📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report
This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.
Sonoma County Grand Jury
• 2022-2023
Outsourcing Petaluma Planning Department Is It Better or Is It Easier?
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 7 findings
F1
The City of Petaluma has continued to contract with M-Group for the past 14 years and has failed to conduct a formal performance review, cost-benefit analysis, or new RFP to determine if the level of costs can be improved.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1
By December 31, 2023, the City completes a cost-benefit analysis of using a private firm versus employees to staff the planning department. (F1, F2, F3, F4)
R2
By no later than March 1, 2024, the City opens an RFP for planning services and considers a combination of city employees and private contractors to staff the planning department. (F1, F3)
F2
The amount of money flowing from the City to M-Group has increased over the life of the contracts due to the increase in development activity and M-Group’s rate increases. The City has failed to provide a cost-benefit analysis justifying the continuing issuance of contracts.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
By December 31, 2023, the City completes a cost-benefit analysis of using a private firm versus employees to staff the planning department. (F1, F2, F3, F4)
F3
The City has failed to conduct a cost-benefit analysis to determine if base level services could be filled with City employees and reduce overall costs.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1
By December 31, 2023, the City completes a cost-benefit analysis of using a private firm versus employees to staff the planning department. (F1, F2, F3, F4)
R2
By no later than March 1, 2024, the City opens an RFP for planning services and considers a combination of city employees and private contractors to staff the planning department. (F1, F3)
F4
The City of Petaluma recently hired a director of community development, demonstrating an interest in increasing oversight, however, the City has failed to consider hiring FTE employees in base level services positions.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
By December 31, 2023, the City completes a cost-benefit analysis of using a private firm versus employees to staff the planning department. (F1, F2, F3, F4)
F5
The City has failed to require M-Group employees working in the planning department to wear identifying badges or logos that would inform the public that they are interacting with contractors and not City employees.
Related Recommendations (2)
R3
By September 30, 2023, the City requires M-Group to provide badges or logos to their employees that identify them as M-Group employees. (F5)
R6
By December 31, 2023, the City conducts a formal survey of the citizens of Petaluma to better understand their awareness and understanding of the outsourcing of the planning department and their experiences interacting with M-Group employees. (F5, F6, F7)
F6
The City has failed to require M-Group employees working in the planning department to include the M-Group logo or company name in their email signatures.
Related Recommendations (2)
R4
By August 31, 2023, the City requires M-Group to direct their employees to include their firm’s logo and or name in their email signature. (F6)
R6
By December 31, 2023, the City conducts a formal survey of the citizens of Petaluma to better understand their awareness and understanding of the outsourcing of the planning department and their experiences interacting with M-Group employees. (F5, F6, F7)
F7
The City has failed to identify persons listed on the Planning Directory located on the City’s website as M-Group employees.
Related Recommendations (2)
R5
By August 31, 2023, the City includes an M-Group designation on each staff listing under the planning staff directory on the website. (F7)
R6
By December 31, 2023, the City conducts a formal survey of the citizens of Petaluma to better understand their awareness and understanding of the outsourcing of the planning department and their experiences interacting with M-Group employees. (F5, F6, F7)
Conclusions 6
-
CL1 Page 9Has the Petaluma City Council ever considered issuing a new RFP to determine if other companies can offer comparable professional services?
-
CL2 Page 9What prevents the City Council from issuing a new RFP?
-
CL3 Page 9Why is there no cost-benefit analysis completed before each contract is issued?
-
CL4 Page 9Why is there no formal and discoverable process for the City Manager to evaluate M- Group performance?
-
CL5 Page 9Has the City Council ever discussed or analyzed the possibility of hiring City employees for the planning department as part of a hybrid model in which employees could provide base services and contractors could provide specialized services for projects that are beyond the scope of the department?
-
CL6 Page 9Is the City confident that there is no possibility that conflicts of interest exist with M- Group serving as the planning department and if so, how has that been analyzed and determined?
Agency Responses 1
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.