Water and Wastewater Rate Study Contract

Context: The item is styled as an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2025-0380 to authorize a first amendment with Raftelis Financial, Inc. capped at $522,010 from the Enterprise Fund, but the underlying ordinance's original amount and scope are not in the agenda record.

Recommended: Request Ordinance No. 2025-0380 and the proposed first amendment to compare the original not-to-exceed amount and scope against the $522,010 maximum now proposed, and confirm whether the amendment expands scope or only adds funds. If the amendment materially enlarges the work, ask in writing what procurement authority supports amending rather than re-soliciting.

Context: The item authorizes a first amendment to an existing Raftelis Financial, Inc. contract with a maximum of $522,010 rather than a new solicitation, and it has been carried on two consecutive June 2026 agendas without disposition.

Recommended: Ask the purchasing office whether the added scope under the Raftelis amendment was competed or added to the 2025 award, and request notice of any companion solicitations for cost-of-service, financial modeling, or utility billing support. Once the amendment passes, this Enterprise Fund work is locked to the incumbent for the contract term.

Context: The identical $522,010 Raftelis amendment appeared on two consecutive agendas — Item 47 on June 10 with no final disposition printed, and Item 19 on June 17 where the City Secretary said it had not been received but would be taken up if it arrived before the meeting ended.

Recommended: Ask the City Secretary and the sponsoring department why the Raftelis contract amendment was listed but "not received" on both June 10 and June 17, and whether it was pulled by the administration or simply never transmitted. Get the transmittal date and the reason in writing before it reappears on an agenda and passes on consent without discussion.