensing, permitting and inspection operating model reflects the complete list of mega-processes and their prioritization at the City of Fort Collins Strategy & Governance Supporting Departmental Strategy Departmental Planning Continuous Improvement Development Review, Licensing, Permitting and Inspection Governance KPIs Cu s t o m e r s Planning and Development Permits and Licensing Code Enforcement Customer Service Shared Functionality Records Mgmt. | Accessibility | Self Service | Usability | Customer Portals | Payment Processing (Credit Card Services) Ou t p u t s In p u t s 2 Ci t y D e p a r t m e n t s a n d O p e r a t i o n s Page 83 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 17 Capability maturity description Weak Moderate Strong •The process is undocumented •Exceptions to the process result in fire fighting •There is no process consistency •The process has some documentation •Exception handling not documented •Process somewhat consistently executed •Process full documented •Exception handling is documented •Process executed consistently •The process is not handled by software •The process is manual using ad hoc tools such as Excel •The process is partially executed in software •Certain steps happen outside the software, e.g., Approvals via email •The process executes completely within the software •All steps, approvals, and documentation are captured and accessible in the software Process TechnologyCapability Level 2 Page 84 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 18 The City of Fort Collins discussed business capabilities, value streams, and business processes to generate an organization wide development review, licensing, permitting and inspection process inventory Planning and Development Permits and Licensing Code Enforcement Customer Service and Shared Functionality Process Technology Process Technology Process Technology Process Technology •Land Development Applications •Lot/Land Management - Attributes •Schedule / Conduct Planning Inspections •Manage application details •New Lot/Land Creation •Subdivision Plan Management •Maintain Fee Schedule •Accept Payments •Land Use Inquiries (Also land use app’s w/ a charge) •Zoning Violations •Manage Permit/License Applications •Receive/validate •Process applications •Issue Permits/ License •Renew Permits/ License •Maintain Fee Schedule •Calculate/Manage Application Fees •Manage Parking Passes •Track Permits •Receive Payment •Manage Inspections •Schedule Inspections •Perform Inspections •Manage Complaints •Identify Infractions •Issue Tickets •Perform Adjudication / Provincial Court •Conduct Inspections •Maintain Fee Schedule •Accept Payments •Other Service Requests Intake •Assign/Route/Schedule (Internal/External) •Perform Service •Complete Service Request •Service Request Tracking – (internal and external users, transparency) •Maintain Fee Schedule •Accept Payments •Customer Service (example walk-ins) •-- •Records management •Accessibility •Self/Service Usability •Portal •Credit Card Services Current State capability maturity Strong Moderate Weak Development Review, Licensing, Permitting and Inspection Process inventory 2 Page 85 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 19 The City of Fort Collins prioritized development review, licensing, permitting and inspection processes which can potentially impact vendor selection and implementation roadmap Process and Requirement Prioritization 2 Pr o c e s s R i g o u r Organizational Importance StrategicOperational Get the Job Done Best Practice Parity You need to do these processes well. Lagging behind in this category can harm the ability to manage City resources effectively. Strategic Processes of utmost strategic importance to the City. These support the Strategic Goals.Cost effectiveness is a must. Operational Business processes that are not frequently done and of low value. It is not necessary to invest capital into. Competitive These processes allow the City to meet objectives even if they are not the gold standard. •Priorities will emerge during requirements gathering. •Look for a system that will meet city with licensing and permitting needs understanding that first priority is given to supporting existing processes. •Senior leadership input will be required to prioritize functional requirements. Priority 1 Must Haves Page 86 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 20 The City of Fort Collins developed an inventory of their applications that support the development review, licensing, permitting and inspection business processes Application Portfolio (Applications currently being used to support in-scope processes) 2 •Accela •ArcView •JDE •Microsoft Office •Utilities System •Customer Portals, Access Fort Collins •Accela, Accela Mobile (inspectors code compliance) •crystal reports, •NCR (Credit card processing), •MuniRev (Sales Tax), •Tungsten (refunds), •Accela electronic document review software {Building) •BlueBeam (Dev Review) •Adobe (markup, need for plan review software) •Scheduling (current) Citizen Portal, Text Message and phone IVR system. (vendor Selectron) •Paper Files •Shared Folders – S Drive. •Laser Fiche) •Microsoft Access (Zoning) •IVR (Scheduling) / Cisco IVR (Integration will be important in the future) •Encampment tool and software (ties into GIS), used for field locations •CIS (VerTexOne) (will be an integration) •Power BI •Login credentials for external users – Google etc. •NetMotion (field service) •Arial imagery •Other Page 87 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 21 Executive Summary •Engagement overview •System description •Business model •Challenges •Future state •Strategy roadmap Alignment and Scope •Vision & guiding principles •City goals & benefits •Scope •Competing Priorities Development review, licensing, permitting and inspection definition •Operating model •Capability maturity description •Process inventory •Process prioritization •Application portfolio Project Plan •Stakeholder analysis •Risks and mitigation strategies •Critical Success Factors Contents •Level 1 Decomposition: •Land Management •Permits and Licensing •Code Enforcement •Customer Service and Shred Functions Use Cases Key Success Indicators Current Pain Points Future State Requirements •Vendor landscape •Related Info-Tech research Appendix Page 88 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 22 The City of Fort Collins mapped the stakeholders based on their expected Influence and involvement in the development review, licensing, permitting and inspection project Involvement In f l u e n c e Involve Closely (2)Keep Satisfied (1) Keep Informed (4)Monitor (3) List of Stakeholders a. Applicants – Engaging Customers, Developers, Builders, Contractors, Homeowners b.Non-compliant Customers c.Informational Customers d.Super User e.Standard /Casual User f.Other Government agencies g.Council h.Decision Makers/Senior Stakeholders/Upper Management i.Project Sponsor j.Project Team k.OCM Resource l.Process Engineer Resource m.Boards and Commissions Stakeholder mapping 3 A B C D E F G H I J K L M Page 89 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 23 The City of Fort Collins identified potential risks that may impede the successful completion of project and for each risk, planned mitigation tactics Potential Risk Impact Likelihood Mitigation Effort Resourcing and staff bandwidth Look at backfilling, cross training, any opportunities to free up bandwidth from critical team members. Decrease regular duty obligations. Look for consultants and external resources. Full Time Project Manager Look for support for this early. Look for external resourcing. Ask for resourcing early along with OCM and Process Engineer Consultant. Budget Work to be aware of costs early. Ask for additional budget and resourcing. Governance Past failures have helped us learn that this is critical to our success. Build in governance model as soon as possible. Work with core team and executive sponsors to get this in place. Vendor Management Lack of product owner has led to issues on other projects. A product owner should be identified. Vendor management should be coordinated between IT and the business. (Coordinate release plans, test plans (internal and external), etc.) Measure vendor performance, SLAs, PSAs. Escalate support. Use concepts such as MVP, iterate over time. Rating Scale: Impact: 1- High Risk 2- Moderate Risk 3- Minimal Risk Likelihood: 1- High/Needs Focus 2- Can Be Mitigated 3- Remote Likelihood Potential risks and mitigation strategies 3 Page 90 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 24 The City of Fort Collins identified potential risks that may impede the successful completion of project and for each risk, planned mitigation tactics Potential Risk Impact Likelihood Mitigation Effort Internal and External Organization Change Management (Including: Messaging/Communications/Training ) Look for an external resource to manage OCM. Involving appropriate resources throughout the project and initiative Ongoing resourcing plan. Requesting form vendor and SI what the internal resource requirements will be. CRM Functionality Full functionality around these capability areas may not be realized without CRM functionality. Communicate this to the team. Include CRM in future project plans and budgeting. User Resistance This may vary across user groups (for example developers). User resistance will require additional effort to mitigate. Make sure we have strong training tools and OCM for all user groups. (user believability that this will move forward also a risk) Rating Scale: Impact: 1- High Risk 2- Moderate Risk 3- Minimal Risk Likelihood: 1- High/Needs Focus 2- Can Be Mitigated 3- Remote Likelihood 3 Potential risks and mitigation strategies Page 91 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 25 The City of Fort Collins identified potential risks that may impede the successful completion of project and for each risk, planned mitigation tactics Potential Risk Impact Likelihood Mitigation Effort Loss of a key stakeholder/knowledge Identifying key stakeholders, regular pulse checks on the team, measuring the health of the team, cross training, knowledge transfer, documentation. Council and electoral changes Be aware of risk. Communicate with new members the importance of this project in relation to other projects. CMO Philosophy Communication, include in the governance of the project. Rating Scale: Impact: 1- High Risk 2- Moderate Risk 3- Minimal Risk Likelihood: 1- High/Needs Focus 2- Can Be Mitigated 3- Remote Likelihood 3 Potential risks and mitigation strategies Page 92 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 26 The City of Fort Collins explored the success factors related to the development review, licensing, permitting and inspection initiative Critical Success Factors for Large Enterprise Initiatives 1.Top Management Support 2.Inter-division communication and cooperation 3.Commitment to business process reengineering 4.Implementation project management from initiation to post go live 5.Change management program 6.Project team competence 7.Education and training for stakeholders 8.Project champion to lead implementation and resources 9.Project vision and mission 10.Consultants and expertise 11.Minimum level of customization 12.System selection (professional requirements-based selection) 13.Consideration of culture in the process (norms, values, beliefs) 14.User involvement and participation throughout the project 15.Vendor support and Partnership Critical success factors 0 Fort Collins Critical Success Factors •Better linkages between the permitting and Land Development processes. Ability to see history and background information on a property. •Coordination of permits that might be happening under a project umbrella. Keep these processes consolidated and centrally visible. •Leadership and key positions helping push that coordination and change from the top down. •Integrated processes and solutions. •Autonomous coordination of processes •Centralizing application process •Create resourcing bandwidth to address process and subprocess reengineering •Letting go of the history and stay focused on the future •Support from above •Approval to not to be reactionary when there is an issue and pressure to change process •Maintain the ability to communicate and build relationships between the formal processes •Hearing from the customer to understand what they need, what information they need to find, the customer experience feedback •Build our internal support infrastructure – ensure we have people in the right positions to help support this initiative and ensure its success Page 93 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 27 Executive Summary •Engagement overview •System description •Business model •Challenges •Future state •Strategy roadmap Alignment and Scope •Vision & guiding principles •City goals & benefits •Scope •Competing Priorities Development review, licensing, permitting and inspection definition •Operating model •Capability maturity description •Process inventory •Process prioritization •Application portfolio Project Plan •Stakeholder analysis •Risks and mitigation strategies •Critical Success Factors Contents •Level 1 Decomposition: •Land Management •Permits and Licensing •Code Enforcement •Customer Service and Shred Functions Use Cases Key Success Indicators Current Pain Points Future State Requirements •Vendor landscape •Related Info-Tech research Appendix Page 94 of 230 INFO-TECH RESEARCH GROUP | 28 Planning and Development Page 95 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 29 Planning and Development LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Brandy Department: •. Rank the Process Maturity for current processes.(highlight appropriate choice) •Strong Process-Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based All activities linked to land and building development and management. Development review, planning, long range planning. USE CASE: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW •Status and understanding of where a process is at (with the City or with the applicant), how to size the projects – match scale of the project to requirements, •Some use of Accela but not all of the process is handled there (Bluebeam), development review not able to accept payments online automatically currently, communications very manual/email etc., Bluebeam collaboration not fully available, Process contacts not searchable or visible, information access limited and cumbersome, Access to records and ability to approve documents cumbersome (Laserfiche is a monster of its own), behind the times in technology, generating comment letters manual (validate this), coordination difficult, shared folders, lots of extra work and effort trying to understand status and move a process along, Task assignment difficult, GIS integration, searching difficult, •Having one system be able to handle process from beginning to end, Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, task assignment, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing, integration with GIS, online submittals for internal staff (?(access for applicants) (intake process, upload documents, view status)), handle rounds of review, be able to identify bad players, automated reminders, customer centered design, compliance •Note conceptual review and minor amendment may be different Page 96 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 30 Planning and Development LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Brandy Department: •. Pr o c e s s St e p Application Review Enter Information Review Workflows start Meetings Scheduled Letters Generated to applicant team Applicant resubmits Hearing Decision Making /Recording Accept Payments Close Application Customer Service Supporting Services Detailed Notes about your specific process. How is it similar/where does it differ? De t a i l s Includes: (Post conceptual review) Application received via email with supporting files Receive application and enter information Email, S Drive at this stage entered in to Accela and Blue beam Team works within Accela and Bluebeam There are set timeframes for the work process At these milestones, the status is reviewed, (Workflow tracked (manual) Coordination and meetings Microsoft letters Bluebeam now being tested) Accept and process payment. Reconcile with issue. 180 days (extension request or expired) •Intake applications •Intake inquiries •Correspond to citizens •Offer information •Update on Status •Policies and Procedures •Record Keeping and document management •Letter and correspondence templates •Status Tracking •Assign/Route/ •Schedule (Internal/External) •Perform Service •Complete Service Request •Service Request Tracking •Maintain Fee Schedule •Walk in Requests Page 97 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 31 Planning and Development LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Brandy Department: •. Page 98 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 32 Planning and Development LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Justin Moore/ Rob Bianchetto Department: •Zoning Rank the Process Maturity for current processes.(highlight appropriate choice) •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process -Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Land Use Review Commission variances •Ensuring applicant is requesting the correct variances, checking application for completeness •Getting applicants to follow instructions •One program to do it all (create/upload packet in same program) Page 99 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 33 Planning and Development LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Justin Moore/ Rob Bianchetto Department: •Zoning Pr o c e s s St e p Development Applications Communicati ons and Inquiry Management Lot/Land Management Schedule / Conduct Inspections Manage application details New Lot/Land Creation Subdivision Plan Management Make Determination Accept Payments Close Application Customer Service Supporting Services Detailed Notes about your specific process. How is it similar/where does it differ? De t a i l s Variance applications received via email or in- person They are usually submitted conversation about one being required. Generally do not receive variances wit hout expecting them Confirm receipt of electronic submissions via email Once review is complete, confirm with applicant date of hearing Schedule on- site visit for photographs Zoning Inspector for hearing presentation Review application for completeness Is variance required? Are the correct variances being additional variances on scope of request? Can the request even be made via a variance? Enter application information into Accela to house all documents that are submitted Assign fees Link to provided in email, for online payment Can pay over the credit card Can pay in- person with cash, check or credit card Can send check via USPS Admin combines all documents into a presentation. Sends out postcards with hearing neighboring properties. Uploads documents for public viewing. •Intake applications •Explains variance process •Determines if variance would be required, if the request can be considered as part of a variance •Offer information •Update on Status •Policies and Procedures •Record Keeping and document management •Letter and correspondence templates •Status Tracking •Assign/Route/ •Schedule (Internal/External) •Perform Service •Complete Service Request •Service Request Tracking •Maintain Fee Schedule •Walk in Requests •Application reviewed and processed •Applicant attends hearing at assigned date/time •City presents, applicant discusses proposal with the commission •Commission makes decision •Zoning Inspector needs to follow up in case a building permit or minor amendment a variance Page 100 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 34 Planning and Development LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Historic Preservation Services (Jim Bertolini) Department: •Community Development & Neighborhood Services Rank the Process Maturity for current processes.(highlight appropriate choice) •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process -Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper- based Historic Preservation is an input in the Development Review process. Our role is to ensure compliance with LUC 3.4.7 protecting cultural resources on development sites. Typically, this includes a Resubmittal requirement for historic survey (an evaluation of whether a property is an historic resource;usually handled at the Conceptual/Preliminary Development Review stage of a process (or earlier informal inquiry), and then the HP staffer reviewing the project against the historic preservation standards (if they apply) like a normal reviewer in Accela. Depending on the scale/scope of the project, the review may be referred to the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC - an all-volunteer quasi-judicial commission with certain land use duties). While there are some cases where HP staff/the HPC are decision-makers, in most cases of development review, HP staff/the HPC provide a recommendation to the decision-maker during the development review process. •Completion of historic survey prior to a PDP or similar submittal (i.e., avoiding an "Incomplete" when a development project submission comes in) •Preservation of Eligible resources on the development site/compatibility of new construction as required. •2 key points in our process are not counted in Accela and are processed manually: Historic survey (which includes an application and a fee payment; the fee is paid through Accela but it's a "miscellaneous" charge that requires coordination with the BDRT); and HPC documentation •Related to above – ancillary documents such as an historic survey form, or minutes from the HPC meeting, are not included in the Accela/development review record, unless they're manually added to a decision-maker packet for an admin hearing or P&Z hearing. •Connection between development review/development agreements is only manually connected to reviewing associated building permits. •Get currently external project components (historic survey, HPC review) connected to development review process •More seamless link between development entitlement process and confirming construction documents during building permit review Page 101 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 35 Planning and Development LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Historic Preservation Services (Jim Bertolini) Department: •Community Development & Neighborhood Services Pr o c e s s St e p Identification of Historic Survey Need Accept Payments Historic Survey Completed Project Review HPC Review Make Recommendat ion Customer Service Supporting Services Detailed Notes about your specific process. How is it similar/where does it differ? De t a i l s Determine if historic survey is needed Processed in Accela but not for fee payment; just marked as a MISC payment) Typically takes 4- payment. 3rd party contractor. Based on further project review is needed, Preservation staff begin working as an input to development review in Accela. For select projects, HP staff refer to HPC for decision. This may include a conceptual to securing a recommendation, and a formal recommendation from the HPC. HPC meets once a month so entire HPC review can take 3 months or more. Typically just tracked by HP staff entering requirements/r ecommendatio ns in Accela during PDP/FDP process. •Provide subject- at development or in separate/extern al meetings to process detail issues. •Record-keeping – at present, Historic Preservation records are not included in Accela or Laserfiche. •Can a development review process include ability to upload key documents? If so, for Historic Pres, this would be a copy of an historic survey record, if one was produced and draft minutes of an HPC meeting where a recommendation was made. •Laserfiche is a larger issue (related to capacity to set up a cabinet and process legacy data into it), but aiming to integrate digital records (once digitized) with GIS and with permit applications when relevant. Largely, the Historic Preservation process itself is not separate from the larger development review process. Our section provides a recommendation to the decision-maker so it's a matter of getting the right info inputted at the right moment to be effective. The key 2 critical pathways that exist entirely outside of our development review tracking system. Development Review •Application, •Planning process •Review •Infrastructure review process, •Construction phase, acceptance, •Building permit •-> building/ zoning etc. Page 102 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 36 Planning and Development LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Marc Virata •. Department: Engineering •. Pr o c e s s St e p Development Applications Communicati ons and Inquiry Management Lot/Land Management Schedule / Conduct Inspections Manage application details New Lot/Land Creation Subdivision Plan Management Make Determination Accept Payments Close Application Customer Service Supporting Services Detailed Notes about your specific process. How is it similar/where does it differ? De t a i l s Includes providing comments on PDP level review, final plan review .Review drawings for determination of eligibility Close review •Review of public infrastructure plans (utility plans) •Review of Traffic Study •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process -Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Makes comments in occasion on development applications with respect to whether there is eligibility for reimbursement to developers on infrastructure being installed from the Transportation Capital Expansion Fee (TCEF) Program. •Sufficient level of information on the plans to make the determination on eligibility for reimbursement. •Coordination with Development Review Engineering on verification that the infrastructure is designed to meet standards and is considered "ultimate" and not "interim" improvements, which would not be eligible for reimbursement. •Ability to better link and find the Planning and Development case history through to the Permitting. They're treated as separate modules and linkages between the two are sometimes difficult to make connections. •Having one system be able to handle process from beginning to end Page 103 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 37 Planning and Development LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Tyler Siegmund Department Light and Power Engineering Pr o c e s s St e p Development Applications Communicati ons and Inquiry Management Lot/Land Management Schedule / Conduct Inspections Manage application details New Lot/Land Creation Subdivision Plan Management Make Determination Accept Payments Close Application Customer Service Supporting Services Detailed Notes about your specific process. How is it similar/where does it differ? De t a i l s Provide comments related to electric design/servic e. Ensure electric service being met .Review drawings and standards are being met •Review plans and coordinate electric design with applicants. •Provide markups in Bluebeam •Enter comments into Accela •Review preliminary electric loads to ensure electric design can handle proposed loads •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process -Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Coordinate with applicants to layout an electrical design for the proposed development Ensure electric service standards are being met •Design electric infrastructure for all projects so applicant can add to the development plans •Some use of Accela but not all of the process is handled there (Bluebeam), , communications very manual/email etc., Bluebeam collaboration not fully available, Process contacts not searchable or visible, information access limited and cumbersome, Access to records and ability to approve documents cumbersome (Laserfiche is a monster of its own), behind the times in technology,coordination difficult, shared folders, lots of extra work and effort trying to understand status and move a process along, Task assignment difficult, GIS integration, searching difficult, •Having one system be able to handle process from beginning to end, Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, task assignment, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing, integration with GIS, online submittals for internal staff (?(access for applicants) (intake process, upload documents, view status)), handle rounds of review, be able to identify bad players, automated reminders, customer centered design, compliance Page 104 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 38 Planning and Development LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Noah Beals, Development Review Manager Department: •CNDS (Planning and Zoning) Rank the Process Maturity for current processes.(highlight appropriate choice) •Strong Process-Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak –manual execution and often paper-based All activities linked to land and building development and management. Development review, planning, long range planning. •Status and understanding of where a process is at (with the City or with the applicant), how to size the projects – match scale of the project to requirements, •Some use of Accela but not all of the process is handled there (Bluebeam), development review not able to accept payments online automatically currently, communications very manual/email etc., Bluebeam collaboration not fully available, Process contacts not searchable or visible, information access limited and cumbersome, Access to records and ability to approve documents cumbersome (Laserfiche is a monster of its own), behind the times in technology, generating comment letters manual (validate this), coordination difficult, shared folders, lots of extra work and effort trying to understand status and move a process along, Task assignment difficult, GIS integration, searching difficult, •Having one system be able to handle process from beginning to end, Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, task assignment, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing, integration with GIS, online submittals for internal staff (?(access for applicants) (intake process, upload documents, view status)), handle rounds of review, be able to identify bad players, automated reminders, customer centered design, compliance Page 105 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 39 Planning and Development LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Noah Beals, Development Review Manager Department: •CNDS (Planning and Zoning) Page 106 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 40 Planning and Development LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Noah Beals, Development Review Manager Department: •CNDS (Planning and Zoning) Page 107 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 41 Process and technology maturity Planning and Development Process Maturity for current processes - Moderate •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate – Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 108 of 230 INFO-TECH RESEARCH GROUP | 42 Code Enforcement Page 109 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 43 Code Enforcement LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Jason Komes Department: •Environmental Services Description/Use Case All activities linked to the receiving and actioning code enforcement / •Initial Response, Number of violations, communication with the fire authority, ratio of calls between complaints and fire response, measuring if community is getting the information on who to call •Manual Processes, lack of access and lack of skill to navigate existing systems to find property information, multiple channels (emails, phone, access fort colins), communications not centralized, alignment with the rest of the city departments on similar. •Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process -Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 110 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 44 Code Enforcement LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Jason Komes Department: •Environmental Services Pr o c e s s St e p Intake Complaint or Violation notice Communicate with Complainant or Violator Manage Complaints Violations Conduct Inspections Make Determination of Violation Written Response Issue Fine or Ticket Adjudication /Court Proceedings Accept Payments Close Violation Customer Service Supporting Services Detailed Notes about your specific process. How is it similar/where does it differ? De t a i l s Receive and enter information Phone or online system (Access Fort Collins), Nuisance Hotline - –if yes a •Intake complaints •Correspond to complainan t or violator •Offer information •Update on Status • • •Policies and Procedures •Record Keeping and document management •Letter and correspondence templates •Status Tracking •Assign/Route/ •Schedule (Internal/External) •Perform Service •Complete Service Request •Service Request Tracking •Maintain Fee Schedule •Walk in Requests • •Systems: •ArcView Online, series of files in OneDrive, Word (Templates for letters), Access Fort Collins, Nuisance Hotline Page 111 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 45 Code Enforcement LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Justin Moore/ Rob Bianchetto Department: •Zoning Description/Use Case All activities linked to the receiving and actioning code enforcement / Land Use Code Violations •Example: Complaint to close time •Manual complaint tracking •Re-inspection/follow-up workflow •Track violations, send violation letters, make notes all in one system -in Inspections done in- person by Zoning Inspector •Intake complaints •Correspond to complainant or violator •Offer information •Update on Status - accessible to all •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process -Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 112 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 46 Code Enforcement LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: . Damien Wilson Department: •.Building Services Description/Use Case Building code and municipal code violations •Issuing building permits for unpermitted work or removing unpermitted work •Correcting municipal code violation •Using manual spreadsheets for all violations tracking •Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process -Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 113 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 47 Code Enforcement LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: . Damien Wilson Department: •.Building Services Pr o c e s s St e p Intake Complaint or Violation notice Communicate with Complainant or Violator Manage Complaints Violations Conduct Inspections Make Determination of Violation Issue Fine or Ticket Adjudication /Court Proceedings Accept Payments Close Violation Customer Service Supporting Services Detailed Notes about your specific process. How is it similar/where does it differ? De t a i l s Receive complaints via phone call, email, comcate/acc ess fort Collins, SARS, in person at 281 N College Ave Up to two violation letters sent to violator, each letter provides 30 days to be in compliance All done through excel spreadsheet which must be checked and updated on a daily An in person inspection from public right of way is performed to confirm the violation a •Intake complaints •Correspond to complainant and/or violator •Offer information •Update on Status •Policies and Procedures •Record Keeping and document management •Letter and correspondence templates •Status Tracking •Assign/Route/ •Schedule (Internal/External) •Perform Inspection Service •Walk in Requests Page 114 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 48 Code Enforcement LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Kory T. Katsimpalis Department: •Neighborhood Services/Code Compliance Description/Use Case All activities linked to the receiving and actioning code enforcement / Abatement Invoicing, Inc. Collections/Liens •Invoices paid by property owner one-time and/or successfully matriculated to collections process •Manual Processes •Reliant on manual entry of notes and case inf •Process can be stalled by bad owner information and/or bad mailing address •Multiple hard copies created and stored in various locations, creates risk of error, misplacement •Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process -Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 115 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 49 Code Enforcement LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Kory T. Katsimpalis Department: •Neighborhood Services/Code Compliance Pr o c e s s St e p Intake Complaint or Violation notice Communicate with Complainant or Violator Manage Complaints Violations Conduct Inspections Make Determination of Violation Issue Fine or Ticket Adjudication /Court Proceedings Accept Payments Close Violation Customer Service Supporting Services Detailed Notes about your specific process. How is it similar/where does it differ? De t a i l s Receive photographs and contractor invoice for each violation abatement performed. Materials are sent by Code Supervisor (J. Hernandez) I do not communicate directly with complainant or violator. My process begins post- Once materials have been processed internally and cases updated, paper invoices are sent to the property owner of record and additional contracts assoc. With the address. If payments are not paid within the 45 days set forth in Code, cases are turned over to a private collections agency. Each year, unpaid invoices over $150 may be turned over the complainant County for Liens. Neighborhood Services Customer Service staff accept payments via check, phone, and walk-in. -line. •NS Cust Svc staff answer questions primarily via phone, and must effectively communicat e code requirement s. Some case require extra investigation and residents may request a formal Admin Review within 10 days. •Policies and Procedures •Record Keeping and document management •Letter and correspondence templates •Status Tracking •Assign/Route/ •Schedule (Internal/External) •Perform Service •Complete Service Request •Service Request Tracking •Maintain Fee Schedule •Walk in Requests Page 116 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 50 Code Enforcement LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •.Damien Wilson Department: •.Building Services Description/Use Case All activities relating to dangerous buildings and complaint based rental inspections •Notification/posting of dangerous building to corrective measures a posting removal •Notification of rental inspection to corrective measures by landlord and case close out •Dangerous building cases are tracked manually via excel spreadsheets with no reminders of timeline •Rental inspections are also tracked manually via excel spreadsheet. No case/tracking system is implemented within our platform. •Information and record keeping, workflow within platform, document management, correspondence tracking, timeline tracking, compl will be Meet with tenant and landlord to conduct rental inspection for minimum rental compliance •Intake complaints or communicat ion from other city services •Correspond to complainant and violator •Offer information to both complainant and violator •Policies and Procedures •Record Keeping and document management •Letter and correspondence templates •Status Tracking •Assign/Route/ •Schedule (Internal/External) •Perform Service •Complete Service Request •Service Request Tracking •Walk in Requests •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process -Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 117 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 51 Code Enforcement LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •.Damien Wilson Department: •.Building Services Pr o c e s s St e p Intake Complaint and communicatio n for rental inspections Intake notification for dangerous buildings Manage Dangerous Buildings Conduct Rental Inspecti ons Make Determination of rental inspection Citations for dangerous buildings and rental properties Follow up inspections for dangerous buildings and rental properties Violation close out Customer Service Supporting Services Detailed Notes about your specific process. How is it similar/where does it differ? De t a i l s Tenants will reach out via telephone or email to request a rental inspection A brief conversation with the tenant is had regarding the issues, tenant fills out rental inspection request form and returns it to us for scheduling Notified via phone, email or text from emergency services, PD drug task force or citizen compl will be Meet with tenant and landlord to conduct rental inspection for minimum rental compliance (this is •Intake complaints or communicat ion from other city services •Correspond to complainant and violator •Offer information to both complainant and violator •Update on Status •Policies and Procedures •Record Keeping and document management •Letter and correspondence templates •Status Tracking •Assign/Route/ •Schedule (Internal/External) •Perform Service •Complete Service Request •Service Request Tracking •Walk in Requests Page 118 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 52 Process and technology maturity Code Enforcement Process Maturity for current processes - Weak •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate – Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 119 of 230 INFO-TECH RESEARCH GROUP | 53 Permits and Licensing Page 120 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 54 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Marc Department: Engineering Description/Use Case Building permit review for calculation/collection of capital expansion fee for Engineering. Key Success Indicators •Currently manually review and sometimes override fee calculation for the Transportation Capital Expansion Fee, would be ideal if the permit intake can take into account the information I need to auto calculate the fee for more passive review. Current Pain Points •Manual Processes,TCEF's calculation methodology is different than the other CEF's which are auto calc'd and collected •Sometimes overriding the standard fee calculation too early under building permit review results in two fees being leveraged when the permit has to be "kicked back" and fees are auto-calc'd all over again. The system doesn't know that an override was created and adds the auto-calc'd fee back in along with override fee. •Different point in which fee is leveraged compared to other CEF's (tenant finish vs. Core and shell) Future State Requirements •Would like for the system to take into account the different methodology TCEF uses (finished basement square footage, finished square footage of each dwelling in a multi-family development) •Would like to easily see historic instances of TCEF being paid with previous changes on the property Rank the Process Maturity for current processes.(highlight appropriate choice) •Strong Process-Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Questions or comments: Would love to see more cradle to grave coordination between the "Land Management" and "Permits and Licensing" which are currently in different modules in Accela and don't appear to be as closely integrated as they could be. An ability to find all case history in both "spheres" that are geospatially databased would be ideal. Page 121 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 55 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Marc Department: Engineering Pr o c e s s St e p Intake Application for a Permit or License Communicat e with Applicant Manage application Make Determinatio n of Permit or License Deny or Approve Permit or License Enter Information in Accella Issue permit or Licenses Calculation of Fees and Payments Accept Payments Close Application Maintain fee Schedules Customer Service Supporting Services Detailed Notes about your specific process. How is it similar/where does it differ? De t a i l s Building permit is "turned on" for my revie w Communica te with applicant so metimes to get specific info like square ges of individual dwellings Currently use an Excel spr eadsheet to calc the fee and also track on over time Either confirm the pre- calculated fee, or override with my d informatio n . Mark as complete •Review square footage information in the application •Contact BDRT's with any potential discrepancies in permit intake •Contact applicant with any additional information needed to complete review •Override auto calc in certain instances •Mark complete Page 122 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 56 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Jason Komes Department: •Environmental Services Description/Use Case Construction Waste Management Plan (CWMP) review/management as part of a construction/demolition permit application process •Turnaround time, Voluntary compliance •Manual processes (no notifications of workflow requirements), Unclear expectations, Lack of field tools/tech,Many touchpoints,Documentation management, work flow continuity, internal contacts/resource availability, , role clarity •Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, correspondence tracking, Accela workflow and emails to dedicated email address (environmenta lcompliance@ fcgov.com). Manage completed Initial/final PDF CWMP forms Acknowledge ment of receipt of CWMP Questions/foll ow-ups as necessary via email and/or phone Review against criteria to determine if CWMP meets requirements Hold or Accela Manual management compliance process as necessary N/A N/A N/A •Intake plans •Correspond to applicants •Offer information •Update on Status •Internal comms, with internal stakeholders •Policies and Procedures •Record Keeping and document management •Letter and correspondence templates •Status Tracking •Assign/Route/ •Schedule (Internal/External) •Perform Service •Complete Service Request •Service Request Tracking •This is an interdependent part of the building permit application process. Stakeholders include internal departments and the applicant and associated Certificates of Occupancy cannot be issued until our process is completed. •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process -Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 123 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 57 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Linda Hardin Department: •Environmental Services •New registrations completed in a timely matter once we learn of a new hauler in FC. Renewals completed by November 30 of year prior to renewal year. •Tracked on Excel spreadsheet collaborating with Sales Tax. Sales Tax collects fees through their payment portal and issues truck stickers. •N/A •Strong Process-Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 124 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 58 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Linda Hardin Department: •Environmental Services Receive report of new hauler operating in FC. Report may come from citizen observation or proactively by the hauler Contractor safety form, proof of insurance *specific requirements for the application for. kept of the application in paper format) Communicat e with Applicant Bonds checked Communicat phone or email Enter information approval Review against criteria to determine if permit or license will be approved. Deny or o license Enter information in Accella License is a copy of the approved application. Requested manually from the applicant and Connie sends it to them. Pay online through portal . Mark enabled in Accella (status enabled or disabled) of fees, update on a •Intake complaints •Correspond to complainan t or violator •Offer information •Update on Status •Policies and Procedures •Record Keeping and document management •Letter and correspondence templates •Status Tracking •Assign/Route/ •Schedule (Internal/External) •Perform Service •Complete Service Request •Service Request Tracking •Walk in Requests •Time Requirements: Applications 2 week turn around target. •(small cell completely different process) •Right of way contractor license – right of way bond expiration date/right of way license date – used to guide validity. If a new bond is received the license continues. •**Reminders sent out manually from a report (Via email) Page 125 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 59 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Brandy Bethurem Harras Department: •Development Review All activities linked to creating, managing and issuing permits and licenses / •Example: Manual Processes •Manual Process •Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing Receive and enter information Email , no online application currently Communicat e with Applicant email Enter information in Accella manually . NA in Accela. No current workflow. •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Questions or comments: Need other departments to provide additional review/ feedback Page 126 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 60 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Rob Bianchetto, Justin Moore Department: Zoning Description/Use Case All activities linked to creating, managing and issuing permits and licenses / •Timely service •Example: Scheduling inspections, collecting fees (being alerted that fees have been paid), contractor cannot upload docs •One-stop shop (application, review, payment, inspection all in one) •Strong Process-Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 127 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 61 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Rob Bianchetto, Justin Moore Department: Zoning Pr o c e s s S t e p Intake Application for a Permit or License Communicat e with Applicant Manage application Make Determination of Permit or License Deny or Approve Permit or License Enter Information in Accella Issue permit or Licenses Calculation of Fees and Payments Accept Payments Close Application Maintain fee Schedules Customer Service Supporting Services Detailed Notes about your specific process. How is it similar/where does it differ? De t a i l s Application emailed Application dropped off in person Email of application, update on anticipated turn-around time We need to take files applicant submits and combine them into one PDF. Sometimes applicant sends in different file types We upload the combined application into Accela for later review and sign district for project location. Review sign permit plans against Use Code to determine if it meets standards as well (total sign area currently in place for address, number of detached signs). Usually need to rely on Google street view Approved if it meets LUC standards If it does not meet standards, we place permit on hold in Accela. Then contact applicant and explain what is not in compliance Also use sign permit to determine if change of use is occurring (ex- previous restaurant, now a retail store). Sign permit may be put of use is occurring and development review is required meets LUC standards, we update description of work with scope of work (type out description of each sign being applied for) upload final approved copy of plans Permit is issued once review is and fees are paid Fees are calculated automatically by Accela based on plus percentage of valuation of project provided by applicant on the application Applicant rarely tells us they are tax exempt; we if certain applicants (churches, registered as tax exempt through Sales Tax Pay online through portal Call and pay over the phone with a credit card Pay in cash, check, or credit card Mail in check Pay via account . Once payment is received, sign permit is issued. Accela does not alert us when payment is made, so if applicant makes payment through online portal, they need to reach out to us and let us know Once sign is installed, applicant needs to contact us to let us know so that we can schedule final inspection. Applicant cannot request inspection through online portal, so must call or email Zoning directly $65 flat fee sales tax based on project valuation •Intake application s •Answer contractor questions •Explain LUC standards •Answer questions about how to get sign permit to meet LUC standards •Intake payment •Schedule inspections Applicant needs to be licensed through Contractor Licensing. Accela does not make it If not, we need to direct them to Contractor Licensing •Aim for a 5- business day review period Page 128 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 62 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Joni / Jamie Department: •Utilities Fees and Rates All activities linked to creating, managing and issuing permits and licenses / Building Permit. W/WW/SW Approvals & completed Tasks signed off through Accela / W/WW/SW Fees uploaded from W/WW Permit to Accela / Escrow payments / Covenant agreements •Timely service, efficient service delivery, •Manual process, unable to upload documents to Accela, Paper files, county has a recorded copy as well, and a scan of the recorded (laser fiche), not able to tie records to address, •Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing, collaboration between departments, customer self-service (ability for customers to upload documents online). Building Permit is changed to "Routed for Review" status Email to Applicant informing them of items to be complete task signoff. Applicant submits documentati on. Approvals WUE and Erosion Approvals si gned off by WUE and Fees assessed after review appr oval. Work with a of tasks for a bldg. permit. Many depts must sign off before approval. Approval completed by BDRTs. N/A Completed by BDRTs Pay online through portal. W/WW Fees entered into W/WW Permit program which uploads to Accela . Completed by BDRTs Maintain list of fees, update on a regular basis •Intake s •Correspo nd to complain ant or violator •Offer informati on •Update on Status •Policies and Procedures •Record Keeping and document management •Letter and correspondence templates •Status Tracking •Assign/Route/ •Schedule (Internal/External) •Perform Service •Complete Service Request •Service Request Tracking •Walk in Requests •Time Requirements: Applications 2 week turn around target. •(small cell completely different process) •Right of way contractor license – right of way bond expiration date/right of way license date – is received the license continues. •**Reminders sent out manually from a report (Via email) •Strong Process-Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 129 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 63 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Rob, Justin Department: •Zoning All activities linked to creating, managing and issuing permits and licenses / •Timely service •No customer portal, applicant cannot pay online •Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing Application emailed USPS Walk-in applicants customer once application is processed- no queue to wait in Check address to ensure it is within City Limits before entering information into Accela Check nature of home occupation to ensure it is compliant with City standards If retail, ensure there are no retail sales occurring on site If clinical/massage, ensure class size management it meets all requiremen ts Denied if prohibited home business (in-person vehicle repair, etc.) Enter informatio License is issued once payment is made Flat rate of $25. Pay over the phone with credit card Pay in person with cash, check or credit card USPS (often included with mail-in application) . Once payment is received, generate license in Accela and close/ approve. Flat rate of $25 •Answer questions regarding license, including if a license is required •Process application •Open investigation to complains regarding illegal home occupations •Process applications •Strong Process-Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 130 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 64 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Shar Manno Department: •Community Development and Neighborhood Services All activities linked to creating, managing and issuing building department contractor licensing and registrations •Timely service, reduction in expiration of license/registrations, reduction in violations, increased knowledge of our code and process, high level of transparency (customer able to self-help), ease of collaboration with permit technicians and other city departments. •Manual Process, paper process (even if received electronically, we print it to get through processing), no way for customer to access electronic certificates and other information, must scan and input into separate archive system. •There is no way to clean up. We cannot easily delete incorrectly entered files; we have 15+ Excel spreadsheets to create our license/registration numbers. •Daily entry of insurance – would like for customers to be able to input into their portal with attachment backup, and we conduct a quick review to complete. •Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing, online application completion that goes directly into system, strong reporting ability, violation tracking from a licensing standpoint, that can also tie into inspector violations if contractor involved. Want system generated everything, like license/registration numbers. •Strong Process-Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate – Some technology support with little automation •Weak –manual execution and often paper-based Page 131 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 65 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Shar Manno Department: •Community Development and Neighborhood Services Receive application via email, USPS, in- person or drop box. If received via email, we print a We drowned in paper. complete – email applicant a 'received email" incomplete – email applicant with needed items and store application i n "items needed items received. If items not received, send reminder email with deadline. If deadline not met, return application Enter information into Excel tracking spreadsheet. Review against criteria to determine if license or registration will be approved. Deny or issue license/regis tration Enter information into Accella. We need more stop gaps, not all information required has a space, Would like one file as opposed to two. Send completion email to applicant, include payment information if necessary. Once payment received, if necessary, create certificate with wallet card, print to applicant. Fees are set in code. Pay online through portal, in- person over the counter, via USPS by check, or drop box . Mark enabled in Accella (status enabled or disabled) Paper are then scanned the n uploaded i nto Laserfiche o nce process complete Fees can be updated with formal code change. We are trying to get on 3- cadence. •Intake violations from bldg. Insp. and residents •Correspond to complainan t or violator •Offer information •Update on Status •Help with in-person customers with licensing questions, comments, questions, concerns •Respond to phone calls and email requests for or those needing help •Policies and Procedures •Record Keeping and document management •Letter and correspondence templates •Status Tracking •Assign/Route/ •Schedule (Internal/External) •Perform Service •Complete Service Request •Service Request Tracking •Walk in Requests •Language services •Building Review Commission •Checking drop box •Time Requirements: Applications 2 week turn around target. •**Reminders sent out manually from a report (letter section) that is manually pulled from BI Launch Pad. Must set my own reminders. •We do not have an actual CL module; it is all very manual for the customer and staff. No different systems used to get to finalization. •Manually enter insurance updated able to update with attachment (of new accord form) Page 132 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 66 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Shar Manno Department: •Community Development and Neighborhood Services All activities linked to creating, managing and issuing building department contractor licensing and registrations •Timely service, reduction in expiration of license/registrations, reduction in violations, increased knowledge of our code and process, high level of transparency (customer able to self-help), ease of collaboration with permit technicians and other city departments. •Manual Process, paper process (even if received electronically, we print it to get through processing), no way for customer to access electronic certificates and other information, must scan and input into separate archive system. •There is no way to clean up. We cannot easily delete incorrectly entered files; we have 15+ Excel spreadsheets to create our license/registration numbers. •Daily entry of insurance – would like for customers to be able to input into their portal with attachment backup, and we conduct a quick review to complete. •Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing, online application completion that goes directly into system, strong reporting ability, violation tracking from a licensing standpoint, that can also tie into inspector violations if contractor involved. Want system generated everything, like license/registration numbers. •Strong Process-Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate – Some technology support with little automation •Weak –manual execution and often paper-based Page 133 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 67 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Shar Manno Department: •Community Development and Neighborhood Services Receive application via email, USPS, in- person or drop box. If received via email, we print a We drowned in paper. complete – email applicant a 'received email" incomplete – email applicant with needed items and store application i n "items needed items received. If items not received, send reminder email with deadline. If deadline not met, return application Enter information into Excel tracking spreadsheet. Review against criteria to determine if license or registration will be approved. Deny or issue license/regis tration Enter information into Accella. We need more stop gaps, not all information required has a space, Would like one file as opposed to two. Send completion email to applicant, include payment information if necessary. Once payment received, if necessary, create certificate with wallet card, print to applicant. Fees are set in code. Pay online through portal, in- person over the counter, via USPS by check, or drop box . Mark enabled in Accella (status enabled or disabled) Paper are then scanned the n uploaded i nto Laserfiche o nce process complete Fees can be updated with formal code change. We are trying to get on 3- cadence. •Intake violations from bldg. Insp. and residents •Correspond to complainan t or violator •Offer information •Update on Status •Help with in-person customers with licensing questions, comments, questions, concerns •Respond to phone calls and email requests for or those needing •Policies and Procedures •Record Keeping and document management •Letter and correspondence templates •Status Tracking •Assign/Route/ •Schedule (Internal/External) •Perform Service •Complete Service Request •Service Request Tracking •Walk in Requests •Language services •Building Review Commission •Checking drop box •Time Requirements: Applications 2 week turn around target. •**Reminders sent out manually from a report (letter section) that is manually pulled from BI Launch Pad. Must set my own reminders. •We do not have an actual CL module; it is all very manual for the customer and staff. No different systems used to get to finalization. •Manually enter insurance updated able to update with attachment (of new accord form) Page 134 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 68 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Tammi Pusheck Department: Marijuana and Liquor Licensing (City Clerk) Description/Use Case All activities linked to creating, managing and issuing permits and licenses / •Timely service •Example: Manual Processes •Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing, violations tracking, on-line portal for customers to check status of their license, GIS interaction, •Strong Process-Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 135 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 69 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Tammi Pusheck Department: Marijuana and Liquor Licensing (City Clerk) Pr o c e s s St e p Intake Application for a Permit or License Communicat e with Applicant Manage application Make Determina tion of Permit or License Deny or Approve Permit or License Enter Information in Accella Issue permit or Licenses Calculation of Fees and Payments Accept Payments Close Applicatio n Maintain fee Schedules Customer Service Supporting Services Detailed Notes about your specific process. How is it similar/where does it differ? De t a i l s Receive and enter information Email or USPS (Both MJ and Liquor are dual licensing programs with the State) Contractor safety form, proof of insurance *specific requirements for the application for. Liquor - Hard of the application papers. Marijuana - stores shared drives Communicat e with Applicant Accept online questions Communicat phone or email and in person applicants and gets complicated because there is no place to keep notes at this point Enter information and send for approval Verify all required information and coordinate with all involved department s Review against criteria to determine if permit or license will be approved. Deny or o license Once the local program approves all materials are sent on to State for their review related to license can be approved ely and others need to be the authority(jud ge) Liquor has an Access database and MJ keeps information in several different Excel spreadsheet s License is for their review via the State portal Once State has completed their review they notify us via the State portal and issue license. Once State are able to issue Fees are standard depending on type of license and include both local and state fees. There locations to pay fees. One and one for State fees. Applic ants must include copies of receipts for paid fees with their applicat ion before it is considered complete Pay online through portal – two separate payment portals. local fees and one for State fees. . of fees, update on a regular basis •Update on Status •Policies and Procedures •Record Keeping and document management •Letter and correspondence templates •Status Tracking •Assign/Route/ •Schedule (Internal/External) •Walk in Requests •Time Requirements: Statutory requirements as well as local City Manager Administrative policy requirements •**Reminders sent out manually from a report (Via email) •Law Enforcement does compliance checks that are currently dealt with in an Access database •GIS interaction to calculate locations of businesses •Both MJ and liquor have local requirements and have confidential information. Page 136 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 70 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Maren Bzdek/HP Team Department: Historic Preservation Division (CDNS) Description/Use Case Design Review – Exterior Alterations to Fort Collins Landmarks and Other Historic Resources •Timely service that provides initial clarity on role and nature of historic review •Accurate capture of relevant properties in all categories that require historic review •Non-permitted activities that require code-based approval from our team are not included in current permit apps; those activities sometimes accompany other work that requires a permit, but don't always, so need solution for both scenarios; Clear demarcation of interior/exterior projects is lacking; No document upload ability for Certificates of Appropriateness/SHPO Reports; Permitted project approvals sometimes occur prior to permit application; Routing does not always reflect current code requirements and review responsibilities •Full integration. Payment processing for related required historic surveys; Storage of application materials in iterative versions;Correspondence tracking, approvals process that clarifies HP as final decision maker for landmark properties; automatic integration or email delivery of design review application; survey payment processing integrated; follow up inspection can be requested by applicant and comments/sign off integrated in system. •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 137 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 71 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Maren Bzdek/HP Team Department: Historic Preservation Division (CDNS) Pr o c e s s St e p Intake Application for a Permit or License Communicate with Applicant Manage application Make Determinatio n of Permit or License Deny or Approve Permit or License Enter Informat ion in Accella Issue permit or Licens es Calculation of Fees and Payments Accept Payments Close Applica tion Maintain fee Schedules Customer Service Supporti ng Service s Detailed Notes about your specific process. How is it similar/where does it differ? De t a i l s Accela permit applications routed to HP due to landmark address layer and everything that is 50+ years (county assessor data) BDRTs may use Teams Chat to alert staff to OTC applications HP staff may perform historic review on conceptual designs prior to submittal of building permit application; permit app version may differ and require us to issue an addendum to our approval Non-permitted design review applications, which may or may not accompany permitted work,received via email or in-person HP staff comments needed from date we reached out Email communicati on from HP staff to explain process, anticipated turnaround, and, if needed, secondary landmark application attached Applications stored on S drive in property address folders Logged into Excel spreadsheet Added to next available HP C meeting agenda if required Same day sign off if simple OTC or N/A; or continue to hold for weekly staff design review or monthly HPC design review decision Review application against Ch.14 any relevant LUC requirements (pri marily compliance with federal SOI standards for treatment of historic properties) Provide comme nt in Accela N/A - no additional fees for building permit review; Some applications require flat historic (staff occasionally exercises discretion for with multiple resources) fee is paid by phone, mail, or in person Not integrated with online portal BDRT staff alerts us to payment Future state: Would be good to create fee waiver threshold for small businesses and small nonprofits Future state: cum ulative application fees from all related departmen ts are managed based on optimized thresholds that means- tested waivers •Phone, email, with applicants, which often includes identifying whether historic review applies, and to what extent •Work with contractors to explain requirements and adjust scope of work/plans as needed •Walking applicants and their contractors through HPC review process, when applicable •Historic Preservation is a sub-component of permit review that is not always applicable AND includes application and review activity that is for non- permitted work •Appeals of Determinations of Eligibility (when survey is required) or appeals of design review decision require HPC and potentially City Council decisions that hold for weeks to months Page 138 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 72 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Russ Hovland Department: Building Services Description/Use Case All activities linked to permit application with plans, managing plan review process and final approval. •Timely service, complete and accurate review of plans, fewer failed inspections, •Many different kinds of permit types (and plan review types), many forms to keep updated, codes changing every 3 yrs., rigid permit types and workflow – inability to be flexible •Need to have: Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing; •Nice to have: Increased access to inspection scheduling/information;ability to "batch" applications and inspections Rank the Process Maturity for current processes.(highlight appropriate choice) •Strong Process-Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 139 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 73 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Russ Hovland Department: Building Services Pr o c e s s St e p Intake Application for a Permit Communicate with Applicant Manage application Make Determination of Permit Approve Permit Calculatio n of Fees and Payments Accept Payments Issue permit Conduct inspections Close Permit Maintain fee Schedules Customer Service Supporting Services De t a i l s •Receive and enter information •Applications received mostly through email, some paper applications accepted •Applications checked for completenes s and rejected if information unclear •Resubmittal s accepted through portal or through email •Revisions accepted through email and manually uploaded •Email or telephone communicatio n to garner complete information during submission and review •Comments to through coordinator to be sent out •Automatically generated emails sent at key points permit issuance) •Enter information and route for approval •Some workflows include automatic bypass for specific off by permit techs or other staff •Some communication through Teams/Outlook required for certain processes to gain sign-off •Some workflows cannot be changed midstream; changes require withdrawal and re- entry of application •Documents uploaded into Accela using strict naming requirements •Review against criteria to determine if permit will be approved. •Some permits automatically dropped into task queue •Some permits assignment to specific staff •Permits claimed in •Accela by reviewer •Use Adobe plugin to review to ensure code compliance and comment on plans •Deny or issue permits •Plans and to be by s on portal •Once tec hnical re ts are met per mit held for licensing and pay ment •Some fees autom calcula ted based on footag e/valu ation •Some fees manua lly added/ voided •Fees manua lly invoice d prior to permit issuan ce •Pay online through portal •Accept person •Building permit and receipt automati cally to online portal •Schedule inspections through text, phone, online •Inspections scheduled one at a time by customers •Permit type determines allowable inspections •Inspections cannot be scheduled when licenses are out of date; IVR allows for some inspection scheduling prior to permit issuance •Specific inspection types required for each permit to close out •Inspections assigned by zone to specific inspector; transferred to workload •Zones assigned manually •Inspections assigned to AM or PM slots; no call-ahead •Option to set inspection for specific time •Some permits held for receipt of final documents. •Final documents submitted through email; if uploaded to portal, customer must also send email to notify staff. •TCOs issued on a case-by-case basis; tracked manually by spreadsheet •Maintain list of fees, update on a regular basis •Respond to requests thr ough email/tel ephone/in- person regardi ng permit stat us, code requirements, inspection scheduling, inspection results, •Manage permit expirations (letters sent automatically to owners prior to expiration) •Tracking/reporting •Manage stock plans •Record Keeping and document management •Archive requests (manual process) •Letter and correspondence templates •Status Tracking •Assign/Route/ •Schedule (Internal/External) •Perform Service •Complete Service Request •Service Request Tracking •Walk in Requests Page 140 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 74 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Tyler Siegmund Department: •Light and Power Engineering •Timely service •Sometimes not activated on certain permits that we need to review •Complicated fee structure, most of our fees are billed directly through Utility Finance and not part of permit process •Our electric service form is not part of the permit application.We have to email this form separately •Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing •Strong Process-Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 141 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 75 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Tyler Siegmund Department: •Light and Power Engineering If there are electric information su bmitted with the permit, then a hold is placed asking the applicant to contact our engineering group. Our group is available for questions regarding the electric requirements o n projects/permi ts. For all permits that are adding/changing electric loads or meter(s) then we are activated on the permit as a sign off. If OK then we sign off, if not then a hold is placed asking the applicant to contact us directly to discuss. There are some permits on, and it becomes an issue during construction. The applicant has an approved permit form the city but Light and Power did not have a chance to review. It doesn't happen too big implications on a project after permit issuance. We are a sign off on some or Approve A sign off on the electric review porti on of the permit. We will sometimes manually add/change/re related to electrical depending on the permit type. We are a sign off on some permi ts but do not Deny or Approve full permits.We only sign off on the electric revi ew portion of the permit. Light and Power has a complicated fee structure depending o n the project/permit type. Most of our fees are invoiced to the customer directl y through Utility Finan ce Dept and not tied to the building permit process. We add some of our fees to the building permit and that is typically a manual p rocess to revise/add/delete fees. There are some permit that auto generate fees that we review and adjust/mo dify as needed. We have some of our account numbers associated with some of the electrical fees and when the permit is paid our portion goes to Light and Power account. For large projects, we invoice our capacity fees and building site charges to the customer directly through Utilities is separate from the permit fees. This can be confusing to applicants that are not aware of our billing processes. Light and Power has a complicated fee structure depending on the project type. Most of our fees are invoiced to the customer directly through Utility and not tied to the building permit. We add some of our fees to the that is typically a manual process to revise/add/delete fees. There are some permit types that auto generate our and adjust/modify as needed. •We are available for questions on anything electrical, the project type. •We have developed a few separate easily run reports for permit and project tracking. •Review electrical information on permits and approve or place holds as needed. •Coordinate with applicants if electrical information is not correct •Email electric service form •Review fees. Add/adjust/delete as needed Page 142 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 76 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Connie Kiehn - Department: Engineering Description/Use Case All activities linked to creating, managing and issuing permits and licenses / •Timely service •Example: Manual Processes •Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing •Strong Process-Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 143 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 77 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Connie Kiehn - Department: Engineering Pr o c e s s St e p Intake Application for a Permit or License Communicat e with Applicant Manage application Make Determinatio n of Permit or License Deny or Approve Permit or License Enter Information in Accella Issue permit or Licenses Calculation of Fees and Payments Accept Payments Close Application Maintain fee Schedules Customer Service Supporting Services Detailed Notes about your specific process. How is it similar/where does it differ? De t a i l s Receive application email or in person, no online application currently Bonds, insurance,C ontractor safety form are all necessary b efore application can be sent off for approval. Hard copies are kept of the application papers. (Bonds are format as per our standards) Communicat e with Applicant Bonds and insurance are checked Communicat phone or email of application approval to various people for approval Review against criteria to determine if permit or license will be approved. Deny or issue If approved, enter information in Accella License is a copy of the approved application. Requested manually from the applicant and Connie sends it to them. Flat fee of $130. One do not charge a yearly renewal unless the license expires, and needs to reapply. Pay online through portal. They may also pay with a check at the time they apply. It is much easier though, if they pay online. If a check, the building department needs to process it in Accela. . The license Accela, if bonds or insurance expire, the license is disabled in the system of fees, update on a regular basis •Offer information •Update on Status •Assistance Access portal questions •Policies and Procedures •Record Keeping and document management •Letter and correspondence templates •Status Tracking •Assign/Route/ •Schedule (Internal/External) •Perform Service •Complete Service Request •Service Request Tracking •Walk in Requests •Time Requirements: Applications 2 week turn around target. •Right of way contractor license – right of way bond expiration date/right of way license date – used to guide validity. If a new bond is received the license continues. •**Reminders sent out manually from a report (Via email) Page 144 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 78 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Connie Kiehn Department: Engineering Description/Use Case All activities linked to creating, managing and issuing permits and licenses Engineering permits (other) – encroachment, portable signs, fence, drive approach/sidewalk, banners, outdoor dining, newsracks, oversized vehicle Key Success Indicators •Timely service, •Easy access to permit online (this is the goal) Current Pain Points •Example: Completely Manual Process •Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing. Goal would be to be completely online. All documents uploaded online and all automated processes. •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process -Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate – Some technology support with little automation •Weak –manual execution and often paper-based Page 145 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 79 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Connie Kiehn Department: Engineering Pr o c e s s St e p Intake Application for a Permit or License Communicat e with Applicant Manage application Make Determinati on of Permit or License Deny or Approve Permit or License Enter Information in Spreadsheet in the S drive Issue permit or Licenses Calculation of Fees and Payments Accept Payments Close Application Maintain fee Schedules Customer Service Supporting Services Detailed Notes about your specific process. How is it similar/where does it differ? De t a i l s Permit is received - Email or Front counter drop off, no online application currently Application is checked to see if all materials are included (varies depending on permit type) Communicat e with Applicant through phone or email Email to inspector for approval. Coordination with other departments occurs depending on permit type. (traffic, parking services, forestry, etc.) Review ag ainst criteria to determine if permit will be approved. Deny or Sign it and email to business to process. Enter information into a spreadsheet located in the S drive so that it’s available for staff taking payment over the phone. Edit include the permit number and date of approval. the S drive. Requested manually from the applicant and is emailed to the applicant. Applicant receives an email with instructions for making payment. Fees are calculated by the inspector issuing the permit. Fees to view on website and on the permit. Pay with credit card over the phone. Payi ng in person is also an option. It would be great if these could be paid online, but it’s not possible now. Depending on permit type, the permit is closed out when it expires or when a final inspection occurs (sidewalk permits). Maintain list of fees. •Correspond to complaint or violator •Offer information •Update on Status ••Policies and Procedures ••Record Keeping and document management ••Letter and correspondence templates ••Status Tracking ••Assign/Route/ ••Schedule (Internal/External) ••Walk in Requests •Time Requirements -5-day minimum required for review and approval of most permits. Varies depending on permit type. •Oversized vehicles are 48 hours -The process is completely manual and there is no software utilized for processing. Our goal is to customers entirely online Page 146 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 80 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Connie Kiehn Department: Engineering Description/Use Case All activities linked to creating, managing and issuing permits and licenses •Timely service, Federally mandated deadlines are met throughout the review process •Easy access to permit online (this is the goal) Current Pain Points •Example: Completely Manual Process •Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing. Goal would be to be completely online. All documents uploaded online and all automated processes. •Strong Process-Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate – Some technology support with little automation •Weak –manual execution and often paper-based Page 147 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 81 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Connie Kiehn Department: Engineering Pr o c e s s S t e p Intake Application for a Permit or License Communicate with Applicant Manage application Make Determinati on of Permit or License Deny or Approve Permit or License Enter Information in a Project Tracking Spr eadsheet MS Teams Issue permit or Licenses Calculation of Fees and Payments Accept Payments Close Application Maintain fee Schedules Customer Service Supporting Services Detailed Notes about your specific process. How is it similar/where does it differ? De t a i l s Permit is received - Email only. are set up in Teams- SharePoint folders for team to access and work on. Comment sheets are put in folders. ) Communicat e with applicant cell email account throughout the review process. 10, Day 24, Day 43, Day 60, or Day 90 if it's a new pole. These permits have strict deadlines that are federally mandated review process. The application project links are emailed (routed) small cell review team on day 1 and on day 43 for review to begin or continue. Review ag ainst criteria to determine if permit will be approved. Deny or issue permit Day 90 Sign application and approved plans,uploa d to project files Enter information into a spreadsheet located in Teams throughout the process as needed when new information is received. Approved permit, plans and comme emailed to the applicant. Applicant receives an email with instructions for making payment. A BMISC is created in Accela on Day 1 so the fees can be applied when the customer calls in to make payment, or to be made by check. Fees are available to cell website and on the permit. Pay with credit card over the phone. Payi ng with a an option. would be great if these could be paid online, but it’s not possible now. good for 1 year from issue date. After the permit is issued, a supplementa l site license is issued,then further permits are obtained prior to the building of the small cell tower. (Excavation, building permit, traffic permit, etc.). Maintain list of fees. Fee study was the past 2 years to determine cost for applicant. •Intake application s and plans •Correspond to applicants •Email communica tion throughout review process. Policies and Procedures- Master License Agreements Legal services GIS services Review Team coordination Weekly team meetings ••Record Keeping and document management ••Letter and correspondence templates ••Status Tracking ••Assign/Route/ ••Schedule (Internal/External) •60 Day Shot Clock begins on the day application is received (only accepted on Mondays). -Timelines are strict for this permit and items need to go out to the applicant on very specific days -Process differs from all other engineering permits due to the complexity of the process. See process below: Page 148 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 82 Permits and Licensing LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: Connie Kiehn Department: Engineering Pr o c e s s St e p Intake Application for a Permit or License Detailed Notes about your specific process. How is it similar/where does it differ? De t a i l s Project tracking sheet is updated (excel spreadsheet). GIS Map is updated with pole repeated at day 43 when new materials are received in the 60- day process (90 day for new poles) •Day 1 MONDAY •Monitor small cell email account for new applications, revised submittals, correspondence •Set up a new electronic folder for the Review team to put comments and store files/redlines (in MS Teams) •Update the Tracking spreadsheet with new application submittals •Route new applications to the review team •Schedule a Friday (Day 19) review meeting for the team to discuss the New applications •Process the review application fees •Email the applicant a notice that project has been routed •Update the GIS map with new pole information •Day 10 FRIDAY •Update the Tracking spreadsheet with new information •Send applicant a letter of complete or incomplete application, including all comments for incomplete applications only submitted by the Review Team. Don’t send comment sheets for complete applications. Those will go out on Day 24. Blind cc the Small Cell Routing group on these emails. •Update the GIS Map for incomplete applications •Update the files •Day 5 FRIDAY •Attend the Friday review meeting •Day 24 WEDNESDAY •Send applicant a 1st Round Comments Letter along with PDF’d Comments and any bluelines. Give them the deadline for when comments are expected back from them (Day 43). •Day 43 & 44 MONDAY to Tuesday •Monitor small cell email account for revised submittals, correspondence •Set up Final round files in MS Teams folders •Route revisions received from the applicant to the team •Email the applicant a notice that revisions have been routed •Schedule day 54 MS Teams coordination meeting for Final review •Day 54 FRIDAY •Attend coordination meeting for Final Review •Day 57 – 60 Monday to Wednesday •Prepare permit and comments letter •Day 60 Thursday •Letter of Determination letter and comments are sent to the applicant •Update tracking spreadsheet •Update GIS map •Update the files Page 149 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 83 Permits and Licensing (working version) LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Marcy Yoder Department: •CDNS – Neighborhood Services Description/Use Case Rental Housing registration program •Timely service •Customer ease of use •It is a new process still in development •Information and record keeping, workflow, approvals process, document management, correspondence tracking, fee schedules, payment processing Applicant completes on line Payment made complete and appropriate. Auto generate email for submission Email if items are missing Auto generate email approval. Notify of renewal needed Enter information approval Review against criteria to determine if permit or license will be approved. Deny or issue permit o license not completed need to be entered by staff on the applicants behalf Auto generate registration Yes should be auto generated based on properties property Pay online through portal . Close as completed and auto generate renewal date Maintain list of fees, update on a regular basis •Yes to register and to share information , etc. •Policies and Procedures •Record Keeping and document management •Letter and correspondence templates •Status Tracking •Assign/Route/ •Schedule (Internal/External) •Perform Service •Complete Service Request •Service Request Tracking •Walk in Requests •Unknown at this point. •Strong Process-Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based I did not include rental inspections as my assumption is that the functionality is the same as the building inspection information you will receive from Marcus’s team. Page 150 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 84 Process and technology maturity Permits and Licensing Process Maturity for current processes - Strong •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate – Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 151 of 230 INFO-TECH RESEARCH GROUP | 85 Customer Service Page 152 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 86 Our Customers •Council •Clerks Office •Other Departments/Internal Staff •Contractors •Developers •Realtors •Commissions •Community Groups NPOs •Neighbors in the Community •Other Government Agencies – Reporting to and requests for information, Regulatorily Requirements, county agencies (intergovernmental agreements,) special districts •Vendors and Consultants •Small Business Owners •Funding – sales tax, cost recovery model, (funding based off of fees and taxes collected) Page 153 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 87 Any Challenges or pain points serving our customers currently •Confusing and hard to navigate processes •Lack of technology to complete processes in some areas •Also not having technology for those who cannot make it into the office in person •Website navigation and content •Digital experience is not streamlined, confusing for users •Voice of the customer not understood (unified vision in progress) •Reactive to negative feedback, not proactive •Customer experience varies across the City processes •Many places to go, lack of information /transparency as to where to go or who to go to •Lack of online tools drives a lot of phone and walk-in services •Reporting is cumbersome Page 154 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 88 The vision for customer service around permitting, licensing, and code enforcement •Provide excellence in customer service •Provide transparent and accurate data to our customers •Automate - reduce administration and create efficiencies increasing bandwidth for high value tasks and personal interaction where required •Increase the accuracy for first point of contact (increased visibility on where to go for information and how to navigate a process) •Ease of use and navigation •Meet our customers where they are at •Support our teams in providing great customer service •Standardize service delivery to be proactive as opposed to reactive in process design. •Transparency •Accurate data – Auditable/ regular review of data and processes •Clear processes and expectations – steps to follow, required information, where to go, status updates Page 155 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 89 Metrics for Customer Service •https://fortcollins.clearpointstrategy.com/community-neighborhood-livability/•https://www.fcgov.com/communitysurvey/files/fort-collins-community- survey-report-draft-2022-06-28.pdf?1661985077 Page 156 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 90 Customer Service and Shared Functionality LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Group Exercise Department: Description/Use Case All activities related to serving our customers Customer service metrics - •Intake complaints •Intake inquiries •Correspondence to customers •Offer information •Update on status •Walk in appointments •Online portals •Website •Support policies and procedures and process documentation •Record Keeping and document management •Letter and correspondence templates •Status Tracking •Assign/Route/ •Schedule (Internal/External) •Perform Service •Complete Service Request •Service Request Tracking •Walk in Requests •Collect payment – E checks and credit card processing •Special checks (marijuana/tobacco) – background checks, credit checks •Reporting including official document generation (permit letters,) metrics, data exports for manipulation and research •Task assignment •Resource management – Managing resources including assigning work, viewing workload and assignments, locations, help make decisions around resourcing •Field worker facilitation (inspections for example) – scheduling, tools to complete work in the field •Integration with necessary systems to eliminate duplicate entry •Integration with emails,, calendars (Scheduling meetings (Should have)), video conferencing (should have) •Accela, crystal reports, NCR(Credit card processing), MuniRev (sales tax), JDE, Tungsten (refunds) •Accela electronic document review software (building) and BlueBeam (Dev Review) •Citizen portal/Text Messaging, IVR system (vendor Selectron) Page 157 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 91 Customer Service and Shared Functionality LEGEND Strong Capability Moderate Capability Weak Capability Stakeholder Name: •Marc Virata Department: •Engineering Description/Use Case Building permit review for calculation/collection of capital expansion fee for Engineering. •Currently manually review and sometimes override fee calculation for the Transportation Capital Expansion Fee, would be ideal if the permit intake can take into account the information I need to auto calculate the fee for more passive review. •Manual Processes,TCEF's calculation methodology is different than the other CEF's which are auto calc'd and collected •Sometimes overriding the standard fee calculation too early under building permit review results in two fees being leveraged when the permit has to be "kicked back" and fees are auto-calc'd all over again. The system doesn't know that an override was created and adds the auto-calc'd fee back in along with override fee. •Different point in which fee is leveraged compared to other CEF's (tenant finish vs. Core and shell) •Would like for the system to take into account the different methodology TCEF uses (finished basement square footage, finished square footage of each dwelling in a multi-family development) •Would like to easily see historic instances of TCEF being paid with previous changes on the property Building permit my review Communicate with applicant sometimes to get specific info like square footages of individual dwellings Currently use an Excel spreadsheet to calc the fee and also track collection over time Either confirm the pre- override with my calculated information Mark as complete •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process -Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate –Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Level 1 Capabilities: Page 158 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 92 Process and technology maturity Permits and Licensing Process Maturity for current processes - Weak •Strong Process- Formalized, documented, optimized, audited. •Moderate Process - Process is poorly documented and resides with individuals. Inefficient and error prone •Weak Process - Ad hoc, not formalized, inconsistent •Strong – The process executed entirely within the technology stack with no manual processes •Moderate – Some technology support with little automation •Weak – manual execution and often paper-based Page 159 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 93 4 Development review, licensing, permitting and inspection Vendors landscape Page 160 of 230 Info-Tech Research Group | 94 Related Info-Tech research Get the Most Out of Your ERP Governance of Enterprise Software Implementation Select and Implement an ERP Solution Select an ERP Implementation Partner In today’s connected world, the continuous optimization of enterprise applications to realize your digital strategy is key. A properly optimized ERP business process will reduce costs and increase productivity. Build an ERP Optimization Team to conduct ongoing application improvements. Assess your application(s) and the environment in which they exist. Use a business-first strategy to prioritize optimization efforts. Being Agile will increase the likelihood of success. Agility outside of software development is still in its infancy. The knowledge to apply it to business processes is lacking. Leverage the best practices of project management to deliver value to the business sooner. Follow our iterative methodology with a task list focused on the business must- have functionality to achieve rapid execution and to allow staff to return to their daily work sooner.. Selecting a best-fit solution requires balancing needs, cost, and vendor capability. Upfront investment of time and resources into project planning will prevent post-implementation regret. Leverage Info-Tech’s comprehensive three-phased approach to ERP selection projects, starting with assessing your organization’s preparedness to go into the selection stage, moving through technology selection, and preparing for implementation. Unlock the potential of your ERP portfolio by choosing the right implementation partner. ERP implementation is not a one-and- done exercise. Most often it is the start of a multi-year working relationship between the software vendor or systems integrator and your organization. Take the time to find the right fit to ensure success. Use Info-Tech’s implementation partner selection process to find the right fit for your organization. 4 Page 161 of 230 INFO-TECH RESEARCH GROUP | 95 Page 162 of 230 LPCE Implementation Project September 20, 2024 Discovery & Recommendations Page 163 of 230 Team Intro/Bios Prosci Team Ian Croft Engagement Leader Debbie Firth Principal Change Advisor Francisco Xavia Change Advisor Page 164 of 230 © Prosci, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Agenda Our Understanding Change Management Overview Discovery Findings Recommendations Sponsorship Page 165 of 230 Our Understanding What’s Changing Page 166 of 230 © Prosci, Inc. All Rights Reserved.5 Overview •Digital Transformation of Licensing, Permitting, and Inspection Processes. Will initiate the transformation of current permitting, licensing, and development review processes and software to a new solution that better matches business needs and meets staff and customer requirements. Core Team •Denzel Maxwell - Executive Sponsor •Kevin Wilkins - Transformation Lead •Kim Meyer - Steering Committee •Drew Brooks - Steering Committee •Kai Kleer/Patti Milio – Project Manager(s) What’s Changing / Our Understanding Page 167 of 230 InterviewsDocuments/Activities ✓Program Charter / Business Case / Overview Deck ✓Project Benefits ✓Concerns / Issues / Risks ✓Communications work to date ✓Risk Analysis ✓4P Exercise (See Appendix Slide 35) ✓Denzel Maxwell (Executive Sponsor) ✓Kai Kleer/Patti Milio – Project Manager(s) ✓Drew Brooks/Kim Meyer - Steering Committee ✓Shar Manno/Kiana Carter/Michelle Reulet - Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) ✓Tyler Robbins/Marcus Coldiron - Business Unit Core Team Reviewed Documents and Key Interviews Page 168 of 230 Change Management Overview How Individuals Move Through Change Page 169 of 230 Helping individuals through ADKAR Organizational Change Requires Individual Change Page 170 of 230 ADKAR element Definition What you hear Triggers for building Awareness Of the need for change “I understand why…” Why? Why now? What if we don’t? Desire To participate and support the change “I have decided to…” WIIFM Personal motivators Organizational motivators Knowledge On how to change “I know how to…” Within context (after A&D) Need to know during Need to know after Ability To implement required skills and behaviors “I am able to…” Size of the K-A gaps Barriers/capacity Practice/coaching Reinforcement To sustain the change “I will continue to…” Mechanisms Measurements Sustainment A D K A R ADKAR Model on a Page Right Before Go Live Page 171 of 230 Business Need to Change Project Success “Technical side” executed by Project Management discipline “People side” executed by Change Management discipline © Prosci. All Rights Reserved. “Technical” does not just mean “technological” Unified Value Proposition Page 172 of 230 Research Findings on Change Success © Prosci Inc., Prosci Research Hub Top Contributors to Change Success Integration and engagement with project management 5 Active and visible sponsorship 1 Structured change management approach 2 Employee engagement and participation 3 Frequent and open communication 4 Dedicated change management resources 6 Engagement with middle managers 7 In all 12 Prosci Best Practices reports, sponsorship was #1 on the list Page 173 of 230 12© Prosci, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Change Management Effectiveness Correlations © Prosci, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 13% 39% 73% 88% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Poor Fair Good Excellent Percent of Respondents That Met or Exceeded Project Objectives 7X 3X More effective change management results in increases in: •Meeting objectives •On or ahead of schedule •On or ahead of budget Page 174 of 230 Discovery Findings Interview Themes, Key Findings and Impact Page 175 of 230 Key Themes Communications Resources •Gap in identified role to support external customer onboarding •Sporadic internal communications support for project Sponsorship: •Risk with no identified program sponsor •Risk with not understanding roles and responsibilities of different levels of sponsorship. Processes/Workflows: •Gap with not having fully mapped workflows and processes (As-is/Future) •Gap with cross functional review of processes and workflows Customer Impact: •Risk with understanding the current and future customer impact •Gap with identified strategic approach for external customers Change Support Resources: •Risk with not identified internal change resources to support project •Risk with resource allocation for critical support roles (training support, change champion, change agent networks) Change Capability: •Immature/sporadic change maturity across City of Fort Collins •Decreased change capability with key leaders (Core Team/Sponsors) Page 176 of 230 © Prosci, Inc. All Rights Reserved.15 Business Related Identified Risks •Varying degree of customized processes and manual processes. A need to understand as is/future state workflows is critical •Cross functional collaboration is lacking with process reviews – risk of resistance with minimizing redundancy of processes Program Related •No program/project sponsor is identified •Core Team may lack the understanding of their role and responsibilities as part of the sponsor coalition •Communication cascading is varied across the organization, especially with people leaders. •Those not directly involved with the project are uninformed and not ready for the change. People & Community Related •Non-standard processes have resulted in a lack of accountability and communication, leading to a poor customer experience. •Current ways of working lack transparency and direction for our customers. •Current customer dissatisfaction and risk to image with City of Fort Collins When asked, “What is keeping you up at night?”, there were several risks that were brought up by key stakeholders. Page 177 of 230 Risk Assessment - Conducted on September 16, 2024 Change Resistant Change Ready Medium risk High risk Low risk Medium risk Small, Incremental Large, Disruptive Or g a n i z a t i o n a l A t t r i b u t e s Change Characteristics Risk Grid 14 42 70 42 70 CC:43 OA: 54 43 Change Characteristics Score 54 Organizational Attributes Score High Risk Profile Critical Aspect Score Insights Change Characteristics​ 43 •Increased risk/complexity of change with impacted groups being both internal and external. •Risk to reputation with poor execution •Increased potential for internal resistance due to varying impacts to groups and the level of disruption (Manual to automated) •Need to identify key resources across impacted groups who can influence, support, and prioritize the effort (ex: Change Agent Networks) Organizational Attributes 54 •Resistance may not be due to the current impacts, but to the previous history of failed changes •Expect to encounter barrier point at Desire -What’s In It For Me (“WIIFM”) •People Managers may resist due to change saturation. It will be important to support this group and to actively engage them in process workflows and processes •Good training will be key to adequately support teams to build Knowledge and Ability. Make sure to allow time to build Ability internally to increase quality of customer experience •Executives may consider deprioritizing (where possible) other less strategic work to prioritize this effort so that change fatigue is reduced Page 178 of 230 High Impact Medium Impact Low Impact Location Impacted Group Processes Systems Tools Job Roles Critical BehaviorsMindset / Attitudes / Beliefs Reporting Structure Performance Reviews Compensation Actions or steps taken to achieve an outcome. People and automated applications organized to meet a set of objectives. An implement, physical or technical, used for a specific purpose. Description of what a person does including competencies essential to performing well in that job capacity. Vital or essential response of an individual or group to an action, environment, person or stimulus. A mental inclination, disposition or frame of mind reflected in behaviors. The authority relationships in a company or organization. Process and indicators of how performance is measured and assessed relative to objectives. Amount of monetary and non-monetary pay provided in return for work performed. Physical, geographical place that provides facilities for a stated purpose. 10 Aspects of Change Page 179 of 230 Impacted Groups – LPCE Implementation City Clerk Office City Managers Office **Outside Agencies *CDNS – Recommend breaking these groups out individually in Phase 1 **Outside Agencies: May break these out – target the 20 who are highly impacted the most *CDNS Unique Group Consideration: A lot of change fatigue with this group. Multiple groups use different systems (technology and manual processes for plan/license review) External Customers Unique Group Consideration: Varying degree of understanding the information/resources, with mixed customer populations. Consider how they need to be supported (Not all customers are technology saavy) (Ex: Residents, contractors & developers) Unique Group Consideration: Local and State regulatory impact – strict enforcement and adherence needed Unique Group Consideration: There are only about 20 agencies who need to be aware of change, and who will be using the system the most (Ex: Poudre Fire Authority, Larimer County, External Water Districts, etc) Unique Group Consideration: Direct feedback from council about the public may cause a greater urgency to execute quickly, impeding a streamless transition High Impact Medium Impact Low Impact 10 Aspects of Change Impact Location Impacted Group Processes Systems Tools Job Roles Critical Behaviors Mindset / Attitudes / Beliefs Reporting Structure Performance Reviews Compensation Start here and go clockwise Page 180 of 230 Change Management Readiness Change Success Status Insights Sponsorship Risk •Primary Sponsor is not currently identified •There is confusion around who the sponsors are, and what their roles are •Sponsors and sponsor coalition unclear with roles and responsibilities CM Approach On Track •A structured Change Management approach should be used (Prosci methodology) Communications Potential Risk •Front-line employees and those not directly involved with the project may be uninformed due to a lack of cascaded communications •Broader communications for awareness are lacking Employee Engagement Potential Risk •Outside of the core project team including SMEs, there is little employee engagement •Currently there aren’t identified standing meetings/channels to distribute project information to leaders and teams •Change champion networks is currently not identified to support the change CM Resources Risk •The project currently does not have dedicated, experienced CM resources. While CM experience among managers and project leaders varies, experienced internal/external change practitioners can fill those gaps with targeted plans and support CM / PM Integration On Track •Change Management is being integrated early into the project lifecycle. Project Managers are willing and eager to work with CM resources People Leaders / Middle Managers Potential Risk •Strong need to coach people leaders on their roles and responsibilities •Lack of awareness with how to manage resistance to support their teams •People leaders will need support with cascading – some do this currently, but it varies Page 181 of 230 Discovery Recommendations Initial Next Steps Page 182 of 230 LPCE Discovery Recommendations Customer Support •Identify external facing roles to help communicate and support external customers Sponsorship and Vision •Identify employee facing sponsorship role to support the LPCE project •Gain leadership alignment to vision, direction, timeline (City Mgmt/SteerCo) •Communicate vision and direction with a clear roadmap to the future state Cross Functional Collaboration •Reduce siloes and coach teams to think bigger picture as “one team” (ex: workflows/processes) Customer Impact •Determine strategic approach to onboard customers for enhanced customer experience Resource Allocation •Identify experienced resources who can fully support the project (change practitioners/communications/training resources) Leadership Change Capability •Recommend Sponsor and Core team Prosci training to build organizational change capability to support LPCE project. Page 183 of 230 © Prosci, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Immediate Communication Recommendations •Share 1-pager with leaders for LPCE – Use as talking point for LPCE. Update accordingly •Broadly communicate for Awareness – “What’s Changing”, “Where we Are”, “Why”, “Why Now”, ‘Approximate Timeline”, “Benefits”, “Consequences of not changing” (Email/All hands/Town Halls or other standing meetings) ‣Capture FAQs •Build initial Share Point site to house email communications/resources/FAQs/project team members/departmental SME network‣Create Executive Sponsor Message to place on Share Point to create Awareness •Create LPCE project email inbox to capture employee questions for inputs to FAQs •Identify brand LPCE project logo for project communications Key activities to begin Awareness phase Recommended Start Date for Phase 1 Change Management Nov 4, 2024 Page 184 of 230 Sponsorship Critical Roles and Responsibilities for Change Success Page 185 of 230 Sponsor Coalition Map Executive/ Primary Sponsor - Employee Facing Role Core Team - Sponsor Coalition Non-coalition Critical Project Roles** Brad Morgan Technical Lead IT Marcus Coldiron Functional lead PDT Justin Moore Permitting, Planning, Compliance/CDNS Tyler Robbins Licensing/City Clerk Ken Zetye Planning/Engineering **TBD** Primary/Project Sponsor Denzel Maxwell Executive Sponsor Steering Committee (Multiple Executives) Ralph Zentz Permitting, Licensing Compliance/Forestry Marcus Glasgow Permitting, Planning/Poudre Fire Authority Brandy Belthuren Harras Planning / CDNS Marcy Yoder Compliance/CDNS Ed Bonnette Purchasing Dan Mogen Planning, Permitting / Utilities Water TBD (Internal) Senior Change Advisor TBD (External) Sr. Principal Change Advisor TBD Internal Communications Kai Kleer/Patti Milio Project Manager TBD External Change Communications (CPIO) TBD Training Lead Page 186 of 230 Sponsorship Roles Primary/Project SponsorExecutive Sponsor/SteerCo Sponsor Coalition •Authorize the change •Provide credibility to change •Perform Employee-facing activities (All hands/Town halls, Meetings) •Build sponsor coalition •Communicate effectively (Go- Lives/Post go- live/Reinforcement) •Active and visible partner/influencer to PM/OCM and the organization •Participate in managing the day- to-day project activities (CM meetings, CM deliverable reviews) •Communicate the “why”, “why now” and “consequences” of not changing, as well as ongoing key messaging throughout •Support the change •Build alignment with their leaders and teams •Engage and mobilize their leaders and teams •Facilitate communications through cascading information •Role model and set expectations of their leaders and teams Page 187 of 230 Change Ecosystem **Primary Sponsor Change Manager People Managers Change Agents Change Champions Provides vision and leadership, communicates directly with employees, and builds a coalition of support. Develops and implements change management plans, coaches sponsors and people managers, and tracks progress. Communicate the change to their teams, act as liaisons, advocate for the change, manage resistance, and coach their teams. Act as liaisons between the change team and employees, gather and share feedback, and support the change (have authority and influence). Advocate for the change, motivate and inspire others, and promote the benefits of the change (key influencers but may not have authority). They understand the business. collaborates closely with provides tools and coaching to communicates changes to and gets feedback from provides practical support to Sponsor Coalition Aligns on change objectives, coordinates efforts, and addresses resistance for their teams. monitors progress and challenges with ensures that teams are aligned with Page 188 of 230 Thank You Page 189 of 230 © Prosci, Inc. All Rights Reserved.28 CONTACT www.prosci.com generalinquiry@prosci.com generalinquiry@prosci.com +1 970 203 9332 2950 E. Harmony Road, Suite 150 Fort Collins, CO 80528, USA © Prosci, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Page 190 of 230 © Prosci, Inc. All Rights Reserved.29 Appendix Page 191 of 230 © Prosci, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Common Pitfalls •Incomplete business processes or cross functional workflows •Compressed timeline for internal training/insufficient training to support role •Lack of training resources/SMEs to help support/build training specific to Fort Collins •Insufficient data cleanup and integration •Lack of resources to support project – CM, communications, customer support •Improper system profiles – Managed access and permissions to system. Possible regulatory and compliance issues due to lack of security within system •Lack of beta testing for customer onboarding – High impacted groups/improper external communications •Lack of CM and PM integration of plans – Siloed approach and lack of “people- side” support Common pitfalls to consider Page 192 of 230 Costs Risks To the project if we do not manage the people side of change well •Project delays •Missed milestones •Budget overruns •Rework required •Loss of work by project team •Resistance – active and passive •Project put on hold •Resources not made available •Obstacles appear unexpectedly •Project fails to deliver results •Project is fully abandoned To the organization if we do not manage the people side of change well •Productivity plunges (deep and sustained) •Loss of valued employees •Reduced quality of work •Impact on customers •Impact on suppliers •Morale declines •Legacy of failed change •Stress, confusion, fatigue •Change saturation To the organization if this change does not deliver the results we expect •Lost investment in the project •Lost opportunity to have invested in other projects •Expenses not reduced •Efficiencies not gained •Revenue not increased •Market share not captured •Waste not reduced •Regulations not met Avoidable Costs and Mitigable Risks Page 193 of 230 ADKAR Example Activities 1.Ensure employees have access to and time to attend training 2.Use job aids to assist employees in the learning process 3.Provide open and ready access to information to support learning 4.Identify employees that others can go to for assistance 5.Provide one-on-one coaching 6.Share problems and lessons learned as a team 1.Repetitive face-to-face communication of the business reasons for the change and the risks of not changing 2.Use a variety of communication channels, such as team meetings, emails, bulletin board postings, posters, etc. 3.Provide employees with ready access to business information, such as external drivers of change 4.Share customer feedback and develop effective responses 5.Surface and address rumors 1.Help employees identify the personal benefits of the change (WIIFM) 2.Acknowledge the losses and opportunities associated with the change 3.Address negative history with change – discuss why previous mistakes occurred and how current and future changes can be implemented differently to ensure success 4.Engage employees in the change process at the earliest possible stages of the change 5.Align incentive and performance management systems to support the change 1.Celebrate successes 2.Recognize employees for successfully implementing change 3.Gather feedback from employees 4.Identify root causes for low adoption and implement corrective action 5.Build accountability mechanisms into day- to-day business operations 1.Help employees apply what they have learned to real work situations 2.Ensure that employees have the time and opportunities to develop new skills 3.Provide solutions when the "real work" does not match what they learned in training 4.Be a role model for how to act in the new environment 5.Identify when "more time" is not the answer and external intervention is required Awareness Tactics Desire Tactics Knowledge Tactics Ability Tactics Reinforcement Tactics Page 194 of 230 Sponsor Role in Change: Fulfill the ABCs to Drive Success It’s not just signing checks and charters Actively and visibly participate throughout the project Build a coalition of sponsorship with peers and managers Communicate directly with employees © Prosci Inc., Prosci Research Hub Page 195 of 230 Sponsors and Change Manager: •Collaborate closely: Develop a sponsor roadmap to guide sponsor activities and ensure they remain engaged. •Regular updates: Change practitioners provide sponsors with progress reports and feedback. Sponsors and Sponsor Coalition: •Unified Communication Plan: Leverage a unified communication plan to ensure consistent messaging •Role Modeling: Actively demonstrate their commitment to the change through their actions and behaviors. Sponsor Coalition and People Managers: •Align People Managers: align on priorities, messaging and address any emerging resistance. •Resource Allocation: allocate resources or adjusts strategies to better support the People Managers and their teams. Change Ecosystem Interactions Change Manager and People Managers: •Equip with tools and training: Provide people managers with the necessary resources to support their teams. •Regular coaching: Conduct coaching sessions to address challenges and resistance. People Managers and Change Agents: •Communicate changes: Work together to ensure clear and consistent communication. •Gather feedback: People managers rely on change agents to understand the team’s sentiment and address concerns. Change Agents and Change Champions: •Foster a positive attitude: Both roles work to create a supportive environment for the change. •Share feedback and success stories: Change agents provide practical support while change champions focus on motivation and advocacy. Interactions and Collaboration Page 196 of 230 4 P’s – Defining the Change Project Purpose Particulars People Digital Transformation of Licensing, permitting, Inspection and Development Review Consequences of not Changing/Risks: •Operations may fall behind increasing demands from businesses and residents, while being unable to integrate new trends and technologies properly due to incompatibility with legacy processes and platforms. •A highly complex environment with current permitting and licensing spanning multiple departments •Highly customized system processes requires significant coordination, •Lack of standardized process, and a high desire for specialized solutions like the ones currently in place could hamper the adoption of more universal tools. Digital Transformation of Licensing, Permitting, and Inspection Processes - Funding this offer will initiate the transformation of current permitting, licensing, and development review processes and software to a new solution that better matches business needs and meets staff and customer requirements Project Outcomes: •Re-engineered processes: elimination, simplification, digitization and automation •Reimagining work to reduce manual and high touch processes into low touch self - service capabilities •Introducing smart workflows to automate processes, shifting from analog paper to digital online solutions •Shifting input to the consumer, guiding them through the process with digital workflows •Implementing intelligent routing and inspections scheduling, and notifications to consumers •Increasing our scale while reducing the time to process and approve submissions with confidence •Implementing automated, no- code workflows, approvals and online payment collection Organizational Benefits: •Increased satisfaction with customer experience through simplicity of standardized processes with permitting and licensing •A more holistic, customer-centered software ecosystem to increase efficiency, and accessibility to information •Increased regulatory compliance through improved accessibility Individual Benefits: •Decreased turnaround times through increased transparency and automation of future processes in one holistic solution •Time reduction through Increased time efficiency through automation of workflows, to focus on day - to-day operations. •Support staff with up-to-date streamlined processes that allows for digital enablement •Better cross functional collaboration Process changes: New, standardized, and optimized processes and procedures across the following groups: System changes: •Digital Enablement using a more robust, customer – centric solution. •Vendor Selection to be completed XX Tools changes: Reduce reliance upon MS Excel and other manual and paper- based tools and forms for data tracking, analysis, and reporting. Approximately 200-300 employees will be impacted by this change across the following groups: List groups: Internal Community Development & Neighborhood Services (CDNS) – (250) City Clerk Office (10) City Council City Managers (15) List groups: External External Customers (175000) Outside Agencies (200) 100% of the benefits we are expecting depends on all employees doing their jobs differently. Page 197 of 230 Headline Copy Goes Here Funding Proposal Council Finance Committee Licensing, Permitting, and Code Enforcement System Appropriation 11/06/2024 Page 198 of 230 Headline Copy Goes Here 2 Introduction Does the Council Finance Committee support an appropriation ordinance to fund critical infrastructure and risk mitigation for the City’s Licensing, Permitting, and Code Enforcement System modernization? Does the Council Finance Committee support an ordinance authorizing an exception to the competitive purchasing process (sole source) for implementation professional services? Page 199 of 230 Headline Copy Goes HereProject Background 3 In 2022, City Council funded an initiative to modernize legacy permitting, licensing, and development processes, aligning with today’s community needs and enhancing both staff and customer experiences. Key Outcomes: •Streamlined, Standardized Processes: Simplify, consolidate, and automate licenses and permits to eliminate redundancies and improve staff efficiency. •Self-Service for All: Empower residents and businesses with low-touch, self-service options, advancing community digital equity. •Smart Digital Workflows: Transition from paper to digital, ensuring accessible, sustainable, and simplified services. •Scalability & Speed: Accelerate processing times to meet rising demands consistently across all service areas. •Unified, Cohesive Platform: Implement a citywide, integrated system that enhances collaboration and responsiveness. •Modernized Legacy Systems: Shift to a future-ready solution that supports a more accessible, equitable, and efficient digital government, adopting leading industry solutions. This initiative reduces complexity, boosts staff efficiency, and provides a simplified, equitable experience for all users.Page 200 of 230 Headline Copy Goes Here 4 The ‘Why’ for System Replacement •Current on-premise solution (Accela) is stopping maintenance of their platform in June-2025, with support ending Dec-2025. •Limited transparency across departments and within specific capabilities hinders understanding of project status and requirements. •Multiple systems and formats create a lack of a single source of truth, making data management and analysis difficult. •Manual processes and outdated tools limit automation and make it difficult to adapt to changing needs. •Varying service delivery models and confusing website navigation create a disjointed digital experience. •Lack of digital tools and services hinders accessibility for citizens who cannot visit City offices in person. •Reliance on temporary solutions like Microsoft Access and Excel, and the inability to support certain processes within current tools, further hinder efficiency. Page 201 of 230 Headline Copy Goes Here 5 Current Status of Project JUN AUG OCT DEC FEB APR JUN AUG OCT NOV JAN MAR Project Kick-off and RFP Development Jun – Jan Vendor Evaluations Feb –Jun Vendor 1 – Scope May -Aug Vendor 2 - Scope Sept -Nov Contract Negotiation Nov - Dec 2023 PROCUREMENT KICK OFF 2025 IMPLEMENTATION KICK OFF Page 202 of 230 Headline Copy Goes Here 6 A Unified, Cohesive Platform •Environmental Services •Community Development •Neighborhood Services •Poudre Fire Authority •Engineering •Utilities (City & External) •City Clerk’s Office •Natural Areas •Parks •Information Technology •City Manager’s Office •External Agencies •Special Events 59 24 3 13 5 1 2 21 8 19 1 Building Planning Zoning Engineering Utility ERA/Erosion Forestry Contractor Licensing Liqour Licensing Medical MJ Licensing Sales Tax 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Licensing and Permitting Processes Record Types Tyler Technologies'Enterprise platform streamlines permitting, licensing, and code enforcement through centralized workflows, online submissions, automation and GIS integration. This solution enhances collaboration, transparency, and customer access, aligning well with Fort Collins' goals of process modernization, simplification and improved customer experience. Page 203 of 230 Headline Copy Goes Here 7 Risk Assessment – Staffing Shortages Much of the request for additional funding is to mitigate for the four highest impact and most likely risks identified by the initial strategic alignment work done by InfoTech. These risks largely center around providing the project with adequate staffing and include the following: Risk Impact Likelihood Mitigation Effort Internal and External Organization Change Management (Including: Messaging/ Communications/ Training) 1 1 Look for an external resource to manage OCM. Resourcing & staff bandwidth 1 1 Look at backfilling, cross training, and opportunity to free up bandwidth from critical team members. Decrease regular duty obligations.. Look for consultants and external resourcing. Full Time Project Manager 1 2 Look for support for this early. Look for external resourcing. Ask for resourcing along with OCM and Process Engineering Consultant. Vendor Management 1 1 Lack of product owner has led to issues on other projects. Vendor management should be coordinated between IT and the business. Page 204 of 230 Headline Copy Goes Here Page 205 of 230 Headline Copy Goes HereTyler Implementation Services ($2M one-time cost) 9Page 206 of 230 Headline Copy Goes HereTyler Software Licensing ($775K annually) 10 Current Licensing & Support Costs Annual License: $185,000 Annual City Staffing & Benefits: $425,000 Other Maintenance Costs: $15,000 Total: $625,000 Tyler Licensing & Support Costs Annual License: $933,000 30% Discount: $262,000 Total w/ Discount: $670,000 Managed Services: $105,000 Total: $775,000 Page 207 of 230 Headline Copy Goes HereKey Elements Essential To Success 11 Project Management •Complex System Migration: Minimize risk in Accela to Tyler transition. •Accountability: Ensure rigorous scheduling and scope control. •Enhanced Service: Deliver a responsive, customer-centered system. Change Management •Universal Adoption: Tailored strategies for businesses, residents, and staff to embrace new processes. •Comprehensive Training: Equips all users with the knowledge needed to become proficient with new capabilities. •Clear Communication: Keep city staff and the community informed and engaged. Expertise & Resources •Comprehensive Skill Gaps: Requires expertise in technical, process, and Tyler system knowledge. •Backfill Support: Maintains essential services by covering key roles required for staff assignment to this initiative. •Knowledge Transfer: Enables City ownership while building long-term capacity. Page 208 of 230 Headline Copy Goes HereImplementation Staffing 12 Resourcing ($720K) •Average of 4 FTEs per month for 18 months. •52/48 work split between internal and external resources. •Backfill for critical roles (building, dev rev, code compliance). •Supplemental pay for supporting and intermittent roles. Change Management ($386K) •OCM added to project scope due to historical challenges and risk assessment. •OCM will provide structured change management. •OCM will train internal staff to lead change initiatives Professional Services ($864K) •RFP issued, no qualified respondents, staff has identified a qualified vendor. Sole-source authorization required. •Specific expertise in Accela-to-Tyler implementation/migration •Project management and scheduling •Configuration and best practices adherence •Risk mitigation and scope control •Vendor accountability for technical deliverables •Timely system delivery Page 209 of 230 Headline Copy Goes Here 13 Summary of Costs Item Implementation Cost Strategy Roadmap & Procurement Process $475,106 Tyler Technologies SaaS Implementation Professional Services $2,522,040* Software Licensing through Implementation $1,342,912 City backfill for the two-year implementation period (4 FTE) $721,032* Third Party Implementation Professional Services $864,000* Prosci Change Management Professional Services $386,640* Total Estimated Project Cost $5,836,624 Previously Appropriated Funds $2,140,200 Supplemental Appropriation Request $3,696,424 *Items assume a 20% contingency. For FTE items, contingency is represented by assuming a 24-month implementation period as compared to the 19- month planned implementation period. Page 210 of 230 Headline Copy Goes Here 14 Suggested Funding Stack Page 211 of 230 Headline Copy Goes Here 15 Case for Change Page 212 of 230 Headline Copy Goes Here 16 Council Direction Does the Council Finance Committee support an appropriation ordinance to fund critical infrastructure and risk mitigation for the City’s Licensing, Permitting, and Code Enforcement System modernization? and Does the Council Finance Committee support an ordinance authorizing an exception to the competitive purchasing process (sole source) for implementation professional services? Page 213 of 230 Headline Copy Goes Here Page 214 of 230 Headline Copy Goes HereStrategy Roadmap 18Page 215 of 230 Headline Copy Goes HereFinancial Impact 19 Summary: •Current Tyler 10 yr TCO w/ managed services is down $4.2M from Tyer’s June BAFO, and $1.9M+ less than Accela’s last proposal. •Tyler has pursued this process with attention, responsiveness, partnering style, and aggressive pricing concessions. •Tyler price includes significant advantageous terms such as unlimited users for core application, 100 DigEplan licenses, no price escalation for 5 years, and includes ALL CoFC current Accela processes plus up to 50 currently manual processes. •Accela has an additional one-time savings of approximately 1 year of existing support costs, which is not enough to change the TCO outcome. Solution / Timeslice Impl. # Months Approach Post Go- Live Support # months Total Implementation Cost Initial Subscription Cost Vendor Implementation Cost Travel 10-Yr Vendor Costs w MAS 10-Yr Vendor Costs w/o MAS Notes Latest Number Latest Number blue if Accela is cheaper orange if Tyler is cheaper ∆ = $ 307,689 ∆ = $ 121,956 ∆ = $ 429,645 ∆ = $ 0 ∆ = $ 1,926,886 ∆ = $ 88,188 Latest comparison Accela vs TylerLower priced vendor highlighted--> Page 216 of 230 Headline Copy Goes HereInitial Vendor of Choice (Accela) 20Page 217 of 230 Headline Copy Goes HereSecond Vendor of Choice Selection (Tyler) 21 18 Months Implementation, 1 Release •18 mos. Implementation •Post Go-Live Support - 1 mos. Hypercare $2,755,906 Vendor Implementation Overall Cost •Subscription - $654,206 •Implementation– $2,021,700 •Optional cost -$ 0 Vendor 10yr $9,168,376 no MAS Vendor 10yr $10,190,608 with MAS Sep 16 18 Months Implementation, 1 Release •18 mos. Implementation •Post Go-Live Support - 1 mos. Hypercare $2,753,156 Vendor Implementation Overall Cost •Subscription - $671,456 •Implementation– $2,021,700 •Optional cost -$ 0 Vendor 10yr $9,354,709 no MAS Vendor 10yr $10,272,652 with MAS Oct 15 Page 218 of 230 Headline Copy Goes Here 22 Tyler – Final BAFO Project Summary Summary: •Tyler Final BAFO price includes significant value such as: •Implements ALL CoFC current Accela processes PLUS up to 50 currently manual processes •Unlimited users license for core application •License, implementation, and support for DigEplan (100 units) •No price escalation for 5 years on SaaS fees or Support Services •Tyler 10 yr TCO including managed services is down $4.2M from Tyer’s June BAFO, and $1.9M+ less than Accela’s last proposal. •Tyler has pursued this process with attention, responsiveness, a partnering style, and aggressive pricing concessions. Item #Category or Item Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 Year-10 Total Cost 7,253,009$ 2 Implementation Costs (Tab 3)2,021,700$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 2,021,700$ 3 Other Costs (Tab 4)80,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 80,000$ Managed Services Costs: 1 917,943$ Total: $ 2,773,156 $671,456 $775,745 $775,745 $775,745 $814,532 $855,259 $898,022 $942,923 $990,069 $ 10,272,652 10-Year Total Cost of Ownership Page 219 of 230 Headline Copy Goes Here 23 Accela vs Tyler - Staffing Comparison Summary: • Tyler’s combined project work hours are 6,340 hours less than the Accela proposal (25,319 for Accela vs 18,979 for Tyler) •CoFC work hours are 3,479 less with the Tyler proposal. •Work split between CoFC and Vendor is roughly the same for each proposal, with CoFC slightly over 50% of total work. Comments 23 Month Project Term 19 Month Project Term Tyler plan completes the project 4 months sooner. Business Sponsor 175 98 Program Director Project Management 2,800 2,555 Project Manager Bus Leads and SMEs 4,669 3,920 SMEs Business Leads and SMEs are critical to both proposals. OCM 2,100 182 Integration Developer 483 140 Application Architect 0 280 Application Developer 0 140 Application Dev/Config 0 140 Testers 0 1,085 Report/BI Developer 1,120 140 Tyler includes much less custom report development. Conversion 1,400 770 Tyler needs input data in their specified format. Trainer 560 378 Tyler is proposing a Train the Trainer approach. Total FC Hours 13,307 9,828 Total FC Hours Tyler proposes 26% fewer FC hours (3,479). Regional Director 552 0 PM 1,524 1,216 Migration Team 1,760 0 Migration not needed for Tyler project Imp Lead 2,720 0 Imp Consultant 1,920 6,790 Integration 992 0 Automation 1,440 173 Reporting 80 385 Conversion 1,024 160 FC provides the data, Tyler executes the conversion. Trainer+OCM 0 427 Tyler is proposing a Train the Trainer approach. Total Accela Hours 12,012 9,151 Total Tyler Hours Tyler proposes 24% fewer Vendor hours (2,861). Total Hours 25,319 18,979 Overall, Tyler proposes 25% fewer Total hours. Tyler Fo r t C o l l i n s Ve n d o r Accela Page 220 of 230 Headline Copy Goes Here 24 Recommendation Summary: •CoFC and TMG invested 2 months with Tyler Technologies to investigate, validate and refine their proposal to improve the fit and reduce risk. •Tyler responded throughout this process with attention, responsiveness, a partnering style, and aggressive pricing concessions. • Tyler’s final proposal includes significant value to meet CoFC strategic direction • Overall proposal supports CoFC transformation. • Recommend moving forward with the latest revised Tyler proposal by requesting approval and funding. Consideration Notes Product Very high fit to CoFC requirements Scope Includes all CoFC processes (150+50) Approach Proven solution that establishes future CoFC ownership Schedule 17+2 months is focused but reasonable Staffing Roughly 50/50 workload split encourages CoFC ownership Price $671k annual + $2M implementation = $10.3M 10-Year TCO Vendor Demonstrated deep understanding and partnering Transformation Product, approach, and vendor all support CoFC transformation Page 221 of 230 Headline Copy Goes HereProcurement Methodology 25Page 222 of 230 Headline Copy Goes HereAnnual Record Types 26 Building Permits, 8000 Contractor Licensing, 1350 Land Development Applications, 360 Retail Licensing, 560 Code Enforcement, 10,000 Building Permits Contractor Licensing Land Development Applications Retail Licensing Code Enforcement 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 Page 223 of 230 Page 224 of 230 Human Resources Department 215 N. Mason St, 2nd Floor PO Box 580, Fort Collins, CO 80522 970-221-6535 humanresources@fcgov.com MEMORANDUM Date: October 28, 2024 To: Council Finance Committee Members Through: Travis Storin, Chief Financial Officer Teresa Roche, Human Resources Executive From: Kelley Vodden, Director of Compensation, Benefits, and Wellbeing Chris Martinez, FP&A Manager, Information and Employee Services Subject: Request to Appropriate Unanticipated Revenue in the Benefits Fund for 2024 City Medical, Dental, and Various Life Insurance Benefits This memo is to apprise committee members of a Council request to appropriate $1.1M from 2024 unanticipated revenues collected in the Benefits Fund to cover Medical/Dental claims and Various Life Insurance premium expenses that could potentially exceed 2024 budgeted appropriations. This supplemental appropriation is self-funded and would be brought to City Council for first reading on November 19th. YTD Benefits Revenue: In evaluating both Medical and Dental plans through September, we are experiencing higher claims activity than what was projected for the 2024 budget. This has a direct correlation to our subscribers increasing by 6% (140 subscribers) over the last 1.5 years vs. budgeted 2-3% subscriber growth. When this happens, the plan collects enough revenue to cover the number of subscribers, but the plan is bound by the original expenditure appropriation based on 2-3% subscriber growth as was projected back in Q1 of 2022 of the 2023-24 BFO process. As a result, the City has collected excess Benefits revenue of approximately $1.1M broken down as follows: Contributions to PPO/HDHP Plans: $855k Contributions to Life Insurance: $170k Contributions to Dental Plans: $113k Total Unanticipated Plan Revenue: $1.14M YTD Medical, Dental, and Life Insurance Expenses: Through October, the plan is seeing an increase of almost 100% more high-dollar claimants (>$100k) with 23 active claimants when a normal year the City experiences 10 - 13 high-dollar claimants. This alone has had a YTD impact of $700k in medical claim expenses. Dental is also operating with more subscribers with YTD overrun of approximately $170k. Lastly, Basic Page 225 of 230 and Voluntary Life Insurance as well as Fire & Police Pension Association Insurance is currently over by $296k as a direct result of additional subscribers to these plans and higher than anticipated administrative costs. Historically, both Medical and Dental plan experience higher claim expenses in Q4 resulting from participants reaching plan deductibles and scheduling procedures before year-end. The Benefits team does budget for this seasonal increase and our projections are showing the plan will come very close to hitting budget, but it is a very thin margin of error. Given the impact of the number of high-dollar claimants and growth of subscribers, the Benefits team recommends appropriation of the excess $1.1M Benefit revenue as a protection provision to cover any potential expenditure overages to avoid violating Fund policy per Chapter 8 Article 3 of the City’s Municipal Code. Page 226 of 230 Page 227 of 230 Community Services 215 N. Mason Fort Collins, CO 80522 fcgov.com MEMORANDUM DATE: October 29, 2024 TO: Council Finance Committee FROM: Victoria Shaw, Community Services Finance Manager RE: Appropriations from unanticipated revenue in Community Services ______________________________________________________________________ The purpose of this memorandum is to inform the Council Finance Committee of requests for two appropriations from unanticipated revenues to address increased expenses in the Recreation Department and the Forestry Division. These appropriations are based on the availability of increased revenue in 2024 vs. the original budget. Background Recreation - $600,000 appropriation request The Recreation department has seen higher participation in programming than was originally forecast during the 2023-2024 Budgeting for Outcomes process. At the time of that forecast, it was not certain what level of participation to expect to rebound after the decrease driven by the pandemic. Participation has returned faster than expected, and corresponding revenues and expenses have exceeded forecasts. Between 2022 and 2024 Recreation has seen a ~20% increase in ‘Total Cumulative Participation’ rates across all facilities. The Recreation department is anticipating 2024 revenues will exceed forecasts by approximately $800,000. The department will seek an additional appropriation of $600,000 in the Recreation Fund to increase the budget to allow for expenses associated with higher participation and revenues, such as contractual labor and recreation supplies. Forestry - $73,900 appropriation request The Forestry division collects revenues throughout the year which are unforecasted since they are unpredictable in nature. These funds are collected to recover costs associated with public tree damage cases, payment in lieu via development, Arborist Licensing, and Work for Others. Year-to-date revenues associated with these activities are $73,900. These revenues were received in the General Fund and, if appropriated, will be primarily used to support tree replacement. Page 228 of 230 Next Steps Staff will schedule these items for 1st Reading on the November 19, 2024 Council Meeting for consideration by Council. Page 229 of 230 Page 230 of 230