City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council approve a Professional Services Agreement with
Goodman’s Towing in an amount not-to-exceed $75,000.
BACKGROUND:
As a part of their duties, Culver City Police Department (CCPD) police officers and
parking enforcement personnel impound vehicles for California Vehicle Code
violations that include (but are not necessarily limited to): driving on a suspended
license/revoked license/no license, registration expired over six months, five or more
overdue parking tickets, and evidence holds. Tow service must be expeditious and
capable of handling vehicles of any size/weight, and storage options must include
secure units for evidence preservation.
Post impound, registered owners must obtain a release at CCPD upon the
presentation of required documents (e.g. identification, paid DMV fees, paid citations,
reinstated license, etc.) and payment of applicable administrative fees. Upon release,
the vehicle may be claimed at the business location of the tow service provider upon
payment for services rendered.
CCPD currently impounds around 60 vehicles per month, which includes both
commercial and passenger vehicles. CCPD traditionally impounds more heavy duty
vehicles than most surrounding agencies with the exception of Santa Monica. These
impounds are the result of CCPD’s Commercial Enforcement Section.
Meeting Date: 06/09/14 Item Number: A-2
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: Approval of a Professional Services Agreement
for a Term of Five Years with Goodman’s Towing in an Amount Not-To-Exceed
$75,000 for Towing Services for the Culver City Police Department.
Contact Person/Dept.: Lt. Hattrup/P.D. Phone Number: (310) 253-6327
Fiscal Impact: Yes [] No [X] General Fund: Yes [] No []
Public Hearing: [] Action Item: [X] Attachments: []
Commission Action Required: Yes [] No [X] Date: ________________
Public Notification: (E-Mail) Meetings and Agendas – City Council (06/04/14)
Department Approval:
Scott Bixby (05/28/14)
City Attorney Approval:
Carol Schwab (by L. Vidra) (06/03/14)
Chief Financial Officer Approval:
Jeff Muir (06/02/14)
City Manager Approval:
John M. Nachbar (06/03/14) City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
Currently, and as a past practice, CCPD uses Goodman’s Towing (Goodman’s) for all
vehicle tow services.
CCPD has been provided excellent service by Goodman’s for many years. All calls
for CCPD service are routed through Goodman’s, and all resulting tows are stored at
their lot located at 9401 Jefferson Boulevard. This location is only 0.6 miles from
CCPD, a convenient 2 minute drive, 4 minute bicycle ride, or 13 minute walk. This
location also ensures the fastest possible response time for trucks responding to calls
for service.
Although they exist as separate tow companies, Goodman’s Towing and All City (All
City) Tow are commonly owned and operated. All City acts as primary default for
CCPD tows. Both tow facilities have ongoing Tow Service Agreements (TSA) with the
California Highway Patrol (CHP) and Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department. As a
result, Goodman’s/All City are continually monitored for compliance with said
agreements. Per these agreements, Goodman’s/All City facilities/equipment are
inspected on an annual basis, drivers are thoroughly screened and enrolled in the
Employer Pull Notice (EPN) program, and reasonable rates approved by the CHP are
applied to CCPD authorized tows.
Goodman’s/All City operators are experienced and specialize in damage-free towing.
They also have a 24-hour secure vehicle storage facility including designated space
for police evidence holds.
Per the CHP TSA with Goodman’s Towing, fees charged “shall be reasonable, valid,
and not in excess of those rates charged for similar services provided in response to
requests initiated by a public agency or private person…operator shall display in plain
view at all cashiers stations, a sign as described in Section 3070(d)(2)(E) CC,
disclosing all storage fees and charges in force, including the maximum storage rate.”
As a result of the aforementioned conditions of the CHP TSA, Goodman’s
automatically imposes posted CHP approved rates on all CCPD approved tows in an
effort to avoid confusion or conflict during vehicle release.
Annual invoices from Goodman’s for services such as evidence storage have
consistently remained well under $30,000. Tow related invoices totaled $5,783 for FY
2010/2011, $10,298 for FY 2011/2012, $4,218 for FY 2012/2013, and $5,313 to date
for FY 2013/2014.
Associated administrative costs of the CCPD impound program are currently offset by
administrative fees charged by CCPD to vehicle owners upon release of a vehicle.
CCPD administrative release fees for FY 2012/2013 are set at:
? $175 Non-commercial passenger vehicles
? $225 Commercial vehicles (GVWR in excess of 10,000 lbs.)
? $200 Investigative impound City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
? $100 Stored vehicles (no charge for GTA victims)
Said charges are in accordance with and by the authority of Section 22850.5(a) of the
California Vehicle Code. Administrative impound fees collected for calendar year
2013 totaled $148,125.00.
The implementation of a franchise fee has been discussed. However, after extensive
research, staff does not recommend further consideration. Per California Vehicle
Code section 12110(b), a franchise fee for towing vehicles “may not exceed the
amount necessary to reimburse the public entity for its actual and reasonable costs
incurred in connection with the towing program.” Because CCPD towing program
costs are already offset through administrative fees, the addition of a franchise fee
would not conform to Vehicle Code demands without the creation of new costs.
DISCUSSION:
CCPD does not currently have a TSA with any tow service provider. A formal TSA
has the advantage of ensuring that the City’s motoring public and CCPD continue to
receive efficient and quality service for all tow services. It would also provide the City
with the safeguard of protective terms set forth in a traditional TSA.
In consideration of the implementation of a formal TSA, criteria for such an agreement
must be established. The following basic criteria are set forth as necessary for the
success of available Culver City tow service options:
1. Comprehensive tow service that includes light duty, medium duty, heavy duty,
and lowboy/super-heavy service.
2. Tow operator is located within the City limits of Culver City to ensure rapid
response time.
3. Tow operator storage facilities are located in the City limits of Culver City to meet
safety/vehicle access expectations.
4. Secure storage for evidence holds.
Through its research, staff has found that commonly owned and operated Goodman’s
/All City are the only tow service providers that meet the above criteria. While there
are four tow companies located within the City of Culver City (Redwood Towing,
Southside Tow Service, Goodman’s Towing, and All City Tow Service), and two within
close proximity of the City (Quicksilver and Bruffy’s), none of these businesses provide
heavy duty or lowboy/super heavy duty tow services. Goodman’s is the only tow
service known within a ten mile radius of Culver City to provide such services.
A TSA between CCPD and Goodman’s/All City would meet all the criteria set forth as
necessary and/or desirable. There are no complaints or ongoing problematic issues
with Goodman’s. Goodman’s facilities are located within the City of Culver City, and City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
they are the only tow service within several miles of the city that offer heavy duty and
super heavy duty tow. Proximity allows for optimal response time. All vehicles are
stored on premises (including evidence holds requiring CCPD Forensics Technician
access), and convenience is optimal for vehicle owners.
CCPD would have the freedom to conduct inspections as deemed necessary or
desired. Goodman’s is currently under a TSA with the California Highway Patrol
(CHP) and has been so for over a decade. They are monitored by the CHP for
compliance with their Tow Service Agreement. Areas of oversight include tow
operator qualifications, business regulations, response time, storage facilities, tow
truck drivers, tow truck classifications (light – super heavy duty), equipment
specifications, regular inspections, rates, insurance, compliance with law, and
compliance with TSA.
FISCAL ANALYSIS:
There is no expected fiscal impact. The projected costs associated with the creation
and ongoing oversight of a TSA are negligible, and vehicle release fees will continue
to offset tow program costs in adherence to the California Vehicle Code.
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
MOTION:
That the City Council:
1) Approve a five-year Professional Services Agreement (Tow Services Agreement)
with Goodman’s Towing/All City Towing in an amount not-to-exceed $15,000 per
year (a total of $75,000 over the five-year life of the agreement); and,
2) Authorize the City Attorney to review/prepare the necessary documents; and,
3) Authorize the City Manager to execute such documents on behalf of the City.
2014
Lt. Heidi Hattrup
June, 2014
CULVER CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
TOW SERVICE AGREEMENT/FRANCHISE FEE
FEASIBILITY STUDY
1
FEASIBILITY STUDY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page #
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................... 2
Purpose ....................................................................................................................................................... 2
Background ............................................................................................................................................... 2
Overview .................................................................................................................................................. 4
Industry Point of View .......................................................................................................... 4
Considerations ........................................................................................................................... 7
CCPD Tow Service Options ................................................................................................... 7
Criteria ...................................................................................................................................................... 8
Scope .......................................................................................................................................................... 9
DISCUSSION .........................................................................................................................................................10
Option 1 - Maintain Tow Service Status Quo .............................................................................10
Option 2 - TSA With Current Tow Provider, No Franchise Fee ........................................11
Option 3 - TSA With Current Tow Provider, Franchise Fee .................................................11
Option 4 - Request For Proposal, No Franchise Fee ..............................................................12
Option 5 - Request For Proposal, Franchise Fee.......................................................................13
CONCLUSIONS .....................................................................................................................................................14
RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................................................................14
2
Introduction
PURPOSE
The purpose of conducting a Tow Service Agreement (TSA)/Franchise Fee feasibility study is
to explore the consideration of the Culver City Police Department (CCPD) entering into a formal
agreement for tow service and the possibility of franchise fee application. The results of this
study are to be presented to the Chief of Police for further consideration.
BACKGROUND
The Culver City Police Department (CCPD) does not currently have a TSA or franchise fee with
any tow service. Historically, rotation tow service has been requested and provided by local tow
companies on an “as needed” basis.
Tow companies located within the City of Culver City are:
1) Redwood Towing
2) Southside Tow Service
3) Goodman’s Towing
4) All City Tow Service
Redwood Towing is a very small tow service with limited vehicle storage capacity and light-duty
tow units. As a result, it has been over 10 years since CCPD has utilized Redwood Towing for
tow service.
Southside Tow has very limited storage capacity and stores the vast majority of their tows at an
off- site facility. CCPD has not utilized Southside Tow for service.
The evolution of informal tow service criteria including the following conditions has resulted in
CCPD’s current usage of tow service provided entirely from Goodman’s Towing/All City Tow
Service:
• Both tow facilities are located within the city of Culver City which enables them to
provide rapid response to CCPD requests for service.
• All City Tow Service provides comprehensive tow service (light duty, medium duty,
heavy duty, and lowboy service) that is not offered by any other Culver City tow service.
• CCPD has been provided excellent service by Goodman’s Towing/All City Tow Service
for many years without complaint.
• Goodman’s Towing has an ongoing TSA with the California Highway Patrol (CHP) and
Marina Sheriff’s which means they are continually monitored for compliance with said
agreement. As a result, Goodman’s Towing facilities/equipment are inspected on an
annual basis, drivers are thoroughly screened and enrolled in the Employer Pull Notice 3
(EPN) program, and reasonable rates approved by the CHP are applied to CCPD
authorized tows.
Although they exist as separate companies, Goodman’s Towing and All City Tow are commonly
owned and operated (all calls for service are routed through Goodman’s). For purposes of this
study, both entities are to be included when reference is made to “Goodman’s Towing.”
All City Towing has been providing tow service for over 20 years. A GPS-based system
dispatches the closest truck to calls for service, ensuring the fastest possible response time. Their
tow unit operators are experienced and specialize in damage-free towing. They also have a 24-
hour secure vehicle storage facility including designated space for police evidence holds.
Vendor invoices from Goodman’s Towing have consistently remained well under $30,000. Tow
related invoices totaled $5,783 for FY 2010-11, $10,298 for FY 2011-12, and $4,218 for FY
2012-13.
Associated administrative costs of our current impound program are recouped through
administrative release fees that are imposed on the vehicles’ registered owner(s). The
administrative release fee is charged by CCPD pursuant to Sections 14602.6, 22651(h),
22651(o), 22651(p), or 22655.5 of the California Vehicle Code.
CCPD administrative release fees for FY 2012-13 are set at:
• $175 Non-commercial passenger vehicles
• $225 Commercial vehicles (GVWR in excess of 10,000 lbs.)
• $200 Investigative impound
• $100 Stored vehicles (no charge for GTA victims)
Said charges are in accordance with and by the authority of Section 22850.5 of the California
Vehicle Code:
22850.5. (a) A city, county, or city and county, or a state agency may adopt a regulation,
ordinance, or resolution establishing procedures for the release of properly impounded
vehicles and for the imposition of a charge equal to its administrative costs relating to
the removal, impound, storage, or release of the vehicles. Those administrative costs
may be waived by the local or state authority upon verifiable proof that the vehicle was
reported stolen at the time the vehicle was removed.
Adjustments to the CCPD impound fee schedule in 2011 and augmented in 2012 have closed
potential gaps in our administrative cost recovery rate (single fee prior to FY 2011-12 was set at
$125.00).
CCPD currently tows an average of 60 vehicles per month. Those tows are typically
comprised of stored vehicles, impounded commercial vehicles, and impounded passenger
vehicles. Of the impounded vehicles requiring release from CCPD, not all vehicles are redeemed
by registered owners (hence no release fee assessed). Redemption rates are approximately 86%. 4
CCPD generated tows have decreased over the past few years. CCPD impounded approximately
1200 vehicles during FY 2010-11, 1000 vehicles in FY 2011-12, and 850 vehicles in FY 2012-
13. This is likely correlated to a decrease in police personnel. However, as a result of improved
cost recovery measures taken in FY 2011-12 in the form of vehicle release fee increases, the
department has since recovered $150,000 for FY 2011-12 and $148,000 for FY 2012-13 as
compared to $91,000 in FY 2010-11.
CCPD has traditionally impounded more heavy duty vehicles than surrounding agencies with the
exception of Santa Monica. These impounds are the result of CCPD’s Commercial Enforcement
Section which has traditionally been operated by two Culver City Police Officers assigned to the
Traffic Bureau. Since October 2011 this program has been operated by only one officer and as a
result, related impounds have decreased by approximately 50%.
OVERVIEW
CCPD’s tow service has been without the protection of a formal TSA. Maintaining CCPD’s
current tow service arrangement may bear the consequence of future complications without the
safeguard of protective terms set forth in a TSA.
For the aforementioned reason, the formalization of a TSA should be explored. A TSA has the
advantage of ensuring the City’s motoring public and CCPD receive, and continue to receive,
efficient and quality service for all tow services. In addition, a written contract is in line with
overall City policy regarding written contracts with vendors.
INDUSTRY POINT OF VIEW
Over the past decade, an increasing number of police departments have turned toward Tow
Service Agreements (often inclusive of a rotation tow program) in an effort to ensure quality
service at a fair rate. In order to ensure vendor compliance with the extensive criteria set forth in
a TSA, ongoing administrative oversight is necessary. In an effort to offset costs to monitor the
Rotation Tow Program, periodically audit and inspect records, administrate complaints, and
other administrative costs, some police departments have implemented a franchise fee as part of
their TSA. Said fees are in accordance with and by the authority of Section 12110 of the
California Vehicle Code:
12110. (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), no towing service shall provide and no
person or public entity shall accept any direct or indirect commission, gift, or any
compensation whatever from a towing service in consideration of arranging or requesting
the services of a tow truck. As used in this section, "arranging" does not include the
activities of employees or principals of a provider of towing services in responding to a
request for towing services.
(b) Subdivision (a) does not preclude a public entity otherwise authorized by law
from requiring a fee in connection with the award of a franchise for towing vehicles on
behalf of that public entity. However, the fee in those cases may not exceed the 5
amount necessary to reimburse the public entity for its actual and reasonable costs
incurred in connection with the towing program.
There are several reasons cities may find a Rotation Tow Program and/or the oversight of a TSA
beneficial. These reasons vary with each city’s unique set of circumstances including:
1. The need to span a large geographical area necessitating multiple tow vendors.
2. The availability of multiple tow vendors who meet service criteria.
3. The existence of tow vendors meeting service criteria that are not Official Police Garages
(OPG’s) and are not regulated as such under an existing TSA.
4. Available OPG vendors’ existing TSA regulations do not meet desired TSA
specifications.
5. The City’s tow volume is at such a high level that the imposition of a franchise fee is
necessary to offset TSA oversight and is agreeable to available tow vendor(s).
Because of the variety of individual factors affecting each individual city, police departments
typically have a distinctive manner in which they have constructed their tow arrangements.
Although the City of Los Angeles’ Official Police Garages (LAOPG) is the “model program that
many government administrators go to for solutions regarding municipal towing and storage
issues,” the City of Los Angeles’ considerations are massive and not generally reflective of a
small municipal entity such as Culver City. Santa Monica and Beverly Hills are instead
discussed for obvious geographic and demographic considerations, and Fullerton is discussed for
purposes of process examination.
Santa Monica
Neighboring Santa Monica P.D. has an informal rotation tow program (no contract, no franchise
fee) with Tip Top Tow, Pacific Towing, and Wilson & Vallely Towing. All three tow
companies are located within the city of Santa Monica. The notion of a formal contract was
entertained in years past, but was dismissed due to difficulties in coming to agreeable terms with
the three tow companies. Santa Monica charges an aggressive release fee ($127.00 for general
impounds, $861 for 30-day holds) to offset administrative costs of their tow program.
Beverly Hills
Beverly Hills P.D. maintains a City owned garage for 30-day impounds and has a formal
contract with Tip Top Tow. Tip Top Tow provides tow service to the Beverly Hills garage for
the 30-day impounds, and transports all other vehicles to their Santa Monica facility. Tip Top
Tow also contracts as an OPG for Santa Monica and the California Highway Patrol. Although
Beverly Hills entertained the idea of implementing a franchise fee, they elected not to as they felt
there was no legal cause (their release fees, like Culver City’s, are set at a level which covers the
cost of their tow program – $114 for all impounds except investigative holds set at $154). 6
Both Beverly Hills P.D. and Santa Monica P.D. must call an outside tow agency when in need of
heavy duty or super heavy duty tow service. Goodman’s Towing/All City Tow is one such
source for these requests.
In 2010, Beverly Hills submitted a RFP for tow services. The impetus for the RFP was an
attempt to find a vendor that would lease and man the Beverly Hills lot, resulting in 100% of
vehicles stored in Beverly Hills rather than distant West Los Angeles. This request was the
direct result of pressure from unhappy Beverly Hills residents/visitors having to retrieve their car
from an inconvenient location. Revenue increase was also a major consideration for this
innovative RFP. Only two tow service providers (Goodman’s Tow and Quick Silver) responded
to the Beverly Hills RFP, and neither was in agreement with the terms of leasing the Beverly
Hills garage as it was cost prohibitive. The end result was an extension of the pre-existing
contract with Quick Silver tow for continued tow service.
Fullerton (Note: Data current as of 2012)
Fullerton covers 22.3 square miles and has a monthly tow volume of approximately 260 vehicles.
Fullerton P.D. historically utilized Anaheim Fullerton Towing for general tow service. Fullerton
charged vehicle owners a release fee of $75 and Anaheim Fullerton Towing charged vehicle
owners an uncommonly low industry rate of $75. At accident scenes where no AAA existed, an
informal rotation tow (no preference tow) from 6 different companies was utilized
(approximately 15 tows per month). According to Fullerton staff, this became problematic as no
rate controls existed, and each company charged vehicle owners varying fees.
In an effort to alleviate tow service issues, Fullerton conducted a study to determine what
administrative costs were not being recovered under their current fee schedule. It was concluded
that approximately $244,000 ($75/vehicle) was not recouped through their existing fee schedule.
As a result, Fullerton P.D. entered a formal agreement with Anaheim Fullerton Towing in which
the tow company agreed to pay a franchise fee of $75/vehicle. This was only made possible
without impacting Anaheim Fullerton Towing as they raised their rates to competitive market
status ($168 tow fee). Fullerton did not raise their release fee, which remained at $75, further
justifying the imposition of a franchise fee to completely offset administrative costs.
In January 2011, Fullerton went out to bid with an RFP for tow service. After an exhaustive
review of Respondents and an inspection of approximately 60 tow trucks, Fullerton found only
two tow services met the requirements of the RFP (their current service provider, Anaheim
Fullerton Towing, included).
CONSIDERATIONS
Attempts from Police/City entities to generate revenue from tow companies have not been
without difficulty. Expenses imposed upon tow service businesses are generally agreeable to the
tow service only when potential tow demand (minus imposed fees) exceeds a level well above
and beyond that which is currently realized. As a result, attempts to seek revenues from tow
service vendors has proved challenging. 7
While franchise fees work well when properly applied (see Fullerton example above), they
can also prove problematic if agencies are unable to justify the level of application for
which they are imposed.
Other complications of the franchise fee are collection and the agreement of application. The
City of Los Angeles has dealt with such issues that have created a serious loss in projected
revenue.
CCPD TOW SERVICE OPTIONS
Several options exist for CCPD’s future tow services:
1. Maintain status quo – no Tow Service Agreement
2. Formalize a Tow Service Agreement with current provider (Goodman’s Towing), no
franchise fee required
3. Formalize a Tow Service Agreement with current provider (Goodman’s Towing),
franchise fee required
4. Request for proposal (RFP) with option of Rotation Tow Program, contract with
vendor(s) selected through Culver City’s formal bid procedure, no franchise fee required
5. Request for proposal (RFP) with option of Rotation Tow Program, contract with
vendor(s) selected through Culver City’s formal bid procedure, franchise fee required.
NOTE: Culver City’s Professional Services and Formal Bid Procedures are as follows:
CCMC § 3.07.085 PROFESSIONAL AND PERSONAL SERVICES.
A. Except as otherwise provided in this Subchapter, the City may award purchase
orders and contracts in any amount for professional or personal services without
complying with the provisions of this Subchapter; provided, the purchase order or
contract shall be based upon competitive quotations, whenever practical, as determined
by the City Manager.
B. For purposes of this Section, professional services shall include, but not be limited
to, services of engineers; architects, accountants, attorneys, doctors, and similar
professionals when the City is contracting for the skill, integrity, judgment, and/or special
technical ability of the professional.
C. For purposes of this section, personal services shall include, but not be limited to:
1. Any communication, gas.-water, electric light and power service or similar utility
service;
2. Insurance, postage, freight and courier service;
3. Travel/hotel accommodations, education and training expense;
4. Subscriptions and memberships;
5. Repair or maintenance service for equipment, machinery or other City-owned
personal property; and
6. Repair and maintenance service for City-owned or occupied real property and
buildings; and
7. Rental of real property or equipment and other personal property. 8
CCMC § 3.07.075 FORMAL BID PROCEDURE. Except as otherwise provided in
this Subchapter, purchases of equipment, goods and supplies of an estimated value of
more than thirty thousand dollars ($30,000.00) shall be by formal sealed written
competitive bids. Awards for such expenditures shall be made by the City Council to the
Lowest Responsive and Responsible Bidder in accordance with the following provisions:
A. Budget verification. Prior to bid solicitation, the Purchasing Officer shall
confirm the requested purchase is identified in the current fiscal year adopted budget. For
items not identified in the current fiscal year adopted budget, the requesting City
department shall be required to receive City Council approval prior to bid solicitation.
B. Bid specifications. Bid specifications shall be prepared and include the criteria
that must be met to be considered the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.
C. Notice inviting bids. Notices inviting sealed bids shall be published in a
newspaper of general circulation within the City at least ten (10) days prior to the date set
for opening of the bids. In addition, notices inviting bids shall be disseminated to at least
three (3) prospective bidders approved by the Purchasing Officer, and all those who have
requested to be placed on the bidders list. Notices shall be posted at City Hall and other
public posting locations as determined by the Purchasing Officer. Notices shall include a
general description of the articles for which bids are being sought, and the time, date and
location for submitting and opening of the bids.
D. Bid submittal and bid opening. Sealed bids shall be submitted to the City Clerk
and shall be opened in public at the time and place stated in the notice inviting bids. All
bids received shall be available for public inspection at the time and place of opening,
and thereafter, in the Office of the City Clerk. Bids must be received prior to the bid
opening to be considered.
E. Rejection or waiver of bid requirements.
1. The City Council may reject any and all bids-presented and may re-solicit for
bids in its discretion.
2. Except as provided in § 3.07.090, the City Council may waive any
irregularities or informalities in any bid or bidding.
3. Except as provided in § 3.07.090, upon determining that conformance with the
procedures set forth in this Section would be contrary to the best interests of the City or
upon determining that compliance with the procedures would be impractical, the City
Council may waive any or all of the requirements of this Section and, if it deems it to be
in the City's best interest, authorize a negotiated contract.
CRITERIA
In consideration of the implementation of a Tow Service Agreement, criteria for such an
agreement must be established. The following basic criteria are set forth as necessary for the
success of available Culver City tow service options:
1. No significant cost to the City of Culver City
2. Minimal addition to workload of existing personnel
3. Provision for efficient and quality tow service at standardized rates 9
4. Minimal vendor response time
The following basic tow service vendor criteria are set forth as desirable and/or necessary:
1. Vendor must provide light, medium, heavy, and super heavy duty tow service
2. Fees charged for calls originating from CCPD shall be reasonable, valid, and not in
excess of those rates charged for similar services provided in response to requests
initiated by a public agency or private person.
3. The primary storage facility must accommodate all vehicles stored less than thirty days
and include a secure structure for evidence holds.
4. All vendor equipment and facilities, including the primary storage facility, utilized for
Culver City service shall be located within one mile of Culver City limits.
Although most cities require tow service operators be located within a 5 mile radius, worsening
Los Angeles area traffic conditions make this distance somewhat unreasonable for Culver City
residents/businesses/visitors. Additionally, the City of Culver City has demonstrated preference
to local businesses:
CCMC § 3.07.060 AWARDS OF CONTRACTS TO LOCAL BUSINESSES. The
City shall give preference to a Local Business when awarding any contract for the
purchase of equipment, goods or supplies; provided, the Local Business to be awarded
the contract will be able to provide equipment, goods or supplies which are equal in
quality and meet all bid specifications of the City and of other competing bidders, and the
contract to be awarded meets one of the following criteria, as determined by the
Purchasing Officer:
A. The difference between bids from the Local Business and a business outside the
City is less than the current sales tax benefit the City would receive from the local sales
tax; or
B. Any other reason which would reasonably justify selection of Local Businesses
based upon criteria which do not illegally discriminate against outside businesses.
SCOPE
This study focuses on options available to CCPD for future tow service arrangements. These
options are meant to provide a basis for decision-making that will most benefit the City of Culver
City.
Factors unique to the City of Culver City are covered and used for relevant discussion.
Information gleaned from outside police agencies is provided as a tool for reference, and neither
has the ability nor intention to convey a direct correlation to the position of the City of Culver
City.
Basic assumptions include: 10
• No change in police personnel (number of personnel assigned to existing bureaus and
general job description)
• No change in budgetary position
• No major change in services offered by existing tow service companies in/near Culver
City
• Criteria as set forth is necessary and/or desirable to the City of Culver City
Discussion
The following discussion will highlight each tow service option as outlined in the overview.
Each option will be analyzed and evaluated for its ability to satisfy criteria previously set forth.
OPTION 1 – MAINTAIN TOW SERVICE STATUS QUO
This option calls for no change to CCPD’s current tow service program.
ADVANTAGES
CCPD’s current tow arrangement with Goodman’s Towing meets all the criteria set forth as
necessary and/or desirable. There are no complaints or ongoing issues with CCPD’s current tow
service. Goodman’s Towing facilities are located within the city of Culver City, and they are the
only tow service within several miles of the city that offer heavy duty and super heavy duty tow.
Proximity allows for optimal response time. All vehicles are stored on premises (including
evidence holds requiring CCPD Forensics’ access) allowing for convenience in the release
process to vehicle owners.
Under this option, no oversight is mandatory. Goodman’s is currently under a TSA with the
California Highway Patrol (CHP) and has been so for over a decade. They are monitored by the
CHP for compliance with their Tow Service Agreement. Areas of oversight include tow
operator qualifications, business regulations, response time, storage facilities, tow truck drivers,
tow truck classifications (light – super heavy duty), equipment specifications, regular
inspections, rates, insurance, compliance with law, and compliance with TSA.
Per the CHP TSA with Goodman’s Towing, fees charged “shall be reasonable, valid, and not in
excess of those rates charged for similar services provided in response to requests initiated by a
public agency or private person…the operator shall display in plain view at all cashiers stations,
a sign as described in Section 3070(d)(2)(E) CC, disclosing all storage fees and charges in force,
including the maximum storage rate.” As a result of the aforementioned conditions of the CHP
TSA, Goodman’s automatically imposes posted CHP approved rates to CCPD approved tows in
an effort to avoid confusion or conflict during vehicle release.
DISADVANTAGES
Although CCPD’s current tow arrangement with Goodman’s Towing meets all the criteria set
forth as necessary and/or desirable, it is without the protection of a formal TSA. Maintaining 11
CCPD’s current tow service arrangement may bear the consequence of future complications
without the safeguard of protective terms set forth in a TSA.
CCPD’s current tow arrangement also does not allow for periodic inspection/oversight of
Goodman’s place of business and/or equipment. While the CHP may currently oversee
requirements of their TSA with Goodman’s, CCPD is not privy as to when/if this oversight
occurs and that inspections meet Culver City expectations.
The lack of a TSA with Goodman’s does not ensure future control over rates, response time, or
any specifications to be adhered to in such agreement. This puts CCPD in a position of
vulnerability in regards to future business expectations.
OPTION 2 –TSA WITH CURRENT TOW PROVIDER, NO FRANCHISE FEE
This option maintains status quo (see OPTION 1) with the exception of formalizing a TSA
between CCPD and Goodman’s Towing.
ADVANTAGES
CCPD’s current tow arrangement with Goodman’s Towing meets all the criteria set forth as
necessary and/or desirable, and would be positively impacted by the added protection of a formal
agreement. The safeguard of protective terms set forth in a TSA would ensure the City’s
motoring public and CCPD receive and continue to receive efficient and quality service for
necessary tow services.
All disadvantages addressed under OPTION 1 would be remedied by OPTION 2. This option
allows for the continuance of a positive business relationship that best services the public and
police department.
Oversight would be on an “as needed” basis, allowing CCPD the freedom to conduct inspections
as deemed necessary or desired. As police resources are already stretched thin, this flexible
oversight minimizes departmental time/labor burden. By not imposing a franchise fee,
Goodman’s Towing continues to operate at a profitable level and the continuance of a positive
business relationship with the City of Culver City remains intact. .
DISADVANTAGES
A TSA that is agreeable to both parties must be constructed. Future ongoing TSA maintenance
(renewal and revision) would also be necessary.
No franchise fee is collected under OPTION 2. The projected oversight of this option is very
minimal, and associated costs are expected to be negligible.
OPTION 3 –TSA WITH CURRENT TOW PROVIDER, FRANCHISE FEE
Option 3 provides for a TSA with Goodman’s Towing with the addition of a franchise fee. 12
ADVANTAGES
As with OPTION 2, CCPD’s current tow arrangement with Goodman’s Towing meets all the
criteria set forth as necessary and/or desirable, and would be positively impacted by the added
protection of a formal agreement. The safeguard of protective terms set forth in a TSA would
ensure the City’s motoring public and CCPD receive and continue to receive efficient and quality
service for necessary tow services.
The imposition of a franchise fee would offset any costs incurred by the implementation and
oversight of a TSA.
DISADVANTAGES
Ongoing oversight of the TSA would be mandatory in order to legally justify the charge of a
franchise fee. Police resources are already stretched thin and additional oversight increases the
time/labor burden to the department.
The franchise fee cannot utilize administrative costs that are already covered through the
imposition of vehicle release fees. As CCPD’s release fees are established to offset
administrative costs, the department does not perceive legal justification for the implementation
of a franchise fee. Implementation of a franchise fee would necessitate either the creation of new
costs (additional personnel and/or workload) or a decrease in current vehicle release fees.
By imposing a franchise fee, Goodman’s Towing takes a direct loss as there is no viable way for
the business to recoup this expenditure. The City of Culver City has a relatively low tow
demand level, further making such an arrangement unfeasible to Goodman’s Towing.
As with OPTION 2, time and effort must be spent to formulate a TSA that is agreeable to both
parties. Future ongoing TSA maintenance (renewal and revision) would also be necessary.
OPTION 4 – REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL, NO FRANCHISE FEE
This option calls for the City of Culver City to invite prospective respondents to submit
proposals for the provision of tow services.
ADVANTAGES
OPTION 4 allows for all qualified respondents to be considered for contract award. It is
unknown whether this option would meet all the criteria set forth as necessary and/or desirable.
Businesses selected for award are bound by contract that seeks to ensure quality service and
controlled rates. The safeguard of protective terms set forth in a signed contract would inhibit
future concerns.
Administrative oversight would ensure the terms of the contract are strictly adhered to, to the
satisfaction of the City of Culver City. By not imposing a franchise fee, businesses are not
concerned with the ability to continue operating at a profitable level.
DISADVANTAGES 13
An RFP must be created and sent through necessary channels for presentation. Proposals must
then be reviewed and considered for contract award. As part of this time consuming process,
tedious inspections must be completed of each business and of all equipment operated by these
businesses.
Facility location, tow distance, lack of evidence storage, and lack of heavy duty tow are several
reasons most vendors will not meet set criteria. For this reason, although many vendors are
likely to submit a proposal, they are likely to be disqualified during the review process.
CCPD also runs the risk of their current vendor not submitting a proposal, and losing the current
level of service we have come to expect. Service from a vendor whose premises are located
outside the city would result in lost tax revenue to the City of Culver City. Police business such
as forensics processing on evidence holds would also bear the burden of greater travel distance
and lost time.
OPTION 5 – REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL, FRANCHISE FEE
This option calls for the City of Culver City to invite prospective respondents to submit
proposals for the provision of tow services. As part of the final agreement between the City of
Culver City and the awarded respondent(s), a franchise fee would be assessed.
ADVANTAGES
OPTION 5 allows for all qualified respondents to be considered for contract award. It is
unknown whether this option would meet all the criteria set forth as necessary and/or desirable.
Businesses selected for award are bound by contract that seeks to ensure quality service and
controlled rates. The safeguard of protective terms set forth in a signed contract would inhibit
future concerns.
Administrative oversight would ensure the terms of the contract are strictly adhered to, to the
satisfaction of the City of Culver City. The implementation of a franchise fee would offset
administrative oversight created by this option.
DISADVANTAGES
An RFP must be created and sent through the necessary channels for presentation. Proposals
must then be reviewed and considered for contract award. As part of this time consuming
process, tedious inspections must be completed of each business and of all equipment operated
by these businesses.
Facility location, tow distance, lack of evidence storage, and lack of heavy duty tow are several
reasons most vendors will not meet set criteria. For this reason, although many vendors are
likely to submit a proposal, they are likely to be disqualified during the review process.
The current tow level demand created by CCPD may not be at a level which makes the burden of
a franchise fee palatable to potential vendors. CCPD also runs the risk of their current vendor
not submitting a proposal for this reason, and losing the current level of service we have come to 14
expect. Service from a vendor whose premises are located outside the city would result in lost
tax revenue to the City of Culver City. Police business such as forensics processing on evidence
holds would also bear the burden of greater travel distance and lost time.
Ongoing oversight of the TSA would be mandatory in order to legally justify the charge of
a franchise fee. Police resources are already stretched thin and additional oversight
increases the time/labor burden to the department. The franchise fee cannot utilize
administrative costs that are already covered through the imposition of increased vehicle
release fees.
Conclusions
Based on option evaluation and analysis, it is concluded that the advantages of the recommended
solution must outweigh the disadvantages associated with option recommendation. Of utmost
importance is the ability for the selected option to meet criteria set forth as necessary and/or
desirable.
Options 1 and 2 meet specified criteria and require little effort to implement. Options 3, 4 and 5
entail significant effort and the prospective advantages of each of these options are outweighed
by associated disadvantages.
The resulting option that appears most feasible is OPTION 2, TSA WITH CURRENT TOW
PROVIDER, NO FRANCHISE FEE. OPTION 2 requires minimal preparation and ongoing
administrative oversight, and ensures that CCPD continues to receive excellent local tow
services with the protection of a formal agreement. Vehicle release fees will continue to offset
tow program costs in adherence to the California Vehicle Code.
OPTION 2 is feasible and could be implemented fairly quickly. An agreeable TSA to both
CCPD and Goodman’s Towing will establish expectations and authorizations.
Recommendations
Based on the above conclusions, it is recommended that CCPD proceed with OPTION 2, TSA
WITH CURRENT TOW PROVIDER, NO FRANCHISE FEE. CCPD should create an
agreeable TSA specifying terms and conditions, effective dates, renewal options, and have such
agreement signed by relevant parties.
For consistency, it is further recommended that the Culver City TSA closely mirror the
California Highway Patrol TSA. This would enable CCPD to quickly prepare a comprehensive
TSA and facilitate Goodmans’ rapid adoption and conformance as they are currently in
compliance with the CHP TSA. 15
Oversight of the CCPD tow service program should continue at the direction of the CCPD
Traffic Bureau Captain. This includes periodic program evaluation for effectiveness and
relevance.