ATTACHMENT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES

Re-release of
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL 0000002180

ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE PROVISION OF MILWAUKEE

WATER

DUE DATE: APRIL 16, 2009

2:00 PM CST

1
 ASSESSING THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE PROVISION
OF WATER TO NEARBY COMMUNITIES

The City of Milwaukee seeks to contract for the development of a methodology to quantify the
economic impacts of potential future water service contracts between the City of Milwaukee and
nearby communities.

Contents
1. Background
2. Scope of Services and Deliverables
3. Proposal Requirements
4. Cost Proposal
5. Required Format
6. Proposal Evaluation
7. Report Submission
8. Dissemination of Report

1. Background
The City of Milwaukee Department of Public Works Water Works is the drinking water utility
owned by the City of Milwaukee and regulated by the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
(PSC), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources. It provides drinking water, fire suppression and public health protection to residents
and businesses in the City of Milwaukee and 15 surrounding communities. The mission of the
Water Works is to provide safe and reliable drinking water to all of its customers.

The PSC is responsible for establishing the Water Works’ rate schedule, and it does so by
calculating the costs the Water Works incurs in providing water services and permitting the
Water Works to recover these costs plus a requested rate of return. The PSC holds that the
benchmark rate of return for municipal water utilities should be 7.4%, and the Water Works’
2008 rate of return was <1%. The rates authorized by the PSC include fees for fire protection,
general service charges and charges for volume of water consumed.

In 2008, the Water Works sold 34 billion gallons of water pumped and treated from Lake
Michigan and delivered it to approximately 858,000 customers through 2,000 miles of mains.
The Water Works currently has the capacity to pump and treat billions more gallons of water
than it sells, and has the ability to expand its service to additional communities.

The Water Works’ customers outside the City of Milwaukee are classified as either wholesale or
retail customers. The Water Works serves 10 wholesale clients which operate their own water
utilities, billing customers and maintaining the distribution systems in their communities.
Wholesale customers are Brown Deer, Butler, Greendale, Menomonee Falls, Milwaukee County
Grounds, New, Shorewood, Wauwatosa, West Allis and We Energies Water Services (Mequon,
Thiensville) and part of New Berlin. The costs related to extending mains and construction costs
to link the Water Works system to a new wholesale customer are evaluated according to which
community will benefit from the extension of infrastructure. If the additional infrastructure does
not benefit the Water Works, the wholesale customer will incur 100% of costs. If the Water

2
Works also benefits, a cost-sharing agreement is executed. As this is not a rate issue, the Public
Service Commission has no authority in this area.

Retail customers receive full water service from the Water Works, including customer billing
and distribution system maintenance. Retail customers are Greenfield, Hales Corners, St.
Francis and a portion of Franklin. The Village of West Milwaukee receives billing services from
the Water Works but maintains its own distribution system. Attached is a map of the Water
Works Service Area.

2. Scope of Services and Deliverables

To accomplish the following scope of services and required deliverables for this engagement, a
vendor will develop a methodology to quantify the economic impacts of potential future water
service contracts between the City of Milwaukee and other communities. The primary
deliverable is the development of a methodology which the City will use to calculate the
economic impacts of future water service contracts. This should be accomplished by identifying
the:

2-a. Potential residential, commercial, manufacturing and population growth that is related to
water service that Milwaukee may provide to another community, and how growth can be
measured over the lifetime of a contract period. This will require distinguishing the impact of
Milwaukee water availability from other factors that influence investment and location decisions.

2-b. Potential negative economic impacts on the City of Milwaukee due to lost opportunities for
attracting new residential, commercial, manufacturing development, and loss of existing
Milwaukee residents and businesses which might be attracted to the new development. Potential
negative economic impacts on projected employment within the region that includes
Milwaukee’s labor force if the other community does not receive water service and businesses
there do not expand, downsize or relocate out of the area.

Alternately, this paragraph could be rewritten more neutrally:

2-b. Positive and negative impacts on the City of Milwaukee and the region that that may result
from provision of Milwaukee water to suburban communities relative to changes in opportunities
for new residential, commercial, and manufacturing development, and effects on existing
Milwaukee residents and businesses.

2-c. Role of the provision of Milwaukee water in reducing public health risks that result from
contaminated drinking water, including reducing the need for household expenditures to “soften”
well water, improvements in fire protection and other identified quality-of-life issues.

2-d. To the extent possible, the impact of the provision of Milwaukee water on the Southeast
Wisconsin region, defined as Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Waukesha and Waukesha counties, with
respect to the distribution of household income and availability of affordable housing for various
income levels among these communities; the concentration of poverty; the demand for and
feasibility of operating mass transit systems; environmental impacts, such as the impact of
increased impervious area on the achievement of water quality standards and the preservation of
environmental corridors and natural resource areas; and the decentralization of economic

3
activity, including employment, office and retail space, manufacturing and warehousing activity,
etc.

Examples of quantitative and qualitative considerations that could be considered in the

development of the calculation in the methodology include, but are not limited to, those
described in the following tables:

Quantitative Considerations

Potential effects on City Potential effects on Other Impacts

of Milwaukee Community Receiving
Water
Community • Impact on residential  • Residential, commercial,  • Increase in groundwater 
Receives population trends,  manufacturing  level 
Milwaukee commercial, manufacturing  development and  • Decrease in sodium 
development  population growth  chloride loading to lake 
Water
• Impact on Milwaukee’s  • Increased property value to  • Avoided generation of 
ability to attract or retain  existing connections  radium‐containing waste 
water‐reliant industries  • Increased developable   
• No change to Milwaukee’s  acreage or future new 
manufacturing absorption  connections or property 
potential  value 
• Broadened ratepayer base  • Impact on municipal water 
for Milwaukee water utility  rates 
• Infrastructure  • Avoided costs of in‐home 
improvements to supply  treatment to individual 
community may also  customers  
benefit Milwaukee  • Reduced public safety risks 
customers  from improved fire 
• Sharing in regional benefits  protection 
resulting from water  • Reduced public health risks 
arrangement  from water contaminants 
• increase to projected  to which individuals are no 
employment within the  longer exposed 
region that includes  • Reliable high quality water 
Milwaukee’s labor force  supply meting federal and 
state standards 
Community • Lost revenue opportunity  • Impact on municipal water 
Does Not for Milwaukee water  rates 
Receive utility, with associated  • Community utilizes 
impacts on general fund  alternate source of water 
Milwaukee
accounts  which meets quantity and 
Water • No mitigating effect on  quality requirements 
future rate increases 
• Decrease to projected 
employment within the 
region that includes 
Milwaukee’s labor force 

4
 Qualitative Considerations

Potential Effect on City Potential Effect on Other Impacts

of Milwaukee Community Receiving
Water
Community • Ability to leverage other  • Less restrictive water  • Regional multiplier factors 
Receives community’s actions, e.g.  conservation requirements  of development 
Milwaukee cooperation on issues  which allow for more 
• Goodwill from community  outdoor uses of water 
Water
• Improved quality of life 
Community • Water purchased from  • Aquifer decline  • Is construction of 
Does Not neighboring utility  • Water shortages  redundant infrastructure 
Receive • Strengthens regionalization  • Arduous conservation  necessary, rather than 
of competing water utility  requirements  utilizing existing excess 
Milwaukee
• Decline in public safety  capacity? 
Water
(reduced water for fire 
protection) 

3. Proposal Requirements

3-a. Description of the proposer’s approach to and organization of the engagement.

3-a-i. The proposer should describe the proposed methodological approach for achieving
valid and reliable study conclusions for the desired scope of services and deliverables. This
section should include a general description of the tasks that the proposer will complete relating
to the deliverables, and an estimate of timelines, number of hours, and the assigned number of
personnel associated with those tasks. This section should include the proposer’s ability to
complete the engagement within 6 months or less of receiving notice to proceed. Proposers may
include charts, tables or graphs in addition to the narrative in order to convey their intended
project organization, tasks and timelines.

3-a-ii. The proposer should identify outside sources of information that they will use to
complete the required deliverables.

3-b. Description of the proposer’s relevant experience and professional qualifications, including
those of the persons the proposer will assign to this engagement.

3-b-i. In 1,500 words or less, the proposer should describe their experience in conducting
engagements of the kind similar to that which this RFP contains. The proposer should provide
specific consulting engagements or other professional experience that is relevant to completing the
required deliverables. Experience regarding (a) the analysis of household and business location
and investment decisions, (b) the influence of economic activity on watershed conditions, (c)
regional economic analysis, (d) water utility business analysis, and (e) the application of land use
information to population and economic projections is considered especially valuable to this
engagement. This section should identify the persons the proposer will assign to this engagement,
and describe their experience and qualifications. If the proposer intends to employ subcontractors,

5
the proposal must also describe the qualifications and experience of the subcontractor’s personnel
to be assigned to this engagement and the responsibilities to be assigned to such personnel.

3-b-ii. The proposer should document how the proposer’s prior engagements were
relevant and useful to government policy decisions.

3-b-iii. This section should also indicate the extent of the proposer’s and assigned
individuals’ experience in making presentations to elected officials.

3-b-iv. Proposers must provide at least 2 references for work similar in scope or subject
matter. This shall include the name and address of the reference, the name and phone number of a
person to contact, a brief description of the work that was performed and the time period of the
project or contract.

3-b-v. Proposers shall attach curriculum vitas for the principal researchers and others
who will be credited for authorship.

4. Required Format

4-a. Each proposer shall submit one electronic copy, and one original, clearly marked as such,
and 8 copies of the complete proposal, securely sealed, to the issuing office not later than the
specified date and time. The cost of preparing proposals is the responsibility of the proposers.

4-b. To enable the City to perform a fair and consistent review of all proposals, proposals
must be submitted in the following manner:

The proposers name, address, email address, telephone and fax numbers must be clearly marked
on all copies of the proposal, as follows:

4-b-i. On the cover page, identify the proposal with the words, “Economic Impact of the
Provision of Milwaukee Water”, RFP Number 0000002180.

4-b-ii. The first page must include the name and the mailing address of the proposer,
including a name, address, E-mail address, telephone and fax number for the proposer’s primary
contact for this engagement. The words “Economic Impact of the Provision of Milwaukee
Water” should be included on this page.

4-b-iii All proposals are time-stamped upon receipt and are securely kept unopened, until the
Closing Date and Time. The City, or any official or employee thereof, will not be responsible
for the pre-opening of, post-opening of, or the failure to open a proposal not properly addressed
and identified. Proposals delivered by electronic means (other than the electronic copy
described herein) such as facsimile and e-mail, are not allowed and proposals so delivered
will not be considered.

6
4-b-iv It is the responsibility of the proposer, prior to submitting a response to the RFP, to
determine whether all addendums have been downloaded from the Procurement Services Section
web page and are included with the RFP response.

5. Cost Proposal
Proposers should disclose their all-inclusive cost, including expenses, to perform deliverables on
the Cost Proposal Form attached as Appendix A. Each proposer shall submit one electronic
copy, and one original, clearly marked as such, and 8 copies of their cost proposal in a single
separately marked envelope to the issuing office not later than the specified date and time.

6. Proposal Evaluation
An evaluation committee will review accepted proposals using the following criteria and points,
which total 100. The evaluation committee will also consider the proposed timelines in the
context of hours and resources the proposer will commit to the engagement.

6-a. Experience and qualifications of the proposer. Comments from proposer’s references will
be included in this portion of the evaluation: 15 points

6-b. Experience and qualifications of the personnel the proposer commits to assign to the
engagement: 15 points

6-c. Proposer’s approach and organization of the engagement: 40 points

6-d. Proposer’s cost proposal: 20 points

6-e. This request for proposals does not have a mandatory Emerging Business Enterprise (EBE)
participation percentage assigned. However, proposers may receive up to 10 points for the
inclusion of a City certified EBE firm in their contract. Proposal must specify how the
EBE firm will provide a meaningful function within the contract: up to 10 points

7. Report Submission
This engagement requires the submission of a draft report, which shall be submitted to the City
within 5 months of receiving notice to proceed, and a final report, which shall be submitted to
the City no later than one month thereafter.

The consultant selected for this engagement shall present an oral report of all deliverables to the
appropriate Common Council Committee.

8. Dissemination of Report
The draft report and final report will become the property of the City of Milwaukee, and the City
will maintain ownership of the reports and disseminate reports as it determines appropriate.

9. Contact Person
Proposers are specifically directed not to contact any City of Milwaukee staff for meetings,
conferences or technical discussions that are related to this RFP. Unauthorized contact of any
City personnel is a cause for rejection of the proposal.

7
All communications regarding this RFP and the submittal process should be directed in writing
to:

Diane Berndt
Purchasing Agent- Sr.
City of Milwaukee
Department of Administration
Business Operations Division
Procurement Services Section
200 E. Wells Street, Room 601
Milwaukee, WI 53202-3560
Email: diane.berndt@milwaukee.gov

10. Timeline

Date* Selection Procedure

March 18, 2009 RFP release date
March 30, 2009 Deadline for submitting questions
April 3, 2009 Date for posting addendum with answers to questions
April 16, 2009 Proposal Due Date – 2:00 p.m. CST
April 17-30, 2009 Evaluation and selection of qualifying firms
May 1-8, 2009 Proposer follow-up interviews
Week of May 11, 2009 Selection of highest ranked Proposer
May 18, 2009 Contract negotiations and preparation
June 1, 2009 Contract commencement date

*NOTE: All dates are tentative and subject to change

11. Clarifications
If additional information is needed to interpret the specifications/requirements, written questions
must be received by the cut-off date listed in the proposal. All questions and answers will be
listed in the form of an addendum to the City’s website. If additional time is needed, the
proposal due date will be extended to allow adequate time for answers to be posted and
proposers to incorporate them into their proposals.

12. Content of the RFP

The “Invitation to Bid” document with a signature and all attachments, additional pages, addenda
or explanations supplied by the vendor with the proposal will be considered as part of the
proposal response. If an oral interview/presentation is required of selected finalists, it shall be at
the respondent’s expense. However, an award may be made without discussion with the
respondents. Therefore, all proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable terms,
from both technical and cost standpoint. Elaborate Inclusions (artwork brochures, etc.) unless
requested, are strongly discouraged.

8
13. Other Considerations
Factors which include, but are not limited to, quantity involved, time of performance, purpose,
financial capacity of vendor, ability to render satisfactory service, use of a City certified EBE
vendor, and past performance will be considered in determining status as a responsible vendor.
The City reserves the right to request additional information as may be reasonable in order to
determine the qualifications of a respondent.

14. Amending a Request for Proposal

After a Request for Proposal has been filed with the DOA-Business Operations Division, if the
responder desires to amend the proposal, PROPOSER MAY DO SO BEFORE THE DUE DATE
AND TIME set for the receipt of proposals in the Request for Proposal by filing an amendment
fully identified with the original proposal submitted by number, commodity or service. All the
conditions and provisions of the original proposal will be in effect. NO REQUESTS FOR
PROPOSAL OR AMENDMENTS WILL BE ACCEPTED AFTER THE DUE DATE AND
TIME FOR RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS AS SPECIFIED IN THE REQUEST FOR
PROPOSAL. This does not preclude the City from requesting additional information and/or
clarification.

15. Follow-up Interviews

The City may conduct discussions with the highest ranked proposer(s) who submitted a proposal.
Proposers must be available for interviews/presentations at City facilities or by phone on the
specified dates.

16. Incurred Costs

Those vendors submitting proposals do so entirely at their expense. There is no expressed or
implied obligation by the City to reimburse any individual or firm for any costs incurred in
preparing or submitting proposals, for providing additional information when requested by the
City or for participating in any selection or follow-up interviews, including negotiations.

17. Jurisdiction, Venue, Choice of Law

This RFP and any resulting contract shall be contract shall be governed by and construed
according to the laws of the State of Wisconsin.

18. Negotiations
The City may at its sole option, open negotiations with the highest ranked proposers after the
proposal closing date and prior to award.

19. Assignment
The proposer may not reassign any award made as a result of this RFP, without prior written
consent from the City.

20. Rejection
The City reserves the right to reject any and all proposals, to waive any informality in the
proposals that are received, to accept or reject any or all items in the proposal, and to award a
contract in whole or in part. Moreover, the City reserves the right to make no selection if
proposals are deemed to be outside the fiscal constraint or not in the best interests of the City.

9
21. RFP Results
RFP scores will be available to the public after contract award, which is approximately 90-120
days from the date of opening. RFP results can be found on the City’s website at:

http://www.city.milwaukee.gov/display/router.asp?docid=338

10
 APPENDIX A

COST PROPOSAL FORM

RFP 0000002180

“Economic Impact of the Provision of Milwaukee Water”

Proposer to quote all-inclusive cost, including expenses, to perform deliverables as required in

paragraph 2.

TOTAL COST: ___________________________

NAME OF FIRM: ______________________________________________________________

11