RPVCCA_SR_2013_06_01_01_Banking_ServicesCrTYOF
MEMORANDUM
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
REVIEWED BY:
HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DENNIS McLEAN,DIRECTOR OF FINANCE &INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY VJJ ~DM L
JUNE 1,2013
BANKING SERVICES
CAROLYN LEHR,CITY MANAGER~for C\-
Project Managers:Kathryn Downs,Deputy Director of Finance &Information
Technology lIlA
Ryan Mills,Sen'iOtAdministrative Analyst
RECOMMENDATION
Approve staff's recommendation to select Bank of the West for the City's banking services
and direct Staff to begin contract negotiations.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City has conducted its commercial banking with Bank of America for more than 17
years.On June 19,2012,the City Council directed Staff to complete the competitive
procurement process for banking services and bring forth a recommendation to City
Council prior to the end of 2012.The RFP was released on October 1,2012 with seven
banks responding with a proposal.Each proposal was evaluated by the City's Financial
Advisor,Tim Schaefer of Magis Advisors.Due to the need for additional steps,including a
Request for Clarification (RFC)issued to the participating financial institutions and
competing staff demands,this presentation of Staff's recommendation was delayed.
Staff invited the three top scoring banks to a formal interview:Bank of the West,Union
Bank and US Bank (listed in alphabetical order).All three banks are well qualified to
provide banking services to the City;however,Staff recommends Bank of the West to
serve as the City's primary banking institution.
When considering the complexities of negotiating and drafting commercial banking
agreements,both the City's Financial Advisor and Staff elected to defer the process until
after the City Council makes its decision.
1-1
BANKING SERVICES
June 1,2013
Page 2 of 6
As reported to the City Council previously,changing the City's commercial bank is not
expected to result in cost savings.In the staff report dated June 19,2012,Staff estimated
that fees currently range from $7,500 to $11,000 annually.Based upon the RFP
submissions and discussions with the three banks interviewed,it still does not appear as
though significant fee savings will occur.However,it does satisfy the requirements of City
Council Policy No.43 -Banking Services Procurement.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Bank of America currently provides general commercial banking series to the City including
checking account,Automated Clearing House (ACH)services and associated or related
services (i.e.stop payment orders,currency and coin handling,night deposit services,
etc.).
March 6,2012 -Presentation of Overview of Banking Services
At the request of then Mayor Misetich and Councilmember Campbell,Staff presented an
overview of its banking and merchant credit card relationship with Bank of America on
March 6,2012.At the conclusion of its discussion,the City Council acted to:
1)Direct Staff to develop a recommendation to the City Council to diversify a
portion of the City's cash portfolio into the Certificates of Deposit Account
Registry Service ("CDARS"),preferably selecting a local gateway bank;
2)Send the [March 6,2012)staff report regarding the RFP to the Finance
Advisory Committee to provide comments and recommendations back to the
City Council by May 1,2012;and
3)Directed staff to reach out to Bank of America to memorialize existing
inventory of services and associated fees that the bank provides to the City.
Staff later advised the City Council on March 5,2013 that the City's Financial Advisor
recommended that the City to not initiate the CDARS relationship with Malaga Bank until
after the RFP process for banking services was complete.
June 19,2012 -Council Directed Competitive Procurement Process for Banking
Services
On June 19,2012,based upon recommendations by Staff and the Finance Advisory
Committee,as well as GFOA Best Practices,the City Council adopted City Council Policy
No.43 that requires a biannual evaluation of banking services and a competitive
procurement process every six years,beginning in 2012.The City Council also directed
Staff to complete the competitive procurement process for banking services and bring forth
a recommendation to the City Council prior to the end of 2012.
The Staff Report,dated June 19,2012,including the following information regarding the
existing inventory of services provided by Bank of America,as well as related agreements:
1-2
BANKING SERVICES
June1,2013
Page 3 of 6
"When this matter was before the Council last,Staff advised the Council that a
single agreement that memorialized all services does not exist.Upon review of the
contracts file,Staff noted that the standard transactional (depository)agreement with
Bank of America (BOA)is titled "Master Agreement"and references their standard
fees for services.Staff believes that an umbrella agreement should be developed to
include all transactional fees and services and reference all other non-transactional
services and agreements (e.g.merchant credit card processing,purchase credit
cards).The inventory contained in Attachment G includes essential depository,
treasury,commercial (purchase)credit card,merchant credit card processing,and
the "Master"(depository transactions)account agreements.The City has also
entered into a number of ACH agreements to allow for electronic transmission of
monies with trusted organizations,especially with governmental agencies."
The Competitive Procurement Process for Banking Services by Staff and the City's
Financial Advisor
Financial Advisory Services for Competitive Procurement Process
The City's Financial Advisor supported and advised Staff through the competitive process
leading to the recommendation contained in this report.The following is a summary of the
advisory steps provided by the City's Financial Advisor during the competitive process:
1)Reviewed the detailed banking inventory of current services and fees prepared by
Staff;
2)Participated in the pre-RFP meeting with interested financial institutions to learn
about emerging services and future fee changes prior to issuance of the RFP;
3)Developed the appropriate financial indicators to assess the creditworthiness of the
financial institutions participating in the competitive process in accordance with the
City Council Policy No.43,Banking Services Procurement;
4)Developed other factors to assess and compare banking fees,services and support
of financial institutions participating in the competitive process;
5)Reviewed the draft RFP document prepared by Staff;
6)Reviewed submissions presented by the seven banks that responded to the RFP;
7)Reviewed the submissions presented in response to a Request for Clarification
(RFC);
8)Prepared the assessment grid;
9)Recommended interviews for the three most-qualified responding financial
institutions;
10)Performed further analysis of the proposed fees and services with key members of
Staff in anticipation of interviews with the three most-qualified responding financial
institutions;
11)Reviewed the interview questions;
12)Participated in the interviews;
13)Offered comments and recommendations to Staff regarding the institutions that
were interviewed;and
1-3
BANKING SERVICES
June 1,2013
Page 4 of 6
14)Prepared a Memorandum regarding review of banking services proposals,dated
May 8,2013 (see Attachment A).
Competitive Procurement Process
Pre-RFP Meetings with Interested Financial Institutions
In August 2012,Staff invited three banks that had extensive experience in government
banking for a one-hour,pre-RFP meeting.The meetings included three staff members,
the City's Financial Advisor,and representatives from the banks.The purpose of the pre-
RFP meetings was for Staff to review some of the new common banking technologies and
service features that would be beneficial for placement in the RFP for consideration.The
participating banks were advised that the pre-RFP meetings were in no way intended to be
a venue to market their banking services to the City,and that each of the banks would be
required to submit a bid in accordance with the instructions contained in the RFP.
Although the pre-RFP meetings were useful in the development of the RFP,no new
services were identified that had not already been presented to Staff by Bank of America.
Developing the RFP
The analysis of the service fee structures of the participating financial institutions is very
complex.Most every financial institution maintains a varied fee structure;making it difficult
to compare.In order to compare bids submitted upon issuance of the RFP,an early step
preceding the RFP was preparation of an inventory of the City's current services,account
fee structure,cash balance trends and transaction activity levels (i.e.deposits,checks
issued,EFT's).A table was composed of two non-consecutive months of quantifiable
charges from the City's current banking statements that would become the quantitative
portion of the RFP each bank would have to complete as part of the bid process.
Although a perfect comparison of fees was impractical due to the different metrics and fee
definitions that banks use,a limited,generic table of services and fees was deemed the
best approach by Staff and the City's Financial Advisor.Another challenge in analyzing
fees as a part of the bid process is the ever changing schedule of fees that banks employ.
So while the City may sign an agreement with a particular bank with a certain fee structure,
that fee structure is likely to change with time.No participating financial institution would
commit to its fee structure beyond one year.The City's Financial Advisor took this into
account when analyzing the fees from each bank.
RFP Process
After gathering data from the pre-RFP banking meetings,Staff released the RFP for
Banking Services on October 1,2012 to interested financial institutions that had a branch
within 10 miles of City Hall,which included eight different banks:Bank of America,Bank of
the West,Chase Bank,Citibank,Malaga Bank,Union Bank,US Bank,and Wells Fargo
Bank (listed alphabetically).Upon reaching the deadline,Staff forwarded all of the
1-4
BANKING SERVICES
June1,2013
Page 5 of 6
unopened RFP bid submissions to the City's Financial Advisor for independent analysis.
Chase Bank did not submit a competitive proposal.
RFC Process
Upon conducting a first pass of the RFP submissions,the City's Financial Advisor alerted
Staff that some of the Excel tables of the RFP submissions had been interfered with by a
few of the participating banks,causing non-comparable fee data;therefore,he could not
objectively analyze the bids as submitted.Staff released a Request for Clarification (RFC)
on November 29,2012,comprised of the same Excel tables attached in the original RFP,
but "locked"so the participating banks could not modify the structure of the tables.The
goal was have comparable data to objectively rate banking fees.All participating financial
institutions submitted a response to the RFC by Friday,December 7,2012.The responses
to the RFC enabled an improved fee comparison.
Merchant Credit Card
As reported previously,Staff conducted an informal fee comparison for merchant card
services in May 2011.Additionally,the City is in the process of acquiring and implementing
a new financial software system.Knowing that there are preferred credit card vendors that
work well with the new financial software selected,the City's Financial Advisor and Staff
elected to defer the competitive process for credit card processing until after completion of
the acquisition and implementation of the new financial system.This will enable cost
savings associated with the preferred credit card vendors with integration of the financial
system implemented.Staff expects to conduct a competitive process for merchant card
services once the new financial software system is implemented in 2014.
Interview Process
Staff invited the three top scoring banks (Bank of the West,Union Bank &US Bank)to
participate in formal interviews conducted on Thursday,April 11,2013 at City Hall.In
anticipation of the interviews,Staff prepared a list of questions to be answered by each of
the three banks (Attachment B),along with a request to inform the City of any experiences
that each bank had with implementation as it pertains to the City's proposed financial
software.All three banks responded in the allotted period of time with an affirmation that to
date none of the banks had any integration issues with the City's proposed financial
software.The interviews provided a forum to ask consistent questions of each bank,
discuss the merits of each bank,and discuss the potential implementation challenges that
each bank has faced with municipalities of similar scale.
Disclosure of Communications and Gifts
The RFP included a requirement for proposing institutions to provide a list of all
communications with City Staff and City Council Members from June 19,2012 through the
date of the proposal,as well as any gifts valued more than $50 given to City Staff and City
1-5
BANKING SERVICES
June 1,2013
Page 6 of6
Council Members during the same time period.Staff expects to provide a disclosure list as
late correspondence for this agenda item.
Financial Advisor's Analysis of Competitive Bids and Recommendation
As described previously,Staff requested that the bids be analyzed by the City's Financial
Advisor.In analyzing the data after the submission of the RFC,Mr.Schaefer ranked each
of the bids under the following criterion as established in the RFP (see Attachment C):
•Proper submission of Proposal
•Federal Requirements
•Comprehensiveness of Services
Provided
•Public Sector Experience &
Resources
CONCLUSION
•Strength and Stability of Financial
Institution
•Assigned Client ManagerlTeam
•Charges for Services
•Service Enhancements
As a result of the RFP and bid selection process,the City's Financial Advisor and Staff
recommends that the City should retain Bank of the West to serve as the City's primary
banking institution.However,Staff is recommending the award of the City's banking
services contract to Bank of the West,both Union Bank and US Bank are well qualified to
provide banking services to the City.
Attachments:
A -Memorandum from Magis Advisors regarding review of banking services proposals
dated May 8,2013
B -Questions for Banking Interview dated April 11,2013
C -Request for Proposal dated October 1,2012
1-6
Attachment A
MEMORANDUM
MAGIS ADVISORS
pu bile rll'lollll(;('~l'I""'Q tlll'l~
To:Dennis McLean
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
From:Tim Schaefer
Magis Advisors
Copies:Kathryn Downs
Ryan Mills
Date:.May 8,2013
Subject:Review of proposals for banking services and initial recommendation for selection
ISSUE PRESENTED
You have requested our assistance with a Request for Proposal (RFP)process for banking services,The
RFP was necessitated by the City's adoption of a new policy requiring periodic evaluation of its banking
relationship.As part of that assistance,you asked us to participate in elements of the solicitation and to
complete an evaluation of the responses to that RFP.
SUMMARY
In mid-June 2012,the City adopted a policy that requires periodic evaluation of the banking services it
receives.The policy requires that a competitive procurement process occur at least every six years,This
approach is consistent with best practices developed by the Government Finance Officers Association.
Prior to the development and distribution of an RFP for banking services,the City conducted "pre -RFP"
meetings with several banks that the City had previously identified as likely to be respondents to the
RFP,At the City's request,I attended those meetings and participated in the development of the RFP
that was a product of the knowledge gained through this pre-RFP process.The RFP was distributed in
early October 2012.The RFP was distributed to a total of eight banks,each of which had an office
location within ten miles of City Hall.The City received seven responses to the RFP.
We evaluated the responses using an agreed-upon scoring system,as discussed with your staff over the
course of the procurement process.We have concluded that three of the seven respondents offer
suitable services,demonstrable financial strength,understanding of the unique nature of governmental
banking,and costs that are representative of the market.This conclusion was based both on an
objective measurement system that scored the submittals based on the criteria set forth in the City's
RFP and a subjective judgment resulting from subsequent in-person meetings with the three
respondents who scored highest on the objective measures.
1301 Dove St"Suite 380 ~Newport Beach,CA 92660 ~Telephone:(949)428-8363
www.magisadvisors.com
00124966.DOCX1-7
Attachment A
Memorandum to Mr.McLean
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
May 8,2013
Page 2
Any of the three banks would serve the City's needs adequately.However,based primarily on the
subjective matters discussed above,and the additional detail provided in the interviews,it is my opinion
that Bank of the West represents the best overall combination of skills,experience,understanding,and
approach.A more detailed discussion of the process,the scoring protocols and the basis for my
recommendation follows,along with an attachment that summarizes the evaluation.
BACKGROUND
This process was initiated in late 2010,following a discussion our discussion about the best practices
recommended by the GFOA.We discussed with you the general applicability of the GFOA's Best
Practices'in Treasury Management,and our understanding is that you discussed these matters with the
City Council prior to the release of the City's Request for Proposals.We participated with you in a series
of pre-meetings with selected banks designed to communicate specific needs of the City in greater detail
and to gather useful intelligence about the status of the banking industry's servicing of governmental
accounts.
EVALUATION PROCESS
Upon receipt of the proposals,the City's evaluation team,consisting of yourself,Ms.Downs,Mr.Mills,
(and subsequently,Ms.Gan-Vanderline)was formed.Mr.Mills compiled the initial results and shared
them with me,in my role as "staff"to the evaluation team.I then developed an evaluation grid based on
the factors described below,proposed a weighting system to be applied to those factors,and performed
an initial evaluation of the material submitted.The result of that initial evaluation,using the agreed-
upon weighting,is attached to this memorandum as Exhibit A.
The RFP specified the criteria the City used in evaluating the responses.Those criteria included:(1)the
proper submission of the proposal,meaning that all of the information required for thoughtful
evaluation of the proposal was included as requested;(2)whether the proposer's institution met or
exceeded all federal regulatory requirements,with a particular emphasis on FDIC coverage;(3)the
proposer's knowledge of,and ability to,adhere to collateralization requirements established in
Government Code §53630,et seq.;(4)the overall capabilities of the institution to meet the requirements
set forth in the City's RFP;(5)the institution's experience in providing services to the public sector,the
number of public agencies served,and the number and experience of the resources and personnel of
the institution dedicated to public sector banking;(6)the financial institution's financial standing among
its peers using credit quality ratings of major credit rating agencies as a proxy for that standing;(7)the
credentials and experience of the person(s)assigned to the City's relationship with the bank;(8)
estimated charges for services;(9)service enhancements,focusing on the respondent's creativity in
proposing solutions that would make the City's treasury operations more efficient or less costly;(10)the
financial institution's role as a corporate citizen,especially its contributions through related Community
Reinvestment Act activities;and,(11)other factors that the City believes would be in its best interest to
consider using the "total mix"of information available to it as a result of the RFP process.
1-8
Attachment A
Memorandum to Mr.McLean
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
May 8,2013
Page 3
In the course of my review of the proposals,I used numerous data sources,including data from Weiss
Ratings,a leading independent provider of research and analysis for the industry;relevant data from the
three major rating agencies,Moody's Investors Service,Standard &Poor's,Fitch Ratings;and,detailed
reports from Dominion Bond Rating Service (DBRS),a provider of credit rating opinions on a broad range
of financial institutions in North America and Europe.DBRS was used because several of the responding
banks are either affiliated with,or controlled by,banking organizations outside of the United States and
DBRS provides extensive credit analysis on such banks at a reasonable cost.Not all of the banks
responding to the RFP had ratings from each of the major rating agencies.Moreover,the ratings system
for multi-national banks presents some challenges to evaluating the financial strength of a particular
bank since some ratings apply to the bank's holding company,some to an individual subsidiary,etc.It is
also important to remember that a rating is not an assessment of the overall strength of the bank,but
rather is the agency's view of that bank's ability to repay debt-a very different proposition from
honoring claims from public sector depositors.
Following our initial review,I concluded that certain of the respondents had either misunderstood or
failed to follow the instructions relating to the presentation of costs.As a matter of fairness,I
recommended that you request additional clarification of the costs proposals,as permitted by the RFP in
order to promote a fairer evaluation of the responses.In particular,I requested,and subsequently
received,uniform data about each bank's proposed cost of services,specifically based on the City's
actual balances,item counts,and other services as those elements were actually present in October,
2012.This enabled me to evaluate cost more fairly,as there was no speculation about the likely mix of
data being used by an individual respondent.
I then compiled the data into summary form and applied the weighting factors described below.I chose
to avoid weighting several of the factors.Instead,I simply graded the responding banks on a "pass/fail"
system,and applied less weight to the response than I applied to the three key categories,capital
strength,financial stability and cost.
THE EVALUATION RESULTS
Treasury management in the public sector differs in key respects from similar operations in private
enterprise.In the public sector,there is a significantly tighter focus on the protection of public funds.
Protecting and managing public funds wisely has always been the primary imperative for the treasury
manager in the public sector.One need look no further than Orange County for the consequences of
mis-managing these processes.That distinction formed my approach to the evaluation just as it guides
the best practices recommended by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA).
The GFOA has been at the forefront of promulgating best practices for management of public funds.The
GFOA has extensive resources available to assist local government finance officers in fulfilling their
1-9
Attachment A
Memorandum to Mr.McLean
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
May 8,2013
Page 4
mission to protect the public's money.The City's RFP process,its evaluation of the responding banks,
and your stated intentions going forward are all generally consist with this knowledge base.Of particular
relevance to this process,the GFOA's Best Practice:Procurement of Banking Services,was a guide to my
evaluation of the various responses.I also relied to a great degree on another excellent publication
from the GFOA,"Banking Relations:A Guide for Governments/'published by the GFOA in 2004.I have
furnished all of these resources to you under separate covers prior to the initiation of this process.
Of particular importance to the City,both as a matter of state law and of prudence in treasury
management,is the matter of collateralization of the City's deposits.Unlike small businesses and
consumers,which rely on the availability of FDIC coverage for their deposits,California law (specifically
Government Code §53630 et seq.)requires that public monies be collateralized with marketable
securities as a safeguard against loss.Collateralization is also the subject of a GFOA Best Practice,which I
also considered in the evaluation of the proposals.
Because the evaluation criteria are not equal in importance,I discussed the proposed "weighting"that
should be applied to the criteria discussed above with you.As a result of that conversation,I proceeded
with the final evaluation using the weights described in the evaluation summary presented as Exhibit A
to this memorandum.In summary,I recommended that capital strength using the "risk-based capital
ratios"of the various banks would receive a doubled weighting.Another measure of financial strength,a
"stability index"as measured by an independent third-party rater,would be evaluated next.While
ratings would be obtained and presented,they would be ignored,since not all of the banks had ratings
from one single rating agency.Finally,costs were evaluated and each bank was ranked on pro forma
costs,ranked from the lowest to highest.All other criteria were evaluated either using a "pass/fail"
system or,a simple evaluation to determine if the bank "met/'exceeded"or failed/'to meet the
requirements of the RFP.In general,this produced a pattern where all of the banks were clustered very
tightly around an initial score on the un weighted criteria,as expected.
By applying the weighted scores,the banks with the most important distinguishing characteristics were
identified.Not surprisingly,there was a fairly significant spread among them,generally as a result of the
use of the risk-based capital ratio and the stability index.Costs were also a varied result.
As a follow up to the initial evaluation,several of the higher scoring banks were invited to participate in
an interview with key City staff,which I also attended.Several questions were posed in advance to the
banks interviewed.These questions included a request for greater specificity on collateralization
computations and methods;the application of unused earnings credits against charges for banking
services;further detail on the respondent's migration plan should that respondent be selected;and a
request for additional information about integration of the City's current and planned-for accounting
system into the bank's electronic infrastructure.These interviews were conducted on April 11,2013 in
your offices.
1-10
Attachment A
Memorandum to Mr.McLean
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
May 8,2013
Page 5
Any of the respondents would represent a suitable,safe choice for the City.One respondent,Bank of
the West,stood out in subjective matters as a result of the in-person interviews.This bank came highly
prepared to discuss the specific matters that had been identified after the initial proposal review.In
particular,this bank stood out in terms of its understanding,and detailed description,of the specific
procedures used in the dedication,measurement,and monitoring of collateral for public agencies.This
bank presented a very clear,thoughtful migration plan for the City's account.This bank has assigned
several key executives to the City's relationship,each of whom is a full-time banker to public sector
clients.The second two banks,Union Bank and U.S.Bank,also assigned talented,experienced
representatives to the City as well as migration plans that were both adequate and detailed,though less
so than Bank of the West's was.Union Bank assigned experience personnel,including a senior banker
with experience with nearby Palos Verdes Estates.U.S.Bank personnel were also quite experienced with
public sector accounts,but this bank's handling of unused earnings credits was far less flexible than the
other two.
RECOMMENDATION
It is my opinion that any of the three highest scoring respondents would provide good service to the City
at an effective cost.I also believe that of the three highest-scoring respondents,Bank of the West
appears to present the best combination of understanding of the issues (a subjective conclusion)and
scoring on the objective measures.The next two banks,Union Bank and U.S.Bank,also offer more than
acceptable understanding of the issues,as well as cost effective proposals,but one or more elements of
their proposals may be lacking the specificity or clarity demonstrated by Bank of the West.The
distinctions among the three banks are minimal in terms of qualifications,suitable products and
financial strength.The recommendation of Bank of the West is based both on its scoring on the
objective measures and my subjective view of its highly detailed migration plan and assigned
knowledgeable bankers possessing relevant experience in handling accounts such as the City's.
We are pleased to have been of service to the City in this matter.
Very truly yours,
MAGIS ADVISORS
~'
Timothy J.Schaefer
Principal Owner/President
Attachments:EXHIBIT A:EVALUATION BY FINANCIAL ADVISOR
1-11
Attachment A
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
RFP FOR BANKING SERVICES
EvALUAnON OF RESPONSES BY FINANCIAL ADVISOR,MAy 2013
EXHIBIT A
WFB
Pass
12.6
1st
7x2=14
Extensive
3
Good
1
Pass
12.9
2nd
6x2=12
1
U.S.Bank
M:Aa2
S:AA-
F:AA-
OBRS:AAH
Stability:8.6
6x2=12
Pass
14.0
3rd
Sx2=10
Union
Extensive
3
Pass
21.0
6th
2x2=4
limited
o
Malaga
Good
1
Pass
16.S
Sth
3x2=6
Citibank
Pass
16.1
4th
4x2=8
Extensive
3
Bk of WestBofA
Pass
21.9
7th
1x2=2
Extensive
3
Criteria/Bank
A.Proper Submission of Proposal:Receipt of
proposal by due date as outlined in this
proposal according to our specifications.
(Pass =1;Fail =0)Weight:1
B.Federal Requirements:Whether the
institute meets or exceeds federal regulatory
capital requirements,including confirmation
of FDIC Coverage.(Pass/Fail,not scored;
then,RBCR measured as of 2Q12 and
ranked among respondents,in inverse
order)Weight:2
C.Comprehensiveness of Services Provided:
Overall capabilities of the financial
institution to meet the required service
levels described in this RFP.(Exceeds =2
Meets = 1 Deficient=0)Weight:1
D.Public Sector Experience and Resources:
The financial institution's experience in
providing services to the public sector,etc.
(Subjective measures;Extensive =3,
Moderate =2,Good =1,limited :=0)
Weight:1
E.Strength and Stability of Financial
Institution:The financial institution's
financial standing among its peers and the
associated credit quality ratings.(Moody's,
S&P,Fitch,OBRS;then,ranked by Weiss
stability index,inverse order)Weight:2
00123098.DOCX
1-12
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
RFP FOR BANKING SERVICES
EvALVAnON OF RESPONSES BY FINANCIAL ADVISOR,MAy 2013
Attachment A
EXHIBIT A
F.Assigned Client Manager/Team:The
credentials and experience ofthe person(s)
assigned to our relationship.(Subjective
measures,therefore not scored)
G.Charges for Services:The benefits and costs
of paying for services through direct fees,
compensating balances,or a combination of
the two.(Objective measures,ranked
highest to lowest order based on responses
calculated by bidder;"earnings credit"
ignoredi Weight:2
H.Service Enhancements:The financial
institution's efforts to understand our
banking needs and goals,and the creativity
the financial institution shows in introducing
and applying technologies and efficiencies to
improve our current practices and
procedures.(EKceeds =1,Meets =0,
Deficient =-1)Weight:1
I.Community Involvement:Your financial
institution's role as a corporate citizen and
related Community Reinvestment Act
contributions.(Pass =1,Fail =0)Weight:1
J.Other Factors:Any other factors that the
City believes would be in its best interest to
consider which were not previously
described.(Subjective measures;not
scored)
K.Overall Rank (Numerical score;see
memorandum dated S/8/13)Overall Rank
Not scored
Exceeds
1
Not scored
Not scored
Exceeds
1
Not scored
Not scored
Meets
o
Not scored
Not scored
Meets
o
Not scored
Not scored
Exceeds
1
Not scored
Not scored
Meets
o
Not scored
36
2nd (tie)
Not scored
Meets
o
Pass
1
Not scored
33
4th
00123098.DOCX
1-13
Attachment B
Questions for Banking Interviews (Bank of the West,Union Bank,US Bank)
4/11/2013
1.How do you determine the city's balances used for the basis of collateralization?Please be as
specific as possible.
2.How do you handle "unused"earnings credits?Carried forward?Lost?Something else?
3.What financial assistance can you offer to the City to defray its conversion/migration costs?
4.Please describe the conversion/migration process and the timetable for it that you
contemplate?How many people are involved?What is the process for resolving difficulties?Is
there a "post-conversion"review for the purpose of giving feedback to each other?
5.What is your process for "testing"the various systems and procedures BEFORE we complete the
conversion?
6.Please discuss your typical "funds availability"schedule;and,describe when an item is deemed
to be "received."(cash,wire,ACH,large checks (threshold amount);and,other checks.)Do you
automatically re-deposit returned/rejected items?What are the conditions under which you
don't and how are we notified?
7.Please confirm your primary point of contact for the City and the designated backup person to
that primary.Is this person familiar with cities of similar size and character to the City?Discuss
the number of accounts our primary point of contact for the City is managing.Can you offer up
a municipal reference for our primary point of contact?
1-14
Attachment C
CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
FOR GENERAL BANKING SERVICES
OCTOBER 1,2012
1-15
Attachment C
Please Submit Proposals to:
Ryan Mills,Senior Administrative Analyst,Finance &IT
City of Rancho Palos Verdes,CA
Finance &IT Department
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275
Deadline for Submittal of Proposals:
No later than 5 p.m.on Monday October 22,2012
1-16
Attachment C
1.General Information
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes was incorporated in 1973 and is located in Los
Angeles County.It operates as a contract city utilizing third party vendors for all
of its major services,including police and fire protection.It is currently governed
by a City Manager I Council form of government with a five member elected City
Council.The Council appoints a City Manager to oversee day-to-day operations.
The City has five main departments (Administration,Public works,Finance &IT,
Community Development,and Recreation &Parks and a total staff of 75.5 full-
time equivalents (FTE's),including 58 full-time positions and about 25 part-time
positions.The City has an annual operation budget of approximately $24 million
and a cash and investments portfolio of approximately $48 million.
The·City of Rancho Palos Verdes seeks proposals from Financial Institutions
interested in providing banking services for our City.The City encourages
financial institutions to submit the most comprehensive proposal possible offering
the highest quality of service while providing opportunities for improving our
banking operations.The City is also interested in various technological advances
that could improve our banking,cash management and customer service
capabilities.You are encouraged to be creative and educational in your
responses.Include information about your financial institution's dedicated
resources for serving the public sector.While your format must be consistent
with the requirements of this RFP,if you believe there is additional information
that would be beneficial to us,the City invites you to include it in your proposal.
The City Council has adopted a policy to conduct a competitive procurement
process for banking services every six years beginning in 2012.The City
currently banks with Bank of America.
Notice to Proposers
Unless this RFP is received directly from the City,responses to it will NOT be
accepted.
Failure to carefully read and understand this RFP may cause the proposal to be
out of compliance,rejected by the City,or legally obligate the proposer to more
than it may realize.Information obtained by the proposer from any officer,agent
or employee of the City shall not affect the risks or obligations assumed by the
proposer or relieve the proposer from fulfilling any of the RFP conditions or any
subsequent contract conditions,although additional materials may be attached to
the proposal,only the format described in the RFP and the attachments included
with this RFP will be accepted as compliant for the submitted proposal.Failure
to completely fill out all required attachments may result in disqualification .
nw
City of Rancho Palos Verdes,California
....
Page 1 of 8
1-17
Attachment C
City's Rights Reserved
1.The City reserves the right to select the proposal(s)which in its sole
judgment best meets the needs of the City.The lowest proposed cost will
not be the sole criterion for recommending the contract award.
2.The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals and to waive
technicalities and informalities when such waiver is determined by the City
to be in the City's best interest.
3.The City may modify this RFP by issuance of one or more written addenda
to all parties who have been furnished the RFP.
4.The City reserves the right to meet with select proposers at any time to
gather additional information.Furthermore,the City reserves the right to
remove or add components until the final contract signing.
5.The City reserves the right to revise the RFP prior to the date that
proposals are due.All registered proposers will be notified of revisions to
the RFP.
6.This RFP does not commit the City to award a contract.All proposals
submitted in response to this RFP become the property of the City and
public records,and as such,may be subject to public review.
7.The City shall not be liable for any expenses incurred by prospective or
selected institutions,including but not limited to costs incurred in the
preparation or submission of proposals.The City shall be held harmless
and free from any and all liability,claims,or expenses whatsoever incurred
by,or on behalf of,any person or organization responding to this RFP.
Communication Regarding This RFP
All communication from prospective proposers regarding this RFP must be in
writing by email to Ryan Mills,Senior Administrative Analyst,Finance &IT.
Communication by telephone or in person will not be accepted.Attempts by,or
on behalf of,a prospective or existing vendor to make telephone or personal
contact with any City employee regarding this RFP (except to seek clarification
for proposal requirements)may lead to the elimination of that vendor from further
consideration.
Attempts by or on behalf of a prospective or existing vendor to contact or to
influence any member of the City Councilor any employee of the City of Rancho
Palos Verdes with regard to the acceptance of a proposal may lead to elimination
of that vendor from further consideration.
City of Rancho Palos Verdes,California Page 2 of 8
1-18
Attachment C
2.Evaluation of Proposals
The ~valuation criteria will include the following evaluation components,
presented in non-sequential order of importance:
A.Proper Submission of Proposal:Receipt of proposal by due date as
outlined in this proposal according to the City's specifications.
B.Federal Requirements:Whether the institution meets or exceeds federal
regulatory capital requirements,including confirmation of FDIC Coverage.
C.State of California Requirements:The institution's knowledge of and ability
to adhere to California Government Code collateralization requirements.
D.Comprehensiveness of Services Provided:Overall capabilities of the
financial institution to meet the required service levels described in this RFP.
E.Public Sector Experience and Resources:The financial institution's
experience in providing services to the public sector,the number of public
agencies served,as well as dedicated resources and personnel.
F.Strength and Stability of Financial Institution:The financial institution's
financial standing among its peers and the associated credit quality ratings.
G.Assigned Client Manager/Team:The credentials and experience of the
person(s) assigned to our relationship.
H.Charges for Services:The benefits and costs of paying for services through
direct fees,compensating balances,or a combination of the two.
I.Service Enhancements:The financial institution's efforts to understand our
banking needs and goals,and the creativity the financial institution shows in
introducing and applying technologies and efficiencies to improve our current
practices and procedures.
J.Community Involvement:Your financial institution's role as a corporate
citizen and related Community Reinvestment Act contributions.
K.Other Factors:Any other factors that the City believes would be in its best
interest to consider which were not previously described.
City of Rancho Palos Verdes,California Page 3 of 8
1-19
Attachment C
3.Proposal process
Time Table
Distribution of RFP October 1,2012
Proposal Submission October 22,2012 @ 5 om
Oral Interview November 8,2012
Final proposed contract due for distribution November 19,2012
Award of Contract bv City Council December 4,2012
Implementation To commence with Contract
Award
Conversion Target completion -June
30,2013
The timing of the proposal process is as follows:
a)Distribution of Request for Proposals:October 1.2012
b)Proposal Submission:Both paper and electronic copies (Microsoft Word
and Excel)of proposals must be submitted directly to Ryan Mills,Senior
Administrative Analyst by mail and by electronic submission via email to
ryanm@rpv.com no later than October 22,2012 at 5 pm.Late submissions
or proposals delivered via fax will not be accepted.A total of four identical
paper proposals must be submitted and labeled as follows:
City of Rancho Palos Verdes,CA
Department of Finance &IT
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275
Attention:Ryan Mills,Senior Administrative Analyst,Finance &IT
Reference:Proposal for General Banking Services
c)Proposal Review:Our review committee will evaluate·each proposal
submitted.It is anticipated that the review process will be completed by
November 30.2012.
d)Oral Interview:Oral Interviews of the banking services finalists are
tentatively scheduled on November 8th at Rancho Palos Verdes City Hall,
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard,Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275.The City
reserves the right to recommend an award of a contract without conducting
oral interviews.
e)Notification:The City Council agenda for the December 4,2012 meeting,in
which an institution will be chosen,will be available by November 30,2012.
Subject to City Council approval,the City anticipates sending written
City of Rancho Palos Verdes,California Page 4 of 8
1-20
Attachment C
notification to all proposers regarding the outcome of the review and award
process on or about December 5,2012.
f)Conversion Activities:Following formal approval and award of the Banking
Services Contract by the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council on December 4,
2012,the awarded financial institution will be required to take the lead in
coordinating all activities to ensure a smooth transition of banking services.
Conversion activities will begin upon notification of contract award.
Current Account Description
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes deposits over $30 million annually through our
variouS demand accounts.The City contracts with ADP for the issuance of
payroll on a bi-weekly basis to 58 full-time employees and approximately 25 part
time'employees in the amount of approximately $200,000.The City receives
approximately 350-400 checks per month and makes approximately 50-65
deposits per month via bank bag,while issuing approximately 250-300 checks
per month.Currently,the City keeps between $2 million and $3 million in its
demand accounts to maintain liquidity and flexibility.
The City uses ACH services such as payments to verified suppliers,fund
transfers to authorized sources,as well as block and filters functionality.The
City has a total of 13 ACH blocks,along with approximately 75 ACH credit items
and 25 ACH debit items per month.The City currently has 24 purchasing cards
(credit cards),under one umbrella account,with a total combined credit limit of
$200,000.
Because the City primarily uses banking institutions for depository services and
less for investments or lending,the City will prioritize RFP ran kings as such.
4.Required Services and Format of Proposal
Minimum Qualifications
To be considered for selection,proposing financial institutions must have at least
the following qualifications:
a)Be a federally or State of California chartered financial institution.
b)Be a member of the Federal Reserve System and have access to all services.
c)Be a qualified depository for public funds.
d)Be a full service financial institution in good standing among other comparable
financial institutions
e)Be capable of providing the services sought by the City.
f)Agree to assign experienced and dedicated staff that is committed and
capable of servicing our accounts.
g)Be in compliance and good standing with the Community Reinvestment Act.
zcnm
City of Rancho Palos Verdes,California
wn
Page 5 of 8
1-21
Attachment C
h)Be sufficiently capitalized to accommodate our cash/investment management
needs.
In order for us to adequately compare and evaluate proposals objectively,all
proposals must be submitted in accordance with this format:
Cover Letter:It should include the name of the proposing financial institution,its
principal business address where the relationship will be managed,and the local
branch address that can meet our daily banking needs.
Section A •Table of Contents
Section B -Bank Profile and Staff Profile:Respond to the following sections:
a.Overview:Provide a corporate overview of your financial institution,and
present the financial institution's Community Reinvestment Act programs.
Also identify all branches within a 10-mile radius of City Hall that can assist us
with our immediate banking needs.
b.Experience:Describe the financial institution's experience in providing
services to the public sector.Include exclusive resources dedicated for the
public sector.
c.Relationship Management:Describe the relationship team that will be
assigned to service our relationship.Describe individual roles,
responsibilities,and briefly detail credential and related banking experience.
d.Compliance and Exceptions:Include statement to confirm your financial
institution's compliance to our minimum qualifications.Also list any exceptions
to required qualifications.
Section C •References:Please provide three (3)references that are of similar
size and scope of service utilization as the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,include
at least one public agency.
Contact Name
Title
Name of Customer
Address
Telephone Number
Fax Number
Number of Years as Customer
Services Utilized
City of Rancho Palos Verdes,California Page 6 of 8
1-22
Attachment C
Section D -Account Structure:With the information provided above on the
City's current account structure,propose an account structure that your bank
envisions that work best for the City.
Section E •Conversion Plan:Describe the overall plan your financial institution
would coordinate,if needed,to ensure a smooth transition from the current
provider.Please include an implementation timeline and any conversion
discounts the City will realize due to the conversion.The financial institution
must also provide training to our personnel for the operation and use of the
financial institution's services and automated systems for all areas of service.
Section F •Service Enhancements:Based upon information presented in our
RFP and your financial institution's knowledge of the public sector,describe any
enhancements,technological or otherwise,that the City should consider to
improve operational or cash management efficiencies.Examples include
Positive Pay,check reader,Check 21,etc.
Section G •Additional Information:Describe any other information not
previously mentioned that the financial institution believes should be given
consideration.
5.Exhibits to be Included in Proposal
A -General Banking Information Answer specific general questions
regarding your financial institution included as Attachment A.Please submit
electronically.
B -General Transaction Costs The City has provided approximate monthly
transactional volumes.Please provide your bank's fees related to these volumes
included as Attachment B.Please submit electronically.In addition,please
indicate your bank's term of commitment to those fees.
C -Proposed Contract Include contract or agreement samples for banking
services in Microsoft Word format that are specific to the services represented in
this RFP.
D •Financial Statements and Ratings Along with completing Exhibit A,
provide the most recent audited financial statements or annual report for the
financial institution.Also include your most current rating levels from all major
rating agencies (i.e.Standard &Poor's,Moody's,etc.).
E •Account Analysis Along with completing Exhibit B,provide a sample of
your financial institution's account analysis statement and a user guide for the
account analysis that provides common language definitions of services and
products.
City of Rancho Palos Verdes,California Page 7 of 8
1-23
Attachment C
F -Funds Availability Statement:Policy stating the timing and ability to
withdraw funds from City accounts,whether by check,automatic payment or any
other method offered for account access.
G -Glossary of Institution's Banking Terminology:Each institution has its
own product lines and terminology for services.Please submit a glossary that
assists the City in understanding those terms.
H -Disclosure of Communications and Gifts:Provide a list of all
communications with City Staff and City Council Members from June 19,2012
through the date of your bank's proposal.The list should include names,dates,
nature of the communication,and information provided or received.Also provide
a list of any gifts valued more than $50 given to City Staff and City Council
Members from June 19,2012 through the date of your bank's proposal.The list
of gifts should include names,dates,description of the gift,and estimated value
in U.S.dollars.Gifts could be in the form of meals,tickets,or paid entertainment.
6.Attachments to the RFP
Attachment A -General Bank Information Matrix to be completed by bank
(electronically).
Attachment B -General Transaction Charges Matrix to be completed by bank
(electronically).
~"1
City of Rancho Palos Verdes,California Page 8 of 8
1-24