Interoffice Memorandum
DATE: December 23, 2024
TO: Mayor Jerry L. Demings and County Commissioners
FROM: Carrie Mathes, CFCM, NIGP-CPP, CPPO, C.P.M., Manager II, Procurement Division
CONTACT: Doug Robinson, Chief Planner, Planning Division
PHONE: 407-836-5518
SUBJECT: Approval of Contract Y25-171, Fiscal Sustainability Tool
ACTION REQUESTED:
title
Approval of Contract Y25-171, Fiscal Sustainability Tool, with Urban 3, LLC, in the estimated contract award amount of $239,978 for a 15-month term. ([Planning, Environmental, and Development Services Department Planning Division] Procurement Division)
body
PROCUREMENT:
This contract will provide an economic analysis of the County, focused on how patterns of land use and development affect the County’s finances. It will culminate in the creation of a financial modelling tool that will calculate the approximate revenues and costs resulting from proposed real estate developments. The performance period is March 1, 2025 through May 31, 2026.
FUNDING:
Funding is available in account number 0001-068-3101-6440.
APPROVALS:
The Planning Division concurs with this recommendation.
REMARKS:
The County’s Destination 2030 Comprehensive Plan includes a policy to create a “fiscal sustainability analysis tool” (FLU 1.2.8). This policy has also been included in the Vision 2050 Comprehensive Plan (LMN 1.3.11). In 2024, the Charter Review Commission proposed a charter amendment requiring the adoption of a “fiscal sustainability analysis methodology and process” by October 2025. This charter amendment was included on the ballot and passed during the general election on November 5, 2024.
The project will provide hard evidence and visualizations that will help County officials and staff explain the implications of land use and development decisions to the public and decision makers. The reports generated would be shared with the Local Planning Agency/Planning and Zoning Commission and Board of County Commissioners.
The project is broken down as follows:
Preparation: Urban 3, LLC will conduct a site visit, collect data, and clean the data.
Phase 1: Countywide Fiscal Analysis - This phase is to determine the fiscal implications of how the County has developed in the past. It will involve researching and modeling the county’s geospatially varying revenue streams and costs to determine parcels’ value-per-acre and the county’s capacity to maintain its infrastructure and services footprint.
Phase 2: Countywide Scenario Projections - This phase is to project how the fiscal health and sustainability of the county will be impacted by Vision 2050 and Orange Code under certain assumptions.
Phase 3: Analytical Tool for Proposed Developments - This phase is to create a tool to evaluate the public fiscal impacts of proposed private developments. The County will use the tool in evaluating the impacts of developments that propose to expand the Urban Service Area and determine how proposed developments in the Rural Service Area or Rural Settlements affect the County’s ability to efficiently provide and maintain infrastructure capacity and services. This task will integrate results of the prior analysis into adjustable financial models, while also providing staff training and developing reporting tools.
Presentation: Urban 3, LLC will create visualizations of their findings and present them in-person, as well as deliver a final report.
Procurement published notice of intent to sole source for a period of 10 business days and did not receive any responses.
Price reasonableness was established by comparison to similar, if not less demanding, projects in other cities and counties that contracted with Urban 3, LLC., including Fort Worth, TX, South Bend, IN, Oviedo, FL, Estero, FL, Doral, FL, Ogden, UT, Bozeman, MT, Eastvale, CA, and Placer County, CA. Pricing of these proposals was in line with the firm's preliminary estimate of $0.50 to $1 per capita. Orange County’s proposal came in substantially below this range due to the larger population of the County and the benefits of economies of scale. Over a dozen projects by other firms were also investigated and were generally in-line, although comparably was limited by comparability differing methodologies and insufficient GIS and/or financial modelling components.