BOARD OF DIRECTORS ALAMEDA‐CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT
AGENDA Regular Meetings of the Board of Directors and the External Affairs and Finance and Audit Committees Special Meeting of the Operations Committee AC Transit General Offices 2nd Floor Board Room 1600 Franklin Street Oakland, CA 94612
Wednesday, January 23, 2013 at 5:00 p.m. Closed Session: 4:00 p.m. (Items 8A‐E) Committee meetings will commence when the Board of Directors recesses to a Committee of the Whole
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS GREG HARPER, PRESIDENT (WARD 2) JOE WALLACE, VICE PRESIDENT (WARD 1) ELSA ORTIZ (WARD 3) MARK WILLIAMS (WARD 4) JEFF DAVIS (WARD 5) JOEL YOUNG (AT‐LARGE) H. E. CHRISTIAN PEEPLES (AT‐LARGE)
Teleconference/Videoconference: H. E. Christian Peeples, Director At‐Large 68 Rue Escudier, 5 GG, 92100 Boulogne Billancourt, FRANCE
BOARD OFFICERS DAVID J. ARMIJO, GENERAL MANAGER KENNETH C. SCHEIDIG, INTERIM GENERAL COUNSEL LINDA A. NEMEROFF, DISTRICT SECRETARY
STANDING COMMITTEES MEETING DAYS* Planning Committee 2nd Wednesday Operations Committee 2nd Wednesday External Affairs Committee 4th Wednesday Finance and Audit Committee 4th Wednesday * All Standing Committees are held in conjunction with the regular Board of Directors meeting,
To access live and archived audio of Board of Directors and Standing Committee meetings as well as agendas, staff reports, and the schedule of future meetings please visit www.actransit.org and click on “Board Meetings”. Dial (510) 891‐7200 to access agendas by telephone. For questions, contact the District Secretary’s Office at (510) 891‐7201. Alameda‐Contra Costa Transit District
January 23, 2013 1
Page 1 of 8
MEETING PROCEDURES
Public Comment: Members of the public wishing to present comments should complete a Speaker’s Form and submit it to the District Secretary. For subjects not listed on this agenda, the public will be invited to speak under the "PUBLIC COMMENTS" section of the agenda. For specific agenda item(s), speakers will be invited to address the Board/Standing Committee(s) at the time the item is being considered. All speakers are allowed two (2) minutes to present comments. Individuals wishing to present more detailed information are encouraged to submit comments in writing. Written comments are included in the record for meeting(s), and as such, are available for public inspection and may be posted to the District’s website.
Electronic Devices: All electronic devices (cell phones, pagers and similar‐sounding devices) shall be placed on mute, vibrate or silent mode during Board and Committee meetings pursuant to District Ordinance No. 12.
Time of Meetings: Times included on this agenda for commencement of Standing Committee meetings are estimates only. Committee meetings will commence when the Board of Directors recesses to a Committee of the Whole.
Order of Agenda Items: The Board or Standing Committee(s) may discuss any item listed on this agenda and in any order.
Agenda Planning: The Agenda Planning portion of the agenda is designed to assist the Board and staff in the preparation of future Board and Committee agendas. Each item requested shall have the concurrence of at least two Directors in order to place a proposed agenda item on a future agenda.
LIVE AUDIO STREAMING OF BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS Live audio streaming and an archive of previously recorded meetings is available on the District’s website at www.actransit.org. For technological reasons, recordings of meetings held outside of the Board Room cannot be streamed to the web.
AVAILABILITY OF AGENDA RELATED MATERIALS
Written agenda related materials for all open session regular meetings are available to the public 72 hours prior to the meeting or at the time the materials are distributed to a majority of the Board. Written materials presented at a meeting by staff or a member of the Board will be available to the public at that time, or after the meeting if supplied by an outside party. Agenda related materials are available on the District’s website or by contacting the District Secretary’s Office.
ACCESSIBLE PUBLIC MEETINGS
Meetings of the Board of Directors are accessible to individuals in wheelchairs. The Board Room is equipped with Assistive Listening Devices for individuals with a hearing impairment. Written materials in appropriate alternative formats, disability‐related modification/accommodation as well as sign language and foreign language interpreters must be made 72 hours in advance of the meeting or hearing to help ensure availability. Please direct requests for disability related modification or accommodation and/or interpreter services to Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary, 1600 Franklin Street, Oakland, California, 94612 or call (510) 891‐7201. AC Transit’s General Offices are generally served by bus lines 1, 11, 12, 51A, 72, 72M. The nearest accessible bus service is provided at the intersection of Broadway and 17th Street in Oakland. The nearest accessible BART station is the 19th Street Station in Oakland. District Ordinance No. 13 prohibits bringing non‐service animals to District facilities unless specifically authorized by federal or state law. To accommodate individuals with severe allergies and environmental illnesses, meeting participants should refrain from wearing scented products to the meeting.
Alameda‐Contra Costa Transit District
January 23, 2013 2
Page 2 of 8
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING – Greg Harper, President Wednesday, January 23, 2013, at 5:00 p.m.
Staff Contact or Presenter
1.
ROLL CALL
2.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Any person may directly address the Board at this time on any items of interest to the public that is within the subject matter and jurisdiction of the Board. Speakers wishing to address a specific agenda item will be invited to address the Board at the time the item is being considered. Two (2) minutes are allowed for each item.
3.
BOARD/STAFF COMMENTS
(Government Code Section 54954.2)
4.
CONSENT CALENDAR Items listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and may be enacted by one motion/one vote. If discussion is desired, an item may be removed from the Consent Calendar and will be considered individually.
4A. Consider approving Board of Directors and Standing Committee Linda Nemeroff 891‐7284 minutes of October 24, 2012. 4B. Consider approving Board of Directors and Standing Committee Linda A. Nemeroff 891‐7284 minutes of January 9, 2013. Jim Pachan 4C. Consider receiving the Accessibility Advisory Committee minutes of 891‐7215 December 11, 2012 (Report 13‐015). 4D. Consider receiving Retirement Board minutes of December 13, 2012 Hugo Wildmann 891‐4889 (Report 13‐021). 5. REGULAR CALENDAR Tom Prescott 5A. Consider adoption of Resolution No. 13‐006 approving amendment 13‐ 891‐7221 A‐16 to the AC Transit District Employees’ Retirement Plan to comply Kenneth Scheidig with the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 also known as 891‐7178 Assembly Bill AB340 (Report 12‐314a). Dennis Butler 5B. Consider approving contract award to URS for project 891‐4798 administration/project control consultant services associated with the Line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction and Sustainability Project (Report 12‐ 297a). Tom Prescott 5C. Consider the options available with regard to the District‐owned 891‐7221 property located at 3500 Seminary Avenue in Oakland (Report 12‐ 301a). 5D. Consider exercising an option to extend the Interim General Counsel’s Kenneth Scheidig 891‐7178 contract with amendments (Report 13‐047). Alameda‐Contra Costa Transit District
January 23, 2013 3
Page 3 of 8
5E. Consider the adoption of Resolution No. 13‐008 repealing Resolution No. 12‐022 setting forth the authority and the responsibilities of the General Counsel and the District Secretary regarding personnel matters (Report 13‐048). 5F. Consider authorizing travel to the American Public Transportation Association’s 2013 Legislative Conference for members of the Board of Directors (March 10‐12, 2013) and the General Manager (March 9‐11, 2013) in Washington, D.C. (Report 13‐038). 5G. Announcement of appointment to the Policy Advisory Committee for the Emeryville‐Berkeley‐Oakland Transit Study. (Verbal) 5H. Announcement of appointments to the limited‐purpose Executive Search Committee. (verbal) 5I. Discussion and announcement of Standing Committee Chair assignments and Liaison Committee assignments. (Verbal)
Kenneth Scheidig 891‐7178
Linda Nemeroff 891‐7284
President Harper
President Harper
President Harper
RECESS TO STANDING COMMITTEES (as the Committee of the Whole) Speakers will be invited to address a Committee at the time an item on the agenda is being considered or under Public Comment for items not on the agenda. Immediately following the Standing Committee Meetings, the Board meeting will reconvene at which time the Board may take action on any of the following Committee agenda items.
ALL COMMITTEES ARE ADVISORY ONLY. Staff Contact or Presenter(s)
A.
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE – Joe Wallace, Chairperson Held immediately following the Board Meeting recess.
Public Comment (for items not on the agenda)
Briefing/Action Items:
A‐1. Consider recommending receipt of the monthly legislative report and approval of legislative positions (Report 13‐016). A‐2. Consider recommending that the Board President and General Manager be authorized to sign a letter to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission regarding AC Transit’s interest in having representation on the Commission (Report 13‐064). A‐3. Consider recommending adoption of Resolution No. 13‐007 in support of the West Contra Costa Unified School District’s general waiver request of the statutory bonding capacity [Requested by Director Peeples 12/12/12] (Report 13‐046). Alameda‐Contra Costa Transit District
January 23, 2013 4
Dennis Butler 891‐4798 David Armijo 891‐4793
Dennis Butler 891‐4798
Page 4 of 8
A‐4. Consider recommending receipt of a report on the use of forward‐ facing cameras in head signs to assist with parking enforcement at bus stops, and the sponsorship of state legislation that would be necessary to enable AC Transit to conduct such enforcement [Requested by Director Peeples 11/8/09; Director Harper – 2/22/12] (Report 13‐031).
Dennis Butler 891‐4798
Staff Contact or Presenter(s)
B.
FINANCE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE – Greg Harper, Chairperson Held immediately following the External Affairs Committee meeting.
Public Comment (for items not on the agenda)
Consent Items:
B‐1. Consider recommending receipt of the Report on Investments for the Month of November 2012 (Report 13‐018). Briefing/Action Items:
Lewis Clinton 891‐4752
B‐2. Consider recommending receipt of the monthly budget update (Report 13‐044). B‐3. Consider review of Board Policy 336 (Investment Policy) with no recommended revisions (Report 13‐020). B‐4. Consider recommending adoption of Resolution No. 13‐004 authorizing the General Manager or designee to file and execute applications and funding agreements with the California Emergency Management Agency for allocations of Transit System Safety, Security & Disaster Response Account (TSSSDRA) funds for FY 2012‐13 through FY 2016‐17 (Report 13‐033). B‐5. Consider recommending adoption of Resolution No. 13‐005 authorizing the General Manager or designee to file and execute applications to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for FY2012‐13 Transit Performance Initiative – Incentive Program funds (Report 13‐036). B‐6. Consider recommending receipt of annual report on the Welfare‐to‐ Work Grant and Lifeline funding (Report 13‐034).
Lewis Clinton 891‐4752
Lewis Clinton 891‐4752 Tom Prescott 891‐7221
Tom Prescott 891‐7221
Tom Prescott 891‐7221
Staff Contact or Presenter(s)
C.
SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE – Joel Young, Chairperson Held immediately following the Finance and Audit Committee meeting.
Public Comment (for items not on the agenda)
Briefing/Action Items:
Alameda‐Contra Costa Transit District
January 23, 2013 5
Page 5 of 8
C‐1. Consider recommending receipt of report on milestones completed and current recommissioning efforts for the Emeryville Hydrogen Fueling Station (Report 12‐171a). C‐2. Consider recommending receipt of a report on the Federal Transit Administration’s Charter Service Rules (Report 13‐030). C‐3. Consider recommending that the General Manager be authorized to sign an assignment and consent agreement between AC Transit, Architecture/VBN and STV Group for on‐call architectural and engineering services (Report 13‐045). C‐4. Consider recommending approval of contract award to ATI Architects & Engineers Services, Inc. of Danville, California, for design and construction phase services for the Photovoltaic Solar System at Division 6 in Hayward (Report 13‐035).
RECONVENE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING – Greg Harper, President
6.
REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES The District Secretary will report on the recommendations made by the Committees, including those items referred to the Consent Calendar Addenda. If discussion or comment is desired, any person may request that an item be considered individually.
A. EXTERNAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE: A‐1. Consider receiving the monthly legislative report and approval of legislative positions (Report 13‐016).
Jim Pachan 891‐7215
John Haenftling 891‐4875 Dennis Butler 891‐4798
Dennis Butler 891‐4798
Staff Contact or Presenter(s) Linda Nemeroff 891‐7284 Dennis Butler 891‐4798
David Armijo A‐2. Consider authorizing the Board President and General Manager to sign 891‐4793 a letter to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission regarding AC Transit’s interest in having representation on the Commission (Report 13‐064). Dennis Butler A‐3. Consider adoption of Resolution No. 13‐007 in support of the West 891‐4798 Contra Costa Unified School District’s general waiver request of the statutory bonding capacity [Requested by Director Peeples 12/12/12] (Report 13‐046). Dennis Butler A‐4. Consider receiving report on the use of forward‐facing cameras in head 891‐4798 signs to assist with parking enforcement at bus stops, and sponsorship of state legislation that would be necessary to enable AC Transit to conduct such enforcement [Requested by Director Peeples 11/8/09; Director Harper – 2/22/12] (Report 13‐031). B. FINANCE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE Lewis Clinton B‐1. Consider receiving Report on Investments for the Month of November 891‐4752 2012 (Report 13‐018). Lewis Clinton B‐2. Consider receiving the monthly budget update (Report 13‐044). 891‐4752 Alameda‐Contra Costa Transit District
January 23, 2013 6
Page 6 of 8
Lewis Clinton B‐3. Consider review of Board Policy 336 (Investment Policy) with no 891‐4752 revisions (Report 13‐020). Tom Prescott B‐4. Consider adoption of Resolution No. 13‐004 authorizing the General 891‐7221 Manager or designee to file and execute applications and funding agreements with the California Emergency Management Agency for allocations of Transit System Safety, Security & Disaster Response Account (TSSSDRA) funds for FY 2012‐13 through FY 2016‐17 (Report 13‐033). Tom Prescott B‐5. Consider adoption of Resolution No. 13‐005 authorizing the General 891‐7221 Manager or designee to file and execute applications to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for FY2012‐13 Transit Performance Initiative – Incentive Program funds (Report 13‐036). Tom Prescott B‐6. Consider receiving the annual report on Welfare‐to‐Work Grant and 891‐7221 Lifeline funding (Report 13‐034). C. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Jim Pachan C‐1. Consider receiving report on milestones completed and current 891‐7215 recommissioning efforts for the Emeryville Hydrogen Fueling Station (Report 12‐171a). C‐2. Consider receiving report on the Federal Transit Administration’s John Haenftling 891‐4875 Charter Service Rules (Report 13‐030). Dennis Butler C‐3. Consider authorizing the General Manager to sign an assignment and 891‐4798 consent agreement between AC Transit, Architecture/VBN and STV Group for on‐call architectural and engineering services (Report 13‐ 045). Dennis Butler C‐4. Consider approving contract award to ATI Architects & Engineers 891‐4798 Services, Inc. of Danville, California, for design and construction phase services for the Photovoltaic Solar System at Division 6 in Hayward (Report 13‐035). 7. CONSENT CALENDAR ADDENDA The Board is requested to authorize as recommended from the committee meetings above.
8.
CLOSED SESSION/REPORT OUT The items for consideration are listed below and will be reported on by the Interim General Counsel as necessary at the end of the meeting.
8A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
Ken Scheidig 891‐7178
(Government Code Section 54956.9 (a)) John Aguilera v AC Transit, Case No. RG11584557, Claim No. 11‐10‐1872
8B. Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation
(Government Code Section 54956.9(b)) (Two Cases)
8C. Conference with Labor Negotiator(s)
(Government Code Section 54957.6) Negotiator: Board President Greg Harper Unrepresented Employee: Interim General Counsel Alameda‐Contra Costa Transit District
January 23, 2013 7
Page 7 of 8
8D. Conference with Labor Negotiators (Government Code Section 54957.6): Agency Designated Representative: David J. Armijo, General Manager Employee Organizations: Local 192, ATU Local 192, AFSCME, Local 3916; IBEW, Local 1245, Unrepresented Employees
8E. Public Employee Performance Evaluation
(Government Code Section 54957) Title: General Manager
9. 10. 11. 12.
GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT AGENDA PLANNING BOARD/STAFF COMMENTS (Government Code Section 54954.2)
David J. Armijo 891‐4793
ADJOURNMENT Next Meeting: February 13, 2013, at 5:00 p.m.
Alameda‐Contra Costa Transit District
January 23, 2013 8
Page 8 of 8
CONSENT CALENDAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING January 23, 2013 Agenda Items 4A‐4D
9
10
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING January 23, 2013
MINUTES Consider approving Board of Directors and Standing Committee minutes of October 24, 2012.
CURRENTLY NOT AVAILABLE WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AT THE TIME IT IS PROVIDED TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
11
This page intentionally blank
12
13
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING- Elsa Ortiz, President Wednesday, January 9, 2013 at 5:00p.m.
ACTION SUMMARY
The Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Board of Directors held a regular meeting on Wednesday, January 9, 2013. Interim General Counsel Kenneth C. Scheidig confirmed that all requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act (Govt. Code Sections 54950, et seq.) and the provisions of Board Policy 100, Section 4.8 regarding teleconferenced meetings were met in order for Director Peeples to participate in the meeting and advised that all votes must be taken by roll call vote. [An affidavit verifying that the teleconference location was accessible to persons with disabilities and that the agenda was posted at the teleconference location at least 72 hours prior to the
start of the first meeting is attached as Exhibit A.] The meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m. for the purpose of Closed Session. All Board members were present with the exception of Director Davis who arrived at 4:15 p.m. The District Secretary announced that the Board would convene in Closed Session to discuss Items SA-D as listed on the agenda. Closed Session concluded at 4:47 p.m. At 5:01 p.m., President Ortiz called the Board of Directors meeting to order. 1.
l ROLL CALL l' Present: Harper, Williams, Davis, Peeples, Young, Wallace, Ortiz Absent: None
i 2.
PUBLIC COMMENT Ed Nash, Vice President of ATU Local192, commented on the recent decision to forgo training new drivers on two pieces of frag work for up to 30 days, noting that new drivers were being put on the night board without adequate training. He said this resulted in a risk to ! • public safety, operator safety and a financial risk to the District. Yvonne Williams, President of ATU Local192, voiced concerns about placing new operators on the night board. She said the Union's position was that new operators would not gain the necessary experience, which would increase stress levels, distracted driving and accidents. She said that if the District didn't have any frag work available, the union was willing to work out alternatives such as doubling up on operators or sending operators to another division. , • Jane Kramer commented on transparency and accountability with regard to Directors' references to the public. She said the public is not to be dismissed, disdained or taken for granted, noting that policy is openly arrived at using credible data with knowledgeable
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
January 9, 2013 14
Page 2 of 12
public discussion. To become an effective Board requires an attitude of respect for the public.
3.
RECEIVED OR APPROVED AS INDICATED
CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: WALLACE/HARPER to approve the Consent Calendar as indicated. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:7: Wallace, Harper, Williams, Davis, Peeples, Young, Ortiz
3A. Consider approving Joint Board of Directors/Retirement Board minutes of September 19, 2012. 3B.! Consider approving Board of Directors and Standing Committee minutes of December 12, 2012. ,
I I
I
3C. i Consider receiving the Accessibility Advisory Committee minutes of November 14, 2012 (Report 13-001). 3D. Consider receiving Retirement Board minutes for November 9, 2012 (Report 13-002). 4.
! I !1
REGULAR CALENDAR
4A. 1 Consider authorizing the issuance of a Request for Proposals for APPROVED WITH 1 executive search services associated with the recruitment of a MODIFICATIONS General Counsel; determine the evaluation criteria for scoring the proposals; and approve the necessary budgetary adjustments to the Board of Directors' FY 2012-13 budget (Report 12-31S). , District Secretary Linda Nemeroff presented the staff report. Discussion ensued regarding amendments were offered to the scope of i services and the evaluation criteria.
I I
MOTION: WALLACE/HARPER to approve the following evaluation criteria: 40% Technical, 20% Past Performance, 40% Cost. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:7:Wallace, Harper, Williams, Davis, Young, Peeples, Ortiz
I MOTION:
ORTIZ/YOUNG to authorize the issuance of a Request for
i Proposals for executive search services associated with the recruitment of a General Counsel and approve the necessary budgetary adjustments to the Board of Directors' FY 2012-13 budget. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:7: Ortiz, Young, Wallace, Harper, Williams, Davis, Peeples
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
January 9, 2013
15
Page 3 of 12
4B. Consider approving the· creation of a special limited-purpose Executive Search Committee (Report 13-039).
APPROVED
There was no presentation of the staff report. MOTION: YOUNG/WILLIAMS to approve the creation of a special limited-purpose Executive Search Committee. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:7: Young, Williams, Harper, Wallace, Davis, Peeples, Ortiz 4C. Consider re-affirmation of regular meeting days and times and APPROVED WITH receive report on the holidays that coincide with regular Board of MODIFICATIONS Directors meetings, determine whether any additional holidays should be included in the holiday schedule, reschedule regular meetings as necessary, and set the dates for the meetings held during the months of August, November and December (Report 13-003).
[A revised meeting schedule (page 2 of the staff report) was distributed ! at the meeting for the Board's consideration.]
I District Secretary Linda Nemeroff presented the staff report noting that I there
were no conflicts between the District's holiday schedule and regular Board meeting schedule for 2013. Ms. Nemeroff further I presented a revised schedule proposing the following changes to the i meeting schedule: i Hold a Board Retreat on March 131h and cancel the regular meeting; 1 1 Move the July 24 h regular meeting to July 31' and cancel the Board Retreat j
;.i~
•
I"
~~~~~: o;,~eeting on August
2
1
14 h, schedule the regular meeting for
! MOTION: YOUNG/WALLACE to approve the meeting schedule set forth ! in the revised staff report. The motion carried by the following vote: i j
AYES:7: Young, Wallace, Harper, Williams, Davis, Peeples, Ortiz.
I RECESS TO STANDING COMMITTEES (as the Committee of the Whole) The Board meeting recessed to the Standing Committees at 5:31 p.m. ALL COMMITTEES ARE ADVISORY ONLY.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
January 9, 2013
16
Page 4 of 12
A.
ACTION SUMMARY
PLANNING COMMITTEE- H. E. Christian Peeples, Chairperson The Planning Committee convened at 5:31 p.m. All Committee members were present. Public Comment (for items not on the agenda) There was no public comment offered. Briefing/Action Items:
A-1.
Consider recommending receipt of an update on the status of the Transit Sustainability Project (TSP) Strategic Plan mandated by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (Report 13-014).
[A letter dated November 21, 1995 from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to the District's General Manager was submitted by Director Peeples for the Committee's information. A letter from a member of the public requesting that the Board direct staff to hold monthly Transbay Taskforce meetings was also distributed at the meeting.]
i
I
RECOMMEND RECEIPT
1 1
Director of Service Development and Planning Robert Del Rosario presented the staff report. Discussion ensued regarding the metrics outlined in the report. Director Harper pointed out that the cost per passenger metric could easily bet met by cutting out all of the low performing service and felt that this metric should only be looked at if service hours were not decreased. He went on further to say that the cost per service hour metric was the real problem. Public Comment: lindsay lmai, Urban Habitat, expressed concern about the TSP and suggested that the Board re-examine the funding sources within the Regional Transportation Plan because there was no way to meet any of the requirements without Measure Bl money. Ms. lmai was also concerned with labor efficiencies, service cuts and ridership, and fare increases as a means of meeting MTC's requirements. Joyce Roy commented that the TSP process was making Transbay riders nervous, noting that there was already a capacity problem on BART during commute hours. She expressed a need for a regional marketing effort to promote the Transbay service as a comfortable and convenient service. She also said that redundancy was needed for service across the bay. MOTION: ORTIZ/WILLIAMS to forward to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending receipt (7). The Planning Committee adjourned at 6:03 p.m.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
January 9, 2013 17
Page 5 of 12
B.
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE- Joel Young, Chairperson The Operations Committee convened at 6:03 p.m. All Committee members were present. 1
ACTION SUMMARY
Public Comment (for items not on the agenda) There was no public comment offered.
t
Briefing/ Action Items:
1
\
,!
B-1. ! Consider recommending receipt of a report on District operating I RECOMMEND ' procedures regarding baby strollers, carts and other large items !' RECEIPT [Requested by Director Wallace- 6/13/12] (Report 13-008). \ Transportation Planner Stephen Newhouse presented the staff report.
I I
i Public Comment Joyce Roy commented that the new buses should solve a lot of the ! capacity problems because they are designed with perimeter seating \ . I to accommodate strollers, carts and wheelchairs. Lindsay lmai, representing Urban Habitat and ACCE, commented that while, in general, ACCE was happy with the District's response to the stroller issue, she would like to see the operator's manual amended to allow parents to keep their child in a stroller and parked in the isle when it can't be accommodated in the wheelchair area.
:'· .· ' She said this was safer and reflected common practice. Andrea Bell, ACCE, asked if drivers would ask riders seated in the wheelchair area who are not in a wheelchair to move to make room for mothers with strollers or carts. She commented that mothers with strollers have been passed up by buses and that drivers have refused to let mothers with strollers use the wheelchair lift. Claire Haas, ACCE, thanked the staff for their work on this issue, i which was about families and children who need to use the buses to get to where they need to go, not cans or pets. She said that as long as the stroller is not blocking access, it should be allowed in other parts of the bus if the wheelchair space is not available. William Morrison agreed with Director Wallace's concerns regarding the abuse of strollers that don't contain children and the presence of large dogs on buses. !,.
•
l MOTION:
ORTIZ/WILLIAMS to forward to the Consent Calendar i Addenda recommending receipt (7).
B-2.
i l Consider
recommending receipt of the semi annual report on the ! Customer Service Call Center (Report 13-010). i
RECOMMEND RECEIPT
! Customer Services Manager Victoria Einhaus presented the staff j
report.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
January 9, 2013 18
Page 6 of 12
Public Comment: · William Morrison commented that he was astonished by the comment that answers were received from the call center in a matter of seconds, noting that it usually took minutes just to talk to an operator. He further stressed the need for a local call center. MOTION: ORTIZ/WALLACE to forward to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending receipt (7). B-3.
Consider recommending receipt of the semi annual report on Clipper outreach activities and usage (Report 13-011).
RECOMMEND RECEIPT
Customer Services Manager Victoria Einhaus presented the staff report. President Ortiz suggested that employee and dependent ID bus passes be put on Clipper to prevent abuse and to have the proper controls in place. General Manager David Armijo advised that staff would look into implementing this at some point in the future. MOTION: WALLACE/WILLIAMS to forward to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending receipt (7). B-4.
Consider recommending receipt of report regarding modifications to classification specifications approved by the General Manager in 2012 and the adoption of Resolution No. 13-001 abolishing classification specifications no longer in use (Report 13-012).
RECOMMEND APPROVAL
There was no presentation of the staff report. MOTION: HARPER/WILLIAMS to forward to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending approval (7).
B-5.
i1 Consider recommending approval of contract award to ATI Architects
& Engineers Services, Inc. of Danville, California, for design and construction phase services for the Photovoltaic Solar System at Division 6 in Hayward (Report 13-03S).
PULLED OFF THE AGENDA
The item was pulled off the agenda. B-6.
Consider recommending approval of amendments to Board Policy 180A pertaining to Miscellaneous Capital Expenses (Section v.) and direct the General Manager to implement the general amendments and the Board-selected optional amendments to Administrative Regulation 119 pertaining to tablet computer devices (Report 12· 269).
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
January 9, 2013 19
RECOMMEND APPROVAL
Page 7 of 12
{A revised version of Attachment 2 was provided at the meeting for the Committee's consideration.] District Secretary Linda Nemeroff presented the staff report. MOTION: ORTIZ/WILLIAMS to accept Access to Apps Option 1 to allow open access to the use of apps (7). MOTION: PEEPLES/WALLACE to accept Replacement Due to Loss or Theft Option 1. Director Harper commented that the tablet user should bear the cost for the value of the tablet at the time it is lost, noting that it is not the responsibility of the taxpayer to pay for the lost device. AMENDED MOTION: HARPER/ORTIZ to accept Replacement Due to Loss or Theft Option 2 amended, in part, as follows: "The user shall bear financial responsibility for the fair market value of a lost or stolen tablet computer device, unless there are extenuating circumstances, if it is more than nine months from normal replacement due to age." MOTION: WALLACE/ORTIZ to forward to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending approval of amendments to Board Policy 180A pertaining to Capital Expenses (Section V.), and direct the General Manager to implement the revised general amendments and optional amendments to allow open access to apps (option 1) and Replacement Due to Loss or Theft (Option 2 as amended) to Administrative Regulation 119 (7). The Operations Committee adjourned at 7:06 p.m. RECONVENE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING- Elsa Ortiz, President i The Board of Directors meeting reconvened at 7:06p.m. 1
5.
REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES District Secretary Linda Nemeroff reported that all Standing Committee agenda items had been referred to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending receipt, approval or adoption, with the exception of Operations Committee Item B-5 which was pulled off the agenda. In addition, it was also reported that Operations Committee Item B-6 was forwarded to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending approval of the Board Policy 180A amendments, the general amendments to Administrative Regulation 119, and optional amendments for open access to apps (Option 1) and replacement due to loss or theft (Option 2) as amended by the Committee.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
January 9, 2013
20
ACTION SUMMARY REPORT GIVEN
Page 8 of 12
6.
RECEIVED, APPROVED OR ADOPTED AS INDICATED
CONSENT CALENDAR ADDENDA MOTION: WALLACE/YOUNG to receive, approve or adopt the items referred to the Consent Calendar Addenda as indicated on the agenda with the exception of Operations Committee Item B-5, which was pulled off the agenda. Approved Item B-6 as recommended by the Operations Committee, including approval of the Board Policy 180A amendments, the general amendments to Administrative Regulation 119, and optional amendments for open access to apps (Option 1) and replacement due to loss or theft (Option 2). The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:7: Wallace, Young, Harper, Williams, Davis, Peeples, Ortiz The items brought before the Board were as follows:
A. A-1.
PLANNING COMMITTEE Consider receiving an update on the status of the Transit Sustainability Project Strategic Plan mandated by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (Report 13-014).
B. B-1.
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Consider receiving report on District operating procedures regarding baby strollers, carts and other large items [Requested by Director Wallace- 6/13/12] (Report 13-008). I Consider receiving the semi annual report on the Customer Service Call Center (Report 13-010). Consider receiving the semi annual report on Clipper outreach activities and usage (Report 13-011). Consider receiving report regarding modifications to classification . specifications approved by the General Manager in 2012 and the adoption of Resolution No. 13-001 abolishing classification specifications no longer in use (Report 13-012). l Consider approving amendments to Board Policy 180A pertaining to l I Miscellaneous Capital Expenses (Section V.) and direct the General I Manager to implement the general amendments and the Board- ! 1 selected optional amendments to Administrative Regulation 119 pertaining to tablet computer devices (Report 12-269).
B-2. B-3. B-4.
i l
B-6.
7.
SELECTION OF PRESIDENT/VICE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD REPORT FROM NOMINATING COMMITTEE Consider report from the Nominating Committee and election of 2013 Board President and Vice President.
REPORT GIVEN
President Ortiz turned the meeting over to Director Peeples, Chair of the Nominating Committee.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
January 9, 2013 21
Page 9 of 12
Director Peeples reported that the Nominating Committee unanimously recommended Director Harper to serve as President and Director Wallace serve as Vice President. No other nominations were offered. MOTION: PEEPLES/ORTIZ to select Director Harper to serve as President and Director Wallace to serve as Vice President for 2013. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:7: Peeples, Ortiz, Harper, Williams, Davis, Young, Wallace
CLOSED SESSION/REPORT OUT Interim General Counsel Kenneth Scheidig reported out on the following:
8.
REPORT GIVEN
MOTION: PEEPLES/ORTIZ to authorize a conflict waiver for Meyers Nave in two cases: one involving the City of El Cerrito and the other involving the City of San Leandro. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:G: Peeples, Ortiz, Harper, Williams, Young, Wallace ABSENT:l:Davis
SA.
Conference with legal Counsel- Existing litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9 (a))
City of El Cerrito, et a/. v. Robert R. Campbell, et a/., Case No. 34-2012-80001200, Sacramento Superior Court
Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential litigation
88.
j (Government Code Section 54956.9{b)) (Three Cases)
l SC. I Conference with labor Negotiators {Government Code Section 54957.6): Agency Designated Representative: David J. Armijo, General Manager Employee Organizations: ATU Local 192, AFSCME, Local 3916; IBEW, Local 1245, Unrepresented Employees
SD.
Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Government Code Section 54957) Title: General Manager, Interim General Counsel, District Secretary
9.
! AGENDA PLANNING I
!' Referred to Operations: i
1 • President Ortiz requested a report explaining AC Transit's hiring practices (direct hire, competitive recruitment, temporary employees, grant funded employees) and the benefits associated Alameda·Contra Costa Transit District
January 9, 2013 22
Page 10 of 12
with each category. In addition, whether temporary or limited term employees become vested upon hiring and what happens when employees change from one category to another. (Director Peeples concurred) Director Wallace requested more buses during the morning commute because of overcrowding. (Director Young concurred) Director Davis requested that the Board consider amending Board Policy 180A (Travel and Meeting Expense Reimbursements for Directors and Board Officers) with regard to the mileage policy for attendance at meetings at the General Offices. (Director Harper concurred) Director Peeples requested that the General Manager provide for monthly meetings oft he Transbay Taskforce while the modifications to Transbay service are being considered as part of the Transit Sustainability Study. (President Ortiz concurred) Referred to Next Board Meeting: President Ortiz requested that the Board repeal Resolution 12-022 which delegated from the General Manager to the General Counsel and District Secretary the authority to hire and fire personnel in their departments. Referred to the Finance and Audit Committee: Director Davis requested that the Board consider rescinding the resolution which voluntarily reduced the Board's compensation by 5%. (Wallace concurred) 10.
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT General Manager David Armijo reported on the following: • Upcoming items for the Board Retreat scheduled for March 13, 2013, including: fare policy, outsourcing and contracting, discussion of audit findings.
11.
BOARD/STAFF COMMENTS Members of the Board commented on meetings and events attended since the last meeting.
12.
ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board of Directors, the meeting was adjourned at 7:23p.m. The next meeting of the Board of Directors is scheduled for Wednesday, January 23, 2013.
Alameda·Contra Costa Transit District
January 9, 2013
23
INFORMATION ONLY
Page 11 of 12
Respectfully submitted,
~ District Secretary
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
January 9, 2013
24
Page 12 of 12
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-015 January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF
REPORT
TO:
AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) Minutes of December 11, 2012
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider receiving the Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) minutes of December 11, 2012. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Minutes for December 11, 2012 were approved by the Accessibility Advisory Committee on January 8, 2013. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: The Accessibility Advisory Committee was established by the Board of Directors in 1991 to review, comment and advise the Board of Directors and District staff regarding the implementation and enhancement of planning programs and services for seniors and people with disabilities. The AAC consists of 14 members with two members being appointed by each of the seven elected members of the District's Board of Directors. Committee members serve a one year term. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: This report is being provided to inform the Board of the activities of the Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC). ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: This report does not recommend an action.
25
Report No. 13-015 Page 2 of 2
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: GM Memo No. 12-073, dated March 28, 2012, Accessibility Advisory Committee Bylaws GM Memo No. 10-221, dated October 13, 2010, Adopted Resolution No. 10-047 Repealing all Prior Resolutions Concerning the Establishment of the Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) and Board Policy No. 504.
ATTACHMENTS: 1: AAC Minutes for December 11, 2012
Department Head Approval:
James Pachan, Chief Operating Officer
Reviewed by:
Robert del Rosario, Director of Service Development Mallory Nestor-Brush, Accessible Services Manager Kim Huffman, Accessible Services Specialist Tammy Kyllo, Administrative Coordinator
Prepared by:
26
Staff Report 13-015 Attachment 1 AAC Minutes
December 11, 2012
MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE AC TRANSIT ACCESSIBILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AAC) DECEMBER 11, 2012 Meeting came to order at 1:07 p.m. 1. Roll Call and Introduction of Guests
AAC members present: Janet Abelson Shirley Cressey Pam Fadem, Chair Jim Gonsalves James Robson Marina Villena
Scott Blanks, Vice Chair Margarita Diaz Steve Fort Don Queen Hector Varela Hale Zukas
AAC members absent: Lisa Cushman (excused) Staff:
Mallory Nestor-Brush, Accessible Services Manager Kim Huffman, Accessible Services Specialist Tammy Kyllo, Administrative Coordinator H.E. Christian Peeples, Board of Directors- via videoconference Stuart Hoffman, Technical Services Manager Beverley Greene, Director of Legislative Affairs & Community Relations Mitra Moheb, BRT Project Engineer David Wilkins, Director ofBRT
Guests:
Stephen Beard, Mayor's Commission on Persons with Disabilities Donna Murphy, Mayor's Commission on Aging Jerry Grace Sheila Gunn Cushman
2. Order of Agenda The order of the agenda was approved.
27
3. Approval of November Minutes MOTION: Gonsalves/Abelson approved the November 14, 2012 AAC meeting minutes. 9 Yeas. 2 Abstentions. 4. Discussion of New Bus Procurement - Board Response to AAC Letter and Technical Update Stuart Hoffman, Technical Services Manager reported that the District Technical Services staff was able to address several suggestions of the AAC to improve access onto the new buses. A few of the suggestions conflicted with suggestions from other customers or could not be accommodated by the bus manufacturer. However, Technical Services staff believes that the new buses, with the modifications, will satisfactorily meet the needs of the District entire customer base. A summary of the changes are as follows: • The buses will be equipped with a I :4 ramp to eliminate the slope inside of the bus and to allow easier access into the bus. • The manufacturer will move one center facing seat from the front of the wheelchair securement area to the area behind the wheelchair securement area, which will reduce the number of seats impacted with two wheelchairs secured in the bus. • The seat flip up lever will be moved to the forward section of the seat. • The seat manufacturer has changed the locking mechanism for the flip up seats so that the seats can flip up without pulling the lever below the seat. • The manufacturer will be able to provide additional isle width by moving both the wheelchair securement seats and the center facing seats closer to the wall, while still providing a safe distance from the wall to prevent injuries. • The seat manufacturer will move the wheelchair stop request button rearward (away from driver) for easier accessibility on the curb side. • Additional yellow edging will be added to the perimeter of the step in the rear ofthe coach to increase visibility. • Operator controlled power rear doors will replace the push type rear doors. Stuart Hoffman also commented that the fare box that has been ordered is the shortest one available and the step that the fare box sits on also allows the driver to get into his/her seat. Chair Fadem commented that the steps in the back of the bus are too steep and handrails are needed to go up/down the steps. With a majority of the seats being at the top of those steps, this is a safety issue for all bus riders. The Committee also commented that the shoulder straps in the wheelchair securement area are too high and hits the passenger's neck. Scott Blanks, Vice Chair, requested bus specs in writing for the AAC to review. Public Comment- Sheila Gunn-Cushman stated that pull cords and spring loaded seats are too hard for her to use because she is vision impaired.
28
5. BRT Overview from the City of Oakland Mayor's Commission on Persons with Disabilities (MCPD) Stephen Beard, MCPD, Chair, reported that the commission received a BRT presentation in May 2012. During that meeting, the Committee had concerns about BRT and the commission passed a motion that eventually lead to the ordinance language that states a joint AC Transit Accessibility Advisory Committee I City of Oakland Access Advisory Committee will review and provide comment on all aspects of the project design and delivery. Stephen requested that a sub-committee of AAC members to be a part of that group and discussion.
Chair Fadem requested the minutes of the May MCPD meeting be sent to the AAC Members. MOTION: Abelson/Blanks: Develop a subcommittee of three people to work with the City of Oakland Mayor's Commission on Disabilities, one representing the vision impaired, one representing wheelchair users, and one representing seniors. 9 Yeas, No abstentions. Motion passes unanimous. Subcommittee members are Scott Blanks, Hale Zukas and Jim Robson. 6. BRT Update (AC Transit Staff) Beverly Green, Director of Legislative Affairs & Community Relations, gave an overview of the BRT project. The BRT project is an approximately $175M investment that will go from down town Oakland at around the 201h street BART station to the San Leandro BART station. The project will provide jobs before and during operation, and will decrease greenhouse gases by using environmentally friendly diesel-electric hybrid busses. The preliminary engineering is underway and the project is expected to meet the 35% milestone by the 3'd week of February 2013. There are 34 stations throughout the corridor, spacing every 1/3 mile, with coaches every 5 minutes. The coaches will be dual door with 2 doors on one side and 3 on the other. These will be New Flyer coaches and are part of the Buy America Program.
David Wilkins, Director of BRT, stated that there are over 2 dozen BRT systems through the USA but none are considered true BRT; rather BRT hybrids. Diaz voiced concerns regarding wheelchair securements with buses coming every 5 minutes and how the wheelchairs are going to be secured and still stay on schedule. Wilkins responded that they are looking at various securement options that are safe and quick. Fort asked is there are going to be tactile markings on the sidewalk for center lane boarding. Wilkins replied that all stations include tactile markings and other accessibility systems on the buses as well. Chair Fadem requested that the AAC receives specs in text format and floor plans for the new bus models.
29
Zukas asked for the criteria for determining placement of the stations including curb side stations versus median stations. Mitra Moheb, BRT Project Manager, stated that to have a bus only lane, there needed to be center stations. There were some limitations that did cause there to be a few curb side boarding stops. Cushman also voiced concerns regarding BRT and crossing the street to get to the stations because she is vision impaired and has been hit by a car once before. Director Peeples added that a right hand dedicated right of way would not have worked because cars stop and have to make right hand turns. Wilkins stated the bridge plates will automatically deploy at every stop regardless if there is a wheelchair boarding. Greene stated that construction will begin in 2014, and revenue operations will begin in 2016. The Fleet procurement plan calls for 104 buses to replace old buses for the next 2-3 years and 27 are dedicated to BRT. 7. Chair's Report Chair Fadem would like more organizing and outreach for the new bus procurement to keep everyone aware of changes and additions to the bus fleet. 8. Board Liaison Report Director Peeples reported that: • The pension reform SB340 to pass Proposition 30 takes effect on January 1st. 13C states this is illegal and federal funds may be blocked for a couple of months while the labor unions and the state try to resolve the issue. • There is a Board meeting on December 12, 2012, which includes the RFP for the BRT buses, the Central and South County reschedule solicitation of the Next Bus replacement, and authorization to release the paratransit Broker RFP. 9. Brown Act and AB1234 (Ethics) This item was not discussed due to time constraints. 10. Review of Lift/Ramp Road Call Report Chair Fadem noted that there are six road calls that are operator error. 11. Review of MCI Fleet Lift Report and Wheelchair Lift Cycling Report - MCI (6000 Series) Chair Fadem voiced concerns about the days that lift cycling dropped below 90%. 12. Service Review Advisory Committee (SRAC) Report None. 13. ACTC PAPCO Report None.
30
14. Public Comments Sheela Gunn-Cushman commented that the BART/Bus connections need to be improved. Director Peeples responded that she should call her issue into customer service so it can be entered into the database and assigned to the appropriate department. 15. Transit Correspondence This is an informational item for the committee. 16. Member Communications and Announcements Gonsalves would like a memo sent to the drivers stating they should not pass people at the bus stops, especially now that winter is here. Drivers need to realize they are obligated to pick people up. Gonsalves stated that majority of the drivers are dedicated to ensure people are being picked up.
Fort reported that buses are passing up other buses without checking to see if someone at the stop needs the other bus. Blanks reported that Transbay buses do not stop at the stop. The buses need to stop and announce which bus it is, especially for those who are visually impaired. Chair Fadem thanked the Committee and Accessible Services staff for all of their hard work and service and wishes everyone a happy holiday. 17. Staff Communications and Announcements None. 18. Set Next Agenda & Meeting Date The next AAC Meeting will be held Tuesday, January 8, 2013 at I :00 pm on the 2nd floor of 1600 Franklin Street, Oakland. Agenda items include Discussion of Outreach Efforts and Discussion of How to Submit Complaints and Commendations. 19. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 4:17pm.
31
This page intentionally blank
32
Staff Report 13-021 Approved Minutes Special Meeting of the AC TRANSIT RETIREMENT BOARD December 13, 2012
ROLLCALL
Chair Lewis called the meeting to order at 8:32AM Members Present: Lewis Clinton, John Rennels, Vice Chair Yvonne Williams, and Chair Jeffrey Lewis -4 Members Absent at Roll Call: Joyce Willis-- I Members Absent: None Also Present: Hugo Wildmann, Retirement System Manager; Adelle Foley, Retirement System Administrator; Russell Richeda, Legal Counsel; H.E. Christian Peeples, District Board Liaison, by Skype; Ken Scheidig, Interim AC Transit General Counsel; Bob McCrory, EFI, by phone; Tom Hickey, Foley & Lardner by phone; Carolyn Smith NEPC. PUBLIC COMMENTS
None CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: RENNELS/WILLIAMS to adopt the Consent Calendar.
Ayes: Noes: Abstain: Absent:
Members Clinton, and Rennels, Vice Chair Williams, and Chair Lewis -- 4 None None Member Willis -- 1
APPROVED A. Approval of Minutes for November 9, 2012.
APPROVED B. Approval ofFinancials for October 2012 APPROVED C. Approval oflnvoices in the Amount of $87,590.25
APPROVED D. Approval of Retirements for January 2013:
33
AC Transit Retirement Board December 13, 2012 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Joanye Cornelius Harvey Porter James Quarante Anthony Rogers Ronnie Versher Connie Willis Rudolph Lewis Betty Walton
#30317 #40704 #80607 #31039 #30964 #30501 #606 -Term Vested #30440- Term Vested
APPROVED REGULAR CALENDAR
(Several Agenda Items were taken out of order to ensure completion of AB 1234 training to accommodate outside presenters, and to enable non-Board members to join in the discussion of selected items.) W. AB 1234 Training Counsel Richeda completed the required two hours of AB 1234 training, covering the issue of gifts received by Board members. (Member Willis was excused from this agenda item because this training was included in the Principles for Trustees course which she attended at Stanford in March 2012. She joined the meeting at this point.) E. Approval of Retirements for October/November 2012: 1. Yvonne Allen
#31558
Recommendation: To approve Yvonne Allen, Badge #31558, for a Service Retirement effective December 1, 2012. 2. Deborah Johnson
#81472
Recommendation: To approve Deborah Johnson, Badge #81472, for a Service Retirement effective January 1, 2013. Her monthly benefit was approved with the understanding that the amount could change if additional information and/or a Board decision on pensionable earnings for Union Officers increases or decreases her pensionable earnings. 3. Lineol Stubbs
#30606
Recommendation: To approve Lineol Stubbs, Badge #30606, for a Service Retirement effective December 1, 2012.
2 34
AC Transit Retirement Board December 13, 2012 4. Benjamin Walker, Jr. #2128 Recommendation: To approve Benjamin Walker, Badge #2128, for a Service Retirement effective January I, 2013. His monthly benefit was approved with the understanding that the amount could change if additional information and/or a Board decision on pensionable earnings for Union Officers increases or decreases his pensionable earning. 5. James Foster
#822 -Term Vested
Recommendation: To approve James Foster, Badge #822, for a Term Vested Retirement effective December I, 20 12. 6. Jude Onwuemeka
#30970 -Term Vested
Recommendation: To approve Jude Onwuemeka, Badge #30970, for a Term Vested Retirement effective January I, 2013. Approval should be contingent upon completion of required paperwork before the end of December. MOTION: RENNELS/WILLIAMS to approve staff recommendations for retirements I through 6 under Agenda Item E. (5-0-0-0) The Board congratulated retiree James Quarante for 43 years of service, retiree Benjamin Walker for 40 years of service, retiree Deborah Johnson for 33 years of service, retiree Joanye Cornelius for 28 years of service, and retiree Connie Willis for 27 years of service. F. Investment Performance and Asset Allocation Hugo reported that the AC Transit portfolio was up about 12 percent since the beginning of2012, and would end the year above the assumed 7.5% return barring any major declines in the markets. Carolyn mentioned that Dodge & Cox had done very well in 2012 after underperforming their benchmark a year ago. Sands, which can be expected to show significant swings, rose 5Yz% during November. Capital Guardian's performance was strong, while Emerging Markets managers lagged their benchmark. Carolyn noted that the fixed income allocation benefited the AC Transit portfolio with Loomis and PIMCO outperforming their benchmarks. The domestic equity allocation also enhanced the fund's performance. The five-year results still suffer from the losses of2008 and the flat results of 20 II. Over I 0 years the plan's portfolio rose at an annual rate of 7%. Responding to a question about the fiscal cliff, Carolyn told the Board that NEPC is finalizing its capital market outlook. She added that as long-term investors, the Board would not be prudent to hedge during the next few weeks. H. Real Estate Agreement and Side Letter I. Authorization to Sign Documents and Funds UBS Trumbull Real Estate Investment
3 35
AC Transit Retirement Board December 13, 2012
Hugo referred to the memorandum from Counsel Richeda dated December 10, 2012 regarding Final Consideration of Board Investment in UBS (US) Trumbull Property Fund LP, included in the Board Package. Hugo recalled that in 2011 the Board had approved a real estate investment in UBS. At that time there was a queue, but now the Trumbull Property Fund has notified him that our funds should be transferred on or before January 2, 2013. The Board had authorized hiring Tom Hickey to consult on the UBS contract and side letters. Hugo told the Board that he had talked with Counsel Richeda and Tom Hickey. They recommended that the Board move forward with the UBS investment, with the understanding that we will be operating under the rules in place for similar investments. He mentioned that the documents have a lot of protections for the investment manager and that if we want to invest with an institutional quality real-estate manager we will need to sign an agreement very similar or identical to the UBS agreement. Hugo added that a side letter was being completed. In his memorandum, Counsel Richeda also concluded that the adverse elements in the UBS documents "do not appear sufficiently significant to recommend against participation in the Fund." Chair Lewis expressed concern regarding two issues: no audit firm is named; and the limit of the Retirement System's liability. Counsel Richeda said that the side letter would address the auditor, and he would check on whether the liability of the Retirement System was limited. Hugo distributed an article from bloomberg.com regarding potential fines facing UBS for altering submissions used to set benchmarks such as Libor rates. The Board discussed the possible impact of this development on the decision to invest in UBS. There was agreement that the Libor questions involved a different area of UBS, legally isolated from the real estate investment. The Board asked Counsel Richeda and Hugo to call Tom Hickey regarding the questions of the auditor and the limit of the Retirement System's liability. Chair Lewis called a recess at 9:33 AM The Board reconvened a 9:44AM (Tom Hickey joined the meeting at this point by phone.) Responding to Board questions, Tom replied that the auditors would be addressed in the side letter, and would be a nationally-recognized firm. With regard to Retirement System liability he said that exposure would not exceed the amount ofthe investment. He cited limitation of indemnification under the Securities Act. The first indemnification would be against insurance policies and then each investor would be exposed up to their capital commitment. (Tom Hickey left the meeting at this point.) MOTION: RENNELS/WILLIAMS to go ahead with the investment in UBS subject to Counsel Richeda's review of the side letter and his conclusion that it satisfies the concerns expressed by the 4 36
AC Transit Retirement Board December 13,2012 Board. To authorize Hugo to sign the the documents and fund the investment in UBS Trumbull. 50-0-0 (AC Transit Interim General Counsel Ken Scheidig joined the discussion of Agenda Items L through N.) (Bob McCrory of EFI joined the discussion of Agenda Items L through N by phone.) L. AB 340 Plan Amendment N. AB 340 Implementation and Board Policy 170
Hugo introduced the discussion of AB 340 by telling the Board that the situation was fluid, changing daily, as we are faced with implementation of a poorly-drafted piece of legislation in a short period of time. The bill was signed in September. The District sent a draft amendment to the bargaining parties in November. The unions responded that they did not have enough time to review the amendment and then, ATU raised the question of the requirement for collective bargaining. Interim General Counsel Ken Scheidig told the Board that the District will release an actuarial study on the impact of the AB 340 changes. He noted that the District Board expects to give the unions 30 days to comment and negotiate, so the earliest that the District Board could act on the amendment would be January 23. Accordingly the amendment would be "13-A-l." Chair Lewis stressed that the Retirement Board does not approve Plan amendments. Rather its role involves reviewing the amendment to ensure that implementation is feasible and there are no legal issues. Hugo added that this role in this case involves determining the normal cost. Bob commented that he thought the Retirement Board could object if there were a question of an amendment's legality, or if they believed that it threatened the actuarial soundness of the Plan. Referring to the letter dated December 4, 2012 from ATU General Counsel Robert Molosky to Ken Scheidig, included in the Board Package, Chair Lewis noted that Mr. Molosky argues that the proposed amendment jeopardizes federal funding because it violates protection of collective bargaining under section l3(c) of the Federal Transportation Act as well as section 10.1 of the Retirement Plan. Ken Scheidig responded that the Department of Labor had responded to other public systems specifying a 30-day period for bargaining. Vice Chair Williams reported that the unions were working with Governor Brown regarding amendments, and the ATU contract expires June 30, 2013. 0. Schedule Special Board Meeting to Discuss AB 340 Plan Amendment
Chair Lewis observed that there did not appear to be a need to schedule a special Retirement Board meeting, since the January meeting would be before the January 23 District Board meeting. M. Normal Cost for AB 340 Bob referred to his letter dated December 13, 2013, regarding PEPRA Plan revisions and costs, included in the Board Package. (AB 340 is also called "PEPRA. ") The letter summarizes the effects of PEPRA on the Plan and provides an estimate of the contributions required of those 5 37
AC Transit Retirement Board December 13, 2012 joining the Plan in 2013 and thereafter. PEPRA specifies that these members contribute one half of the normal cost of the revised plan, Bob explained that, absent experience with new plan members, the estimates of required contributions would have to be based on experience with current employees. Bob raised two questions: what assumptions should we make pertaining to the employees who will be hired after 1/1/13 and be in the AB 340 Plan; and how to handle the requirement that the contribution rate be rounded to the nearest 114%. The first question stems from the fact that employees hired during the last five years have been older than the Plan population as a whole, when they joined AC Transit. As a result, the projected normal cost would be higher than if Bob assumed the new employees would have an average age at hire of all current plan participants. The normal cost would be -- 12.71% using the age of the most recent hires as opposed to 10.96% for the population as a whole. Bob recommended that the Board use the percentage calculated for employees hired during the last five years, under the assumption that those hired under PEPRA would be similar to more recent hires. Member Clinton told the Board that during 2012 the average age of hires had been lower. Chair Lewis wondered how to incorporate that decrease into these estimates. He suggested incorporating 2012 into a new 5-year average. He stressed the importance of getting the rate as accurate as possible. Bob pointed out that this issue will continue to come up during the next few years. Hugo suggested asking Human Resources staff to provide the 2012 figures to Bob, who could add a column for 2012. The Board agreed with this approach. The question of rounding merits Board attention because the unrounded contribution rate, using hires in the last five years, would be 6.335%, which becomes 6.25% rounded to the nearest 1/4%. Use of 6.25% would mean that the employees would be paying slightly less than 1/2 of the normal cost (12.71%). The Board agreed with the approach that would compute the cost and then round even ifthis resulted in the employee contributing slightly less than 50% of the normal cost. (Bob McCrory left the meeting at this point.) Hugo noted that several items pertaining to the amendment are unresolved and requested guidance from the Board on what to tell employees who request information. He mentioned that in many cases the answer he would provide would be that the issue is still open and has not been resolved. The Board agreed with this approach. In response to a question, Ken Scheidig told the Board that the payment of interest on employee contributions is still open for discussions with the unions. P. Vendor to Provide Services to Track the Employee Contribution Required in AB Hugo distributed his memorandum dated December 12, 2012 regarding a vendor to track employee contributions. He pointed out that it is hard to talk to a potential service provider in view of the remaining uncertainties. He suggested that the District could begin tracking the initial contributions
6 38
AC Transit Retirement Board December 13, 2012 until these matters are decided. Later, we could make a decision on hiring Pensys, the outside service provider, which has quoted a reasonable price and has received good references K. Calendar for 2013 Board Meetings
Hugo referred to the Proposed Schedule for 2013 Board Meetings, included in the Board Package. The Board agreed to hold the January meeting on January 14,2013 from 9AM to I PM. The Board also eliminated the possible January 7, 2013 special meeting for discussion of AB 340 from the schedule. G. Private Debt/Opportunistic Credit Allocation Hugo reminded the Board that presentations on opportunistic credit such as global allocation assets, and real estate, had resulted in addition of those asset classes to the AC Transit portfolio. Recently, NEPC had provided educational information on private debt, including the more complicated Hedge Fund structure for this investment class. Carolyn referred to her memorandum dated December 6, 2012 on private debt/opportunistic credit allocation, included in the Board Package. She stressed that the rationale for including private debt was the attractive risk and return characteristics and the diversification benefits as displayed in the charts on return/standard deviation and correlations. Hugo pointed out that in a financial crisis when diversification is especially important, correlations usually increase. She noted that private debt is relatively illiquid. As a result, corporate plans are less interested in this asset class, although foundations and public retirement funds are still interested due to their long-term perspective. A chart of risk and return showed Senior Private Loans, Whole Loans, Mezzanine Loans and stressed/distressed assets increasing their relative return compared with other assets, with little change in risk over the four-year period. Carolyn agreed to provide examples of funds and companies represented by the high risk/return on assets. Carolyn described possible choices such as Beach Point, EleganTree and Tricadia. She suggested selecting more than one fund for this 5% allocation to private debt. Board Members expressed the need for increased understanding of these assets. Carolyn agreed that these are complicated assets, requiring more due diligence before an investor is comfortable. The Board discussed their interest in private credit, noting the potential return as well as the risk. Carolyn said that if the Board is interested in investing in EleganTree it should let the fund know because the opportunity could close soon. She believed that Orchard probably would provide more information rather than locking us out. If they will wait until February 15, she suggested talking to Orchard by phone in January, and then asking Tom Hickey to analyze the documents.
7 39
AC Transit Retirement Board December 13, 2012 With regard to the other alternatives Chair Lewis suggested that NEPC provide information on senior private loans. Carolyn told the Board that NEPC's analysis might not be available until March. (Member Clinton left the meeting at this point.) I.
Authorization to Sign Documents and Funds UBS Trumbull Real Estate Investment (Continued) The amount of the investment in UBS was discussed. Hugo discussed our real-estate allocation and the impact of a sharp stock market decline on the overall portfolio. When equity markets decline sharply the percentage of real estate in the portfolio usually increases as a result of real-estate being a fairly stable asset class. When this occurs pension funds cannot quickly sell real estate assets and this portion of the portfolio is overallocated. Hugo mentioned that if we informed JP Morgan that we wanted to invest funds with them it would take several quarters for these funds to be invested. The Board discussed the situation and decided to invest $9.5 million with UBS.
MOTION: RENNELS/WILLIAMS to invest $9.5 million in UCB Trumbull. 4-0-0-1.
J. NEPC Work Plan for 2013 Carolyn told the Board that NEPC could present the capital market discussion in January, but the paperwork would not be available much in advance of the meeting. During January Orchard will be on the agenda to discuss EleganTree, and the other private debt options will be discussed in February or March. Q. Quarterly Retirement Board Report to the District Board for February Hugo told the Board that they would receive the draft report with preliminary numbers in January. The report is due in February. R. Opinion of General Counsel of AC Transit on Ordinance #I 0 Pertaining to ATU Appointments to the Retirement Board S. Update on Calculation of Pension Benefit for Former Union Officer James Gardner Hugo distributed his memorandum dated December 6, 2012 regarding appointments to the Retirement Bard for the Gardner issue. In it he told the Board that Interim General Counsel Ken Scheidig would provide the Board with information in January. T. Referral of Investment Manager Nothing to Report. U. Report on ATU Workshop
8 40
AC Transit Retirement Board December 13,2012 Vice Chair Williams thanked Member Willis for her hard work putting togther the food for the workshop in a very cost-effective manner. V. Website Hugo said that he would discuss this question with the AC Transit General Manager and report back in February. X. Retirement System Manager Report: I. Retirement Board Recruitment Hugo referred to the memorandum from AC Transit District Secretary Linda Nemeroff to the District Board regarding recruitment for the AC Transit Retirement Board. Director Peeples told the Board that the District Board had voted to give preference to applicants from the five Bay Area counties. 2. Attendance at the CALAPRS Board Leadership Institute at UCLA January 29-31 ''. Member Rennels expressed an interest in attending. MOTION: WILLIS/WILLIAMS to approve Member Rennels to attend the CALAPRS Board Leadership Institute. (4-0-0-1)
3. CALAPRS GAin San Francisco, March 3-5. The Board agreed that Board Members and Staff could attend the General Assembly, but the Retirement System would not pay for overnight lodging. Y
(CLOSED SESSION) I) Matters Relating to Personnel: Disability Applicants' and Disability Retirees' Medical Records (Government Code Section 54957; 65 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 412 (1982) a. Ansar Muhammad- Occupational Disability b. Mark Naylor - Total and Permanent Disability c. Cathy Lewis -- Total and Permanent Disability 2) Matters Relating to Pending or Threatened Litigation a. Conference with Legal Counsel- (Government Code Section 54956.9(a)): I) Diana Starnes - Appeal of Denial of Total and Permanent Disability Application
Z (RESUME OPEN SESSION) I) Report and/or Action on Closed Session There were no actions to report. PENDING ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION
9 41
AC Transit Retirement Board December 13,2012 None STAFF COMMENTS
None RETIREMENT BOARD COMMENTS None ATTORNEYS' REPORT
None ADJOURNMENT MOTION: WILLIAMS/WILLIS to adjourn. (4-0-0-1)
The Board adjourned its meeting at I :05 P.M.
10 42
REGULAR CALENDAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING January 23, 2013 Agenda Items 5A‐5I
43
44
Report No: Meeting Date:
12-314(a) January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Adopt Resolution No. 13-006 Amending the AC Transit District Employees' Retirement Plan to Comply with Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013, also known as Assembly Bill 340
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Adopt Resolution No. 13-006 Approving Amendment 13-A-16 to the AC Transit District Employees' Retirement Plan to Comply with Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013 Also Known As Assembly Bill AB340. (Attachment 1) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA) was signed by the Governor on September 12, 2012, and is effective January 1, 2013. Most elements of the statewide pension reforms are applicable only to employees who become members of the pension plan on or after the effective date. The proposed Amendment 13-A-16 (Plan Amendment) incorporates the reforms contained in PEPRA into the District's pension plan (Attachment 2). Two of the three District unions have agreed with the proposed amendment to the pension plan. ATU Local192 has not specifically commented on the proposed amendment but maintains that PEPRA conflicts with federal 13(c) bargaining rights protections and cannot be applied to transit employees, including the District's employees. The District complied with the actuarial report requirements of California Government Code Section 7507 and has received no public comment on the actuarial report. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: Initially the reforms contained in PEPRA will have a limited fiscal impact on the District but over time will result in significant savings to the District. The estimated annual savings 10 years out is $7.12 million, 20 years out is $14.61 million, and 30 years out is $22.12 million, as determined by the District's actuary (see Attachment 3).
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: On September 12, 2012, the Governor signed into law the PEPRA, which adopted statewide public pension reforms effective January 1, 2013. Section 7522.10(a) requires that, "On or after January 1, 2013, each public retirement system shall modify its plan or plans to comply with the requirements of this section for each public employer that participates in the system." 45
Report No. 12-314(a) Page 2 of 4 While some of the changes in the law affect all employees most of the changes affect only employees who become members of the pension plan on or after January 1, 2013. The reforms applicable to new members of the pension plan include: mandatory employee contributions, lower retirement formula, a cap on pensionable compensation, and restrictions on what income can be counted for pension purposes (e.g. overtime is not included). The reforms applicable to all members of the pension plan include: implementing limitations on reemployment after retirement, eliminating retroactive pension benefit increases by limiting any pension improvements to future service, and creating a forfeiture of pension benefits for employees with work related felony convictions. In accordance with Board Policy No. 170, the Plan amendment was submitted to the District's retirement counsel to draft the amendment language, it was submitted to the Retirement Plan Manager and Retirement Board counsel for review and comment as well as the three District unions: AFSCME Local3916; IBEW Local1245, and ATU Local192. After receipt of comments from these parties a revised amendment was submitted to the Retirement Board for comment. AFSCME Local 3916 and IBEW Local 1245 both provided comments on the proposed Amendments and have accepted the final version of Amendment 13-A-16. ATU Local 192 did not provide any comments on the proposed amendment and has not agreed with the proposed amendment. ATU-International has taken the position that PEPRA conflicts with federal 13(c) bargaining rights protections for transit employees and therefore should not be applied to the transit industry in California. ATU Local 192 has made the same objection with respect to the applicability of PEPRA to the District's employees. ATU International and ATU Local 192 have both indicated that if PEPRA is implemented they will file objections with the federal Department of Labor ("DOL") requesting that the DOL withhold the necessary 13(c) certification for the release of federal grant funding to transit properties in California generally and to the District specifically. The DOL has not made a final determination on the ATU International objections made with respect to three other California transit properties (Monterey-Salinas Transit, Orange County Transportation Authority, and Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority) but requested that the parties engage in 30 days of negotiations with respect to the applicability of PEPRA to those properties. In one case (Monterey-Salinas Transit) federal certification was granted as a result ofthis process. The District has twice offered to meet and confer with ATU Local192 with respect to PEPRA but to date ATU Local192 has not accepted that offer. In a letter dated October 12, 2012, ATU International wrote to the California Transit Association ("CTA"), with copies to 16 California transit agencies including AC Transit, detailing its concerns with PEPRA and inviting the CTA to work with ATU International on a "solution". The solution ATU International is seeking appears to be a legislative exclusion from PEPRA for transit
46
Report No. 12-314(a) Page 3 of 4 properties in California. As of the date of this report the District is not aware of any legislative action to adopt the exclusion sought by ATU International. The Retirement Board met on January 14, 2013 and discussed the proposed Plan Amendment. It directed its counsel to provide comments to the District Board and those comments were received on January 16, 2013. Staff is evaluating the comments to determine if any revisions to the proposed Plan Amendment are required. The Retirement Board requested in its letter that the District Board postpone its decision to February 13, 2013 in order to provide additional time for the Retirement Board to review and comment on the proposed Plan Amendment. Government Code Section 7507 requires an agency, before considering an amendment to a retirement plan, to have an actuarial report prepared of the fiscal impacts of the amendment and to make the report available for public review and comment for at least two weeks in advance of the meeting at which the amendment will be considered. The District's actuarial consultant (BuckConsultants) prepared the necessary report and there have been two public review periods - December 13, 2012 to January 2, 2013 and January 12, 2013 to January 21, 2013. To date, there have been no comments. If any comments are received by January 21, the Board will be advised at your meeting. An issue has arisen as to the need to proceed with the adoption of the proposed Plan Amendment at this Board meeting, or by the meeting on February 13, 2013, or whether a decision can be delayed pending the passage of state legislation, as discussed earlier in this Staff Report. PEPRA is a duly enacted state law, effective as of January 1, 2013. There are a number of civil and criminal actions that are possible if the District failed to comply with PEPRA. For example, PEPRA requires employee contributions toward the cost of the pension benefit for employees hired on or after January 1, 2013. The willful omission to transfer or refusal to pay over the legally required employee contributions to the Pension Plan may be a violation of Penal Code Section 424 and/or 425, a felony and grounds for disqualification from holding any public office in the state. However, proceeding at this Board meeting or the February 13th meeting is unlikely to be considered a "willful" action, since the Board is still in the deliberative process regarding the adoption of the Plan Amendment. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
The District is required by PEPRA to "modify its plan ... to comply with the requirements" of the new law. Adopting the amendment to the District pension plan at this time meets the District's obligation to comply with State law. ATU International and/or ATU Local 192 have not agreed with the proposed plan amendment and may challenge the amendment through legal proceedings and/or may attempt to block upcoming federal grant funding for the District. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
As the District is required by State law to modify its pension plan to incorporate the provisions of PEPRA there are no viable alternative actions at this time.
47
Report No. 12-314(a) Page 4 of 4
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: SR-314 Actuarial Report/Retirement Plan Amendment
ATTACHMENTS: 1: Resolution No. 13-006
2:
Amendment 13-A-16
3.
Revised actuarial report from BuckConsultants dated January 4, 2013, with attachments
Department Head Approval: Reviewed
by:
Prepared
by:
David Armijo, General Manager Ken Scheidig, Interim General Counsel Lewis Clinton, Chief Financial Officer Tom Prescott, Chief Performance Officer
48
SR 12-314a Attachment 1
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 13-006 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT 13-A-16 TO THE ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT PLAN TO COMPLY WITH THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' PENSION REFORM ACT OF 2013 ALSO KNOWN AS ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 340
WHEREAS, the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Board of Directors (the District) is authorized by the California Public Utilities Code to establish a retirement system; and WHEREAS, the District has created a retirement system known as the AC Transit Employees' Retirement Plan (the Plan), which Plan may be amended from time to time; and WHEREAS, the California Legislature sent the Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013 (AB 340 or PEPRA) to Governor Brown on or about August 31, 2012, which he signed on or about September 12, 2012 with an effective date of January 1, 2013; and WHEREAS, the District has been advised by legal counsel that it is necessary to amend the District's Plan to comply with AB 340; and WHEREAS, a proposed amendment of the District's Plan (the Plan Amendment) to comply with AB 340 has been prepared by legal counsel as set forth in Attachment A; and WHEREAS, in accordance with California Government Code Section 7507, the District's actuarial consultant prepared a report, dated December 11, 2012 and a revised report dated January 2, 2013 (the Reports) to estimate the effect on the District's current and future unfunded actuarial accrued liabilities and Annual Required Contributions resulting from PEPRA and by extension the Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, the initial Report was placed on the District's website for public review and comment on December 13, 2012 and was available until January 2, 2013. The revised Report was posted to the District's website on January 12, 2013 and was available for public review and comment from that date to January 21, 2013; and WHEREAS, no public comments on the Report were received during either of the comment periods; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Board Policy No. 170, the Plan Amendment has been provided to Retirement Board staff, the affected unions (ATU, Local 192,
Resolution No. 13-006
Page 1
49
SR 12-314a Attachment 1
AFSCME, Local3916 and IBEW, Local1245) and the Retirement Board for review and comment; and WHEREAS, in early December 2012, the District offered to engage in good faith negotiations with the aforementioned unions concerning the proposed Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, the District on December 21, 2012, received a letter from ATU, Local 192's counsel contending that PEPRA removes mandatory and/or traditional subjects of collective bargaining from consideration by the District and ATU under the provisions of section 13(c) of the Federal Transit Act (49 U.S.C. sec. 5333(b)(2)(B)), case law and the doctrine of federal preemption; and WHEREAS, by letter of January 7, 2013, to ATU's counsel, the District reaffirmed its readiness to bargain in good faith with ATU regarding the Plan Amendment and identified with specificity issues under PEPRA that require discussion and good faith negotiations; and WHEREAS, in early January 2013, the Board was advised that authorized representatives of AFSCME Local 3916 and IBEW Local 1245 informed the District that said labor unions were in agreement with the Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Retirement Board on January 14, 2013 authorized its staff to provide comments on the proposed Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, Retirement Board staff provided comments on the proposed Plan Amendment to the District's legal counsel and District staff on January 16, 2013, and said comments were provided to and duly considered by the District's Board of Directors prior to the consideration and adoption of the Plan Amendment; NOW, THEREFORE, after giving due consideration to the information provided to it, as outlined in the aforementioned Whereas clauses, the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Board of Directors does resolve as follows: SECTION 1. Amends the AC Transit Employees' Retirement Plan as set forth in Attachment A hereto, which is incorporated by this reference as though set forth fully in the body of this resolution. SECTION 2. Repeals Resolution No. 12-030 (A Resolution Approving Pension Benefits For Unrepresented District Employees). (This is an option. If this option is adopted the following sections will need to be renumbered) SECTION 2. Directs staff to begin implementation of the Plan Amendment.
Resolution No. 13-006
Page2
50
SR 12-314a Attachment 1
SECTION 3. Directs staff to again reaffirm to ATU, Local192 the District's desire and willingness to engage in good faith negotiations to achieve resolution and agreement on issues under PEPRA, which can and will affect ATU's members. SECTION 4. Further directs staff to continue to monitor any legislation sought exempt transit employees from the provisions of PEPRA, and to monitor decisions the United States Department of Labor interpreting the application of Section 13(c) PEPRA and, as the result of such monitoring, bring to the Board's attention the need take any action to modify the Plan Amendment as adopted.
to of to to
SECTION 5. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon passage by four affirmative votes of the Board of Directors.
its
RESOLUTION NO. 13-06 WAS PASSED AND ADOPTED this_ day of January 2013.
Greg Harper, President Attest:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
I, Linda Nemeroff, District Secretary for the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors held on the _day of January 2013, by the following roll call vote: AYES:
DIRECTORS:
NOES:
DIRECTORS:
ABSENT:
DIRECTORS:
ABSTAIN:
DIRECTORS:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary Approved As To Form:
Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel
Resolution No. 13-006
Page3
51
This page intentionally blank
52
SR 12-314A
Attachment 2 1/17/13 AMENDMENT 13-A-16 AC TRANSIT EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT PLAN
The AC Transit Employees' Retirement Plan (the "Plan") hereby is amended by adding a new Article XIII as set forth below. Capitalized terms not defined in this amendment have the same definitions as in the Plan.
ARTICLE XIII PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' PENSION REFORM ACT
13.1
Construction.
(a) Effective Date. The provisions of this Article XIII are effective as of the dates set forth below. (b) Application and Interpretation. As of the applicable effective date, this Article XIII takes precedence over any conflicting provision of the Plan; all other Plan provisions remain in full force and effect. Article XIII will be interpreted and administered in accordance with the applicable requirements of the California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013, which are codified in Article 4 , Chapter 21 of Division 7 of Title 1 of the California Government Code, as amended from time to time ("PEPRA"). (c) Authority to Amend . The District reserves the right to retroactively or prospectively amend this Article XIII as appropriate to (1) incorporate provisions reflecting the District's 2012 collective bargaining agreements (CBA) with the bargaining units represented by IBEW and AFSCME, subject to any collective-bargaining obligations, (2) incorporate the terms of the 2012 resolution of the District's Board of Directors ("District Board") concerning Participants who are Non-Represented Employees, and (3) reflect any amendments to or authoritative guidance under PEPRA affecting the Plan. 13.2 Provisions Applicable to All Participants. This Section 13.2 is effective January 1, 2013, for every Participant, regardless of when his or her participation in the Plan begins. (a) No Retroactive Benefit Enhancements. Any enhancement to a Participant's Benefit that is adopted on or after January 1, 2013, or that results from a change to the Participant's classification or employment on or after that date, will apply only to Service performed on or after the operative date (as defined in section 7522.44 of the California Government Code) of the enhancement, and will not be applied to any Service performed prior to the operative date of the enhancement. (b) Purchases of Nonqualified Service Credit Prohibited . The purchase of nonqualified service credit, as defined by section 415(n)(3)(C) of the Internal Revenue Code, is not permitted.
4840992.6 53
(c) Reinstatement of Retired Participants. Except as provided under Section 13.2(d), if a retired Participant who is receiving a Benefit serves the District, or is employed by, or employed through a contract directly by the District, he or she will be reinstated. If a Participant is reinstated, payment of the Participant's Benefit will cease; and, the Participant will resume participation in the Plan, but only if he or she is eligible to participate under Section 2.1. This Section 13.2(c) applies only to retired Participants who return to employment or service on or after January 1, 2013. (d) Exception to Reinstatement. A retired Participant will not be reinstated under Section 13.2(c) if all of the following conditions are satisfied: (1) The District Board appoints the Participant either during an emergency to prevent stoppage of public business or because he or she has skills needed to perform work of a limited duration. (2)
The appointment does not exceed a total of 960 hours in a Plan
Year. (3) The monthly rate of pay for the appointment is neither less than the minimum nor more than the maximum paid by the District to other Employees performing comparable duties, divided by 173.333 to equal an hourly rate. (4) The Participant does not earn any benefit under the Plan during the appointment. (5) Upon accepting the appointment, the Participant certifies in writing that he or she did not, during the 12 months preceding the appointment, receive any unemployment-insurance compensation arising out of the Participant's prior employment with the District. If the Participant accepts the appointment after receiving that type of compensation, the District must terminate the Participant's employment or service on the last day of the current pay period; and, this Section 13.2(d) will not apply to the Participant for 12 months after the termination date. (6) The appointment may not begin during the 180-day period after the Participant's retirement under the Plan, unless (A) the District certifies the nature of the employment or service and that the appointment is necessary to fill a critically needed position before 180 days has passed, (B) the District Board approves the appointment at a public meeting (the appointment may not be placed on a consent calendar), and (C) the Participant did not receive a retirement incentive at retirement. (e) Felony Convictions. If a Participant who is subject to section 7522.70, 7522.72 or 7522.74 of the California Government Code is convicted of a felony described in the applicable section or sections, he or she will forfeit his or her accrued rights and benefits, and will not accrue further benefits, in the Plan to the extent provided in the applicable section or sections. This subsection will be interpreted and administered in accordance with the requirements of sections 7522.70, 7522.72 and 7522.7 4 of the California Government Code, including, but not limited to, any applicable rules governing return of Participant contributions, notice, and reversal of conviction, which requirements are herein incorporated by this reference.
2 4840992.6 54
13.3 Provisions Applicable to New Participants. Except as otherwise specified below, this Section 13.3 is effective on the following dates: January 1, 2013, for each Represented Employee who first becomes a Participant on or after January 1, 2013; and, [July 1, 2012, for each Non-Represented Employee who first becomes a Participant on or after July 1, 2012]. This Section 13.3 will apply only to Participants described in the preceding sentence. (a) Definition of Compensation. For purposes of determining the Participant's Benefit, "Compensation" means the normal monthly rate of pay or base pay of the Participant paid by the District in cash to similarly situated Employees of the same group or class of employment for services rendered on a full-time basis during normal working hours, pursuant to publicly available pay schedules. Deferred amounts will be included in Compensation when earned rather than when paid. The following amounts are excluded from Compensation: (1) Any amount that the Board determines has been paid to increase the Participant's Benefit. (2) Any amount that is (A) paid in kind to the Participant, or was paid directly to a third-party (other than the Plan) for the Participant's benefit, and (B) subsequently converted to and received by the Participant in cash. (3)
Any one-time or ad hoc payments to the Participant.
(4) Severance or any other payment that is granted or awarded to the Participant in connection with, or in anticipation of, a separation from employment, but is received by the Participant while employed. (5) Any payments for unused vacation , annual leave, personal leave, sick leave, or compensatory time off, however denominated. (6) Any payments for additional services rendered outside of normal working hours. (7) Any employer-provided allowance, reimbursement, or payment, including, but not limited to, one made for housing, vehicle, or uniforms. (8) Compensation for overtime work, other than as defined in Section 207(k) of Title 29 of the United States Code. (9) District contributions to deferred compensation or defined contribution plans. (10) 13.3(a).
Any bonus paid in addition to the amounts described in Section
(11) Any other form of compensation that the Board determines is inconsistent with the requirements of Section 13.3(a). (12) Any other form of compensation that the Board determines should not be included in Compensation.
3 4840992.6 55
(13) For each calendar year, any amount in excess of $113,700, the contribution and benefit base specified in section 430(b) of Title 42 of the United States Code on January 1, 2013. The Board will adjust the annual Compensation limit described in the preceding sentence after each annual actuarial valuation of the Plan based on changes to the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers. The adjustment will be effective on the January 1 following each such annual valuation. (b) Definition of Monthly Average Earnings. For purposes of determining the Participant's Benefit, "Monthly Average Earnings" means the highest average annual Compensation earned by the Participant during a period of at least 60 consecutive months (36 consecutive months, in the case of an Eligible Age Employee) immediately preceding his or her Retirement, or during any other period of at least 60 consecutive months (36 consecutive months, in the case of an Eligible Age Employee) during the Participant's applicable service that the Participant designates on the application for retirement. (c)
Participant Contributions.
(1) For a Participant who is a Non-Represented Employee, this Section 13.3(c) is effective January 1, 2013. For a Participant who is a Represented Employee, this Section 13.3(c) is effective on the later of (i) January 1, 2013, or (ii) the date on which the CBA between the District and the Participant's Union, as in effect on January 1, 2013, expires or, if earlier, the renewal, amendment, or other extension of that CBA. (2) Each Participant must contribute part of his or her Compensation to the Plan. The initial contribution rate will equal 50% of the normal cost rate, rounded to the nearest quarter of 1%. The District may not pay any portion of this contribution for any Participant. The Participant contribution rate will be expressed as a percentage of Compensation. (3) Once established, the Participant contribution rate will be adjusted to reflect a change in the normal cost rate, but only if the normal cost rate increases by more than 1% of payroll above or below the normal cost rate in effect on the later of: (i) the date the Participant contribution rate is first established, or (ii) the date of the last adjustment to the Participant contribution rate under this paragraph. (4) The Participant contribution rate may be more than 50% of the normal cost rate, but only if the requirements of section 7522.30(e) of the Government Code are satisfied. (5) For purposes of this Section 13.3(c), "normal cost rate" means the total annual actuarially determined normal cost under the entire Plan of Benefits for Participants covered by the Service Retirement Benefit formula under Section 13.3(d), as determined by the Plan's actuary in accordance with the Board's funding policy. (6) All Participant contributions will be collected by deducting the amounts thereof from the Compensation due to the Participant from the District.
4 4840992.6 56
'
Participant contributions will not be deducted from any amount due to a Participant for any calendar year in excess of the limit described in Section 13.3(a)(13). (7) In general, if a Participant's District employment terminates before Retirement, the Participant's total contributions will be returned to the Participant by the Plan. This Section 13.3(c)(7) will be subject to negotiations or further District Board action (as appropriate) addressing various topics, including but not limited to the following: the terms and conditions upon which a Participant, whose employment is terminated for reasons other than death or Retirement, may elect to leave his or her Participant contributions in the Plan, the Participant's corresponding Benefit upon Retirement, and any other aspects of Participant contribution refunds upon termination. (d)
Service Retirement Allowance.
(1) Each Participant who has (A) completed at least five complete Years of Service, (B) reached at least age 52, (C) terminated service as an Employee, and (D) completed and submitted an application for benefits, at the time and manner determined by the Board, may retire for service and receive a Service Retirement Benefit. (2) The Service Retirement Benefit payable to a Participant upon meeting the requirements in Section 13.3(d)(1) will equal the percentage of the Participant's Monthly Average Earnings, as determined in accordance with the following schedule based on the Participant's age at retirement, taken to the preceding quarter year, multiplied by the Participant's Years of Service. Age at Retirement 52 52Y. 52% 52% 53 53Y. 53% 53% 54 54Y. 54% 54% 55 55Y. 55% 55% 56 56Y. 56%
Percentage 1.000% 1.025% 1.050% 1.075% 1.100% 1.125% 1.150% 1.175% 1.200% 1.225% 1.250% 1.275% 1.300% 1.325% 1.350% 1.375% 1.400% 1.425% 1.450%
5 4840992.6 57
Age at Retirement 56% 57 57Y. 57% 57% 58 58Y. 58% 58% 59 59Y. 59% 59% 60 60Y. 60% 60% 61 61Y. 61% 61% 62 62Y. 62% 62% 63 63Y. 63% 63% 64 64Y. 64% 64% 65 65Y. 65% 65% 66 66Y. 66% 66% 67
Percentage 1.475% 1.500% 1.525% 1.550% 1.575% 1.600% 1.625% 1.650% 1.675% 1.700% 1.725% 1.750% 1.775% 1.800% 1.825% 1.850% 1.875% 1.900% 1.925% 1.950% 1.975% 2.000% 2.025% 2.050% 2.075% 2.100% 2.125% 2.150% 2.175% 2.200% 2.225% 2.250% 2.275% 2.300% 2.325% 2.350% 2.375% 2.400% 2.425% 2.450% 2.475% 2.500%
6 4840992.6 58
13.4
Funding.
In any Plan Year beginning on or after January 1, 2013, the District's (a) contribution to the Plan, in combination with Participant contributions to the Plan, may not be less than the actuarially determined normal cost of Benefits under the entire Plan for the Plan Year. (b)
The Board may suspend contributions only when all of the following
occur: (1) The Plan is funded by more than 120%, based on the computation by the Plan's actuary in accordance with the Governmental Accounting Standards Board requirements that is included in the annual valuation. (2) The Plan's actuary determines, based on the annual valuation, that continuing to accrue excess earnings could result in disqualification of the Plan's tax exempt status under the Code. (3) The Board determines that the receipt of any additional contributions required by this section would conflict with its fiduciary responsibility set forth in Section 17 of Article XVI of the California Constitution.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Plan is hereby amended as set forth above on this_ day of _ _ _ _ _ , 2012.
By: _________________________ Its:
-------------------------
7 4840992.6 59
This page intentionally blank
60
SR 12-314a Attachme nt 3
buckconsultants
A Xerox Company
January 2, 2013
Mr. Lewis Clinton Chief Financial Officer Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District 1600 Franklin Street Oakland, CA 94612-2800
Complying with California Government Code Section 7507 Regarding Changes to Pension Benefits as of January 1, 2013
Dear Mr. Clinton: We have been asked to estimate the effect on the District's current and future unfunded actuarial accrued liabilities and Annual Required Contributions resulting from a new benefit structure. The new structure is specified in Assembly Bill 340 (AB340) , known also as the California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA), which Governor Brown signed into law on September 12, 2012. PEPRA takes effect on January 1, 2013. Generally, for employees who become members of the AC Transit Employees' Pension Plan (the Plan) on or after January 1, 2013, PEPRA legislates a pension formula of 2% at age 62, a 36month final averaging , a 50/50 cost-sharing between employees and the District of normal cost requirements, and a maximum annual salary amount used for pension calculations of the Social Security Taxable Wage Base ($113 ,700 for 2013, and adjusted by the Consumer Price Index for future years).
Because this change affects the benefits of future employees only, it will have no effect on the unfunded actuarial accrued liabilities of the current Plan or on the District's amortization payments. Current employees will experience no changes as a result of AB340. We are enclosing a projection of future District normal costs that illustrate the savings due to the implementation of the new tier of benefits. Savings increase each year as fewer employees are subject to pre-PEPRA benefit structures, and the savings reach 8.17% of payroll at the end of our projections.
3200 N. Central Ave., Suite 2200 • Phoenix, AZ. 85012-2425 (602) 864-3500 phone • (602) 864-3535 fax
61
SR 12-314a Attachme nt 3
Mr. Lewis Clinton January 2, 2013 Page 2
Our projections assume that participants leave the Plan according to the assumptions used in the actuarial valuation . We also assume that the District hires new employees in sufficient numbers to replace the employees who terminate, thus achieving a level active work force. The methods and assumptions used to determine the savings were the same as those used in the 2012 actuarial valuation. We have not reduced pay in our assumptions to reflect PEPRA Section 7522.34 (c)'s exclusions of types of pay that will not count toward pension accruals, e.g., severance payments, one-time payments, unused time off, overtime pay, and bonuses.
Please let me know if you have any questions or need anything more.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Chittenden Principal and Consulting Actuary En c.
buckconsultants 62
AC Transit- AB 340 Employer Cost Analysis (in millions)
-
40.00 35.00 30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00 0.00
~ER::fl.-JL I • I Il- l 1
I
..... ...,
2012
n _"]_ L 2017
2022
2017
63
Valuation Year Valuation Salary Current Plan Current Plan(% of Pay) AB340 AB340 (%of Pay) avin
Saving(% of Pay)
saving - -Current Plan
2022 -
IJ ll I n l- 1
2027 -
2012
1 Hddu i-I HLJ ~ t t t ' ~~-: L
~TARn I 1
_j
l ~: n '
_j
_j
_jq~ I
2032
2037
2042
2032
2037
2042
- -AB340
2027
Saving (%of Pay)
E
- -current Plan (%of Pay)
- -AB340 (%of Pay)
~.llifWI~Jii!W~JUtWW'JOfWM'.JU!:WM'.JiitWM1.JOt:WW'Jiif!WW'.l•t.l•WW'.ltPJWW'.lltfWW'.lttJWW'.tltt{!WWJ'JetfWW'.tlttJ:WW'JU'.tW
123.42 14.85 12.03% 14.85 12.03% 0.00 0.00%
126.37 15.21 12.04% 14.56 11.52% 0.65 0.52%
129.20 15.54 12.03% 14.27 11.04% 1.27 0.99%
132.27 135.16 15.95 16.34 12.06% 12.09% 14.02 13.75 10.60% 10.17% 1:93 -:" ~2.59 l.46% - 1.92%
137.75 16.73 12.15% 13.43 9.75% 3.302.40%
140.98 17.21 12.21% 13.19 9.36% 4.02 2.85%
144.37 17.76 12.30% 13.00 9.00% 4.76 3.300,(,
147.94 18.3_?_ 12.42% 12.82 8.67% ,.05.55 3.75%
151.82 18.98 12.50% 12.65 8.33% 6.33 4.17",(,
155.93 19.65 12.60% 12.53 8.04% 7.12 4.56%
160.o7 164.39 '20.30 20.97 12.68% 12.76% 12.40 12.30 7.75% •• 7.48% 7.90 8.67 4.93% - 5.28%
169.06 21.71 12.84% 12.25 7.25% 9.46 5.59%
173.78 22.44 12.91% 12.21 7.03% 10.23 5.88%
Valuation Year M4•fJ=MMA·fkMMl•#i·MM4•€1MM4•€fMM4•@iMM4•€!MM4•§fWMd·€1WM4•€MMd·€1:MMJ•€PMM4•Ei·MM4•GIMM4•§fM Valuation Salary 183.84 189.07 194.52 200.13 205.6?, 211.40 217.28 223.22 229.27 235.48 242.05 248.80 255.87 263.21 270.87 Current Plan 24.68 25.46 26.27 29.66 23.91 27.06 27.89 28.75 30.60 31.56 32.58 33.64 34.75 35.89 37.08 13.01% 13.05% 13.09% 13.13% 13.16% 13.19% 13.23% 13.29% 13.35% 13.40% 13.46% 13.52% 13.58% 13.64% 13.69% Current Plan (%of Pay) 12.22 12.27 12.37 12.45 12.56 14.23 14.58 14.96 AB340 12.19 12.70 12.89 13.10 13.32 13.60 13.89 AB340 (% of Pay) 6.63% 6.46% 6.31% 6.18% 6.05% 5.94% 5.84% 5.77% 5.71% 5.66% 5.62% 5.58% 5.56% 5.54% 5.52% 13.90 14.61 15.33 16.05 16.77 17.50 18.24 18.98 19.75 20.52 21.31 22. 12 Savin 11.72 12.46 13.19 Saving (%of Pay) 6.38% 6.59% 6.78% 6.95% 7.11% 7.25% 7.39% 7.52% 7.64% 7.74% 7.84% 7.94% 8.02% 8.10% 8.17% Notes 1. January 1, 2012 census and assumptions are used in the analysis. 2. Level active workforce is assumed. 3. Future new hire profile developed based on the characteristics of post January 1, 2009 hires.
178.65 23.19 12.98% 12.20 6.83% 10.99 6.15%
en
;;o ~
':-' ~ ~
0>
~ i:\T
g.
3
@
a "'
This page intentionally blank
64
Report No: Meeting Date:
12-297a January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Contract Award for line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction & Sustainability Project Administration I Project Control Consultant
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S}:
Approve contract award to URS for Project Administration I Project Control Consultant (PA/PC) services associated with the Line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction & Sustainability Project. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction and Sustainability project, originally funded as an FHWA (Federal Highway Administration) Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) grant under MTC's Transit Performance Initiative (TPI) pilot program, is designed to reduce on-street congestion/delay and improve reliability for buses. The District has applied to transfer funding from the FHWA to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). The Project Administration/Project Control (PA/PC) contract is the first of two contracts that will prepare the project for construction. It will provide the technical expertise required to perform the preliminary engineering & environmental concepts and studies necessary to facilitate preparation of MOU/Agreements and design consultant's scope to help effectively deliver this project on schedule. The second contract is the design contract and will be coming to the Board in the next quarter. In answer to the District's publicly solicited Request For Qualifications (RFQ) for the Line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction & Sustainability Project the purchasing department received 4 qualified submittals. The RFQ was advertised on our website and in local publications. Of the 359 total firms solicited, 204 firms were solicited via the District's notification system and 155 DBE firms were solicited via email notification. The technical evaluation of the qualifications submitted was conducted by District staff, augmented by representatives from the Cities of Oakland and Berkeley (Alameda elected not to participate). URS was selected as the most qualified firm based on the evaluation criteria in the RFQ. Staff concluded negotiations with URS at a firm-fixed price of $487,011.
65
Report No. 12-297a Page 2 of 4 BUDGETARY /FISCAL IMPACT:DGETARV/FISCAL IMPACT: The base period of performance for this contract will be for two (2) years, or 24 months from contract award through December 31, 2014, with three 1-year extensions. This RFQ has resulted in a fixed price contract in the amount of $487,011, funded by an MTC grant through the FTA.
P2042- Line 51 CDRS PA/PC A&E Contract (This contract award)
Design Contract (Estimated)
Construction Contracts (Estimated)
Total:
I
FTA Grant
District Funds
Total Contract
$487,011
-0-
$487,011
$968,300
-0-
$968,300
$9,060,313
-0-
$9,060,313
$10,515,624
!
-0-
I
$10,515,624
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: This project will construct improvements along line 51's route through Alameda, Oakland, and Berkeley. The project will install transportation infrastructure improvements to decrease travel time and increase operational reliability for buses along the length of the corridor. Generally, improvements within each city include: signal interconnect for coordination, intersection reconfigurations, bus queue jumps, bus bulbs, bus lanes, and bus stop relocations. The Board authorized issuance of a Request for Qualifications for the line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction & Sustainability Project Administration I Project Control Consultant (PA/PC) (SR 12297). Purchasing posted the RFQ on the AC Transit website on November 20, 2012. Notices were also posted to the Oakland Tribune. Purchasing solicited 204 firms via the District's notification system and 155 DBE firms via email notification. A Pre-Proposal Conference was held on December 4, 2012 which was attended by all firms which proposed. The District received 4 qualified responses on December 11, 2012. Qualifications were evaluated by a panel comprising representatives from the Cities of Oakland and Berkeley (Alameda elected not to participate) as well as District staff. The line 51 procurement is an Architect/Engineer (A&E), qualifications-based procurement, as required by the Brooks Act (40 U.S.C. Chapter 11). By definition, this type of procurement requires the District to base the selection of the contractor solely on the qualifications presented in the contractor's submission, as was the case here. In this process, the qualifications of responding firms were reviewed and ranked. Price was not considered, nor was it a factor in the review of qualifications. In an RFQ evaluation, negotiations begin only with the most qualified firm. If an agreement cannot be sought, negotiations with the next most qualified firm occur until a contract award can be made with the most qualified Offeror whose price is deemed fair and reasonable by the District. The qualifications based procurement method can only be used for the procurement of A & E services related to or leading to construction. 66
Report No. 12-297a Page 3 of 4 The District negotiated with URS, Inc. The other firms who submitted qualifications and who were evaluated in terms of qualifications were CH2MHILL, ARUP, and STANTEC. Submittals were evaluated and ranked on technical criteria as well as the overall responsiveness to the RFQ in accordance with the process outlined in the RFQ. All proposals met required minimum technical criteria. The firms were evaluated based on Experience, Qualifications, Technical Competence, Current Capacity, Past Performance, Geographical Location, and Quality Control. Based on the results of the scoring, interviews and negotiations commenced with URS, the firm deemed most qualified. Purchasing staff reviewed the cost proposal and following negotiations with the consultant regarding fees, pricing was lowered to $487,011. Purchasing staff has determined that the costs are fair and reasonable. Staff recommends award of contract to URS for Line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction & Sustainability Project Administration I Project Control Consultant services. The next step, once an award is made, will be to meet with the consultant to discuss Tasks 1-4 in the scope and the subtasks which need to be completed immediately to finalize preliminary engineering, project development, and environmental phases of the project. Staff plans to return to the Board next quarter for authorization to proceed with the design procurement for the project. The scores are summarized in the table below. RFQ Respondent
Primary Location
DBE I WBE I SLBE I SBE
Final Technical Score
URS
Oakland, CA
None Listed
88.4
CH2MHILL
Oakland, CA
None Listed
79.6
ARUP
San Francisco, CA
None Listed
74.9
STANTEC
San Francisco, CA
None Listed
71.8
The URS team included sub-consultants that are SLBE's and DBE (Hispanic) who carry 2% of the work scope on this project. All of the responding firms had a primary location situated in AC Transit's service area. A firm, fixed fee of $487,011 was negotiated with URS as the most qualified firm. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
There are advantages recommendation:
and
disadvantages
associated
with
Disadvantages Staff can identify no disadvantages associated with this procurement.
67
proceeding
with
staff's
Report No. 12-297a Page 4 of4 Advantages This contract will provide the required technical expertise in a variety of specialties that is not available among District staff. This will permit the District to implement the project using a pay-as-you-go approach to the specialists rather than hiring full-time staff.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Do nothing. Reject the grant and leave the 51-line as is. Reject all proposals and re-solicit for the project PA/PC. This would delay project implementation and jeopardize funding. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: GM Memo 10-178- Speed Protection and Enhancement Program GM Memo 10-233a- Line 51 Service and Reliability Report GM Memo 11-015- Service Sustainability Program to Improve Travel Time Efficiency GM Memo 12-087-Transit Sustain ability Study (TSP)/Comprehensive Operations Analysis (COA) SR 12-146- Line 51A/B Corridor Delay Reduction and Sustainability Project SR 12-297- Line 51A/B Corridor Delay Reduction and Sustainability Project PA/PC Procurement ATTACHMENTS: There are no attachments associated with this report.
Department Head Approval:
Dennis W. Butler, Chief Planning and Development Officer
Reviewed by:
Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel Lewis Clinton, Chief Financial Officer Robert del Rosario, Director of Planning and Marketing Jon Medwin, Procurement and Materials Director
Prepared by:
Wil Buller, Traffic Engineer
68
Report No: Meeting Date:
12-301a January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Consider the options available with regard to the District-owned property located at 3500 Seminary Avenue in Oakland
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
1. Consider authorizing the General Manager to dispose of the District owned property at 3500 Seminary Avenue, Oakland, CA at current fair market value . or 2. Consider authorizing the General Manager to lease the District owned property at 3500 Seminary Avenue, Oakland, CA to a residential tenant at current fair market value. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Based on the internal audit report, the District currently has $510,503 invested in the parcel of real property located at 3500 Seminary Avenue, in Oakland. Disposing of the property at current market value would result in a loss of approximately $205,500 (or 40% of the invested amount). Renting the property to a residential tenant would return approximately $14,300 per year to the District (or 2.8% of the value of the investment). BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
The District currently has $510,503 invested in this property, including legal fees associated with the foreclosure on the property.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
Based on the internal audit report, the District currently has $510,503 invested in the parcel of real property located at 3500 Seminary Avenue, in Oakland. The current options with respect to this property are to dispose of it at current fair market value or to lease the property to a residential tenant and dispose of the property at a later date when market conditions have improved . Sale of Property The property was appraised at $300,000 in August 2012. The appraisal took into consideration the number of bank owned and blighted properties in the surrounding neighborhood. The appraiser indicated that all these factors had a negative impact on the property's value.
69
Report No. 12-301a Page 2 of 3 Current estimates of the market value of the property on Internet sites are higher than the August appraisal. These are set out below:
Source Trulia.com
Total Price $350,000
Price/Sq. Foot $165
Zillow.com Realestate.com
$332,247 $328,700
$156 $155
Balancing the concerns expressed by the professional appraiser with current market prices identified by these Internet sites, the District could anticipate a gross sales price of approximately $330,000. From this amount approximately $25,000 in sales expenses would be deducted, resulting in a loss on the current investment of approximately 40%. Lease of Property If the property were leased to a residential tenant the District could expect to receive a rent of approximately $2000 per month (according to Zillow.com). As the District does not currently employ a property manager, an outside property management firm would be required. The fees for this property will be negotiable but the District should expect to pay approximately a 10% management fee. In addition, the District will be required to make any necessary repairs to this 92-year old home. A contingency will be factored into the equation to account for repairs. The District's estimated monthly return on the rental ofthis property is set out below:
Item Monthly Rent Real Estate Taxes Management Fee Repair Contingency*
Income $2,000
Expense
Net
$444 $200 $167
Monthly Proceeds to District
$1,189
• repair contingency based on one month's rent per year spread over 12 months
Based on the foregoing, the estimated annual rate of return on the District's current investment in this property is approximately 2.8% (i.e. ($1,189 x 12) + $510,503). This return on investment will be negatively affected by repairs in excess of the budgeted $2,000 annually and/or any period(s) of vacancy of the property.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: Advantages of the immediate sale of this property are elimination of any further costs of maintenance and upkeep of the property as well elimination of administrative costs associated 70
Report No. 12-301a Page 3 of 3 with the security of the property. In addition, sale of the property may also more clearly align with District Policy 336, Investment Policy. Disadvantages of the immediate sale of this property include the significant loss on investment as well as missing any potential of a strong, near term turn-around of the Oakland real estate market, which would result in a higher sale price. Advantages of leasing the property including providing a small rate of return on the District's investment; eliminating the administrative costs of monitoring and securing the property, and potentially taking advantage of an upward trend in the market value of the property by selling at a later date. Disadvantages of leasing the property include the inconvenience of holding a property that does not fit the District's business needs and may conflict with Board Policy 336. In addition, the property is 92-years old and may require a significant investment to maintain in marketable condition, particularly if tenants cause any significant damage to the property.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: The alternative is to maintain the status quo and hold the property without a tenant until a decision is made to sell or lease at a later date.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Staff Report 12-301
ATTACHMENTS: 1: Appraisal of Property dated August 15, 2012
2:
Property value information from Truilia.com
3.
Property value information from Zillow.com
4.
Property value information from Realestate.com
Department Head Approval:
David Armijo, General Manager
Reviewed by:
Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel Lewis Clinton, Chief Financial Officer Tom Prescott, Chief Performance Officer
Prepared by:
71
This page intentionally blank
72
SR 12-301a Attachment 1
APPRAISAL REPORT of
3500 SEMINARY AVE OAKLAND, CA 94605
As Of: AUGUST 15, 2012
Prepared For: ACTRANSIT 1600 FRANKLIN STREET OAKLAND,CA
Prepared By: ALFRED L. WATTS ALFRED L. WATTS AND ASSOCIATES 2211 HARBOR BAY PARKWAY ALAMEDA. CA 94502
73
SR 12-301a Attachment 1
[
ALFRED L. WATTS AND ASSOCIATES 2211 HARBOR BAY PARKWAY ALAMEDA, CA 94502
AC TRANSIT 1600 FRANKLIN STREET OAKLAND, CA
RE: 3500 SEMINARY AVE OAKLAND, CA 94605 File No. Case No.
Dear MR. BUTLER In accordance with your request, I have personally inspected and prepared an appraisal report of the real property located at: 3500 SEMINARY AVE, OAKLAND, CA 94605
The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the market value of the property described in the body of this appraisal report. Enclosed. please find the appraisal report which describes certain data gathered during our investigation of the property. The methods of approach and reasoning in the valuation of the various physical and economic factors of the subj ect property are contained in this report. An inspection of the property and a study of pertinent factors, including valuation trends and an analysis of neighborhood data, led the appraiser to the conclusion that the market value, as of AUGUST 15, 2012 is: $ 300,000 The opinion of value expressed in this report is contingent upon the limiting conditions attached to this report. It has been a pleasure to assist you. If I may be of further service to you in the future, please let me know.
ALFRED L. WATTS
74
SR 12-301a Attachment 1
ALFRED L. WATIS AND ASSOCIATES File No. CASE NO.
NL- Residential 512007
This form may be reproduced unmodified without written permission, however, Bradford Technologies, Inc. must be acknowledged and aecfrted Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800-622-8727 Page 1 of 17 . 75
SR 12-301a Attachment 1
ALFRED L. WATTS AND ASSOCIATES FileNo. CASE NO.
NL • Residential 512007
This form may be reproduced unmodified without written permission, however, Bradford Technologies, Inc. must be acknowledged and credited. Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800-622-8727 Page 2 of 17 76
SR 12-301a Attachment 1
ALFRED L. WATTS AND ASSOCIATES FileNo. CASE NO.
Residential
NL - Residential 5/2007
This form may be reproduced unmodified without written permission, however, Bradford Technologies, Inc. must be acknowledged and credited. Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800-622-8727 Page 3 of 17
77
SR 12-301 a Attachment 1
n ALFRED L. WATTS AND ASSOCIATES EXTRA COMPARABLES 4-5-6
File No. CASE NO. Borrower Property Address 3500 SEMINARY AVE City OAKLAND County Lender/Client AC TRANSIT
ALAMEDA State CA Zip Code Address 1600 FRANKLIN STREET, OAKLAND, CA
Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800-622-8727
78
94605
Page
4
of
17
SR 12-301 a Attachment 1
ALFRED L WATTS AND ASSOCIATES
LOCATION MAP ADDENDUM Borrower Property Address 3500 SEMINARY AVE County City OAKLAND lender/Client AC TRANSIT
FileNo. CASE NO.
ALAMEDA State CA Zip Code Address 1600 FRANKLIN STREET. OAKLAND. CA
94605
..,<" a:
<
Q.
=-·.
•. ItS
l!NC~LN
HIG!-f!..ANDS
"HCOL
(.)tr..o{,_
.......,,.:!
-~
S ~:Y
_u,.,: . .
,-; IUC R ~T
{:!..Qh l.i p_;:..~
~.$T:\1~ ~
A P.RI!I:GTvN
f>.I;('OV·~
\.··~.:;, Mt:·.Jwt·o.-• Cl'nt"' A~RCYO
\tr:J·:t
Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800-622-8727 79
Page
5
of
17
SR 12-301 a Attachment 1
r. ALFRED L. WATTS AND ASSOCIATES COMPARABLES 1-2-3
Borrower Property Address 3500 SEMINARY AVE City OAKLAND County Lender/Client AC TRANSIT
File No. CASE NO.
ALAMEDA State CA Zip Code Address 1600 FRANKLIN STREET. OAKLAND CA
94605
COMPARABLE SALE# 6031 MAURITANIA AVE OAKLAND, CA 94605
COMPARABLE SALE#
2
6024 MAURITANIA AVE OAKLAND, CA 94605
,_
-
COMPARABLE SALE#
3
3432 65TH AVE OAKLAND, CA 94605
Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800-622-8727
80
Page
6
of
17
SR 12-301a Attachment 1
ALFRED L. WATTS AND ASSOCIATES COMPARABLES 4-5-6
File No. CASE NO.
Borrower Property Address 3500 SEMINARY AVE City OAKlAND County Lender/Client AC TRANSIT
ALAMEDA Address
State CA Zip Code 1600 FRANKLIN STREET OAKLAND CA
94605
COMPARABLE SALE #
4
3012 RAWSON ST OAKlAND, CA 94619
COMPARABLE SALE#
5
COMPARABLE SALE#
Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800-622-8727
81
Page
7
6
of
17
SR 12-301a Attachment 1
ALFRED L. WATIS AND ASSOCIATES
SUBJECT PHOTO ADDENDUM
File No. CASE NO.
Borrower Property Address
3500 SEMINARY AVE City OAKLAND County Lender/Oient AC TRANSIT
ALAMEDA Address
State
CA
Zip Code
94605
1600 FRANKLIN STREET. OAKLAND, CA
FRONT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY 3500 SEMINARY AVE OAKLAND, CA 94605
REAR OF SUBJECT PROPERTY
STREET SCENE SEMINARY AVENUE LOOKING EAST SUBJECT IS ON THE RIGHT
Page
82
8
of
17
SR 12-301 a Attachment 1
g ALFRED L. WATIS AND ASSOCIATES
SUBJECT PHOTO ADDENDUM
File No. CASE NO.
Borrower
3500 SEMINARY AVE City OAKLAND County Lender/Client AC TRANSIT
Property Address
ALAMEDA Address
State CA Zip Code 1600 FRANKLIN STREET. OAKLAND. CA
94605
STREET SCENE LOOKING WEST SUBJECT IS ON THE LEFT
TYPICAL BEDROOM
LIVING ROOM
Page
83
9
of
17
SR 12-301a Attachment 1
ALFRED L WATTS AND ASSOCIATES
SUBJECT PHOTO ADDENDUM
File No. CASE NO.
BorrOwer Property Address 3500 SEMINARY AVE City OAKLAND County Lender/Client AC TRANSIT
ALAMEDA Address
State CA Zip Code 1600 FRANKLIN STREET OAKLAND CA
94605
TYPICAL BATHROOM
KITCHEN
BASEMENT AREA/LAUNDRY AREA
Page
84
10 of
17
SR 12-301a Attachment 1
ALFRED L. WATTS AND ASSOCIATES
SKETCH ADDENDUM
Property Address 3500 SEMINARY AVE City OAKLAND County Lender/Client AC TRANSIT
FileNo. CASE NO.
Slale CA Zip Code Address 1600 FRANKLIN STREET. OAKLAND. CA
ALAMEDA
SKETCH ADDENDUM
94605
Fila No.
Zip Coda
42.50'
28.00'
11.00' 17.00'
6.QO'
Galage&Beaemenl
Firs! Floot1Meln l..e'lal
aw
14 .00'
42.00'
•0'.00'
1.
16.00'
2.75' 1poo 12.00' 43.1 lr
19.00'
1 iro•
13.00'
225'-,
/3.51 5.00'
.
10.00'
~J ~-I~
3.00' 19.00'
225'\_ 5.00'
3.50'
10.00'
Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800-622-8727
85
Page
11 of 17
SR 12-301 a Attachment 1
ALFRED L WATTS AND ASSOCIATES
SKETCH ADDENDUM
3500 SEMINARY AVE Property Address County City OAKLAND Lender/Client AC TRANSIT
ALAMEDA State CA ZiD Code Address 1600 FRANKUN STREET. OAKLAND. CA
SKETCH ADDENDUM
SKETCH CALCULATIONS
.,
FileNo. CASE NO.
F1Jo No.
Plllllnet81
3.0 1.0 10.0
o.s. 1.Dx2.0 =
A4:S.Oz2.0=
.
I
.. . "'
--
A10
1176.0
A1 :2B.Ox42.0=
/4 : 0.5 X 3.01C2.0 "' A3 :
~
141.8
1190.0
Total Ganlge Ana
141.8
1190.0
467.5
AS:42.5x11.0= A8 :48.5x6.0 = A7:47.5x1.0:::: NJ:315x3.0= A9: 28.5 X 12.0 ::z A10:295x13.0<= A11 :2B.Ox3.0= A12 : 28.0 X 3.0 ::z A13: 0.5 X 2.01C2.0 c A14: 29.5x 2.0 = A15: 0.5 x 3.0x2..0 a A16! 0.5 X 1.Qx2.0 cr A17:5.0x2.0=
Fils! Floor
94805
291.0 47.5 94.5 342.0
383.5 78.0 134.0 2.0 59.0 3.0 1.0 10.0 211.7
A18:10.0x9.0=
1883.0 90.0
G] Second A Total BuDding Area
Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800-622-8727
86
38.0
90.0
248.7
1953.0
Page
12 of
17
SR 12-30 1a Attachment 1
0 ALFRED L. WATTS AND ASSOCIATES
PLAT MAP
FileNo. CASE NO.
Borrower Property Address 3500 SEMINARY AVE City OAKLAND County Lender/Client AC TRANSIT
8
ALAMEDA Address
State CA Zip Code 1600 FRANKLIN STREET OAKLAND CA
94605
.
ASSESSOR'S MAP 3.7 A
Chevrolet ParK. Scale 11~ .. 4of"+.
.So
\U "::).
'
"Z..
\>1
">
Ill ;:)
<:: t.J
> 'it
"
...,•.
s ;ss .,.. -DE.
,~.
'270/
Q
2748
j:: 1/)
Ill ....,
~
Produced by Click FORMS Software 800-622-8727
87
Page
13 of
17
SR 12-301a Attachment 1
ALFRED L. WATTS AND ASSOCIATES FileNo. CASE NO.
This appraisal report is subject to the scope of work, intended use, intended user, definition of marl
SCOPE OF WORK: The scope of worl< for this appraisal is defined by the complexity of this appraisal assignment and the reporting requirements of lhis appraisal report form, including lhe following definition of marl
DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE: As per Fannie Mae lhe definition of marl
STATEMENT OF ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS: The appraise~s certification in lhis report is subject to lhe following assumptions and limiting conditions: 1. The appraiser will not be responsible for matters of a legal nature that affect enher the property being appraised or lhe titie to it. except for information that he or she became aware of during the research involved in performing this appraisal. The appraiser assumes lhat the titie is good and marl
2. The appraiser has provided a sketch in lhis appraisal report to show the approximate dimensions of the improvements. The sketch is included only to assist the reader in visualizing the property and understanding lhe apprais~s determination ofns size.
3. The appraiser has examined lhe available flood maps that are provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (or other data sources) and has noted in this appraisal report whether any portion of lhe subject site is located in an identified Special Flood Hazard Area. Because the appraiser is not a surveyor, he or she makes no guarantees, express or implied, regarding this determinalion. 4. The appraiser will not give testimony or appear in court because he or she made an appraisal of the property in question, unless specific arrangements to do so have been made beforehand, or as olheowise required by law. 5. The appraiser has noted in this appraisal report any adverse conditions (such as needed repairs, deterioration, the presence of hazardous wastes, toxic subslances, etc.) observed during the inspection of lhe subject property or that he or she became aware of during lhe research involved in performing this appraisal. Unless olheiWise slated in lhis appraisal report. the appraiser has no knowledge of any hidden or unapparent physical deficiencies or adverse conditions of the property (such as, but not limned to, needed repairs, deterioration, lhe presence of hazardous wastes, toxic substances, adverse environmenlal conditions, etc.) that would make the property less valuable. and has assumed that there are no such conditions and makes no guarantees or warranties, express or implied. The appraiser will not be responsible for any such conditions that do exist or for any engineering or testing lhat might be required to discover whether such conditions exist. Because the appraiser is not an expert in the field of environmenlal hazards, lhis appraisal report must not be considered as an environmenlal assessment of the property. 6. The appraiser has based his or her appraisal report and valuation conclusion for an appraisal that is subject to satisfactory completion, repairs, or alterations on the assumption that the completion, repairs, or aiterations of the subject property will be performed in a Professional manner.
NL- General Cerlificalion 5I20fi/
This form may be repnxluced unmodified without written pennission, however, Bradford Technalogies, Inc. must be acknowledged ancl aeclited.
Produced by ClickFORMS Software 80~22.a727 88
Page
14 of
17
SR 12-301 a Attachment 1
ALFRED L. WATTS AND ASSOCIATES
FileNo. CASE NO.
APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION: The Appraiser certifies and agrees that 1. 1have, at a minimum, developed and reported this appraisal in accordance with the scope ofworl< requirements stated in this appraisal report. 2. 1performed a visual inspection of the interior and exterior areas of the subject property. I reported the condition of the improvements in factual, specific terms. I identified and reported the physical deficiencies that could affect the
livability, soundness, or structural integrity of the property. 3. 1performed this appraisal in accordance with the requirements of the Unifonn Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice that were adopted and promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal Foundation and that were in place at the lime this appraisal report was prepared. 4. 1developed my opinion of the marl
SR 12-301a A ttachment 1
ALFRED L. WATIS AND ASSOCIATES
File No. CASE NO.
21 . 1am aware that any disclosure or distribution of this appraisal report by me or the client may be subject to certain laws and regulations. Further, 1am also subject to the provisions of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice that pertain to disclosure or distribution by me. 22. If this appraisal report was transmitted as an "electronic record" containing my "electronic signature," as those terms are defined in applicable federal and/or state laws (excluding audio and video recordings). or a facsimile transmission of this appraisal report containing a copy or representation of my signature, the appraisal report shall be as effective. enforceable and valid as if a paper version of this appraisal report were delivered containing my original hand written signature.
SUPERVISORY APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION:
The supervisory Appraiser certifies and agrees that:
1. 1directly supervised the appraiser for this appraisal assignment, have read the appraisal report, and agree with the appraiser's analysis, opinions. statements, conclusions, and the appraiser's certification. 2. 1accept full responsibility for the contents of this appraisal report including, but not limited to , the appraiser's analysis, opinions. statements, conclusions. and the appraiser's certification . 3. The appraiser identified in this appraisal report is either a sub-contractor or an employee of the supervisory appraiser (or the appraisal firm). is qualified to perform this appraisal, and is acceptable to perform this appraisal under the applicable state law. 4. This appraisal report complies with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice that were adopted and promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal Foundation and that were in place at the time this appraisal report was prepared. 5. If this appraisal report was transm itted as an "electronic record" containing my "electronic signature," as those terms are defined in applicable federal and/or state laws (excluding audio and video recordings). or a facsimile transmission of this appraisal report containing a copy or representation of my signature, the appraisal report shall be as effective. enforceable and valid as if a paper version of this appraisal report were delivered containing my original hand written signature.
A~ /~ A/~ -~
SUPERVISORY APPRAISER (ONLY IF REQUIRED)
Signature Name Company Name Company Address
" Signatur Name ~FRED L. WATTS Company Name ALFRED L. WATTS AND ASSOCIATES Company Address 2211 HARBOR BAY PARI
.COMCAST.NET Date of Signature and Report Effective Date of Appraisal AUGUST 15. 2012 State Certification # AG005996 or State License # or Other (describe) State# State CA Expiration Date of Certification or License 12/04/2012
Telephone Number Email Address Date of Signature State Certification # or State License# State Expiration Date of Certification or License
SUBJECT PROPERTY
B
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY APPRAISED 3500 SEMINARY AVE OAKLAND CA 94605 APPRAISED VALUE OF SUBJECT PROPERTY S CLIENT Name Company Name AC TRANSIT Company Address 1600 FRANKLIN STREET OAKLAND CA Email Address
NL - General Certification 5/2007
0
300.000
Did not inspect subject property Did inspect exterior of subject property from street Date of Inspection Did inspect interior and exterior of subject property Date of Inspection
8
COMPARABLE SALES Did not inspect exterior of comparable sales from street Did inspect exterior of comparable sales from street Date of Inspection
This form may be reproduced unmodified Without wntten permiSSion, however. Bradford Technologies, Inc. must be acknowledged and cred~ed.
Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800-622-8727 90
Page
16 of
17
c:r
lOusiness, !lransp·ottatiGn ,& Housing Agency
OPFfCE OF IRE'AL .ESTATE ~APPRMSERS
REA.L.,BS'f.ATE jiAF-PRAIS£R~ LICEN!SIE ALFRED L. W1ATTS "'0
aa. c
2
a.
has successfully met the requirements for a ,license as a general real estate appraiser in the State of California and is, therefore, ·entitled 1t'0 use :the title "Certi,fie
CT
'<
Q
~
-n 0
This license has been issuedrin accoroance with the provisions of the Real Estate Appraisers' Licensing and €ertificabion Law.
::0
91
s:
)>
"C "C
D1
ur
., c
(1)
(')
(1)
:::s
en en
tJj (1)
0
~
OREA APPRAISER rDENTIFlOATl(')N NUMBER
iil
I
AG005996
I
0
(1)
CXI
Dutc fssucd:
Dcccnibcr 5, 20 l 0
::+
~ ~
Date Expires: December 4, 2012
I»
0 0
1\)
3i (')
S'
~
.&i(ft.J
Director, 0REA
o-n :~:>= enro
mz
l ...... .._,
Audit No.
12·2 9 21
(/)
::u ~
t;-J w
z~
0
9
Q)
~
~ g. Q)
3(1) ;:!. ~
Q,
...... .._,
This page intentionally blank
92
;:s:,uu :sem1nary Avenue, uaKiano I;A • 1ruua
1/:.!/1:$
SR 12-301a Attachment 2 TrullaMoblle
( Mllsrron~ Oakland, CA
HOMES 1'
8\Jy
rttnl
Atlvl~t
hloriQDIII
See your Credit Score Instantly! -$0
Home Facts
Map & Nearby
Refinance
Comparables
Tr ends
Find
Q
Pto
[ SIGH UP
I
»
3500 Seminary Avenue, Oakland CA 94605
PUBLIC RECORD
LotDllnlo
c See similar homes
Schools
Chock your credit scoro f or f ree
Fo r
Sale
Rece ntly Sold Propert y type
Distance
Sold pr ice
Bed a
Bat hi
Sqfl
Prlct/aqll
Yr built
1.75
1.465 sqrt
S206
1935
4
2,1 21 aqft
$185
1 920
5182,000
2
880 sqft
5207
1926
Singlc-FornilyHomc
5264,500
3
1,459 sqft
5181
1938
Singlc-FornilyHomc
5185,000
2
1,032 sqlt
5179
1929
5185,000
3
2
1,832 sqft
5101
1953
5247,500
4
2
1,7 16 sql l
5144
1925
Giv e Trulia your feedback about mobile
5225,000
2
992 sqft
5227
1952
Participate In our latest surwy to help shape Trulla's next generation of mobile apps. G et
Avorogcs 0.96 mi
52 63.675
This property Si ngle-Family Home 3208 60lh A110 0.23 mi
Singlc -FumllyHornu
3693 Delmont Avo 0.29mi
2
3228 63rd Avo 0.30 ml
6401 Wokclumnc Avo 0.34mi
Singlc-FumilyHomo
3027 Seminary Avo 0.35 rni
Singlc-FomilyHomo
6189 HillmcnlDr 0.35 rni
Singlc-Fumily Homo
Started
34 32 65lh Avo 0.38ml
Singlo-FumilyHome
5270,000
3
1.273sqfl
5212
1939
5272,636
2
1.407 sqlt
5194
1920
5295,000
2
2
1.214 sqlt
5243
1925
5245,000
4
2
1,508 sqlt
5162
1952
Singlc-FomilyHomo
5282,000
2
620 sqft
5455
1925
Singlc -FomllyHomo
5189,500
3
1Y,
1,300 sqrt
5146
1924
3756 Buell St 0.56mi Singlc-FornilyHomo
5266,000
3
2
1.266 sqrt
5 210
1940
5200,000
6
2
2,141 sqlt
593
1912
5237,000
4
2
2,092 sqlt
5113
1939
2940 Seminary A\'0 0.41 mi
Singlc -FomilyHomo
Trulla Partner Center
6508 Wokolumno Avo 0.44 mi
Singlo-Fu milyHome
6311 HillmonlDr 0.45mi
Singlo-FornllyHomo
This property maybe overpa)4ng their property taxes. Check For Free
6548 ~'okelumno Avo 0.48mi 8435 Brann 51 0.51 mi
A good etedlt score Is 750 & above, whars )Ours?
Great work, no wonies. Cabinet refacing backed by The Home Depot
2645 65lh AIIC 0.64 mi
Singlo-FurnilyHurno
Discussions In Mlllsmont, Oakland, CA
6915 OJUook Avo 0.64 ml
Singlc-FurnllyHomo
trulia.com'homes/compare/Californla/Oakland/sold/1193296-3500-Seml nary-Ave-Oakland-CA-94605
93
11
;jOUU ::semtnary Avenue, Uaktano t;A- 1 ruua
lWl;j
SR 12-301a Attachment 2
2627 65th Ave Singlc·Family Homc
0.65 m i
$189,000
2
1,1 54
sq~
5 1 6~
192~
5200,000
3
1 .1 48sq~
5 1 7~
1925
553 followers
6809 Hillmont Dr Si nglc-Fumil y Homc
0.66 mi
/.
2608 64th Avo Singlc·Fomily Home
0.66mi
5175.000
1.026 sq~
2
5 171
19~ 5
5347 Fleming Avo Single-Family Home
53~0.000
3
Single-Family Home
5174,000
2
Singte-Fumily Homo
5206,000
3
2906 Rowson St Singlo-Fumily Horno 0.72 mi
5333,000
3
0.67mi
1,459
sq~
5233
1925
1,056
sq~
$165
1925
2
1,299 sq~
5 159
1919
2
1.411 sqn
5236
1925
5161
1926
2
AlkQutatlon Recent Activity l am on out of stoto O.vnor and I need o Properly IVunogcr. Mist bo o licensed Broker/Agent. 3 answers
26 15 66th Avo 0.69ml 2581 63rd two 0.70mi
5525 WolnutSt 5189,000
2
1,176 sqn
$240,000
2
1.1~4
sqll
5210
1948
5325,000
3
1,168 sqn
5278
1925
5170,000
2
1.21 2sqn
51~0
1923
527 1,000
3
1.203 sqll
5225
1924
Single-Family Home
5250,000
2
964 sqn
5259
1939
Single-Family Horne
5385,000
3
1,689 sqll
5228
1963
Single-Family Homo
0.72mi
~
when was lho last drivo b y? 5 answers
~
Is i tpossiblolo chango contractors midway through u 203k (stroomllno)? I urn getting bad looting on tho porson 1 huw used. 2 answers
3911 Burckhallcr Avo Singlo-FamilyHorno
0.73 mi
3355 Birdsall Ave Single-Family Horne
0.75mi
..
~ ':11
whotis lhoprico in2315th avenue? 2 answers
2600 Havens court Blw 0.75 rni
Single-Family Horne
3000 Kings fond Avo Single-Family Home
0.76 mi
6927 Sunkist Dr 0.77 rni 11528 W.nUis Ct 0.78 rnl
2
2817 73rd Ave
0.80mi
V\'hy do short solo negoUoUons lllko so long? 9 answers
it suys 3 roil but gives no lnloronwhlch r uil Answ er first
a
tr,msit score. how is it culculalcd? what docs it mean when it says roil? how lar would lhotbo from o borhloUon? 1 answer
VIew recent questions Si nglo·FumilyH omo
52112,000
3
2
5114
2.120 sqn
More loco! ad..Cco
1947
VIew ellcompuablta
Contact local agents nea r 3500 Seminary Ave Brion Cheek (5 10) 584·9446
From
1 ~ Tracy Loa Butler
0 fJ~ (510~488·2141
Derek Suring (510) 878-4612 11
0
H
Heidi Marchesolti (510)878·3489 12
1'/ontlo bolide~ hen>? l oom noro
Subject
Schodulo a viow ilg
Messago I am searching fOt' a horm In Mllsrront and I found 3500 Serrinary Ave, Oakland CA 94605 wiUI4 bedrooms, 1 bathroom. Aoaso send rm rroro inforrTOiion about this or other smlar islilgs in this
A
ti y s~n:hn;. yau U~ ~n:f
COpyright e 2013 Trufia, nc. AI rights reserved. 1
~il' "o I;) I ruli.,'s 1 ems ot l'rlv
Fair ~-busing and filual Opportunity
Have a quos lion? Visl our Help Center to find the answer
trulia.comfhomes/compare/California/Oakland/sold/1193296-3500- Seminary-Ave-Oakland-CA-94605
94
;;,:,uu ~emrnary Avenue, ua1<1ano lJA - 1ruua SR 12-301a Attachment 2 Trulia Mobile
IMBsrron~
oakland, CA
HOMES..,
Rtr.t
Buy
Atlvlct
M?rlgDIJI
See your Credit Score Instantly! -$0
Map & Nearby
Show boundaries: ~ t.'ilsrnont
0
Refinance
Com parables
Tronds
[SIGN UP ]
Anti a f'ro
11
3500 Seminary Avenue, Oakland CA 94605
PUBLIC RECORO
Homo Facts
L?tol lnlo
• Soo similar homos
Schools
94605 'q
Satotllto
Hybrid
-
..
~ -~
~...
~
Chock your credit score f or free
E~·!r..Jr~!.,
t. Cen,e:@')'
AS! CC·3 ti0 1
r.~a~~
s•.re ) 0\,r c re:J: IS reacy
l or s no;·.\ h~>tr.'?
Recently Sold
For Sale
Property type
Oiatanco
List price
Beds
Baths
Sqft
Prlcolsqft
Yr built
5326,578
3
2.05
1,608 sqfl
S220
1937
4
2,121 sqft
$165
1920
1.238 sqf\
S202
1927
A1'0rugc~
1.34 mi
This property Slngle·Famlly Home (j!)(j!) Laird Ave
0.08mi
Singlc-FomilyHomo
52(;0,000
3
Single-Family Homo
5328,000
3
2
2,050 sqf\
St60
1926
5379,000
3
2
1,583 sqf\
S239
1927
5253,000
3
1.450 sqf\
S17~
1920
5312.000
2
1.327 sqn
5235
1925
Give Trulla your feedback about mobile
5390,000
3
1,136 sq n
S313
1926
Participate in our latest sur.ey to help shape Trulia's next generation of mobile apps. Get Started
5399,000
~
2
1,855sqn
S2 15
1939
5389,888
3
2
1,795 S4f\
$217
1928
5359,900
2
3
1.596 sqn
S226
2007
5399,000
3
1,30G sqn
S30G
19~2
3(i 14 6~ lh Ave 0.28mi 30~~
Mllsbrne Ave Single-Family Homo
0.32mi ~107
Wounlai n ~e w Ave
0.48 mi
Si nglc-Fumily Homo
G233 Camden Sl 0.49ml
Singlc-FomilyHomc
2
3122 Mldcra A"c 0.55 rni 3~68
Single-Family Homo
Mlrcom A1-e
0.71 rnl
Singlc-FumilyHornc
3025 IVonliccllo Ave 0.82 mi
Singlo-FurnllyHornc
Trulla Partner Center
6160 Old Quarry loop 0.89mi
Singlc-FamilyHomc
7(i 16 Sunkisl Dr 0.97 mi
Single-Family Homo
This property may be owrpa}lng their property Ia xes. Check For Free
.Ad dross Not Dis closed 1.01 mi 7~02
Single-Family Home
5359,950
3
2
1,28 1 sqn
528 1
1925
Sing lo-Fo mily Homo
5269,900
3
2full,1 purtiol
1,11 2sq~
S2~3
19~ 1
Single-Family Homo
$~9.000
6
3
2,3G8 sqR
S 1 ~7
1918
Single-FamilyHorn o
$315,000
3
2
1,215 sqn
S25!l
1939
Singlo-FumllyHomc
5299,000
3
2
1.~ 28
S209
1922
Doorwootl Ave
1.03 mi
A good credit score Is 750 & abow, what's ~urs?
Great work, no womes. Cabinet refaclng backed by The Home Depot
GOOO Trask St 1.07 mi
~352 Allendale 1.1~
mi
/we
3828 Dale PI 1.37 mi
sqn
trulla.comlhomes/compare/California/Oakland/sold/1193296-3500-Seminary-Ave-Oakland-CA-94605
95
Discussions In Mlllsmont, Oakland, CA
;:J:>UU
11
::;em1nary Avenue, uaKiano t,;A- 1ruua
SR 12-301a Attachment 2
3909 Koller AYfl 1.39 tni
Singlo-Fmnily Homo
5250,000
2
800 sqn
5313
1925
Singlo-FumilyHomo
5399.900
2
1.344 sqn
529 8
1937
Singlo-Fumily Home
5369,900
2
1,662 sqn
5223
1926
553
fo ii U~I UIS
8120 ULDh St 1.44 rni
,;
3300 35th Ave 1.53 mi
3
2500 35th Ave 1,245 sqn
5197
1915
5245,000
2
5270,000
3
2
Singlo-FumilyHorno
524G,OOO
3
3'h
2.GG8 sqn
592
Single·FumilyHumu
5390.000
4
2
1,8 15sqn
5215
1914
Singlo-FumilyHumu
5328,000
3
2 lull, 1 puttiul
2.267 sqn
5 145
1954
5280,000
3
2
1.4 14 sqn
5198
2008
Singlc-Fmnily Homo
1.77 mi
Alit Quutlon Recent Activity I om on out of sllltc O.vnor a nd I need a Property ~1fl nagcr. Wusl boa licensed Brokc r/Pgcnt. 3 answers
6500 OuUook Ave Singlc-FumilyHomo
0.39mi
2013
6617 Simson St OA9 m i 2210 35th AYfl 1.89 mi 9001 Burr St 1.97 mi
~fi
when was lho Ius t dri\'0 by? 5 answers
';l
Is it possible lo chango contractors midwuythro ugh u203k (slroumlino)? I urn getting bud reeling on the parson I hll\11 used. 2 answers
j.)
Why do s ho rt s ala negotiations take so long? 9 snsw ers
807 Hawkins Or Singlu-FumilyHomc
2.41 mi
·""'
2827 25th Avo
.;:II Singlc·F!lln ilyHomu
2.57mi
5299,000
3
1.300 sqn
5230
193 1
1.204s qn
5241
192 1
whalis Ule price in2315th avenue? 2 answers
2914 23rd Avo 2.71 mi
Singlo-Fumily Horno
5290,000
3
2
5350,000
4
2
5360,000
3
2
1.580 sqn
5228
1967
$31 8.000
~
2
1.483 sqn
S214
1895
3329 Oclil,; u St 1.50 rni
Single·F
3009 Broadmoo rVw 2 .90 mi
Singlo·Fumil y Homc
1934 22nd Avo 2.96mi
Singlc-FomilyHom c
2014 E 171h St
3.12mi
it says 3 rail bulgivos no lnforonwhich ruil Answer first
1933
a
tmnsit score . how is it culculaled? what docs it mean when it says rail? how far would Ulalbc from a bart station? 1 answer
'view recent questions
Singlo-FumilyHomu
S349.~00
3,506 sqn
5
G
5 100
N'.ore local ad~co
192 7
Vln r aD compatablta
Contact loca l agents near 3500 S e mi nary Ave From
Derek Suring (51 0) 8 78·4612
Subjoct
,,
0
D
Schodulo a view ilg
Holdi Marchosotli (510) 878-3489
Wan l l o bo lid.od hen)? Lo .srn
Message I am searching for a hon-e in Mllsrront and I found A 3500 Seninary Ave, Oakland CA 94605 w ilh 4 y bedrooms, 1 bathroom Rease send rm rrore lnforrrolion about this or other sirrilar listings in this
12
rn:no
Oy st:nd1 ng . y;,u U~ ~ nd
Copyright e 2013 Trurl3, Inc. AI rights reserved. 1
Fa~
n~r ~c
to Trulin's 1 crm !i ol
l'rivilt)' Polley.
!-busing and !'qual Opportun~y
Have a question? Vis~ our Help Center to find lho answer
trulia.com'homes/compare/California/Oakland/sold/1193296-3500-Seminary-Ave-Oakland-CA-94605
96
;,:>uu ::semtnary Avenue, uaKtano \,;A- 1ruua
SR 12-301a Attachment 2 Trulla Mobllo
(t.t~srron~ Oaldand, CA HOMES T ) ~================~
l:!uy
;c.nt
Atlvltt
Mortgn~•
Locollnlo
Anti o Prr.
[SIGN UP
Looking to Save? The Orange Savings Account from lNG DIRECT. Safe and Secure. FDIC Insured.
3500 Seminary Avenue, Oakland CA 94605
PUBLIC RECORO
Home Facts
Map & Nearby
Refinance
Comparablos
Trends
l!'ient
0511712004
Sold
>>
a Sooslmlbrhomos
Schools
Price HIs tory for 3500 Seminary Ave Data
I
Alort
Prlco view delals
5350,000
Source Public records
Marl
r td
~\'l~rl.C>r•
t600K 14761< -t- - -- - -,4001<
-
-
-
-
-
·- -----
Averagellslilg A'k:e
$232,31'
M!dlan Sales A'k:e
$269,7!
Aver ago prk:elsqrt
$11
+4. 1'.: 'li·C·W
..,. ~
.
-
1\\Jrreer ol Sales
1·58.7 1/t.
Y·O· Y
•12.G'.,
y-o-y
'·SO'.'.
y- o-y
~~--~----r---,--Dec05'12
Otc12'12
c Oeldond
Dec19 '12
Cltcck yo ur c rccl it sco1o for ft oo Ma~e 5~ 1 e ) ()l..r c r ~ll t
Otc26 't2
rs r~ady
lcr a n~w hor 11~
1/.cre Uotsmont 1.\!rket Trends
D ~thlhOnt
Financing Guides Why refinance: how to know when Rofinoncing is most often mo~wtcd by lower inlorostrates, w hich can bring the dual bono fit of lowor mortgago payments and low or interest costs owr Umo. But there are many othor logitimolo motiwtion s. Somo Dro II product or ·croaliw' financing products .. By Trull a 11 GCommonts
Home equ~y loons: the types, pros, and cons A home equity loan uses a borrowers •equity" in a homo as collatoral. The term generellyrofol$ to a loan taken outanar the home has been ownod for a whilo. The owner signs a mortgage, pledges his homo as collateral, and walks awaywlth a check. But technically, •. ByTrullo 117 Comments
Why pay points? Whon pooplo ask whothcrto payup-lront •points• on a mortgago loan, it brings to mind on ol d motor oil ad. A mochanlc is holding s omo wom onglno parts ond tolling us why we should opt for tho promium lubricant rather than Brand X "You can pay me now; ... ByTrulio 121 Comments
Viaw all frnanclng guides "
Give Trulla your feedback about mobile Participate In our latest survey to help shape Trulia's next generation of mobile apps. Get Started
Homes you might like ...
Alert
Contact local agents near 3500 Seminary Ave 595g Laird Aw, Oakland CA Brian Cheek (510) 584·9446
Ffom
Derek Suring (510)878-4612
Subject
11
0
D
HeldiMarchesotU (510) 878-3489 12
$250,000 3br I 1 ba 1,238 sqrt Single-Farrily Horre
3514 64th Aw, Oakland CA
Schedulo a view ng
$328,000
3br I 2ba 2,050sqrt
Message
I am searching for a home In Mlllsmont and I found 3500 Seminary Ave, Oakland
WNW. trulia.comfhomes/price/California/Oakland/sold/1193296-3500-Semnary-Ave-Oakland-CA-94605
97
Slngle-Farriy Horre
.., 1r
This page intentionally blank
98
SR 12-301a Attachment 3
Homea
Rentala
Mortgage Ratea
Advice
Find a Pro
Local Info
Blogo
More .. For Proo .....
Oakland
Millsmont
Views: 177
3500 Seminary Ave
Contactalocaiagent
3500 Seminary Ave , Oakland, CA 94605 Photos
Map
Sign In
D
Location: City, State, or ZJP California
Mobile
Bird's Eye
Street View
Travis Hill
Not for Sale
(11 reviews) (510) 255-2943Call :
Zestimate: $332,247 Rent Zestimate: $1 ,998/mo Est. Mortgage: $1.167/mc
David Earley (1 review) (5 10) 200~152Call :
See current rates on Zillow A Bad Credit Score is 598. See Yours for $0
Bedrooms: 4 beds
Bao Lu
Bathrooms: 1.0 bath
(3 reviews) (510) 291-4591Call :
Single Family:
2,121 sq ft
Lot:
8,160 sq ft
Your Name
Year Built: 1920
Phone
Last Sold:
May 2004 for
Parking:
$350,000
Email Address
Contact for details
Correct home facts
Saw this home
Get updates
Email
more
v
I would like a professional estimate of my home at 3500 Seminary Ave, Oakland, CA
VI
I Contact Agent I Description
Learn how to appear in this list
This 2121 square foot single family home has 4 bedrooms and 1.0 bathrooms . It is located at 3500 Seminary Aw Oakland, California. Cooling Unknown
Heating Type Unknown
Basement Type Unknown
Fireplace Unknown
Floor Covering Unknown
Attic Unknown
Roof Type
Exterior Material Unknown
View Unknown
Unknown #Stories 2.0
Deck Unknown
.... More
See data sources
Similar Homes for Sale
Zestlmates
6100 Laird Av ...
99
SR 12-301 a Attachment 3
Zestlmale
Value
Range
30-day change
$332,247
$189K$548K
-$3,207
$1.6K$2.5Kimo
-$67
Rant Zestlmale
$1,998/mo
OWner Estlmale
Post your own estimate
I"Or ~a1e:
$/sqft
Last updale•
$156
12/30/2012
Beds: 2
12/31/2012
Sqfl: 1007 Baths: 2.5 Lot: 3250
$0.94
$325,000
5959 Laird Ay.. , For Sale:
$250,000
Beds: 3 Zestlmate Rent Zestimate more
Sqfl: 1544 Baths: 1.5 Lot: 3745
1 year 5 years 10 years
This home Mlllsmont -
3044 Mlllsbra ...
Oakland
For Sale:
$379,000
Beds: 3 Sqfl: 1583 Baths: 2.0 Lot: 3789 See listings near 3500 Seminary Ava
Nearby Similar Sales 6401 Byena V1ntum AyA. Opkla .. ,
Sold
on 112612012: $238,500
Beds: 3 Baths: 2.0
Sqfl: 2081 Lot: 5520
Get Lifelock Utimate Ran Expanded 10 Theft Protection §663 Bra no St. Oakland. CA
Sold
94805
on 412412012: $118,000
Beds: 3 Baths: 1.0
Sqft: 1084 Lot 4750
6800 Macar!hur Blvd, Oakland, ... Sold
on 4127/2012: $199,000
Beds: 3 Baths: 1.0
Sqft: 1397 Lot 4448
See sales similar to 3500 Seminary
Ave
Neighborhood
0
Home Values
0
Listings
Featured Partners Your Credit Score Onllnel Freacredltscore.com View Your Latest Score Online Instantly for $0
100
Kealt:.State.com Home value t::sllmator- ~t ACcurate-Home Values
1(01~
SR 12-301 a Attachment 4
Au:h:o:r,. Ch.llx.•t R,'lji~I>Jt
P,1•k
tJ.,;p,·,-S,M lom:l••J F:~H'iY0/1
\ A
A
Col~I)"J!l
R(.qia11;tl ~C'aNI;i11
Gn.-~llkl!IO<
Pol'k
;onsult a local not fOuod i1
Mulford Gardens
•
T1 ~ Z·e Cet:!t·
Real Estate Market Coodltfons ror9460S Houses in 94605 Median Us~ Price 5300,000 Me'"'" !J~ys on Market 31
Condos il, 94605 Medon Listing Price $455,430 Median Days on Market43 ActM: Listir!w; 6 19
Sold Date
Price Estimate
Beds
Baths
SqFl
112
www.rvalestate.comhlomevalu89/3500+semlnary+ave,oakland,ca,946051?conv:=rehVJW
101
Kealt:.sune.com HOme vaJue ~nmator. ~ACCurate HOme valUeS
1rt.11a
3500 SEMINARY AVE OAKLAND, CA 94605 3919 OAK llllL RD OAKLAND, CA 94605 61900VERDAIEAVE OAKLAND, CA 94605 3101 HOODST OAKLAND, CA 94605 391411JRNLEY AVE OAKLAND, CA 94605
Eslimatcd Vahle
$328,100
4
2121
611212012
$348,000
4
2
0
3/2012012
$345,000
5
2
0
311512012
$331,000
4
2
0
212212012
$325,000
4
2
0
SR 12-301a Attachment 4 ~
'!:
NeigbborbJod and vahmti:m infbrmation provided by Onboard Informati:s C2012 Onboard infurmati:s. Information deemed relabie but not guaranteed.
Gete~pert ~
Adv1ce
D,:Ui,. ·
Today!~(
I Find out now l
,.
• Besan:b JpsaJ mm
• Area Oyerri;w Spycd Pmpertjea
For Profe:smnali
• Sign juto yow awnmt • Tamah!n¢rngmpducts • PaJtncrwj1bRq!f§tate cpm
Corporate • Abmd BeaJEstate com
·~
• Tenmnftr8
• WmJ:& Partners • MAikctLeadcr
• ASM;Bain • SbprperAgent
Corua:t Wilh Us
·~
•·~ I!d!l&l: • LiWdiD •·~ Yliiillllll: 0 2012 FastS tart Real Estate SeMces lLC dlbla realestate.com and Market Leader Inc. Th5 sile ~ directed at. and made ava&bie to, persom in the comilx:ntal U.S., Alaska and Hawaii only. nd Equal Qpnnrqm
www.raaJestate.contnlomevalues/3500+seminary+ave,oaXIand,ca,948051?conr-rehvrw 102
212
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-047 January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel
SUBJECT:
Interim General Counsel's Contract
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider exercising an option to extend the Interim General Counsel's contract with amendments. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Kenneth Scheidig was appointed Interim General Counsel on November 19, 2012, for three (3) months with the option of three (3) one-month extensions. The initial three-month term will expire on February 19, 2013. Since the District has just begun the process for the recruitment and selection of a permanent General Counsel, it is requested that the Board exercise the options made available in Mr. Scheidig's agreement. It is recommended that the Board exercise the option to extend the contract for all three months at once and approve the First Amendment to the Agreement For The Provision of Interim General Counsel Services. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
The cost of each one-month extension under the present contract is $13,000. Under the amended contract, each one-month extension would be paid at the rate of $110 per hour. BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
Kenneth Scheidig was appointed Interim General Counsel on November 19, 2012. The initial terms of the agreement will expire on February 19, 2013, unless extended. Said agreement contains the option to extend the agreement on a monthly basis for the next three months. On January 9, 2013, the Board approved a Request for Proposal for soliciting an executive search firm in order to recruit for a General Counsel. It is anticipated that it will be at least March 2013 before the selected search firm can begin searching for candidates. It is possible, but unlikely that a new General Counsel will be selected before May 2013. The District needs a General Counsel as its legal adviser as outlined in Transit District Law (Public Utilities Code Section 24938) and Board Policy No. 100 (Section 3.6) and to manage the Legal, Risk Management and Safety and Environmental Engineering Departments. Failure to exercise this option will leave the District without a General Counsel and a temporary Acting General Counsel would need to be appointed. This lack of continuity would leave the District at a disadvantage as Mr. Scheidig is providing legal advice and assistance on several major 103
Report No. 13-047 Page 2 of 2 projects, including but not limited to, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT); the Transbay Terminal project; the procurement of supplemental outside counsel; and researching, handling and providing advice on various other issues. He has further taken action to rein in the use of outside counsel and has reduced those costs by handling matters in-house. He has re-established confidence in the Legal Department throughout the District and within the department itself. Mr. Scheidig provides stability and has a wealth of institutional knowledge due to his 19 plus years of service as the District's general counsel. The proposed First Amendment reflects changes to Paragraph 4 of the original Agreement for the Provision of Interim General Counsel Services (the Contract). The amendment to Paragraph 4 would increase Mr. Scheidig's compensation to the $110.00 rate agreed to in the Fifteenth Amendment to his General Counsel's Employment Agreement of December 15, 2010. Paragraph 4 of said contract provided for the $110.00 hourly rate as an independent contractor. This compensation increase is requested to comply with the provision in the Fifteenth Amendment to the General Counsel's Employment Agreement of December 15, 2010, and due to the intense demands on the Interim General Counsel that were not anticipated at the time of the execution of the original Agreement. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: The advantage of exercising the option to extend the contract is providing quality legal service to the District and re-establishing confidence in the legal department. There is no disadvantage to exercising the option. It is more advantageous to extend the contract for all three months at once rather than have the issue come back to the Board each month, three times. Failure to exercise the option would be a disadvantage as there would be no stability or continuity in the legal department and the Board would have to select an Acting General Counsel, which would be very disruptive to the District and the department as a whole. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Do not exercise any option and appoint an Acting General Counsel. recommended for the reasons identified in this Staff Report.
This option is not
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: The Board approved appointing Kenneth C. Scheidig as Interim General Counsel at its meeting on November 14, 2012. ATTACHMENT: 1. First Amendment to the Agreement for the Provision of Interim General Counsel Services 2. Agreement for the Provision of Interim General Counsel Services Department Head Approval:
Greg Harper, Board President General Counsel
Reviewed by:
Lewis Clinton, Chief Financial Officer
Prepared by:
Denise Standridge, Attorney IV and Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel
104
Att. 1 to SR 13-047
FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR THE PROVISION OF INTERIM GENERAL COUNSEL SERVICES THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR THE PROVISION OF INTERIM GENERAL COUNSEL SERVICES (Amendment) is made, entered into and effective as of the 23'' of January, 2013 (Effective Date) by and between the ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT (DISTRICT) and Kenneth C. Scheidig (CONTRACTOR), collectively referred to as the PARTIES). WHEREAS, DISTRICT and CONTRACTOR entered into an Agreement for the Provision of Interim General Counsel Services (Agreement) on November 19, 2012; and WHEREAS, the first three (3) months of the Agreement will end on February 18, 2013, unless extended by exercise of the three (3) one month Option Periods provided for in Paragraph 2 of the Agreement; and WHEREAS, the PARTIES wish to amend provisions of the Agreement as more specifically set forth in this Amendment; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the faithful performance of the terms and conditions set forth in this Amendment, the PARTIES agree as follows: SECTION 1.
Paragraph 2 is amended to read as follows:
2. DISTRICT agrees to retain CONTRACTOR for a guarantee period of three (3) months (Initial Term), from the Effective Date of the Agreement to February 18, 2013 and (choose one of following: Option A. 'exercises the option to extend the Agreement from February 19, 2013 to March 18, 2013'; or Option B. 'exercises all three (3) one month extensions at this time so that they occur concurrently without further action of the DISTRICT for the period from February 19, 2013 to May 17, 2013.' If Option A is chosen add 'If DISTRICT wishes to continue the services of CONTRACTOR for any of the remaining Option Periods, it shall provide written notice (Notice) to CONTRACTOR prior to the end of each Option Period. If Notice is not provided to CONTRACTOR prior to the end of any of the Option Periods, the PARTIES agree that DISTRICT has not exercised the option to continue CONTRACTOR's services.~~~
SECTION 2. Paragraph 4 is amended to read as follows: 4. CONTRACTOR shall be paid at the rate of One Hundred Ten Dollars ($110.00) per hour for all hours worked each month of the Optional Periods set forth in Paragraph 2, above, less applicable taxes. If CONTRACTOR terminates his services to DISTRICT as provided in Paragraph 3, he shall be paid $110.00 per hour for the hours worked. CONTRACTOR shall be paid every two (2) weeks, commencing on November 30, 2012. If CONTRACTOR is paid the hourly rate he shall be paid the cumulative sum for hours worked in that month, less applicable taxes, on the last day of his employment." SECTION 3. Except as otherwise amended in this Amendment, all provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
1" Amendment to Agreement for Interim Generol Counsel Services Poge 1 of2
105
Att. 1 to SR 13-047
THIS AMENDMENT was made and entered into as of the Effective Date referenced at the beginning of this Amendment. ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT
Date
Greg Harper, President
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Date KENNETH C. SCHEIDIG
Date
1" Amendment to Agreement for Interim General Counsel Services Pagelo/2
106
Att. 2 to SR 13-047
AGREEMENT FOR THE PROVISION OF INTERIM GENERAL COUNSEL SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT FOR INTERIM GENERAL COUNSEL SERVICES (Agreement) is made, entered into and effective as of the 191h day of November 2012 (Effective Date) by and between the ALAMEDACONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT (DISTRICT) and Kenneth C. Scheidig (CONTRACTOR). WHEREAS, DISTRICT requires the services of an attorney to perform the duties and responsibilities as Interim General Counsel pending the recruitment and retention of a permanent General Counsel; and WHEREAS, on November 14, 2012, DISTRICT's Board of Directors by motion, voted to select CONTRACTOR as Interim General Counsel effective Monday, November 19, 2012, and WHEREAS, CONTRACTOR served as DISTRICT'S full-time General Counsel from January 15, 1992 to and including December 31, 2010, when CONTRACTOR retired; and WHEREAS, CONTRACTOR is willing to act as Interim General Counsel, as more specifically set forth in this Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the faithful performance of the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, the parties agree as follows: 1.
DISTRICT retains CONTRACTOR as Interim General Counsel to perform all duties and responsibilities of that position as set forth in Section 24938 of Transit District Law (Cai.Pub.Utilities Code Sec. 24501 et seq.) and Section 3.6 of Board Policy No. 100. These duties include managing the Legal Department and such other departments and employees that were under the supervision of the General Counsel's Office on the Effective Date of this Agreement.
2.
DISTRICT agrees to retain CONTRACTOR for a guaranteed period of three (3) months (Initial Term), from the Effective Date to February 8, 2012, and may exercise three (3) one month options (Option Periods), from February 9, 2013 to March 8, 2013, from March 9, 2013 to April
5, 2013, and from April 6, 2013 to May 3, 2013, by giving written notice (Notice) to CONTRACTOR prior to the end of the Initial Term or the end of each Option Period. If Notice is not provided to CONTRACTOR prior to the end of the Initial Term or any of the Option Periods, the parties agree that DISTRICT has not exercised the option to continue CONTRACTOR's services. 3.
CONTRACTOR agrees that he serves at the pleasure of DISTRICT and he may be terminated at any time during the Initial Term or any of the Option Periods.
DISTRICT agrees that if
CONTRACTOR is terminated during the Initial Term or any of the Option Periods, DISTRICT shall pay CONTRATOR the sum(s) set forth In Paragraph 4, below.
If CONTRACTOR wishes to
terminate his services to DISTRICT prior to the end of any month in the Initial Term or any of the
Agreement for the Provision of Interim General Counsel Services Pagel
107
Option Periods, CONTRACTOR shall provide two (2) weeks written notice to DISTRICT's President. If CONTRACTOR provides notice of termination to District he shall not be entitled to the lump sum monthly payment provided above, but shall be paid for his services in the month of his termination based on the hourly rate set forth in Paragraph 4 for the time worked for DISTRICT based on time sheets on file in DISTRICT's Legal Department. 4.
CONTRACTOR shall be paid the sum of Thirteen Thousand Dollars ($13,000.00) per month, less applicable taxes, for each month this Agreement is in effect, as set forth in Paragraph 2.
If
Contractor terminates his services to DISTRICT as provided in Paragraph 3, he shall be paid $110.00 per hour for the hours worked. CONTRACTOR shall be paid every two (2) weeks, commencing on November 30,2012. If CONTRACTOR is paid the hourly rate he shall be paid the cumulative sum for hours worked in that month, less applicable taxes, on the last day of this employment. 5.
DISTRICT recognizes that CONTRACTOR currently is a retiree of the AC Transit District Employees' Retirement Plan (PLAN). a.
CONTRACTOR receives benefit payments under the PLAN that are attributable to his prior service with DISTRICT. DISTRICT agrees that nothing in this AGREEMENT will have any effect whatsoever on CONTRACTOR's continued benefit payments under the PLAN. Thus, during the term of this AGREEMENT, CONTRACTOR will continue to receive benefit payments under the PLAN as a retiree in accordance with the PLAN's terms, irrespective of CONTRACTOR's service under this AGREEMENT.
In addition, CONTRACTOR agrees that he will not be
entitled to, and hereby waives any claim to, any credit under the PLAN for service performed under this AGREEMENT; accordingly, CO NTACTOR will not receive any additional benefits under the PLAN for such service, other than those he currently is entitled to by his prior service. This paragraph will prevail over any contrary provisions in the PLAN or any other document. b.
CONTRACTOR, in addition to the above benefit payments under the PLAN is entitled to and receives certain other benefits as part of his retirement from DISTRICT, which include paid medical, dental, and vision plans and CONTRACTOR paid life insurance for himself and CONTRACTOR paid medical, dental, vision and life insurance plans for his spouse (ADDITIONAL BENEFITS).
CONTRACTOR shall continue to receive these ADDITIONAL
BENEFITS and nothing in this AGREEMENT shall be considered to reduce, alter or eliminate them during the term of CONTRACTOR's retention as Interim General Counsel or upon termination of said retention. 6.
CONTRACTOR does not accrue general leave, but is entitled to the same holidays as District employees receive.
Agreement for the Provision of Interim General Counsel Services Pagel
108
7. DISTRICT shall provide the following to CONTRACTOR: a.
R~imbursement
of paid California Bar Du~s for 2012 in th~ sum ofTwo Hundr~d Elghty-fiv~ Dollars ($285.00). DISTRICT will pay CONTRACTOR's California Bar Dues for 2013 when they are dve in order to maintain CONTRACTOR's status as an active member of the State Bar.
b. A covered parking space, at no charge, In DISTRICT's garage located at 1600 Franl
In order to manage the Legal Department, CONTRACTOR shall be provided with the General Counsel's office on the sixth (6'h) floor, together with necessary equipment (desk, chairs, computer, phone, copy machine, etc.) and staff to enable Contractor to perform his work as Interim General Counsel.
d. Inclusion In the DISTRICT's insurance provisions, e.g. errors and omissions, workers' compensation, bonding, ac.cldent and travel, etc., provided there is no adr;lltlonal cost to DISTRICT. 8. This Agreement constitutes the entire written agreement between the parties and shall govern their respective rights and responsibilities unless otherwise amended In writing by them. THIS AGREEMENT was made and entered Into as of the Effective Date referenced above. ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT:
Dat~:
KENNETH C. SCHEIDIG
Date: ~·~~1·•"1.
Agreement tor the. Provision of Interim General Counsel Services Page3
109
This page intentionally blank
110
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-048 January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel
SUBJECT:
Authority of the General Counsel and District Secretary Regarding Personnel Matters
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider the adoption of Resolution No. 13-008 repealing Resolution No. 12-022 setting forth the authority and responsibilities of the General Counsel and District Secretary regarding personnel matters. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On March 28, 2012, the Board of Directors adopted Resolution No. 12-022 setting forth the authority and responsibilities of the General Counsel and District Secretary regarding personnel matters and repealing Resolution No. 12-007. Upon review, it is recommended that Board repeal Resolution No. 12-022 as it conflicts with state statute by granting the General Counsel and District Secretary with powers that by law are expressly granted to the General Manager. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: On March 28, 2012, the Board of Directors adopted Resolution No. 12-022 setting forth the authority and responsibilities of the General Counsel and District Secretary regarding personnel matters and repealing Resolution No. 12-007. Upon review by the Interim General Counsel's Office, it has been determined that due to the conflicting nature of the resolution with Public Utilities Code § 24936 (Transit District Law), which provides that the power to administer the personnel system resides solely with the General Manager, and not the other Board Officers, Resolution No. 12-022 should be repealed. The adoption of the resolution also will amend applicable sections of Board Policy No. 100 pertaining to the powers and duties of the General Manager, General Counsel and District Secretary. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: This report does not recommend a course of action with notable advantages or disadvantages.
111
Report No. 13-048 Page 2 of 2 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
The rationale behind the recommendation to repeal Resolution No. 12-022 is outlined in the report and there are no practical alternatives to the contrary. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES:
Resolution No. 12-022, adopted March 28, 2012 Public Utilities Code Section 24936 ATTACHMENTS: 1: Resolution No. 13-008
2:
BRD Memo No. 12-098
Reviewed by:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
Prepared by:
Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
112
REPORT 13-048 ATTACHMENT 1 ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 13-008 A RESOLUTION REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 12-022 SETTING FORTH THE AUTHORITY AND THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL AND DISTRICT SECRETARY REGARDING PERSONNEL MATTERS WHEREAS, on March 28, 2012, the Board of Directors adopted Resolution No. 12-022 setting forth the authority and responsibilities of the General Counsel and District Secretary regarding personnel matters and repealing Resolution No. 12-007; and WHEREAS, Public Utilities Code Section 24936 (Transit District Law), subject to the control of the Board, sets forth the powers and duties and the General Manager, which includes the power to administer the personnel system adopted by the board and except for the officers appointed by the board to appoint, discipline or remove all officers and employees subject to the rules and regulations adopted by the board and the labor provisions of Transit District Law, whichever are applicable; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors wishes to repeal Resolution No. 12-022, as well as related amendments to Board Policy 100 (Board of Directors Rules for Procedure) associated with this resolution, specifically Sections 3.5(g) (District Secretary) and 3.6(g) (General Counsel); NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District does resolve as follows:
Section 1.
Repeals Resolution No. 12-022 in its entirety and related amendments to
Board Policy 100.
Section 2.
This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage by four affirmative votes of the Board of Directors. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of January, 2013
Greg Harper, President Attest:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary I, Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary for the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors held on the 23rd day of January, 2013, by the following roll call vote:
Resolution No. 13-008
Page 1 of2 113
AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
Approved as to Form and Content:
Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel
Resolution No. 13-008
Page2o/2 114
REPORT 13-048 ATTACHMENT 2
AC TRANSIT DISTRICT Board of Directors
BRD Memo No. 12-098 Meeting Date: March 28, 2012
Committees: Operations Committee External Affairs Committee Board of Directors
0 0 r8J
Planning Committee Finance and Audit Committee Financing Corporation
0 0
0
SUBJECT: Consider the Adoption of Resolution No. 12-022 Setting forth the Authority and the responsibilities of the General Counsel and the District Secretary Regarding Personnel Matters and Repealing Resolution No. 12-007. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
0
Briefing Item
[gj Recommended Motion
~!;!QP.~.R.!~.9.!.!:!1i9.nN9.,H.::QU........... .............. . _ ............ ·····-·········-········-··········-····· -··· ... ···········-···· ........ Budgetarv/Fiscallmpact: None Background/Discussion: The District has three statutory officers: the General Manager, General Counsel and District Secretary. The duties of the General Manager are set forth in Section 24936 of the Public Utilities Code (Transit District Law). The law includes Section 24936(d), which grants the General Manager the duty "To administer the personnel system adopted by the board and except for officers appointed by the board to appoint, discipline, or remove all officers and employees subject to the rules and regulations adopted by the Board and the labor provisions of this law, whichever are applicable." Because each statutory officer's staff reports directly to him/her, each officer should have the authority and responsibility to select, discipline, and remove any personnel reporting to them recognizing that employees are better managed and the District better served when said authority and responsibility rests with each officer. The resolution before the Board seeks to clarify these responsibilities as they pertain to the General Counsel and District Secretary. Prior Relevant Board Actions/Policies: GC Memo No. 12-036 Attachments: Attachment 1: Resolution No. 12-022 Attachment 2: Resolution No. 12-007 Elsa Ortiz, Board President Approved by: Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary Prepared by: Date Prepared: March 23, 2012
Rev. 8/11 115
BRD Memo No. 12-098 Attachment 1
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 12..022 A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH THE AUTHORITY AND THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL AND THE DISTRICT SECRETARY REGARDING PERSONNEL MATTERS AND REPEALING RESOLUTION N0.12..007 WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 24501, et seq., the government of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District is vested in its Board of Directors and said Board is the legislative body of the District empowered by Sections 24881 through 24890, to determine all questions of District policy consistent with the provisions of the Transit District Law; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24884, all matters and things necessary for the proper administration of the affairs of the District which are not provided for in the Transit District Law shall be provided for by the Board; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24885, the Board shall supervise and regulate every transit facility owned and operated by the District, including the fixing of rates, rentals, charges, and classifications, and the making and enforcement of rules, regulations, contracts, practices, and schedules, for or in connection with any transit facility owned or controlled by the District; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24886, the Board has adopted a personnel system for the purpose of recruiting and maintaining an effective working force with good morale. The Board has by resolution determined and created such number and character of positions as are necessary to properly carry on the functions of the District. Except as otherwise provided by the Board, appointments to such positions shall be made by the General Manager; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24926, the Board has appointed and fixed the salary of a General Manager, who shall have full charge of the acquisition, construction, maintenance and operation of the facilities of the District and also the administration of the business affairs of the District and also possesses such powers and duties as are more fully detailed in Section 24936, namely, to administer the personnel system adopted by the Board and except for the General Counsel and the District Secretary, appoint, discipline and remove all officers and employees subject to the rules and regulations adopted by the Board and the labor provisions of the Transit District Law, and federal and state labor law, whichever are applicable; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24938, the General Counsel shall take charge of all suits and other legal matters to which the District is a party or in which it is legally interested. He shall give his advice or opinion in writing whenever required by the Board. He shall be the legal adviser of the General Manager and other District officers and shall prepare or approve the forms of all ordinances, resolutions, contracts, bonds, and other legal documents connected with the business of the District. He shall perform such other and additional services as the Board may require; and
Page 1 of3
Resolution No. 12.022 116
WHEREAS, the General Manager has reviewed and analyzed the said duties, powers, and functions of the General Counsel and the District Secretary in light of the changing nature of the District's activities and, with the full concurrence of the General Counsel and the District Secretary, endorsed the declarations to be made herein and recommended their adoption to this Board. NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit AC Transit does resolve as follows: Section 1. The effective functioning of the District requires a close working relationship between the General Manager, the General Counsel and the District Secretary. The Board Officers shall effectively communicate and to maintain working relationships recognizing that the Board sets policy, and the General Manager implements that policy and oversees all operations. The General Counsel will independently exercise his professional reporting responsibility to the Board, the General Manager and the District Secretary. Section 2. The General Counsel has authority to select, discipline and remove all lawyers and other personnel working in the Office of the General Counsel subject to Board Policies, Administrative Regulations, collective bargaining agreements, and applicable federal and state laws and regulations. Selection and retention of District legal personnel shall be subject to normal budgetary restrictions. The retention of outside counsel to the Board or the District shall be designated by the Board upon consultation with the General Counsel and in compliance with applicable purchasing requirements. Section 3. The District Secretary has full authority to select, discipline and remove all Office of the District Secretary personnel working in the Office of the District Secretary subject to Board Policies, Administrative Regulations, collective bargaining agreements, and applicable federal and state laws and regulations. Selection and retention of District Secretary personnel shall be subject to normal budgetary restrictions. Section 4. Repeals and replaces Resolution No. 12-007 in its entirety and related amendments to Board Policy 100. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage Section 5. by four affirmative votes of the Board of Directors. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of March, 2012.
Elsa Ortiz, President Attest:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
Page 2of3
Resolution No. 12·022 117
I, Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary for the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors held on the 28th day of March, 2012, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
Approved as to Form:
Vincent C. Ewing, General Counsel
Page3of3
Rosolullon No. 12..022
118
BRD Memo No. 12-098 Attachment 2
ALAMEDA.CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 12-007 A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH THE AUTHORITY AND THE RESPONSIBILinES OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL AND THE DISTRICT SECRETARY WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Utilities Coda Section 24501, et seq., the government of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Is vested In Its Board of Dlrectora and said Board Is the legislative body of the District empowered by Sections 24881 through 24890, to determine all questions of District policy consistent with the provisions of the Transit District Law; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24884, all mattars and things necessary for the proper administration of the affairs of the Distdct which are not provided for in the Transit District Law shall be provided for by the Board; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24885, the Board shall supervise and regulate every transit faciHty owned and operated by the District, Including the fixing of rates, rentals, charges, and classifications, and the making and enforcement of rules, regulations, contracts, practices, and schedules, for or In connection with any transit facility owned or controlled by the District; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24888, the Board may adopt a personnel system for the purpose of recruiting and maintaining an effective working force with good morale. The Board shall by resolution determine and create such number and character of positions as are necessary to properly carry on the functions of the District. Except as otherwise provided by the Board. appointments to such positions shall be made by the general manager; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24928, the Board shall appoint and fix the salary of a General Manager, who shall have full charge of the acquisition, construction, maintenance and operation of the faclntles of the District and also the administration of the business affairs of the District and also possesses such powers and dulles as are more fully detailed in Section 24936, namely, to administer the personnel system adopted by the Board and except for the General Counsel and the District Secretary, appoint, discipline and remove all officers and employees subject to the rules and regulations adopted by the Board and the labor provisions of the Transit District Law, whichever are applicable; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24938, the General Counsel shall take charge of all suits and other legal matters to which the District Is a party or In which it Is legally interested. He shall give his advice or opinion in wriUng whenever required by the Board. He shall be the legal adviser of the General Manager and other District officers and shall prepare or approve the forms of all ordinances, resolutions, contrscts, bonds, and other legal documents connected with the business of tha District. He shall perform such other and additional services as the Board may require: and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors desires to establish a poncy concerning the said powers and duties In order that they may be exercised In the best Interests of the District with maximum assistance to the Board and to the General Manager; and
Pagef of4
ResofuUon No. 12..007 119
WHEREAS, the General Manager has reviewed and analyzed the said dulles, powers, and funcllons of the General Counsel and the District Secretary in light of the changing nature of the District's activities and, with the full concurrence of the General Counsel and the District Secretary, endorsed the declarations to be made herein and recommended their adopUon to this Board; and NOW, THEREFORE, be It resolved that the Board of Directors of the Alameda· Contra Costa Transit District hereby adopts the following statement of policy concerning the General Manager, the General Counsel and the District Secretary: Section 1. The effective funcUoning of all District departments requires a close working relationship between the General Manager, all District departments, the General Counsel and the District Secretary. The Board Officers shall continue their efforts toward effective communication and to maintain proper working relationships recognizing fully the overriding policy authority of the Board, the broad administrative power of the General Manager, and the broad legal professional responsibility of the General Counsel to the Board and to the District. Section 2. The General Counsell& the Dlstricrs chief legal officer, with full authority to administer the personnel system adopted by the Board to appoint, discipline and remove all lawyers and other Office of the General Counsel personnel subject to the rules and regulations adopted by the Board and the labor provisions of the Transit District Law, whichever are applicable. Selection and retention of District legal personnel shall, of course, be subject to normal budgetary restrictions. The association of special counsel to the Board shall be designated by the Board upon consultation with the General Counsel. Section 3. The District Secretary has full authority to administer the personnel system adopted by the Board to appoint, discipline and remove all Office of the District Secretary personnel subject to the rules and regulations adopted by the Board and the labor provisions of the Transit District Law, whichever are applicable. Selection and retention of District Secretary personnel shall, of course, be subject to normal budgelary restrictions. Section 4. The General Counsel is free to raise any matter directly with the Board. He may, however, rely on the General Manager as the official representative of the Board and should generally direct his comments to the General Manager and to the Board through the President. Section &. The General Manager will direct that the General Counsel and the District Secretary have full access to Information concerning all District activities and be furnished with copies of all documents sent to the Board at the time of distribution to the Board. Section 6. Where direct contact by District staff members with associated counsel Is necessary, such contact shall be pursuant to the authorization of the General Counsel. Section 1. District contacts with attorneys for outside parties shall be administered by the General Counsel to the extent he deems advisable. Section 8. There should be free communication between the Board and Its individual members with the General Manager, the General Counsel, and the District Secretary, since no Board appointee may be removed except by action of a majority of the
RaoluUon No. 12.007
Page2of4 120
Board. Thare must and can be completa candor and a frea axchange of infonnaUon without fear that a particular position Is jeopardized because of such an arrangement. The General Manager, the General Counsel, and the District Secretary should feel free to answer questions asked by the Board as a whole or Its individual members without referring to the General Manager beforehand. In addition, it should be a responsibility of the Board members and the General Counsel and the District Secretary to keep the General Manager Informed of both quesUons and answers given and the General Manager shall encourage such free exchange of questions and answers. Section 9. This Resolution shall become effective Immediately upon Its passage by four affirmative votes of the Board of Directors. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 251h day of January 2012.
u~ Elsa Ortiz, President
Attest:
I, Unda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary for the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors held on the 25th day of January 2012, by the following roll call
vote: AYES:
DIRECTORS HARPER, WAu.ACE, WILLIAMS, PEEPLES, YOUNG, PRESIDENT ORTIZ, VICE PRESIDENT DAVIS
NOES:
NONE
ABSENT:
NONE
ABSTAIN:
NONE
~Secretary Page3of4
R1111olurton No. 12o007 121
Approved as to Fonn and as to Content:
r
~7
VIncent mng.Uounsel
RIISO(UI/on No, 12.007
Pase4or4 122
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-038 January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
SUBJECT:
Travel Authorization
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider authorizing travel to American Public Transportation Association (APTA) 2013 Legislative Conference for members of the Board of Directors (March 10-12, 2013) and the General Manager (March 9-11, 2013) in Washington, D.C. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In accordance with Board Policy 180A, this report requests approval of out-of-state travel for Board members to attend the APTA 2013 Legislative Conference in Washington, D.C. Th is conference directs the industry's advocacy effort to the U.S. Congress and Administration. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
The estimated cost of the trip is $3A06 and includes registration, airfare, lodging, per diem and ground transportation.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
Pursuant to Board Policy 180A, all out-of-state travel for Directors and Officers to attend a conference or a meeting related to District business and at District expense, shall be approved by action of the Board of Directors prior to incurring expenses. This travel authorization has been prepared in accordance with Board Policy 180A. The APTA Annual Legislative Conference directs the industry's advocacy effort and legislative strategy to the U.S. Congress and Administration and offers sessions with key members of Congress, Hill staff, Administration officials, and Washington opinion makers. It is attended by board members, policy makers, transit operators, consultants, manufacturers and suppliers, local coalition members, and state association leaders.
123
Report No. 13-038 Page 2 of 2 Estimated costs: Conference Fee {For members) Airfare lodging {5 nights @ $350/night) Per Diem {6 days @ $71/day IRS rate) Ground Transportation {6 days @ $30/day) Total
$650 $400 $1,750 $426 $180 $3,406
Upon return from the trip, pursuant to Board Policy 180A, Directors are to provide a brief oral or written summary of their activities and/or information learned during the trip not later than the next Board meeting. In accordance with Policy 180A, the Board is asked to authorize out-of-state travel to the 2013 APTA legislative Conference for members of the Board and the General Manager. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
This conference directs the industry's advocacy effort to the U.S. Congress and Administration and includes the opportunity to meet with members of Congress and Administration officials. The impact on the District of sending Directors to this conference would be entirely positive. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
None. This item was prepared at the request of Board members. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES:
Board Policy 180A - Travel and Meeting Expense Reimbursements for Directors and Board Officers. ATTACHMENTS:
1:
APTA 2013 legislative Conference Preliminary Program
Prepared by:
Kathleen Eichmeier, Assistant District Secretary
124
SR 13-038
Attachment 1
2013 LEGISLATIVE CONFERENCE
PRELIMINARY
PROGRAM J.W. Marriott Hotel Washington, DC
PRELIMINARY PROGRAM* *subject to change
Saturday, March 9 10 a.m.- 5 p.m.
Registration
10 a.m.- 6 p.m.
Committee and Board of Directors Meetings
Sunday, March 10 7 a.m. - 6 p.m.
Registration
7 a.m. - 5 p.m.
Committee Meetings
5-6:30 p.m.
Welcome to Washington, General Session Hear the most up to date information on the DC political scene and get insight on the legislative agenda for the 113'h Congress from a renowned political commentator.
6:30-7:30 p.m.
Welcome Reception Over cocktails and light fare, join your colleagues for a reception and networking opportunity to kick off the conference.
Monday, March 11 7 a.m.- 4:30 p.m.
Registration
125
7:30-8:45 a.m.
The Insider Perspective on the Transit Industry Start your day off with a taste of politics at this sit-down breakfast briefing. Hear a prominent transportation insider address some of the key issues facing the industry such as implementation of MAP-21, appropriations, and the timing for the next authorization bill.
9- 10:15 a.m.
Opening General Session: What's Ahead for Transit- New Opportunities in 2013 The conference's first general session will kick off with welcoming remarks from APTA's leadership. Session participants will then hear a special keynote address from a U.S. Department of Transportation official.
10:30- 11:45 a.m.
General Session: View from the Hill Hear directly from key congressional staff on how the U.S. Senators and Representatives they work for are addressing issues facing public transportation and high-speed rail.
12 noon - 1:30 p.m.
Lunch & Entertainment (tickets required) Be entertained at a luncheon featuring the satirical musings of The Capitol Steps, the famous musical troupe that puts the "mock" in democracy.
1:45-3:15 p.m.
Update from U.S. DOT Listen to key modal administrators of the U.S. Department of Transportation. Important program updates and MAP-21 initiatives will be discussed.
3:30- 4:45 p.m.
Expanding the Transit Coalition: Partners in Transportation Authorization Join representatives of stakeholders in the authorization process as they discuss how their organizations advocated for MAP-21 and are gearing up for the next authorization 2 126
bill. APTA partners with a broad spectrum of interest and membership groups in order to advance transit's message. Plan to attend this session to learn how important partners approached the authorization process.
Tuesday, March 12
7:30- 11 a.m.
Registration
8 -10:30 a.m.
Morning General Session: Get Started With Members of Congress Breakfast Start the most important day of the conference with a full breakfast and hear directly from Members of Congress on issues affecting public transportation and high-speed rail.
11 a.m. - 5:30 p.m.
Capitol Hill Visits Reserve this time and make appointments to v1s1t your Senators and Representatives to brief them about your system or business and advocate for continued growth in the federal investment in public transportation and high speed rail.
5:30- 7:30 p.m.
Closing Reception Meet and greet lawmakers and their staffs as we close the conference with a Capitol Hill reception that provides one more chance to talk transit in a relaxed setting. As in previous years, APT A will join with the Amalgamated Transit Union (A TU) to hold a joint reception to conclude both organizations' legislative conferences.
Wednesday, March 13
7:30- 10 a.m.
Registration
9 a.m. - 5 p.m.
Capitol Hill Visits (Continued) 3 127
Reserve this time and make appointments to visit your Senators and Representatives to brief them about your system or business and advocate for continued growth in the federal investment in public transportation.
4 128
From: Patrick D O'Keeffe [mailto:pokeeffe@ci .emeryvi lle.ca .us]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 2:24 PM To: David Armijo
Cc: Charles Bryant; Diana L Keena Subject: Emeryville-Berkeley-Oakland Transit Study Advisory Committees Dear David : The City of Emeryville has been selected to receive funding from the Federal Transit Administration via Caltrans for an Emeryville-Berkeley-Oakland Transit Study. The purpose of the study is to examine the establishment of a multi-city transit corridor to supplement and enhance existing public transportation for the support of new job-producing commercial enterprise and residents in West Oakland, West Berkeley and Emeryville . Startup is expected in February. The timeline and committee structure are attached . We are asking agency directors to appoint members of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and the Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) . The TAC will meet eight times at three- to-fourmonth intervals. We hope to convene the TAC in February, and to bring a draft Request for Proposals to the TAC for comments. The PAC will receive public briefings at the beginning, middle and end of the process. AC Transit is an important partner in this study. We are requesting that you appoint a staff member to the TAC. Nathan Landau in Planning and Steve Newhouse in Operations worked with us on the grant application. We are also requesting that you ask AC Transit Board Chair Elsa Ortiz to serve on the PAC or appoint a Board member to the PAC. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact our Director of Planning and Building Charlie Bryant at [email protected] or 510-596-4361, or Associate Planner Diana Keena at [email protected] or 510-596-4335. It would be helpful to have your response by February 1. We look forward to hearing from you. Thanks!
Sincerely, Patrick D. O' Keeffe Emeryville City Manager
129
Emeryville:Berkeley-Oakland Transit Study Committe~s ---
Organization
-------
---
--
··-
City of Oakland City of Berkeley City of Emeryville
-------·-·--------
""
Emeryville Transportation Management Association
~'--
-
Berkeley Gateway Transportation Management Associatio_n Alameda Contra Costa Transit -
···--
TAC 3 staff members*
""
----
. ··---
Bay Area Rapid Transit "Metropolitan Tran~i!Commission- Transit Sustainabili~y_ Project Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority ---East Bay Green Corridor -----West Oakland Commerce Association
Mayor/designee & resident -----3 staff members* Mayor/designee & resident ---3 staff members* Mayor/designee & resident Staff member Board chair ----------Same as ETMA Board chair ---- ----------Staff member Board chair or member ···-·· Staff member _ j Board chair or member Staff member I Staff member Staff member - -------
130
East Bay Housing Organizations Center for Independent ~iving- Disabled Services ---------- --- ----------
-
--------------------
* from Public Works, Planning, and Economic Development
···--
·--------
T= - -
----- --------
Oakland Metropolit~n Chamber of Commerce Berkeley Chamber of Commerce Emeryville Chamber of Commerce
PAC
-- · - -
------
.. - -
1---
----------
_ ':fi_c_~_ president Chamber chair "-- -Chamber chair -- ----Chamber chair Board chair/designee -Board chair/designee
-----------
--
--
-
California Department of Transportation Transportation Planning Grants Fiscal Year 2012-2013
PROJECT TIME LINE Emeryville-Oakland-Berkeley Transit Study
Project Title
-
L OCO
T ask
No.
Total Cost
Responsible Party
Grant Amount
Cash Match
131
1_1
Kickoff Meeting with canrans
CityofEmetyvine
Staff Coordination
City of Emeryville
Technical Advisory Committee Meetings
4.
4.2 4.3 4.4 4 ,5
4.6 4. 4.8
RFP and Contract for Consultant
$500
$565 $3,050
$2.700
585 $350
Citv/TAC C~y of Emeryville
$2,824
$2,500
$0
$1 .581
$1 ,400
$181
City of Emeryville
$585
$500
City of Emeryville FY2013114
FY-2014115
L OCO
In-Kind Match JAS ONDJFMAMJ JASONDJFMAMJ JA SOND J F
1.0 Ptojecl.lnltlatlon and Coonllnallon 1.2 1.3 1.4 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 4.0
Grantee
Fbcal v.... 2012113
Fund Source
•
Meeting notes Monthly mee1ing notes
•
$324
•
-
I I • I I • I • I • I I • I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Post Cards. Flyers. Press Releases
City/Consultant
$13,555
$12,000
585 $1,5$5
Options Community YVoctshops (3)
C~y/TAC/Consu~ant
$13.555 58.472 $13,555 58,472
$12.000 $7,500 $12,000 $7,500
$1,555 $648 $1,555 $648
$11,296
$10,000
$1 ,296
$11,296
$10,000
$1 ,296
$22 ,591
$20,000
$2,591
$11 ,296
$10,000
$1,296
Options Commissions Councils Boards
TAC/Consultant
Plan Community Workshops (3) ian CommiSSIOns Councils Boards
CityfTAC/Consull:ant TAC/Consultant
•I
Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant
Existing and P otential Transit Modeling Future Travel Demand Gap and Phasing Analysis Route, Mode, Operator Options Ridership Projedions for Options Institutional and Funding Options
$11,296
$10,000 $15,000
$1,943
$14,800
$1,917
•• . I ••I . •
Consultant Consultant
$11 .2913 $11,296 $11 ,296 $11 ,2_913 $11 ,29 $11 ,296 $11 ,2913 $11 ,296 $5,648
$10.000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $5,000
$1,296 $1 ,296 $1,296 $1,296 $1,296 $1,296 $1,296 $1 ,296 $648
Consultant
$9.036
$8,000
$1,036
Consultant
$3.389 $2,2591
$3.000 s2.ooo 1
$259 1
$3,050
$2,700
$350
Opt/oM Evaluation VMTIC021Ene rgy R eduction Projections Economic Development Potential
Consultant Consultant
Effects on Minority Communities Safety and Security Effects on Existing Trnnsit
Consultant
Capital & Operating Cost Projections
Consultant
Funding Sources Cost/8enefit Analysis
Consultant
Consultant Consuttant
4 .\1 [UP tOns Kepon
Plan,__
5.0 5.1 !Administrative Draft P lan 5.2 Ornft. Plan I 5.3 Final Plan I 6.0 Pto}ecl. /llanagement & Admin_, 6.1 Fiscal Administration 6.2 Ouarterty Reports I
I
TOTALS
Consultant
I
C~of Emeryville
C~y of Emeryville
I I
$1 ,0171
S282,390f
ssoo
I
$250,0001 $31 ,4181
Questionnaire and web page Post cards, flyers, press releases Presentation, workshops summary, photos Meetings notes Presentation, workshops summary, photos Meet1ngs notes
land Use Memo Transit Memo Transit Demand Memo Gap and Phasing Memo Opt ions Memo R idersh ip Projedions Memo
-----
Institutional and Funding Memo VMT/C021Energy Memo Economic Development Memo
•• •
Effects on Minorities Memo Safety and Security Memo Effects on Transit Memo Cost Projections Memo F unding Sources Memo CosVBenefit Memo OpUons Report
I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I ~dministrative Draft Plan I I I I I I Draft Pian I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - Final Plan
I I I I I
$369
$117 1
-
$324
$1,296
$16 ,943 $16 ,717
•I ll •
$324
Confaxt lind Options ldentitlt:atlon Existing and Planned land Use
!Meeting notes !consultant contract
I
Public OUtl'each Questionnaire and Web Page
Deliverabl e
I I I I I
Invoice Packages
I I I I I S912l
•
I •
I •
I •
I •
I •
I •
j •
(Ouarterty Reports
This page intentionally blank
132
2013 STANDING COMMITIEE REQUESTS- CHAIR
Director Peeples and Director Davis indicated they would serve as chair at the pleasure of the Board President.
133
2013 LIAISON COMMITIEE ASSIGNMENTS REQUESTED 2012 ASSIGNMENTS
'
I
2013 REQUESTS
I
#of Reps/ Voting (V)
...
Member(s) Williams
1
Young, Peeples
•••
Young
2V
ACTransit/City of Emeryville Liaison Committee
Harper, Young
•••
Harper,
BART/ACTransit Liaison Committee
Davis, Harper
Wallace
Harper
Williams, Peeples
•••
Williams
2V
Ortiz, Peeples
•••
Ortiz
2V
Harper
•••
Harper
1
Harper, Ortiz, Williams
•••
Harper,
3V [Wards 2, 3, 4]
Retirement Board
Peeples
•••
Service Review Committee (SRC)/Advisory Comte (SRAC)
Williams
•••
INTERNAL Liaison Committees
Member(s)
Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC)
Williams
AC Transit/City of Berkeley Interagency Liaison Committee
Central Alameda County Policy Committee [PACHayward/San Leandro] City of Alameda/AC Transit Interagency Liaison Committee (ILC)
District Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee Policy Steering Committee (BRT)
South Alameda County Policy Committee [D-2 Fremont/Newark] Transbay Task Force
Davis, Young Williams
Alternate(s)
••• •••
Alternate(s)
2V
Young Wallace
Ortiz
2V
1 Williams
1
Young
2V
Williams
1
2012 ASSIGNMENTS
2013 REQUESTS
Member(s)
Alternate(s)
Member(s)
Alternate(s)
#of Reps/ Voting (V)
Alameda County Transportation Commission * [Compensation of $250 per meeting attended]
Harper
Ortiz
Harper
Ortiz
1V
Alameda Co. Conference of Mayors Conference
Young
Williams
Young
Williams
1
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)**
Williams
•••
Williams
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
Peeples
Harper
Young
•••
Young
1
Contra Costa Conference of Mayors
Wallace
•••
Wallace
1
Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA)
Peeples
Young
Bus Transit Coordinating Committee • (CCTA) [2 year ex-officio appt]
Next Appt in 2015
N/A
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)
Davis, Harper
•••
Policy Advisory Committee to Study Tri Valley Transit
Davis
Young
Transbay Joint Powers Authority*
Ortiz
Harper
Ortiz
Wallace
Peeples
Wallace
EXTERNAL Liaison Committees
Bay Area Alliance for Sustainable Communities
West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee*
Harper
Young
134
1
1 1V
Harper
Director Peeples and Davis have indicated no preference in committee assignments. • Form 700 Required • •• Alternates appointed as needed
1
2 Young
1V
Harper
1V 1V
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE January 23, 2013 Agenda Items A‐1 – A‐4
135
136
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-016 January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
External Affairs Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Monthly legislative Report
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Receive Monthly Legislative Report and Approve Legislative Positions. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This report provides an update on the monthly legislative activities at Federal and State levels; and requests approval of legislative positions on state bills. The Federal legislature passed legislation to avoid the fi sca l cliff and provide transit commuter tax benefit parity in the 112nd Congress. The 113th Congress has been sworn in. The supermajority in the upper and lower houses of the State legislature provides both opportunities to pass legislation that has been rejected; however, the Governor has indicated a need for fi scal restraint even though the budget is balanced. Cap & Trade revenues are estimated at approximately $600 million through 2014. BUDGETARY/FISCALIMPACT: There is no budgetary or fi sca l impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Federal legislation Update 1) 112nd Congress Ends and Averts Fiscal Cliff After a contentious end to a lame duck session, the 112nd Congress has concluded. A drop off of the fiscal cliff has been extended by at least two months. If the sequestration is allowed to go forth at that time, an 8.2% cut in FTA Small Starts I New Starts domestic discretionary spending could possibly affect the allotment for the Bus Rapid Transit Program in the 2014 federal budget.
137
Report No. 13-016 Page 2 of 3 2} Transit Parity The 112nd Congress passed a tax provision that increases the transit commuter tax benefit to $240 per month through 2013, making this benefit equal to the tax benefit for parking from employers. The commuter benefit was previously $125 per month. This provision is retroactive to 2012. 3} 1131h Congress Begins The AC Transit House and Senate delegation members have received their appointments. AC Transit House members serve on the Appropriations, Budget, Education & the Workforce, Homeland Security, and Science, Space & Technology Committees. Senator Feinstein serves as Chairperson of the Intelligence Committee and Senator Boxer is the Chairperson of the Environment and Public Works Committee.
State Legislation Update 1) 2013-2014 Legislature Is In Session The supermajority in both the upper and lower houses will require Democrats to be disciplined and fiscally careful. It is expected that Governor Brown will hold a tight rein on any attempts to increase the budgets for programs that were cut during last year's session. 2} Cap & Trade Last year was the year the Governor signed AB 1532, which enacted a very broad process on how the expenditure plan for cap and trade revenue will be developed. In short, the measure directs the Department of Finance to develop a plan in consultation with the Air Board and other state agencies. The expenditure plan would outline investments over the next three years, and the first expenditure plan will be introduced in May as part of the Budget Revise process. Before the expenditure plan is finalized, the Air Resources Board must hold two workshops, one in the north and one in the south, and one public hearing. These public meetings have not been set yet.
As the dust begins to settle, a little more information on the amount of funds that might be available is now known. The budget reduces the prior estimate on the amount of cap and trade auction revenue that will be generated in the current fiscal year and in the 2013-14 budget years. The current year revenue estimate has been reduced from $500 million to $200 million, and the amount estimated for the 2013-14 is $400 million, for a two year total of $600 million. These revised amounts reflect the lower than expected sales generated at the November auction. The November auction resulted in revenues of $288 million. Of this amount $55 million was generated for these programs, and the remaining $233 million generated was earmarked to offset increased utility bills for investor owned utilities. Another auction is currently set for February 19, and another one in May. After the February auction, we will have a better idea ifthe state will hit its revenue estimates of $400 million.
As for next steps, the Governor's budget clearly identifies transportation as his highest priority for the use of these funds. 138
Report No. 13-016 Page 3of 3 3) Legislative Matrix
Refer to Attachment 3 for the legislative matrix from Platinum Advisors. The matrix lists bills with recommended Board positions.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: This report is being provided to inform the Board of monthly legislative activities.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: This report provides an update of monthly legislative activities.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: None
ATTACHMENTS: 1: Federal Legislative Report from VanScoyoc Associates 2: State Legislative Report from Platinum Advisors 3: State Bill Matrix from Platinum Advisors 4: FY 2013 Federal Advocacy Program 5: FY 2013 State Advocacy Program
Department Head Approval:
Dennis Butler, Chief Planning & Development Officer
Prepared by:
Beverly Greene, Director of Legislative Affairs & Community Relations
139
This page intentionally blank
140
SR: 13-016 Attachment 1
S f ~YOC
VAN A
B
S
0
C
I
A
T
E
S
Transportation Update January 8, 2013
Steven 0. Palmer, Vice President Jacqueline Schmitz, Director
Fiscal Cliff. In the first days of the new year and the final days of the II t
11
Congress, Congress passed legislation dealing with the fiscal cliff. This legislation included changes to a number of tax rates, as well as a two-month delay to the planned budget sequestration. The budget sequestration calls for an 8.2 percent cut to domestic spending programs; however, Highway Trust Fund programs, including the transit formula programs, are exempted. Under the sequestration, some FTA General Fund programs including New Star1s and administrative and research expenses would see cuts. The enacted fiscal cliff legislation also includes two tax provisions relevant to transit: • •
Section 412 extends the alternative fuels tax credit through the end of calendar 2013. It is also retroactive for the year 2012, during which the provision had previously been lapsed . Section 203 extends transit benefit parity through January I, 2014, bringing the maximum level of transit benefits that employers can offer up to $240 a month- now equivalent to the maximum allowable parking benefit. This provision is also retroactive for the year 2012.
Last week, the 113111 Congress was officially sworn in. House and Senate Leadership in each par1y remained the same, although House Speaker John Boehner was elected by a narrower-than-usual margin, as a dozen Republicans cast protest votes for various other individuals. Issues facing the new Congress include the need to raise the debt ceiling in order to honor debts previously incurred; dealing with the budget sequestration, which was delayed for two months by the fiscal cliff deal; and the need to fund the federal government for the final six months of fiscal year 2013 after the appropriations continuing resolution expires on March 27, 2013.
113111 Congress.
In transpm1ation, areas of focus will include authorization of new rail and water resources legislation, as well as oversight of the implementation of MAP-21. On the House Transpot1ation and Infrastructure Committee, new Chairman Bill Shuster (R-PA) and Ranking Democrat Nick Rahall (DWV) have expressed interest in beginning work on MAP-21 reauthorization sooner rather than later. MAP-21 runs through Sept. 30, 20 14.
AC Transit Congressional Delegation.
The House and Senate are continuing to work to fill committee and subcommittee rosters. The Committee assignments announced thus far include: House • • • •
Barbara Lee: Appropriations; Budget George Miller: Education and the Workforce (Ranking Democratic Member) Eric Swalwell: Homeland Security; Science, Space, and Technology Mike Honda: Appropriations, Budget
141
2 Senate • Dianne Feinstein: Appropriations; Intelligence (Chainnan); Judiciary; Rules • Barbara Boxer: Environment and Public Works (Chairman); Commerce, Science, and Transportation; Foreign Relations; Ethics
FTA New Starts/Small Starts Rule. The Federal Transit Administration issued a final rule to streamline certain elements of the New Starts and Small Starts programs. The highlights of these changes include: • A simpler, more straightforward approach for measuring a proposed project's costeffectiveness; • Expanded range of environmental benefits used to evaluate proposed projects; • New economic development factors for the ratings process; and • Streamlined project evaluation process by reducing regulations and red tape. FT A will also be working on further rulemakings and guidance to update the program consistent with changes in MAP-21. DOT Appointees. At the close of the 112'" Congress, the Senate also approved several of the President's nominees for senior positions in the Department of Transportation. This included Polly Trottenberg to serve as Undersecretary for Policy. Trottenberg formerly served in several positions on Capitol Hill, including as a senior staffer for Senator Barbara Boxer.
###
142
SR: 13-016 Attachment 2
January 10, 2013 TO:
Director Elsa Ortiz, President, and Members of the Board David J. Armijo, General Manager Beverly Greene, Director, Community Relations & Legislative Affairs
FR:
Steve Wallauch Platinum Advisors
RE:
Legislative Update
"Fiscal discipline is not the enemy of democratic governance, but rather its fundamental predicate." Gov. Jerry Brown New Session: The 2013-14 Legislative Session is officially underway, with 39 new members
settling into their new offices and waiting their turn to have pictures and plaques carefully placed on their walls. While leadership in both houses has made the case to temper expectations of the 2/3 majority held in both houses, we expect caution to be thrown to wind when the avalanche of new bills breaks loose on the February 22"d introduction deadline. The deadline to submit new bill proposals to Legislative Counsel for drafting is January 25th. Committee Assignments: With the start of each session, leadership in both houses reorganize
committee memberships and shuffle committee chairs. The following are the committee assignments for AC Transit's delegation. •
Senator Ellen Corbett --Majority Leader, Member of Banking & Finance, Business Professions & Economic Development, Energy Utilities & Communications, Environmental Quality, Insurance, Judiciary,
•
Senator Mark DeSaulnier- Chair-Transportation & Housing, Member of Budget & Fiscal Review, Energy Utilities & Communications, Governance & Finance, Health, Senator Loni Hancock- Chair -Public Safety, Member of Budget & Fiscal Review, Education, Elections & Constitutional Amendments, Environmental Quality Assemblywoman Susan Bonilla- Member of Budget, Insurance, Utilities & Commerce,
• •
1
143
• • • •
•
Assemblyman Rob Bonta- Chair-Public Employees & Retirement, Member of Banking & Finance, Elections & Redistricting, Transportation Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan- Chair-Education, Member of Accountability & Administrative Review, Transportation, Utilities & Commerce, Assemblyman Bill Quirk- Member of Agriculture, Appropriations, Public Safety, Rules, Utilities & Commerce, Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner- Chair-Rules Committee, Member of Business Professions & Consumer Protection, Natural Resources, Public Safety, Utilities & Commerce, Assemblyman Bob Wieckowski- Chair-Judiciary, Member of Health, Insurance, Public Employees & Retirement,
Budget: This morning Governor Brown released his spending plan for 2013-14. The proposed 2013-14 Budget outlines a $98 billion spending plan that contains no deficit, provides a $1 billion reserve and ends the fiscal year with a $78S million surplus. Where did the $1.9 billion deficit the LAO predicted go? First, the proposed budget is frugal in repaying prior year loans from special funds. In the current fiscal year about $1.6 billion in loans from various special funds that were scheduled to be repaid in 2013-14. The Governor repays those funds that are needed, but delays repayment of $1.3 billion until the following year. While the Governor's budget reduces the amount of revenue realized by the dissolution of RDAs, the Administration's numbers continue to be much higher than the LAO's estimates. The Governor's numbers are based on Finance's recently completed review process. The budget assumes the Prop 98 General Fund contribution will be reduced by $2.1 billion in 2012-13, and by $1.1 billion in 2013-14 due to the increase in property tax revenues allocated to schools by the RDA dissolution process. The LAO estimated a $1.4 billion benefit in 2012-13. Finally, the Budget dedicates all Prop 39 revenue to schools. This action not only allocates funds for energy efficiency projects statewide, it also counts toward the Prop 98 obligation, which reduces the general fund contribution to schools. In addition to modest growth in all of the main revenue sources (income tax, sales tax, and corporation tax), these three items address the bulk of the disparity between the LAO's and DOF's estimates.
Transportation
July 1, 2013 marks the official start of the Transportation Agency, which will oversee everything with wheels and pedestrians, as well as the Board of Pilot Commissioners. The new Agency will oversee a budget of $21.1 billion- all but $200 million is from special funds. 2 144
State Transit Assistance- The budget estimates STA funds will be $391 million in 2013-14, and the estimate for the current year is now at $415 million. The original estimate for 2012-13 was $469 million. However, regardless of the estimate the amount of funds allocated through STA will depend on the amount collected each quarter. Based on diesel prices and consumption the amounts can vary from quarter to quarter.
Cap & Trade Revenue- The budget summary points out that the details of how the cap and trade auction revenue will be spent is still being developed, but the summary outlines the Governor's three priorities. First, with transportation being the largest contributor of GHG, reducing transportation emissions would be the top priority. This includes funding mass transit, high speed rail, electrification of heavy duty vehicles, sustainable communities, and energy projects that complement high speed rail. Second would be funding to reduce GHG used for commercial and residential energy needs, and then funding to reduce GHG emissions from the electricity used to convey water in California.
Infrastructure Needs Assessment- This spring the Agency will create a working group comprised of representatives from state, local, and regional entities. This group will be tasked with examining the CTC's transportation needs assessment and explore funding options, such as pay as you go, and evaluate the most appropriate level of government to deliver high priority projects.
MAP-21/mplementatian- The budget summary does not contain a specific proposal for implementing changes enacted in the federal MAP-21 Act. However, it is the Administration's position to maintain the status quo on splitting funds between the state and locals, while continuing to work with the Legislature on any implementation measures.
Active Transportation Program -Somewhat tied to the changes in MAP-21, the Governor is proposing to create the Active Transportation Program by consolidating various bicycle and pedestrian funding programs .. The proposal would consolidate the federal Transportation Alternatives Program, Safe Routes to School programs (state & federal), Environmental Enhancement & Mitigation funds, and the Bicycle Transportation Account. Since many entities submit the same project for several of these funding programs, the hope is that a consolidated account will streamline the process and focus on high priority projects that meet SB 375 goals.
Co/trans Local Assistance- As a result of the zero-based budgeting review the budget proposes to cut $1.5 million and 20 positions, and to establish staffing levels that are consistent across the district offices. In addition, $13.4 million in state funds will be shifted to local federal funds in order to offset state costs on local projects.
3 145
Planning Programs- The budget proposes to streamline and standardize Caltrans planning documents, reduce administrative costs for existing grant programs, and add positions to complete necessary project initiation documents.
Non-Article 19 Funds- The budget continues with the practice of using $67 million in special fund revenue that is not restricted by Article 19 of the Constitution to partially offset the debt service on transportation bonds. Article 19 restricts the use of fuel excise tax revenue and other revenues to capital projects. Non-Article 19 revenues are generated through rental incomes and the sale of surplus property.
4
146
SR: 13-016 Attachment 3
ADVISORS
December 11, 2012
Table 1: Board Action Items Bills
Subject
Status
AB 8 is the reintroduction of SB 1455 which died ~SSEMBLY PRINT (Perea D) when time ran out on the last day of session. This Alternative fuel bill would extend the sunset dates for various clean air and alternative fuel vehicle funding and vehicle programs. echnologies: funding programs. Specifically this bill proposes to extend the following fee programs to December 31, 2023:
AC Transit Position
~
~
(Steinberg D) Sustainable Communities Investment
•
AB 118 -- Authorizes a vehicle registration fee to fund the Alternative and Ren ewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program.
•
AB 923 -- Increased the vehicle registration fee for vehicles registered in specified areas in the state and increased the Tire Recycling Fee to fund air emissions reduction activities.
•
The Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment (Carl Moyer) Program, which can be used to fund the incremental cost of cleaner-than-required vehicles, engines, and equipment
~he bill also includes provi sion s prohibiting CARB f:rom moving forward with the Clean Fuel Outlet regulations and to instead use AB 118 funds for he construction and operation of a hydrogen fueling network in California. SB 1 is the re introduction of SB 1156, which was SENATE PRINT vetoed by the Governor. The Governor vetoed his bill, but stated he is interested in implementing thi s type of program once the dissolution of redevelopment is complete and the
Recommended Position: Support ~C Tran sit did not ake a position on SB 1455. SB 1455 was gutted and amended at the end of session and the Board was not able to consider a position in time.
Recommended Position : Watch ~C Transit did not 1
147
Authority.
general fund savings realized.
l'ake a position on SB 1156
SB 1 would allow local governments to create a Sustainable Communities Investment Authority hat would utilize tax increment financing to inance specified activities within a sustainable communities investment area. SB 11 also reintroduces SB 1455 from last session. SENATE PRINT Like AB 8, this bill extends the following fee (Pavley D) Alternative fuel programs to December 31, 2023: and vehicle echnologies: AB 118 --Authorizes a vehicle registration funding fee to fund the Alternative and Renewable programs. Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program.
SB 11
Recommended Position: Support
•
•
AB 923 --Increased the vehicle registration fee for vehicles registered in specified areas in the state and increased the Tire Recycling Fee to fund air emissions reduction activities.
•
The Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment (Carl Moyer) Program, which can be used to fund the incremental cost of cleaner-than-required vehicles, engines, and equipment
AC Transit did not ake a position on SB 1455. SB 1455 was gutted and amended at the end of session and the Board was not able to consider a position in time.
he bill also includes provisions prohibiting CARB rom moving forward with the Clean Fuel Outlet regulations and to instead use AB 118 funds for he construction and operation of a hydrogen ueling network in California. ~ (Wolk D)
Infrastructure financing districts: voter approval: repeal.
SB 33 is the reintroduction of SB 214 from last session. SB 214 along with SB 1156 and AB 2144 were all vetoed by the Governor. While SB 1 makes changes based on existing redevelop law, SB 33 would create a new tax increment financing structure based on Infrastructure Financing District (IF D) law.
SENATE PRINT Recommended Position: Watch AC Transit did not ake a position on SB 1156
SB 33 would eliminate the vote requirement to create an IFD and expands the type of projects an IFD may fund. 2
148
SCA4 (Liu D) Local government ransportation projects: special axes: voter approval.
SCA 4 would amend the Constitution to lower the SENATE PRINT ~oter approval threshold to 55% for the imposition, extension, or renewal of a local tax for ransportation projects. SCA 4 is one of several Constitutional amendments introduced aimed at lowering the voter threshold to enact local taxes for specific purposes. SCA 8 is another measure that would amend the SENATE PRINT Constitution to lower the voter approval hreshold to 55% for the imposition, extension, or renewal of a local tax for transportation projects.
SCAB (Corbett D) Local government ransportation projects: special Senator Corbett has also introduced SCA 9, which axes: voter would allow for a sales tax to be imposed with a approval. 55% voter approval if the funding is used for local community and economic development projects.
Recommended Position: Support AC Transit supported ACA 23, which was identical to SCA 4.
Recommended Position: Support AC Transit supported ACA 23, which was identical to SCA 8.
3
149
This page intentionally blank
150
SR : 13-016 Attachment 4
2013 Federal Advocacy Program Funding •
FY 2012 Grant Opportunities- Secure federal funds for key capital projects and support funding for 2013 Project Priorities for: o East Bay BRT Improvements within the Small Starts Program and other programs o AC Transit's Intelligent Transportation and Communication System upgrades o Bus lifting equipment program o Rehabilitation of aging facilities
•
Advocate for supplemental funding through the Federal Transit Administration to offset rising operating costs without jeopardizing total funding available for capital projects.
•
Support funding for the Transbay Terminal.
•
Support/seek additional funding for lifeline services including, but not limited to services for access to work, school or medical facilities.
•
Support efforts to rescind the planned across-the-board cuts to all federal programs, called "Sequestration," as enacted under the Budget Control Act of 2011 . Such cuts would reduce funding for the Small Starts Program, which could impact the East Bay BRT project schedule.
Transportation Authorization Principles •
Support efforts to increase the gas tax or to increase other revenues to replenish and sustain long-term growth of the Highway Trust Fund/Mass Transit Account.
•
Support transportation authorization reform that emphasizes greater funding levels to urban mass transit systems, and oppose efforts to reduce spending on transit formula programs.
•
Support FTA and Congressional efforts to make State of Good Repair for transit bus systems a strategic priority.
Pagej l 151
•
Support broad funding eligibility for BRT projects in federal transit programs, including New Starts and Small Starts programs,
•
Seek revisions to the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) grandfather clause that supports the direct representation of transit properties on local transportation policy boards.
Other Advocacy •
Advocate for transit-supportive legislation that mitigates global warming and/or calls for environmental stewardship and related funding.
•
Support funding and coordination between Health and Human Service (HHS) agencies and other transportation agencies to provide services to HHS clients.
•
Support modal parity in the commute tax benefits.
•
Support legislation that relieves the fiscal burden of mandatory regulations.
Page
12 152
SR : 13-016 Attachment 5
2013 State Advocacy Program Funding
•
Support efforts to implement the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) that at least maintains funding level for mass transit projects and programs for bus operators in the Bay Area.
•
Support the development and implementation of an expenditure plan for AB 32 cap and trade revenue that provides an equitable investment in mass transit capital improvements, operations, and infill/transit oriented development.
•
Support efforts that create new sources of operating funds with equitable distribution to reflect urban transit needs.
•
Support efforts to sustain existing transit revenues .
•
Support efforts that would exempt public transit providers from state sales tax.
•
Support efforts to provide funding for lifeline services including, but not limited to, services for access to work, school or medical facilities .
•
Support local ability to increase fees and gas taxes to be used for local mass transit purposes.
•
Support legislation and programs that would provide funding for global warm ing initiatives, clean air and clean fuels and that support implementation of AC Transit's Climate Action Plan.
•
Seek funding for East Bay Bus Rapid Transit.
•
Support congestion pricing strategies and legislation that provide an equitable multimodal distribution of generated revenues.
•
Support legislative or administrative action to remove State barriers so that Medicaid transportation funds can be used for public trans it services, including ADA paratransit services.
•
Support funding and coordination between Health and Human Service (HHS) agencies and other transportation agencies to provide services to HHS clients.
Pa ge
11 153
•
Support legislation and programs that would provide funding for employee benefits programs.
•
Support funding initiatives that relieve the fiscal burden of mandatory regulations.
Equipment and Operations •
Support legislation or administrative action that would direct Caltrans to establish and maintain HOV lanes on state highway routes and to improve existing HOV lane management to maximize throughput.
•
Support incentives to provide bus contra flow lanes on the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge to/from the Transbay Terminal.
•
Support legislation to exempt public transit vehicles from state and local truck route ordinances.
•
Support legislation or administrative action that would direct Caltrans to permit permanent use of freeway shoulders by public transit buses.
Transit Incentives •
Support legislation to provide incentives for employees and employers to use public transportation to commute to work, including tax credits for purchasing transit passes.
•
Support Clean Air Initiatives that encourage increased public transit use.
•
Support incentives that would give auto insurance credits to heavy transit users.
•
Support common fare programs between Bay Area systems.
•
Support legislation to provide incentives for local governments and developers to incorporate transit passes into the cost of housing.
Environment and Transit Supportive Land Use
•
Support efforts that provide a new form of tax increment financing that promotes economic investment through transit oriented development, and requires the approval of all affected taxing entities.
•
Advocate for transit-supportive legislation that addresses climate change, healthy communities and environments.
Page
12 154
•
Foster transit supportive land use initiatives that require coordination with transit providers in the initial stages of local planning or project development that impacts transit, including density level decisions or transit oriented developments (TODs); and advocate for the required use of: o Transit streets agreements, and o Complete streets plans in which local transportation plans anticipate use of all modes.
•
Support legislation that requires reporting of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) annually through DMV renewal.
Policy Interests •
Support simple majority vote for local transportation ballot tax initiatives.
•
Support legislation to allow District to ban persons for specified offenses from entering district property.
•
Seek revisions to the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) grandfather clause that supports direct representation of transit properties on local transportation policy boards.
•
Redefine agency as Rapid Transit District.
•
Support legislation for STA formula reform that includes federal operating funding as eligible revenue.
•
Support efforts that maintain existing Workers' Compensation regulation.
Page j3 155
This page intentionally blank
156
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-064 January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
External Affairs Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Representation on Metropolitan Planning Organization Policy Board
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider authorizing the Board President and General Manager to sign a letter to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission regarding AC Transit's interest in having representation on the Commission. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: AC Transit is interested in requesting representation on the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal or budgetary impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: On July 61h, 2012, President Obama signed into law P.L. 112-141, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21" Century (MAP-21), a new two-year surface transportation authorization aiming to transform the framework for investments to guide the growth and development of the vital transportation infrastructure. As part of this legislation, Metropolitan Planning Organizations in urbanized areas designated as transportation management areas are required to include transit officials on their policy boards. This staff report requests authorization to send a letter to MTC requesting representation on the Commission. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: This report requests transit representation on the MPO policy board. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: This report requests transit representation on the MPO policy board.
157
Report No. 13-064 Page 2 of 2
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: None
ATTACHMENTS: 1:
Letter to MTC, Executive Director Steve Heminger and Chair, Adrienne Tissier,
Approved by:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
Reviewed by:
Ken Scheidig, Interim General Counsel
Prepared by:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
158
SR 13-064 Attachment 1
Soard of Directors
January 23, 2013
Greg Harper, President ward 11
Adrienne J. Tissier Chair, Metropolitan Transportation Commission Supervisor, San Mateo County Hall of Justice 400 County Center, 1'1 Floor Redwood City, CA 94063
Joe Wallace, Vice President Ward I
Elsa Ortiz ward Ill
Mark A. Williams Ward IV
Jeff Davis WardV
H. E. Christian Peeples Director at Large
Steve Heminger Executive Director Metropolitan Transportation Commission 101 Eighth Street Oakland, CA 94607-4700 RE: Transit Representation on MPO Policy Board Dear Mr. Heminger and Chair Tissier:
Joel B. Young Director at Large
On behalf of the AC Transit Board of Directors, I am writing to you in the hope that our respective agencies can initiate a dialogue with regard to transit representation on the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.
Board Officers David J. Armijo General Manager Kenneth C. Scheidig Interim General Counsel
As you know, on Julr 6, 2012, President Obama signed P.L. 112-141 -Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21' Century or MAP 21. This transportation legislation is intended to encourage and promote safe and efficient public transportation and provide federal funding for transit in our region. More importantly, this new legislation requires that within two years, MPOs, in urbanized areas designated as transportation management areas, such as MTC, must include transit officials on their policy boards.
linda A. Nemeroff
District Secretary
AC Transit is seeking advisement on how MTC plans to address this new requirement in its work plan for the coming year, and what AC Transit can do to support this new initiative in the future. MTC provides a forum for addressing transit's interests in regional decisionmaking. To that end, membership on the Commission can only serve to bolster MTC's efforts to enhance regional coordination and efficiencies, and would enhance decision making through their representation and participation. Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration. We look forward to your response. Questions and further discussion can be directed to the District's General Manager, David Armijo. Mr. Armijo can be reached at 510-891-4753 or by email at [email protected]. Sincerely,
David Armijo, General Manager AC Transit
Greg Harper, President AC Transit Board of Directors cc: Bay Area Regional Transit Authorities
1600 Franklin Street • Oakland, CA 94612 ·TEL (510) 891-7284 • FAX (510) 891-4705 • www.actransit.org
159
This page intentionally blank
160
Report No: Meeting Date:
T~NS/T
13-046 January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
External Affairs Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Resolution Supporting West Contra Costa Unified School District (WCCUSD) Waiver of Bonding Capacity
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider Adoption of Resolution 13-007 in Support of the West Contra Costa Unified School District's General Waiver Request of the Statutory Bonding Capacity. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The West Contra Costa Unified School District is requesting a ten year waiver of an 1879 statute that limits the amount of bonded indebtedness allowable from the State Board of Education to 2.5% of the School District's assessed value. WCCUSD has requested a resolution in support of this waiver from AC Transit.
BUDGETARY/FISCALIMPACT: There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: AC Transit serves riders in the West Contra Costa cities of El Cerrito, Richmond, and San Pablo, and the unincorporated areas of El Sobrante, North Richmond, and Kensington. These cities overlap portions of the West Contra Costa Unified School District (WCCUSD).
WCCUSD has requested a resolution from the AC Transit Board of Directors supporting their request to the State Board of Education to waive an outdated statute that limits the maximum bonded indebtedness level at 2.5% of the total assessed valuation of the School District.
Based on its 2012-13 valuation, WCCUSD's bonding capacity is $591 million. Having received prior waivers, the School District currently has $797 million in outstanding debt. In 2012, a majority (64%) of voters of the WCCUSD passed Measure E to authorize $360 million in bonds to complete school renovations and reconstruction projects. In order to keep the keep the renovation and reconstruction projects on schedule under the bond, WCCUSD is requesting a ten year increase in its bonding capacity of 2.5% to 6%. This increase will allow WCCUSD to 161
Report No. 13-046 Page 2 of 2 issue the full $360 million in voter approved Measure E 2012 bonds to complete the projects. Voters were informed of the need for this waiver in the bond language.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: The advantage of supporting this resolution is that it assists WCCUSD in renovation and reconstruction of school facilities for students, some of whom are riders in the northern portion of the AC Transit District. There are no disadvantages of supporting this resolution. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: AC Transit could opt not to issue a resolution in support of WCCUSD's request to waive the bond statute for renovation and reconstruction of school facilities. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: None ATTACHMENTS: 1: Resolution 13-007
Department Head Approval:
Dennis Butler, Chief Planning & Development Officer Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel
Prepared by:
Beverly Greene, Director of Legislative Affairs & Community Relations
162
SR 13-046 Attachment 1
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 13-007 A RESOLUTION OF THE ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT BOARD EXPRESSING ITS SUPPORT OF THE WEST CONTRA COSTA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT GENERAL WAIVER REQUEST OF THE STATUTORY BONDING CAPACITY WHEREAS, the West Contra Costa Unified School District (WCCUSD) serves to educate the children of the Cities of El Cerrito, Hercules, Richmond, Pinole and San Pablo as well as the unincorporated areas of west county including Kensington, North Richmond, El Sobrante, Giant, East Richmond, and Rollingwood; and WHEREAS, the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit) provides public transit to the students in West Contra Costa cities of El Cerrito, Richmond, and San Pablo, and the unincorporated areas of El Sobrante, North Richmond and Kensington; and WHEREAS, the west county community requires quality schools capable of serving its children and their families; and WHEREAS, the residents of the west county area are beneficiaries of the School District's $2 billion Facility Improvement (Program) that began in November 2000; and WHEREAS, the purpose of the program is to bring all School District facilities to a common standard with regard to seismic/structural safety, upgrades to building systems, new classrooms, technology upgrades, and safety/security; and WHEREAS, the West Contra Costa Unified School District's bond program has broad community support as evidenced by the five successful bond elections that the District has held since November 2000, including 2012 Measure E - a $360 million bond authorization approved by 64% of West County voters in November 2012; and WHEREAS, the California Education Code limits the amount of bonds that a unified school district can have outstanding to 2.5% of its then-current assessed valuation, but the State Board of Education has the authority to waive this limitation and has done so many times in the past; and WHEREAS, the School District's financing plan indicates that, assuming that a waiver is granted and that the School District can move forward under its proposed plan, the School District will be able to issue all $360 million of 2012 Measure E bonds without causing tax rates to exceed the targeted maximums and the School District Board of Education will consider adjusting the pace and structure of the bond issues in order to meet these tax rate targets; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District does resolve as follows:
Resolution No. 13-007
Pagel o/2 163
Section 1. · The Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Board of Directors does hereby support the West Contra Costa Unified School District's application to the State Board of Education for a waiver of the Statutory Bonding Capacity. Section 2. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage by four affirmative votes of the Board of Directors.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of January 2013.
Greg Harper, President Attest:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary I, Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary for the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors held on the 23rd day of January, 2013 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
Approved as to Form and Content:
Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel
Resolution No. 13·007
Page2of2 164
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-031 January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
External Affairs Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Use of Cameras On Buses to Enforce Parking Violations at Bus Stops
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Receive report on the use of forward-facing cameras in head signs to assist with parking enforcement at bus stops; and sponsorship of state legislation that would be necessary to enable AC Transit to conduct such enforcement. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) is engaged in a pilot Transit-Only Lane Enforcement (TOLE) program to assess the use of f~rward-facing cameras on buses to enforce parking restrictions in bus only lanes. The SFMTA has had some success with the TransitOnly Lane Enforcement (TOLE) program. Key challenges for SFMTA have included labor intensive analysis of video evidence, maintenance of equipment, and adjudication of appeals. It costs about $1,000 per bus to install the cameras and about 18 full-time employees to review video evidence and issue citations. The number of citations using this method has steadily increased since the inception of the program but there has been no discernible improvement in bus speed. The program required special legislation. Assembly Bill 1041 temporarily amended sections 40207, 40240, 40242 and 40243 of the California Vehicle Code to permit the SFMTA to test the use of cameras mounted on buses to enforce parking restrictions in bus-only lanes. The bill will expire in 2016. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report at this time.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: The purpose of this report is to: 1. Describe the technology used for camera enforcement of traffic laws 2. Summarize San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency's experience using forwardfacing cameras mounted on buses to enforce parking restrictions in bus-only lanes 3. Describe current legal framework for use of cameras for enforcement of traffic laws 165
Report No. 13-031 Page 2 of 6
Technology Automatic license-plate recognition (ALPR) is a technology that employs cameras with optical character recognition enabling the device to read license plates for the purpose of law enforcement, toll collection, etc. There are several applications currently in use in the Bay Area. ALPR is being used by the Alameda County Sherriff's office as part of the services contracted to the District. The system enables deputies to determine vehicle ownership and indicate whether the vehicle has been reported as stolen. The cameras are a tool of the officer and are not automated for purposes of issuing citations or summons. Below is an image of an ALPR camera suitable for mounting on vehicles, in this case a police cruiser.
A second but more common use of the technology is cameras mounted on traffic signals for speed and red light enforcement. A third use of the technology is on State-owned toll bridges where ALPR is used to identify toll evaders and to serve as a back-up for users of FasTrak transponders. For instance, if a registered FasTrak user's device is not recorded when passing through a toll plaza; a photo of the vehicle license plate is used to bill the customer. In this case, no citation would be issued. If an unregistered vehicle evades the toll a citation would be issued automatically.
SFMTA Experience The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) is the first agency in California to test ALPR technology to enforce parking in bus-only lanes. San Francisco has a 15-mile system of peak period and all day bus lanes (see figure belowL exclusively located in the right side of the roadway. The cameras record the license plate numbers of vehicles double parked in the bus lanes. Registered owners are sent a citation via mail and are fined $105 for parking in a bus lane.
Cameras cost upward of $1,000 per bus to install.
presented to the state legislature is included as Attachment 1.
166
An early report on the project
Report No. 13-031 Page 3 of.G Transit-only lanes In San Francisco
Sovtce: S.F. Mvnlclt»l TtdMIXHidiiOnA[lency Todd TrumbiAII The Chronicle
The original purpose of using forward-facing cameras for parking enforcement was to improve on-time performance by reducing delays caused by vehicles double parked in the bus lanes. According to SFMTA, the pilot program is unproven in terms of its effectiveness in reducing bus travel times. The pilot did, however, successfully prove the ability to use forward-facing cameras as an enforcement tool, increasing the number of citations of vehicles in tow-away zones. Over time, the video records showed increased instances of cars moving out of the way when a bus pulled up in the bus lane, presumably to avoid a citation. The program has steadily increased the number of citations issues using the cameras.
By January 2011, about 300
citations were issued monthly. There were numerous challenges encountered by SFMTA and reported in the TOLE study, including: " ... staffing levels, office and supporting equipment, proper staging and assigning TOLE (Transit Only Lane Enforcement) buses to TPS (Transit Priority Streets) lanes, technical issues, single vendor utilization, in-depth program cost analysis, AM/PM TOLE bus demand modeling." (Pp. 3) Although ALPR camera enforcement is a potentially labor-saving technology, SFMTA found the pilot required substantial staff resources to implement. The SFMTA staffing requirements are summarized below:
1. 8 clerks to review video data 2. 6 parking control officers to review video and write citations 3. 1 hearing officer to adjudicate citations on appeal 4. 2-3 technicians to maintain equipment 167
Report No. 13-031 Page 4 of 6 Currently, the District does not have the job specifications for these positions. Review of existing positions or creation of entirely new positions would be required to implement camera enforcement of bus zones.
If a SFMTA clerk is comparable to the District's Senior
Administrative Clerk position, it would cost about $60,000 per year excluding benefits per position. According to SFMTA staff, both the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) and the California Highway Patrol (CHP) have concerns about enforcement of moving violations using automatic front-facing cameras on buses. Moving violations, such as driving in a bus-only lane, are not covered under the pilot camera enforcement program. enforcement to police moving violations.
Instead, SFMTA relies on law
SFMTA has indicated that, in San Francisco, any
proposal to issue citations for driving in bus-only or future Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) lanes on Van Ness Avenue will need to involve SFPD and the CHP.
SFMTA staff indicated that there is
controversy in Sacramento regarding the use and proliferation of cameras for traffic enforcement in California. Legal Framework The SFMTA has sought and been granted legislation to enable it to run its TOLE pilot program. AB No. 1041 (Ma) is a temporary expansion of the authority to use forward-facing cameras on buses for enforcement of parking violations in bus-only lanes; the pilot program ends in January, 2016.
Similar earlier legislation permitted parking enforcement using cameras
mounted on street sweepers within the City and County of San Francisco through AB 2567 (Bradford). Intentionally excluded from the program are moving violations such as driving in a bus-only lane or parking violations in bus stops outside of the agency's bus-only lane network. The SFMTA already had the authority to issue parking citations under state law in designated transit only lanes using conventional enforcement methods such as citations issued by parking control officers. AB 1041 is very specific in the type of traffic infraction it seeks to enforce - illegal parking in bus-only lanes within the City and County of San Francisco. As such, it is not legislation that could be easily modified to serve the District's parking enforcement needs- parking violations at bus stops with no bus-only lanes and outside the City and County of San Francisco. This is due in part because the video evidence need only determine whether a motorist is driving in a bus-only lane - which is permitted under some circumstances - or whether the motorist is parked in the lane. To implement a similar camera-based parking enforcement program, the District would need legislation similar to San Francisco's. Specifically, the law would need to grant the authority of the District to use cameras on buses to enforce illegal parking in bus zones.
168
Report No. 13-031 Page 5 of 6 There are also additional technical complications associated with enforcement to be considered that may affect how legislation is crafted. For example, it is more difficult to enforce parking in bus zones than parking in bus only lanes. A photograph or video record of a possible parking violator would need to show enough detail to determine whether the vehicle is parked in a bus zone or in the legal parking area just ahead of the bus stop. Information about the length of bus stops and the presence of adjacent on-street parking would be needed to assess the photographic or video record. This is more complicated than the SFMTA case where reviewers of the video record need to determine if the vehicle is moving or not. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
The use of forward-facing ALPR cameras on buses to enforce parking restrictions in bus zones has the potential to provide greater coverage at lower cost than presently provided by the Alameda County Sherriff's office alone. The primary disadvantage is the cost of the program. There is a need for large numbers of clerks to review photographic records, potentially negating any cost savings achieved by the cameras. In addition, the technology would require ongoing maintenance; replacement of hardware and software upgrades. Finally, there is no evidence that the program has increased bus speeds and thereby contributed to reduced operating costs to offset the cost of the program. A second disadvantage is that, like red light camera enforcement, there would be a greater likelihood that bus zone violators would challenge the evidence, increasing the cost to prosecute such cases. SFMTA identified these as continuing challenges if the program were expanded or made permanent. There also is an issue that money from fines would not come back to the District, but would go to the county. So there are no fine off-sets for the costs incurred in the program. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Do nothing. Continue to have the County Sherriff and local authorities enforce parking violations. Independently pursue changes in state legislation, similar to the AB 1041 to enable the District to develop and implement a photo enforcement program similar to the current SFMTA pilot program. Language would be needed to specify enforcement of parking violations at bus stops. Investigate the use stationary cameras at locations with high numbers of violations instead of using cameras on buses, lowering capital and administrative costs in reviewing video evidence.
169
Report No. 13-031 Page 6 of 6 PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: There has been no previous action. ATTACHMENTS: 1: 2:
Transit Only Lane Enforcement Project- Report to the California Legislature Relevant Legislation- AB 1041
Department Head Approval: Reviewed by:
Dennis Butler, Chief Planning & Development Officer Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel
Prepared by:
Jim Cunradi, Manager of Special Projects
170
SR 13 - 031 Attac hment 1
SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY
Q nly Lane Enforcement Project
Transit
Report to the California Legislature pursuant to provisions of Assembly Bill AB1 01 (Ma)-2007
24 March 2011
171
CA Assembly Bi11101, 2007-08 Transit Only Lane Enforcement Pilot Project - TOLE Assemblymember Fiona Ma introduced Assembly Bill 101 during the California Legislature's 2007-08 regular session. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed the bill on October 10,2007. AB I 0 I allows the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA), which operates the San Francisco Municipal Railway (Muni), to conduct a pilot project equipping transit vehicles with forward facing parking detection devices to document vehicles parked in Transit Preferential Street (TPS) lanes, or transit only lanes, and issue parking citations based on that video evidence.
TOLE Concept of Operation This legislative change was designed to improve safety, reliability and performance ofMuni transit vehicles using San Francisco's 14.8 miles of transit-only lanes. A number of traffic violations significantly impact operating speed and efficiency of transit vehicles within an urban environment. Double parking , the practice of parking in an active lane of traffic, for example creates a pinch point, thereby forcing vehicles to merge and avoid the obstruction. Not only causing delay, but the chaotic traffic pattern distracts drivers, increasing the potential for accidents. Bus zone violations 2, parking or dwelling in a designated bus stop, are particularly disruptive. Customers must walk around the obstructing vehicle to access bus services. The exposure to traffic and potential for injury is much greater. If it cannot pull into the designated zone, the bus itself causes a disturbed lane of traffic while servicing the stop. Similarly parking in tow-away zones or fire lanes is unsafe and disruptive. 3 Standard methods of discouraging these behaviors, such as ticket writing by Parking Contro I Officers (PCOs) and San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) Officers (for moving violations), require the presence of a third party for effective enforcement. The TOLE Project endeavors to directly link the approach of a transportation vehicle with enforcement of violations along designated Transit Preferential Streets (TPS). Video evidence from TOLE cameras is viewed by qualified SFMTA staff, with tickets being issued within 14 days of the violation. Violation video evidence may be retained up to six months or sixty days after final disposition of the citation, whichever date is later. Video with no violations is destroyed within 15 days. 1
Violation Code: V22500H Double Parking Violation Code: V225001 Bus Zone 'Violation Codes: T32A.l Towaway Zone- Downtown, T32A.2 Towaway Zone, v22500.l Parking in Fire Lane, 2
172
Implementation •
January 2008- July 2008
Phase 1: Operation Evaluation
Two vendors fully participated in this operations evaluation period, each equipping four coaches and operating along limited stretches of TPS lanes. A number of vendors declined to participate, one did not complete the trial. Each of the final two vendors experienced technical difficulties but successfully captured valid video evidence of traffic violations. Note that warning notices were issued in lieu of citations for an initial thirty-day period. Phase I experienced staffing difficulties due to funding constraints. Technical staff spent a significant amount of time on the initial pilot installations and on subsequent reviews, revisions, meetings and presentation. These and other demands on technical staff limited the use of automated processes. Limited availability of security staff, to manually retrieve video footage, reduced the number of citations issued as video evidence is valid for review for only for 14 days from capture. Operational policies regarding vehicle allocation and substitution challenged the pilot, as outfitted vehicles did not always go on their pre-designated runs. Maintenance windows and locations similarly changed from schedule expectations. Initial Driver "marking" of violations (hitting a time-stamp button) was inconsistent. These initial findings and challenges may be attributed to the fact that this program was, indeed, a new pilot program requiring a requisite learning curve.
•
August 2008- June 2009
Phase II: Installation and Rollout
As of December 5, 2008 cameras were successfully installed by the two vendors on net 30 vehicles. A citation processing contractor was selected December of 2009. A formal 17 month observation period commenced January I, 2009 and concluded June 30, 20 I 0. Lessons learned and program benefits derived from Phase II are captured in the next two sections of this report. It was recommended the TOLE Project delay proceeding to Phase III implementation until several key issues were either solved or have a solid planned action plan for resolution: staffing levels, office and supporting equipment, proper staging and assigning TOLE buses to TPS lanes, technical issues, single vendor utilization, in-depth program cost-analysis, AM/PM TOLE bus demand modeling.
•
Phase Ill: Single-Vendor Expansion and Project Refining
Pending, see above.
2 173
Program Benefits The TOLE Project was able to link the approach of a transportation vehicle with enforcement of violations along Transit Preferential Streets (TPS).
TOLE Citations Issued 400 ·-----·-- -
~--
- - -- - - - -·
·----- ---~--
300
200 100 0 JUL
SEP
MAR MAY JUL SEP NOV
2008
AN MAR MAY JUL SEP NOV AN
2009
2010
2011
Comparing the monthly average January 20 l 0 trip within TPS lanes to January 2011 results in no statistically significant change in run-time. 4 However, as can be seen from the charts below, violations for Double Parking and Bus Zones are declining as a percentage of issued tickets.
Average Monthly Citation
Average Monthly Citation
Rates
Rates as a Percentage of Issued Tickets
• Towu way
• Double Purk ing
• Bus Zone
149
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2011
Project staff notes that initially it was easier for the PCOs to spot double parked cars and vehicles in bus zones; drivers were not thinking about the possibility of a camera for photo enforcement being on the bus. However, after the first year the reviewers observed cars moving as they saw buses approaching to avoid risking a citation in case the bus had a camera. This trend continues today. 4
+2.4% Net TPS Lane Run Time Difference (Net both Inbound and Outbound Directions)
3 174
With the tow away zones, the reverse seems to be true, the public seems to forget the approaching buses are likely to have a camera and remain in the tow away zones well after they have the camera has recorded a violation. These drivers tend to wait until they observe a PCO approaching before moving. When these drivers observes a PCO sweeping a tow away zone on the opposite side or end of the street they tend to remain in the tow away zone until the PCO chases them away. In 2009, Double Parking and Bus Zone Violations accounted for 77% of all citations issued under the pilot program, and Tow Away Zone Violation only accounted for 23%. In 2010, Tow Away Zone Violations account for 74% of all citations issued, and Double Parking and Bus Zone Violation only account for 26 %.
Lessons Learned Resources and Technology
Staff labor demands for the program exceeded initial expectations and budget. It was determined that to monitor and maintain I 00 recording units, minimum staffing levels would consist of eight (8) 1406 Clerks to review data packs collected daily from the coaches equipped with cameras, six (6) PCOs to review videos and write tickets from within the strict time constraints of the program's authorization legislation (ABIOI), a Hearing Officer to adjudicate TOLE citations under appeal at the SFMTA Customer Service Center and two to three 7318 Electronic Maintenance Technicians to maintain the forward facing camera equipment. Corresponding needs exist for additional space and equipment such as vehicles for the collection and swapping of data packs from the revenue vehicles. Phase II has clearly demonstrated that it is technically possible to enforce TPS traffic violations using vehicle-borne video evidence. Physical hardware issues remain to be solved, including both camera types changing focus due to vibration (requiring regular fine-tuning) and lack of a secure camera enclosure, but these should not provide a significant hurdle to broader implementation of the program. However, software and related improvements to streamline the video i) transmission, ii) event identification, iii) review, iv) record, and v) recall processes are more significant. Until these processes have automated assistance, citation issuance via TOLE evidence will remain highly labor-intensive. 5 5
SFMTA Customer Service, in conjunction with the IT group, is working with the citation processing contractor to develop an add-on to the current system, whereby the vendor would provide viewing software to view both the video clips and issue citations online. This would eliminate a significant amount of manual processing and handling time and costs by Security, Enforcement, and Customer Service personnel. Video evidence would then be available in the eTIMS system, as part of the citation record, for Customer Service and Hearings staff to review for protests and hearings. The system enhancement would also provide an internet viewing option via a public portal, whereby a violator would have secure access online to his/her violation video image. A data cataloguing/indexing system would also be provided, which will provide an automated method for deleting video evidence for non-violations, and for issued violations once they have been resolved (paid/dismissed).
4 175
TOLE Project Vehicle Staging and Planning
Proper staging and assigning TOLE buses to TPS lanes is essential. This requires extensive coordination with Operations and Maintenance and systematic procedures on how to stage and track TOLE coach runs. Also essential is to analyze AM/PM TOLE bus demand to determine whether the daily demand can be met.
Public Awareness
On-going public awareness of the program is critical to achieve behavior changes. As evidenced by the declining percentage of Bus Zone and Double Parking violations, public understanding ofTPS lanes/hours of operation and TOLE enforcement is key.
Recommendations Aggressive and persistent citation issuance to ensure reliable/predictable bus travel time on congested routes is desirable. Vehicle-borne TOLE enforcement is technically achievable today and, with advances in software capabilities/implementations, may become the most economically efficient option in the future, once stafflabor time required for TOLE enforcement is reduced. In recognition of these items SFMTA should: •
Pursue legislative authority to continue Transit Only Lane Enforcement, including: o Amendment to AB 101 legislation to allow for secure automatic wireless uploads of video evidence and allow the TOLE system to be part of the "whole coach" security system. This would be consistent with AB 2567 (Bradford), allowing streetsweepers to be equipped with forward facing recording devices and enacted in 2010, and allow for reduced staff labor. o Amendment to ABlOl legislation to allow for TOLE enforcement across future designated TPS lanes, not just those in place when the original legislation was passed.
•
Increase public awareness regarding TPS lanes including hours of operation, use and street markings.
•
Address key concerns identified in Phase II, including performing a cost-benefit analysis. Then, if and when implementing future vehicle-borne TOL enforcement SFMTA should: o Increase public awareness about TOLE through increased development of community outreach programs, and utilization of high visibility signage on each corridor and bus in the TOLE fleet. o Standardize, to the extent possible, the entire fleet with forward facing TOLE capability.
5 176
SR 13-031 Attachment 2
Assembly Bill No. 1041 CHAPTER325 An act to amend Sections 40207,40240,40242, and 40243 of the Vehicle Code, relating to vehicles. (Approved by Governor September 26, 2011. Filed with Secretary of State September 26, 2011.] LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 1041, Ma. Vehicles: delinquent parking violations: video imaging: transit·only lanes. Existing law authorizes the City and County of San Francisco (San Francisco), until January 1, 2012, to enforce parking violations in specified transit-only traffic lanes through the use of video imaging evidence and authorizes San Francisco to install automated forward-fucing parking control devices on city-owned public transit vehicles for the purpose of video imaging of parking violations occurring in transit-only traffic lanes. Existing law requires a designated employee, who is qualified by San Francisco, to review the video image for determining whether these parking violations have occurred and to issue a notice of a parking violation to the registered owner within 15 days of the violation. Existing law requires that the video image records be confidential and available only to public agencies to enforce parking violations and that the City and County of San Francisco provide to the transportation committees of the Legislature an evaluation of the pilot program's effectiveness no later than March I, 2011, if it implements a pilot
program pursuant to these provisions. This bill would extend the above-described provisions to January I, 2016, and would redefine "transit-only traffic lane" as any designated transit-only lane on which use is restricted to mass transit vehicles, or other designated vehicles including taxis and vanpools, during posted times. The bill would also delete the prohibition that video images captured pursuant to these provisions shall not be transmitted wirelessly and would require that the devices record the date and time of the violation at the same time as the video images are captured. The bill would extend to January I, 2016, those provisions governing the content of a delinquent parking violation that are applicable to notices of parking violations in specified transit-only lanes issued by the City and County of San Francisco. The bill would also require instead the City and County of San Francisco to provide to the transportation and judiciary committees of the Legislature an evaluation of the pilot program's effectiveness and impact on privacy no later than March I, 2015, if it implements the pilot program pursuant to these provisions.
94
177
Ch.325
-2-
The people of the State of California do enact as follows: SECTION I. Section40207 of the Vehicle Code, as amended by Section I of Chapter 471 of the Statutes of2010, is amended to read: 40207. (a) The notice of delinquent parking violation shall contain the information specified in subdivision (a) of Section 40202, subdivision (a) of Section 40241, or subdivision (a) of Section 40248, as applicable, and Section 40203, and, additionally shall contain a notice to the registered owner that, unless the registered owner pays the parking penalty or contests the citation within 21 calendar days from the date of issuance ofthe citation or 14 calendar days after the mailing of the notice of delinquent parking violation or completes and files an affidavit of nonliability that complies with Section 40208 or 40209, the renewal of the vehicle registration shall be contingent upon compliance with the notice of delinquent parking violation. Ifthe registered owner, by appearance or by mail, makes payment to the processing agency within 21 calendar days from the date of issuance of the citation or 14 calendar days after the mailing of the notice of delinquent parking violation, the parking penalty shall consist solely of the amount of the original penalty. Additional fees, assessments, or other charges shall not be added. (b) This section shall remain in effect only until January I, 2016, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted before January I, 2016, deletes or extends that date. SEC. 2. Section 40207 of the Vehicle Code, as amended by Section 2 of Chapter 471 of the Statutes of2010, is amended to read: 40207. (a) The notice of delinquent parking violation shall contain the information specified in subdivision (a) of Section 40202 or subdivision (a) of Section 40248, as applicable, and Section 40203, and, additionally shall contain a notice to the registered owner that, unless the registered owner pays the parking penalty or contests the citation within 21 calendar days from the date of issuance of the citation or 14 calendar days after the mailing of the notice of delinquent parking violation or completes and files an affidavit of nonliability that complies with Section 40208 or 40209, the renewal of the vehicle registration shall be contingent upon compliance with the notice of delinquent parking violation. If the registered owner, by appearance or by mail, makes payment to the processing agency within 21 calendar days from the date of issuance of the citation or 14 calendar days after the mailing of the notice of delinquent parking violation, the parking penalty shall consist solely of the amount of the original penalty. Additional fees, assessments, or other charges shall not be added. (b) This section shall become operative on January 1, 2016. SEC. 3. Section 40240 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read: 40240. (a) The City and County of San Francisco may install automated forward facing parking control devices on city-owned public transit vehicles, as defined by Section 99211 of the Public Utilities Code, for the purpose of video imaging of parking violations occurring in transit-only traffic lanes. Citations shall be issued only for violations captured during the posted hours
94
178
-3-
Ch. 325
of operation for a transit-only traffic lane. The devices shall be angled and focused so as to capture video images of parking violations and not unnecessarily capture identifying images of other drivers, vehicles, and pedestrians. The devices shall record the date and time of the violation at the same time as the video images are captured. (b) Prior to issuing notices of parking violations pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 40241, the City and County of San Francisco shall commence a program to issue only warning notices for 30 days. The City and County of San Francisco shall also make a public announcement of the program at least 30 days prior to commencement of issuing notices of parking violations. (c) A designated employee of the City and County of San Francisco, who is qualified by the city and county to issue parking citations, shall review video image recordings for the purpose of determining whether a parking violation occurred in a transit-only traffic lane. A violation of a statute, regulation, or ordinance governing vehicle parking under this code, under a federal or state statute or regulation, or under an ordinance enacted by the City and County of San Francisco occurring in a transit-only traffic lane observed by the designated employee in the recordings is subject to a civil penalty. (d) The registered owner shall be permitted to review the video image evidence of the alleged violation during normal business hours at no cost. (e) (l) Except as it may be included in court records described in Section 68152 of the Government Code, or as provided in paragraph (2), the video image evidence may be retained for up to six months from the date the information was first obtained, or 60 days after final disposition of the citation, whichever date is later, after which time the information shall be destroyed. (2) Notwithstanding Section 26202.6 of the Goverrunent Code, video
image evidence from forward facing automated enforcement devices that does not contain evidence of a parking violation occurring in a transit-only traffic lane shall be destroyed within 15 days after the information was first obtained. (f) Notwithstanding Section 6253 of the Government Code, or any other provision of law, the video image records are confidential. Public agencies shall use and allow access to these records only for the purposes authorized by this article. (g) For purposes ofthis article, "local agency" means the City and County of San Francisco. (h) For purposes of this article, "transit-only traffic lane" means any designated transit-only lanes on which use is restricted to mass transit vehicles, or other designated vehicles including taxis and vanpools, during posted times. SEC. 4. Section 40242 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read: 40242. If the City and County of San Francisco implements a parking enforcement pilot program pursuant to this article, no later than March 1, 2015, the City and County of San Francisco shall provide to the transportation and judiciary committees of the Legislature an evaluation of
94
179
Ch. 325
-4-
the pilot program's effectiveness and impact on privacy in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code. SEC. 5. Section 40243 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read: 40243. This article shall remain in effect only until January l, 2016, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted before January l, 2016, deletes or extends that date.
0
94
180
FINANCE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE January 23, 2013 Agenda Items B‐1 – B‐6
181
182
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-018 January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF
REPORT
TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Monthly Report on Investments
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider Receiving Monthly Report on Investments for November 2012. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As of November 30, 2012, the District had the following investments: (Collateralized 102%) Repurchase Agreement (REPO) $25 million Money Market Account $62.56 million (Collateralized 110%) Money Market Fund $2.91 million (Advantage Heritage/Prime & Cash Investment) Money Market Account $1.75 million (small banks; all FDIC insured) BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
There are no budgetary or fiscal impacts associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
In compliance with Section 15.0 of Board Policy 336, Investment Policy, the Monthly Investments Report for November is forwarded to the Board of Directors for review. The portfolio contained in the Monthly Report on Investments for November 2012 is in compliance with Board Policy 336, Investment Policy. The District is able to meet its expenditure requirements for the next six months. Return on the District's investments is small due to the market conditions and ultra conservative investment approach. Daily roll-over of REPO and collaterized money market accounts constitute 95% of the portfolio, -to ensure the preservation of principal. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
This report does not recommend a course of action with notable advantages or disadvantages.
183
Report No. 13-018 Page 2 of 2 ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: This report is being provided to inform the Board of activities of the Treasury Department. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Board Policy 336, Investment Policy ATTACHMENTS 1:
Monthly Report on Investments on November 2012
Department Head Approval:
Lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer
Prepared by:
Beverly Abad-Fitzgerald, Treasury Administrator
184
185
ALAMEDA - CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT MONTHLY REPORT ON INVESTMENTS FOR THE GENERAL FUND NOVEMBER 30, 2012
~ ~
•
~ ~
"
18
"
~ ~
w
'
0
~
~
" ~
~ ~
ALAMEDA - CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT MONTHLY REPORT ON INVESTMENTS
Table of Contents
1
Investment Overview
2
Return on Investments
3
Detail of Portfolio
4
Repurchase Agreements
5
Government Securities (General Fund)
6
186
Investment Summary
INVESTMENT SUMMARY FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS/OTHER FUND NOVEMBER 30, 2012
TYPE
Average Interest Rate%
MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS REPO'S TREASURY BILLS DISCOUNT NOTES AGENCY BONDS
0.248% 0.148% 0.000% 0.000% 0.000%
187
TOTAL GENERAL FUND INVESTMENTS
TYPE
Average Interest Rate%
Carrying Value
Par Value
Fair Value
%of Total
$17,935,323.97 $25,000,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$17,935,323.97 $25,000,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$17,935,323.97 $25,000,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
41.77% 58.23% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
$42,935,323.97
$42,935,323.97
$42,935,323.97
100.00%
Carrying Value
Par Value
Fair Value
%of Total
0.034% 0.000% 0.000% 0.000%
$49,293,815.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$49,293,815.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$49,293,815.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
TOTAL OTHER (Bus Proc./Chevron) INVESTMENTI
$49,293,815.50
$49,293,815.50
$49,293,815.50
100.00%
MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS REPO'S DISCOUNT NOTES AGENCY BONDS
Page 1
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT INVESTMENT OVERVIEW FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS PROCUREMENT/OTHER FUND NOVEMBER 30, 2012
2012 DESCRIPTION
YTO
2013
JUL
AUG
SEP
NOV
OCT
DEC
JAN
FEB
APR
MAR
MAY
JUN
AVERAGE
CURRENT MONTH AVERAGE INTEREST RATES Repurchase Agreements {current month) Money Market Accounts {current month) Govt Securities held at month end Treasury Bills (purchased in current month) Discount Notes (purchased in current month) Agency Bonds (purchased in current month)
0.130%
0.120%
0.070%
0.070%
0.145% 0.070%
0.152% 0.070%
0.148% 0.070%
0.139% 0.070°/o
0.072% 0.039%
0.079% 0.042%
0.088% 0.046%
0.097%
0.050%
0.106% 0.054%
0.088% 0.046%
0.160% 0.110% 0.120% 0.055%
0.150% 0.105% 0.125% 0.062%
0.130% 0.110% 0.129% 0.070%
0.170% 0.130% 0.136% 0.080%
0.170% 0.100% 0.143% 0.080%
0.156% 0.111% 0.131% 0.069%
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
9
7
7
7
7
7
$25,000,000 $52,309,318
$25,000,000 $52,314,388
$25,000,000 $25,000,000 $52,319,937 $67,222,960
$25,000,000 $67,229,139
$25,000,000 $58,279,149
$77,309,318
$77,314,388
$77,319,937
$92,222,960
$92,229,139
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$83,279,149
$77,309,318
$77,314,388
$77,319,937
$92,222,960
$92,229,139
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$34,699,645
AVERAGE INTEREST RATE
188
Repurchase Agreements {12-month avg) Money Market Accounts (12-month avg) Govt Securities held at month end Treasury Bills {Portfolio) Discount Notes (Portfolio) Agency Bonds {Portfolio) !~VESTMENT
BENCHMARKS
Current Month Daily Fed Funds Average Current Month Daily 3 Month T Bill Rate Average Monthly Avg of Daily Fed Funds (12 month avg) Monthly Avg 3 Month T Bill Rate (12 month avg) !,VERAGE MATURITY OF INVESTMENTS Repurchase Agreements Treasury Bills Discount Notes Agency Bonds
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
INVESTMENTS AT CARRYING VALUE Repurchase Agreements Money Market Accounts Treasury Bills Discount Notes Agency Bonds
INVESTMENTS AT COST
Page2
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RETURN ON INVESTMENTS FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS PROCUREMENT/OTHER FUND NOVEMBER 30, 2012 2012 RETURN ON INVESTMENTS
2013
YTD
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
TOTAl.
$2,743
$2,535
$3,014
0
$0 0
$0 0
0
$0 0
$14,653
3,591
$0 0
$0
3,378
$0 0
$0
2,807
$2,993 2,717
$3,368
2,807 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
$0 $0
Total return on invesb'nents
$5.550
$5,342
$5,710
$6.746
$6.605
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$29,953
Interest received Accrued interest Total return on investments
$2,903 2.647 $5.550
$2,236 3,106 $5,342
$2,715 2,995 $5,710
$3,847 2,899 $6.746
$2,778 3,827 $6.605
$0 0 $0
$0 0 $0
$0 0 $0
$0 0 $0
$0 0 0
$0 0 $9
$0 0 $0_
$14,479 $15,474 $29,953
Repurchase Agreements MoneY Mali
$15,300
$0
Discount Notes
Bonds
PORTFOLIO INVESTED Average daily portfolio available for investment Average daily portfolio invested
$65,920,806
$65,920,806 $29,166,667
$29,166,667
44.25%
44.25%
% of average daily portfolio invested
189
FY 12113
CARRYING VALUE GENERAL FUND PORTFOLIO Jul 2012 A"g Sop Oct Nov Deo
$42,603,947 $42,607,123 $42.610,779 $42,931,605 $42,935,324
Aug Sep Oct Nov o~
Jan 2013
Jan 2012
Feb Mac Ape May
Feb Mac Ape May
J""
J"" FY 12/13
CARB;YING VALUE BU$/OTHER PORTFOLIO Jul 2012 Aug Sep Oct Nov
$35,460,813 $25,463,299 $25,464,942 $25,465,414 $40,467,036 $40,468,599 $40,837,954 $40,840,300 $40,843,075 $41,844,149 $42,597,995 $42,601,366
Jul2011
$34,705,371 $34,707,265 $34,709,158 $49,291,355 $49,293,816
Jul2010 A"g Sep Oct Nov Deo
Jan 2011 Feb Mac Ape May J""
$5,743,559 $5,743,605 $5,743,649 $5,743,695 $5,743,739 $5,743,817 $5,375,346 $5,375,389 $34,699,100 $32,551,967 $32,553,678 $34,703,831
Jul2011
D~
Jan 2013
Jan 2012
Feb Mac Ape May
Feb Mac Ape May
J""
J""
Page 3
$25,423,957 $15,427,078 $15,429,234 $15,429,332 $45,432,936 $45,437 ;2.77 $45,442,015 $45,447,053 $45,451,256 $45,453,059 $45,456,386 $40,459,599
Jul2009 A"g Sep Oct Nov Deo
Jan 2010 Feb Mac Ape May J""
Jul 2010 A"g Sep Oct Nov Deo
Jan 2011 Feb Mac Ape May J""
$5,742,841 $5,742,990 $5,743,090 $5,743,140 $5,743,184 $5,743,245 $5,743,291 $5,743,332 $5,743,378 $5,743,423 $5,743,468 $5,743,513
$38,603,872 $29,608,637 $47,612,409 $47,111,961 $31,115,540 $26,118,775 $26,115,925 $27,518,036 $27,520,554 $27,522,185 $37,525,793 $35,422,186 FY 09/10
FY 10/11
FY 11/12
A"g Sep Oct Nov Deo
FY 09/10
FY 10/11
FY 11112
Jul2009 A"g Sep Oct Nov Deo
Jan 2010 Feb Mac Ape May J""
$3,130,877 $3,131,177 $3,131,362 $3,633,947 $3,634,044 $3,634,072 $3,634,100 $3,634,125 $3,634,125
$3,634,182 $3,634,210 $5,742,684
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT DETAIL OF PORTFOLIO FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS PROCUREMENT/OTHER FUND NOVEMBER 30, 2012 Pun:hased
TYPE
From
SetUement
Maturity
Date
Date
Days to Maturity
MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS Wells Fargo Local Banks TOTAL MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS
REPO'S
Bank of America
TREASURY BILLS;
TOTALREPO
11/26/12
7
12/03/12
Purchased Rate %
Maturity Rate%
Canying Value
Par Value
Fair Value
0.070% 0.425% 0.248%
0.070%
16,164,613.97
16,164,613.97
0.425%
1,750,710.00
0.248%
17,935,323.97
1,750,710.00 17,935,323.97
17,935,323.97
0.140%
0.140%
25,000,000.00
25,000,000.00
25,000,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
16,184,613.97 1,750,710.00
TOTAL TREASURY BILLS
AGENCY DISC NOTES:
TOTAL DISCOUNT NOTES AGENCY BONOS:
190 TOTAL. BONOS
IPORTFOLIO - GENERAL FUND MONEY MARKET ACCOUNT: Wells Fargo
TOTAL MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS
Chevron 1-Bond Grant CaiEMA Next Bus Set-aside Bus Procurement
0.00
0.00
0.00
42,935,323.97
42,935,323.97
42.935,323.97
441,241.04
441,241.04 1,832,027.31 2,148,910.00 637,018.81 44,234,618.34
0.010% 0.010% 0.070% 0.010% 0.070%
0.010% 0.010% 0.070% 0.010% 0.070%
2,148,910.00 637,018.81 44,234,618.34
441,241.04 1,832,027.31 2,148,910.00 637,018.81 44,234,618.34
0.034%
0.034%
49,293-;-8Ts-:-M
49,293,815.50
49,293,815.5-0
92,229, 139_47
92,229,139.47
92,229,139.47
1,832,027.31
TREASURY BILLS: AGENCY DISC NOTES:
AGENCY BONDS: 1PUR I FOLIO-:-QTRER"""(CheVrOnli-BondJNext
Bus/Bus Procurement)
ITOTAL PORTFOLIO GENERAL FUND
COMPOSITION OF PORTFOLIO : Money Market Accounts Repurchase Agreements Treasury Bills Discount Notes Bonds
41.77% 58.23% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00°,{,
Page4
OTHER (Bus Procurement/Chevroru1-Bond, Etc.)
100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00%
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS FOR THE MONTH ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 2012
SETTLEMENT DATE
MATURITY DATE
DAILY "REPO" INVESTMENT$
CURRENT # INTEREST OF DAYS RATE
INTEREST EARNED
INTEREST RECEIVED
CASH RECEIPT
AIR ACTIVITY
NET ACTIVITY
AVERAGE INVESTMEN AMT. INV • #OF DAYS/ DAYS IN MONTH :
30
BANK OF AMERICA
10/29/12 11/05/12 11/13/12 191
11/19/12 11/26/12 TOTAL
11/05/12 11/13/12
$25.000,000.00 $25,000,000.00
7
11/19/12 11/26/12
$25,000,000.00 $25,000,000.00
0.1500% 0.1400%
12/03/12
$25,000,000.00
6 7 7
0.1400%
486.11
680.56 0.00
$100,000,000.00
7
0.1475%
$3,013.89
$2,777.78
8
0.1200% 0.1600%
333.33 888.89 625.00 680.56
Page 5
583.33 888.89 625.00
25.000,000.00 25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00
-250.00 0.00 0.00
-25,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5,833,333.33 6,666,666.67 5,000,000.00
25,000,000.00
0.00 194.45
25,000,000.00
5,833,333.33 5,833,333.33
$125,000,000.00
-$55.55
$0.00
$29,166,666.66
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT GENERAL FUND GOVERNMENT SECURJTIES SUMMARY FOR THE MONTH ENDED
NOVEMBER 30, 2012 AGENCY
CUSIP
SETILEMENT
MATURITY
DISCOUNT
PAR
DATE
DATE
RATEI~M
VALUE
NUMBER
DAYS
COST
HELD
;;.~
MARKET
FAIR
RAT•
VALUE
'"'
Treasurv Bills Matured:
I Treasury Bills
CARRYING
'MQ:;~
DURING
'";;'~~~~..,
VAWE
INT.EARNED
MONTH
MONTH
..~~R;~N'""d
n
VALUE
I Held~
Month End:
I I
I TOTAL TREASURY BILLS
o.ool
o.ool
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
I
0.001
I
I
I
I
0.0~
0.0~
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
o.ool
_l
Discount Notes Matured:
Discount Notes Held at Month End:
192 TOTAL DISCOUNT NOTES Agency Bond Matured
Agency Bond Held at Month End:
TOTAL BONDS TOTAL GOVERNMENT SECURITIES
I
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Government Securities 90 days and less
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Government Securities over 90 days
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total Government Secunlies - Aged
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Variance
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Page 6
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-044 January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Monthly Budget Update
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider Recommending Receipt ofthe Monthly Budget Update EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: • • • • • • •
Labor costs, including fringe benefits, are in line with plans. Overtime expenses were significantly reduced in November and December. Services expenses in the first 5 months of the year were on average lower than expected After peaking around September, fuel prices have been trending down and thus Fuel and lubricants expense are under budget Materials and supplies expenses were slightly under budget for the period due to the reduced cost for the purchase of new, warranted components The cost of the ADA Consortia program is lower than budgeted due to 5 percent lower passenger volumes than planned Interest expenses are lower than budget due to the favorable impact of the refinancing of COPS Operating expenses are under budget by 3.6 percent for the first six months ofthe fiscal year.
BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report. There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Labor costs remained within budget projections with the hiring of additional operators to fill existing vacancies; thereby, reducing the need for unscheduled overtime. In addition, new management directives were issued to control the use of overtime within the maintenance department to reduce the maintenance overtime budget variance.
193
Report No. 13-044 Page 2 of 2 Fuel and lubricant expenses were under budget for the first half of the fiscal year as the price of diesel fuel was trending down after peaking in September. The positive variance resulted from a combination of lower than anticipated diesel fuel prices and no expenditures of hydrogen fuel during the period. The materials and supplies expenses were slightly under budget for the period, as anticipated, with the purchase of new, warranted components replacing the internal rebuild of components that are more costly to rebuild. The new components generally experience a longer service life which is also projected to result in reduced road calls in the long run. The cost of the ADA Consortia program is lower than budgeted due to passenger volumes being 5 percent lower than earlier projections. The positive variance during the first half of the fiscal year is expected to result in an overall positive variance for FY12-13. Interest expenses are lower than budget due to the favorable impact of the refinancing of COPS Operating expenses are under budget by 3.6 percent for the first six months of the fiscal year. Please see Attachment 1- Operating Expense Trend Analysis. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: This report does not recommend a course of action with notable advantages or disadvantages. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: This report does not recommend an action. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: There are no prior relevant Board Actions/Policies. ATIACHMENTS: 1: Operating Expense Trend Analysis
Department Head Approval:
Lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer
Prepared by:
Hernan Vargas, Budget Manager
194
FYlZ/13 Operating Expense Trend Analysis As of December 31, 2012
July
Operating Expenses (OOO's) Salary & Wages Fringe Benefits
Budget
8,881
Total Labor Costs
6,318 3,397 18,596
Adjusted labor Costs
18,596
Pension Fund
Senl1ces Fuel & Lubricants
Other materials & Supplies Utilities & Taxes Casualty & Liability Interest Expense ADA Consortium and other Purchased Trans Other Total Operating Expenses
1,768 1,624 1,209 521 795 145 2,230 230 27,117
Actual
8,713 5,753 3,082 17,548 17,548 1,237 1,757
1,067 320 759 111 1,478 72
24,349
Var$ 168 565 315 1,048 1,048
531 (133) 142 202 35 34 752 158 2,768
Var% 1.9%
8.9% 9.3% 5.6% 5.6%
Budget 8,881 6,318 3,397 18,596 18,596
August Actual Var$
Var%
Budget
-0.7%
8,925
8.6% 9.8%
5,747
17,786
(66) 542 333 809 809 111 46 (317) 90 (142) 34 44 174
8,947 5,776
3,063 17,786
30.0%
1,768
-8.2% 11.7% 38.7% 4.4% 23.4% 33.7% 68.5%
1,624 1,209 521 795 145 2,230 230
1,658 1,577 1,526 432 937 111 2,186 56
10.2%
27,117
26,2.68
849
September Var$ 8,843 81 (2,579) 8,326 (125) 3,116 20,286 (2,623) (2,623) 20,286
Actual
Var%
Budget
0.9%
8,896
-44.9% -4.2% -14.9% -14.9%
6,128
3,261 18,285
October Var$ 9,197 (301) 5,733 394 3,101 160 18,031 254 18,031 254
Actual
4.4%
2,991 17,662
4.4%
17,662
6.2%
2.8% -26.3% 17.2% -17.9% 23.4% 2.0% 75.8%
1,760 1,727 1,438 520 795 145 2,230 251
1,571 1,164 415 233 105 2,387 112
146 156 274 105 562 40 (157) 139
9.0% 19.1% 20.2% 70.7% 27.8% -7.0% 55.4%
1,766 1,658 1,285 521 795 145 2,230 237
1,681 1,824 1,289 503 749 108 2,208 54
3.1%
26,527
27.885
(1,358)
-5.1%
26,921
26,447
1,614
8.3%
18,285
85 (167) (4) 18 46 37 22 183 473
Var% -3.4% 6.4% 4.9% 1.4%
1.4%
4.8%
-10.0% -0.3% 3.4% 5.8% 25.6% 1.0% 77.2% 1.8%
195
• Note: December accruals and adjustments are being finalized by the Accounting and Budget departments
en .; > "11
"11
:0
.,
m 0
:0 .; ~
c.>
.. I
0
>
.; .;
:-
FY12/13 Operating Expense Trend Analysis As of December 31, 2012
Operating Expenses (DOD's)
Salary & Wages
Budget 9,196
Fringe Benefits
6,191
Pension Fund
Total Labor Costs Adjusted labor Costs
Services Fuel & Lubricants Other materials & Supplies Utilities & Taxes Casualty & Liability Interest Expense ADA Consortium and other Purchased Trans Other Total Operating Expenses
196
• Note: December accruals and adjustments are being finalized by the Accounting and Budget departments
November Actual Var$
var%
8,369 6,265 3,683 18,317 18,317
827 (74) (422) 331 331
9.0% -1.2% -12.9% 1.8% 1.8%
582 794 145 2,229 238
1,561 1,530 1,326 392 653 108 2,490 39
338 126 (36) 190 142 37 (260) 199
17.8% 7.6% -2.8% 32.6% 17.9% 25.6% -11.7% 83.6%
27,484
26,416
1,068
3.9%
3,261
18,648 18,648 1,900 1,657 1,290
Budget
December (Preliminary) "' Actual Var$
Total FYTO
var%
109,299
Var$ 693 (288) 441 846 846
10,754 9,946 7,717 3,198 4,767 871 13,379 1,423
9,571 9,693 7,301 2,780 4,143 651 12,493 447
1,183 253 416 418 624 220 886 976
11.0% 2.5% 5.4% 13.1% 13.1% 25.2% 6.6% 68.6%
162,200
156,377
5,823
3.6%
Budget
8,956 6,140 3,261 18,357 18,357
8,972 5,277 3,082 17,331 17,331
(16) 864 180 1,027 1,027
-0.2% 14.1% 5.5% 5.6% 5.6%
53,734 36,841 19,569 110,144 110,144
(27) 224 357 (186) (18) 37 485 123
-1.5% 13.5% 27.8% -34.9% -2.3% 25.6% 21.8% 51.8%
7.5%
1,792
1,819
1,658
1,434
1,286 533 795 145 2,230 237
929 719 813 108 1,744 114
27,033
25,011
2,022
Actual 53,042 37,129 19,128
109,299
Var%
1.3% -0.8% 2.3%
0.8% 0.8%
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-020 January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Board Policy No. 336- Investment Policy
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider Review and Approval of Board Policy No. 336- Investment Policy with No Revisions. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: In accordance with Board Policy No. 302, "the Board of Directors shall review each fiscal policy of the District once every two years with the exception of the investment policy which shall be reviewed annually" . Action is requested to continue Board Policy No. 336 Investment Policy with no revisions . Board Policy No. 336 meets all accounting requirements for Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), and reflects best practices as conducted by public agencies. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: The applicable policy documents are attached for reference. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: This report does not recommend a course of action w ith notable advantages or disadvantages. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Staff found no practical alternatives to the course of action recommended in this report. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Staff Report 12-157 Amendments to Board Policy No. 336 -Investment Policy
197
Report No. 13-020 Page 2 of 2 ATTACHMENTS
1:
Board Policy No. 336
Department Head Approval
Lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer
by: Prepared by:
Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel
Reviewed
Lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer
198
Staff Report 13-020 Att.l
AC Transit BOARD POLICY
Policy No. 336
Category: FINANCIAL MATTERS INVESTMENT POLICY Table of Contents
1.0 - Investment Policy Statement
2
2.0 - Investment Policies
2
3.0 -Accounting Policies
2
4.0 - Prudence (Prudent Person Rule)
2
5.0 - Objectives
3
6.0 - Delegation of Authority
3
7.0- Ethics and Conflicts of Interest
4
8.0- Authorized Financial Dealers and Institutions
4
9.0 -Authorized and Suitable Investments
5
10.0 - Collateralization
5
11.0 - Safekeeping and Custody
5
12.0 - Diversification
6
13.0 - Maximum Maturities
6
14.0- Internal Controls
6
15.0- Reporting Requirements
7
16.0- Fuel Hedging Program
8
17.0- Investment Policy Adoption
10
18.0- Glossary of Terms Used
10
Last Amended by Resolution No. 12-032 Page 1 of 14
Adopted: Amended:
199
1/92 3/03. 3/04. 3/05. 3/06. 3/07. 6/09. 3/10.4/10. 1/11.6/12
1.0 -INVESTMENT POLICY STATEMENT It is the policy of the District to invest all public funds in accordance with the following goals, listed in descending order of priority: A.
Compliance with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, and regulation requirements.
B.
Preservation of capital.
C.
Liquidity to meet required cash demands.
D.
Maximization of income.
2.0 • INVESTMENT POLICIES This investment policy applies to the investment activities of the Alameda Contra Costa Transit District. The financial assets of all District funds shall be administered in accordance with the provisions of this policy, except for Section 457 Deferred Compensation Plan funds, which shall be invested in accordance with the applicable laws, regulations, and contracts for such funds. Funds of the Alameda Contra Costa Transit District Pension Fund are not subject to this policy as the Pension Fund is administered by the Alameda Contra Costa Transit District Retirement Board, a separate entity from the District. 3.0
ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Short-term investments (those with a remaining maturity at the time of purchase of one year or less) are reported at cost, which approximates fair value, provided that the fair value of those investments is not significantly affected by the impairment of the credit standing of the issuer or by other factors. Investments with a remaining maturity at the time of purchase of greater than one year are carried at fair value. For financial reporting purposes, all investment income, including changes in fair value of investments, is recognized as revenue in the District's operating statement. 4.0 ·PRUDENCE (Prudent Person Rule) District investments shall be made with care, skill, prudence and diligence, under the circumstances then prevailing, that a prudent person acting in a like capacity and familiar with such matters would use in the conduct of an enterprise of a like character and with like aims, to safeguard the principal and maintain the liquidity needs of the District. Persons acting in accordance with this policy and exercising due diligence, shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security's credit risk, or market price changes, provided Last Amended by Resolution No. 12-032 Page 2 of 14
Adopted: Amended:
200
1/92 3/03, 3/04, 3/05, 3/06 3/07, 6/09, 3/10 4/10 1/11 6/12
deviations from expectations are reported in the monthly investment report to the District Board, and appropriate action is immediately taken to control adverse developments. 5.0 - OBJECTIVES The primary objectives, in priority order, of the investment activities of the District shall be: A.
B.
With respect to all investments: 1.
To be in compliance with all Federal, State and local laws as well as all District policies and procedures.
2.
To ensure safety of principal. All investments of the District shall be undertaken in a manner which seeks the preservation of principal.
3.
To remain sufficiently liquid to enable the District to meet all operating requirements which might be reasonably anticipated.
4.
To maximize yield consistent with risk limitations identified herein and prudent investment principles.
With respect to short-term Cash Management objectives: 1.
To accelerate receipt of all funds due the District.
2.
To accurately monitor and forecast expenditures and revenues, thus enabling the District to invest funds to the fullest extent possible.
3.
The investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of obtaining a rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, commensurate with the investment risk constraints and the cash flow needs. The basis used by the Treasury Manager to determine whether market yields are being achieved shall be the three (3) month U.S. Treasury Bill and the average Federal Funds rate. This index is considered a benchmark for "riskless" investment transactions and therefore should be a minimum standard for the portfolio's rate of return.
6.0- DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY The following individuals are authorized to sign investment documents and/or execute cash transfers and make investments of the District's funds: A. B. C.
General Manager Chief Financial Officer Treasury Manager or Treasury Services Administrator
Last Amended by Resolution No. 12-032 Page 3 of 14
Adopted: Amended:
201
1/92 3/03, 3/04. 3/05, 3/06 3/07, 6/09, 3/10,4/10,1/11,6/12
All investment documents and cash transfer authorization forms shall be approved by (2) signature authorities from the above list. In the exercise of this responsibility, the authority to perform specific investment tasks and duties may be delegated as follows: Controller: If the General Manager or Chief Financial Officer are out of the office for any reason, the Controller may sign and execute the necessary investment documents and cash transfer authorization forms as the 2"d signature authority. 7.0 ·ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The officers and authorized employees as defined in Section 6.0 of this policy who are responsible for the investment of District funds shall refrain from personal business activity that could conflict with the proper execution of the District's investment program, or which could impair the ability to make impartial investment decisions. Pursuant to the District's Conflict of Interest Code, employees shall disclose any financial interests in financial institutions that conduct business within the District. They shall further disclose any personal financial/investment holdings that could affect the performance of the District's portfolio or the individual's judgement or decisions regarding the District's portfolio. In addition. the services provided by the District's external auditors shall include an annual review of the Fair Political Practices Commission "Statement of Economic Interests, Form 700", for individuals authorized to make investments of District funds. As outlined in Section 6.0 of this policy, those individuals are: A. B. C. D.
General Manager Chief Financial Officer Treasury Manager Treasury Services Administrator
8.0 ·AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL DEALERS AND INSTITUTIONS The Treasury Manager shall maintain a list of "Primary Government Securities Dealers" reporting to the Market Reports Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. This list is published by the Federal Reserve Bank. In conformance with the District Investment Policy, only those entities listed will be considered as a viable dealer to provide investment services to the District. All Primary Dealers who desire to become qualified bidders for investment transactions must supply the Chief Financial Officer with the following: 1) audited financial statements; 2) proof of National Association of Security Dealers (NASD) certification; 3) certification of having read our investment policy and agreement to comply with the policy requirements. No public deposit shall be made except in a qualified public depository as established by Government Code Section 53635.2. Last Amended by Resolution No. 12-032 Adopted: Amended:
Page 4 of 14
202
1/92 3/03, 3/04, 3/05, 3/06, 3/07, 6/09, 3/10,4/10, 1/11,6/12
9.0 ·AUTHORIZED AND SUITABLE INVESTMENTS
In accordance with and subject to the restrictions in California Government Code Section 53601, the District may invest in the following types of investments: A. B. C. D. E. F.
Repurchase Agreements Securities of U.S. Government and its agencies California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) Negotiable Certificates of Deposit Commercial Paper Bankers Acceptances
Although Local Agency Investment Funds, Negotiable Certificates of Deposit, Commercial Paper, and Bankers Acceptances, are allowed under the California Government Code, these types of investments may not be utilized without the prior authorization of the Chief Financial Officer, after prudent investigation of the credit risk of such investments. 10.0 · COLLATERALIZATION
California banks and savings and loan associations are required to secure District deposits by pledging eligible securities as collateral, pursuant to California Government Code Section 53651. In accordance with California Government Code Section 53652, the fair value of the pledged securities must equal at least 110 percent of the District's deposits. California law also allows financial institutions to secure deposits by pledging first trust deed mortgage notes having a value of 150 percent of the District's total deposits. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 53601, the fair value of securities that underlay a repurchase agreement shall be valued at 102 percent or greater of the funds borrowed against those securities and the value shall be adjusted no less than quarterly. As a matter of District policy, all deposits of the District are secured by the pledge of eligible securities equal to 110 percent ofthe District's deposits. All repurchase agreement transactions of the District must meet the requirements in California Government Code Section 53601 and shall be secured by the pledge of eligible securities equal to 102 percent of the District's principal investment. In accordance with California Government Code 53653, the District Treasury Manager may waive the 110 percent collateral requirement for deposits which are insured up to $250,000 by the FDIC. 11.0 ·SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY
Securities purchased as District investments must be physically delivered to a third-party agent of the District. If U.S. Treasury securities are purchased, delivery may be made by book entry only. All investment transactions for the District require "Delivery vs. Payment" method of Last Amended by Resolution No. 12-032 Page 5 of 14
Adopted: Amended:
203
1/92 3/03, 3/04, 3/05, 3/06 3/07, 6/09, 3/10, 4/10, 1/11' 6/12
settlement only. The District's securities and collateral for those securities shall be maintained, in the name of the District, in the Trust Department or Safekeeping Department of the various banks doing business with the District as established by written third-party safekeeping agreements between the District and the banks. 12.0- DIVERSIFICATION The District shall diversify its investments by security type, institution and maturity. With the exception of securities of the U.S. Government and its Agencies, no more than 33% of the District's total investment portfolio shall be invested in a single security type or with a single financial institution. 13.0- MAXIMUM MATURITIES To the extent possible, the District shall match its General Fund investments with anticipated cashflow requirements. Unless matched to a specific cashflow, the District shall not directly invest in maturities greater than 3 years from the date of purchase without prior authorization of the Board of Directors. All investments of District funds shall be made in accordance with and subject to the restrictions in California Government Code Section 53601. Short term investment of District funds shall be restricted to the following instruments:
Investment Instrument
Maximum Percentage/Am!$ of Portfolio
Repurchase Agreements* U.S. Treasury Bills & Notes U.S. Government Agency Securities Bankers Acceptance Commercial Paper Local Agency Investment Funds Negotiable Cert. of Deposit Money Market Accounts (Non U.S. Gov't) Interest Bearing Cash Collateralized by Securities of the U.S. Government or Its Agencies
$25M 100% 100% 20% 20% 20% 20% $25M
Maximum Length To Maturity for Short Term Investments
7 days 3 years 3 years 180 days 270 days N/A 3 years N/A
100%
*All repurchase agreements entered into by the District require that an authorized master repurchase agreement between the District and the financial institution be in place before any repurchase agreement transactions occur.
Last Amended by Resolution No. 12-032 Page 6 of 14
Adopted: Amended:
204
1/92 3/03, 3!04, 3/05, 3/06, 3/07, 6/09, 3/10,4/10, 1/11,6/12
14.0 -INTERNAL CONTROLS The Treasury Manager shall establish a system of internal controls through procedures designed to prevent losses of public funds arising from fraud, employee error, misrepresentation of third parties, unanticipated changes in financial markets, or imprudent actions by employees and officers of the District. These controls shall include: A.
Development of investment procedures inclusive of but not limited to: 1.
Separation of transaction authority from accounting and record keeping responsibilities.
2.
Third-Party safekeeping of securities.
3.
Competitive bids shall be obtained only from "Primary Government Securities Dealers" reporting to the Market Reports Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, as described in Section 8.0 of this policy.
4.
All investments shall be selected through an informal documented competitive telephone bid process. If a specific maturity date is required, bids will be requested from at least three "Primary Dealers" for instruments which meet the maturity requirement. If no specific maturity is required, a yield curve analysis will be conducted to determine which maturities produce the greatest yield prior to securing the required competitive bids described above.
5.
Written confirmation of all financial transactions.
6.
Written documentation of bids, transactions and investment strategies.
B.
Periodic independent reviews to be conducted to ensure the District's investment operation is in compliance with the established policy and associated procedures.
C.
The investment portfolio and all related transactions are reviewed and balanced to appropriate general ledger accounts by the Controller's office on a monthly basis.
15.0- REPORTING REQUIREMENTS The Treasury Manager shall be responsible for preparing a monthly investment report as required by California Government Section 53607. The investment report shall include: A.
Type of Investment
Last Amended by Resolution No. 12-032 Page 7 of 14
Adopted: Amended:
205
1/92 3/03, 3/04 3/05, 3/06, 3/07, 6/09, 3/10 4/10 1/11 6/12
B.
Institution of Purchase
C.
Date of Purchase, and Maturity
D.
Interest Rate, Rate of Return, and Yield
E.
Target Benchmark
F.
Par, Book and Fair Values
In addition, the investment report shall state compliance of the portfolio with the statement of investment policy and a statement denoting the ability of the District to meet pool expenditure requirements for the next 6 months in accordance with California Government Section 53646 (b) (2) and (3). The investment report is to be produced monthly and will be forwarded to the Finance and Audit Committee and then to the full Board of Directors for review.
16.0- FUEL HEDGING PROGRAM Staff is directed to utilize appropriate fuel hedging strategy to minimize the variability in the District's budget due to fluctuations in the price of diesel fuel. This variability is due to the fact that the District primarily purchases fuel on the spot market, which varies daily and may subject the District to volatile variances between budgeted and actual fuel expense. Variances between budgeted and actual fuel expenses vary significantly during any given year. The hedging program is designed to minimize large budget variances resulting from the volatility of diesel fuel prices. Hedging increases budget certainty and facilitates more effective utilization of budgetary resources. The District's hedging program will include:
A.
Fixed price Physical Delivery Contracts Subject to an open and competitive process, the District solicits bid prices and award contracts for future delivery of fuel from suppliers.
B.
Fuel Commodity Swap The District enters into a financially-settling contract with qualifying counterparties under which the District either pays an upfront amount or exchanges future payments with a counterparty.
C.
Futures Contracts The District may enter into such contracts that allow it to enter into smaller transactions and make certain pricing decisions over time.
Last Amended by Resolution No. 12-032 Adopted: Amended:
Page 8 of 14
206
1/92 3/03, 3/04, 3/05, 3/06, 3107, 6/09, 3/10 4/10 1/11 6/12
Any strategy to fix or otherwise hedge future prices carries certain risks, some of which are identified below. Certain of these risks may be mitigated, in part, by taking certain measures, some of which are also identified below. Counterparty Risk: The risk that the counterparty fails to make required payments or otherwise comply with the terms of the hedging contract. This non-performance would expected to result from financial difficulty, but also may occur for physical, legal or business reasons. This risk is mitigated by establishing minimum credit quality criteria, establishing maximum credit limits, requiring collateral upon a counterparty downgrade and when credit limits are exceeded, limiting the term of the agreement and employing credit rating surveillance. Pricing Risk: The risk that, during the term of the hedging contract, the District usually pays a higher price than it would have paid by purchasing diesel fuel in the spot market alone, without entering into a hedging contract. Political Risk: The risk that the hedging program may be unjustly criticized. Political risk is mitigated by ensuring that the Board and public are fully informed about the purpose, nature and expectations for the hedging program.
Basis Risk: The risk that there is a mismatch between any payment received from a counterparty and the variable cost for diesel fuel actually paid to a gas company .. Such basis risk may be mitigated by basing hedging contracts on indices that have a strong historical correlation with the price of diesel fuel in the relevant market. Termination Risk: The risk that there will be an early termination of a hedging contract. An early termination may result in the District either paying or receiving a termination payment. Early termination may result in the District either paying or receiving a termination payment. Early terminations generally occur when one of the parties deteriorates in credit quality, suffers bankruptcy or fails to perform. The risk is mitigated by establishing safeguards such as requiring collateral posting if credit limits are exceeded or credit ratings decline. Fuel Commodity Transactions Each Fuel Commodity Transaction shall have a term not to exceed the Maximum Term and shall be for a notional quantity of diesel fuel not to exceed the Maximum Percentage. Further, each Fuel Commodity Transaction shall be entered into solely with a Fuel Hedge Counterparty under a Fuel Hedge Agreement and shall contain a Fuel Hedge Collateral Provision and a Fuel Hedge Termination Provision. Each Fuel Commodity Transaction shall include a provision that permits the District to early terminate such transaction at any time and for any reason, at its option. Each contemplated Fuel Commodity Transaction shall be approved by the Board prior to the Staff entering into such transaction. Subject to any additional parameters established by the Last Amended by Resolution No. 12-032 Page 9 of 14
Adopted: Amended:
207
1/92 3/03, 3/04, 3/05, 3/06, 3/07, 6/09, 3/10 4/10 1/11 6/12
Board in its approval, the Staff shall be permitted to award a Fuel Commodity Transaction to any qualifying Fuel Hedge Counterparty bidding on such transaction after evaluating the price quoted, credit quality and reputation of each bidding Fuel Hedge Counterparty, and any other information it may deem relevant or appropriate. Each Fuel Hedge Counterparty shall enter into a Fuel Hedge Agreement prior to or promptly following the execution of a Fuel Commodity Transaction. The Staff shall monitor, on a continuing basis during the existence of a Fuel Commodity Transaction, the index upon which any Fuel Commodity Transaction is based and the credit ratings of each Fuel Hedge Counterparty. On a quarterly basis following the execution of a Fuel Commodity Transaction, the Staff shall deliver a report to the Board regarding such Fuel Commodity Transaction, including the existence of any significant events or occurrences under the Fuel Hedge Agreement, any operational or other issues relating to the management of such transaction and the overall economic performance of such transaction. The Staff shall report to the Board the occurrence of any default or termination event, however described, with respect to a Fuel Hedge Counterparty under a Fuel Hedge Agreement or the downgrade of any Fuel Hedge Counterparty immediately upon becoming aware of any such event or occurrence. 17.0- INVESTMENT POLICY ADOPTION The District's investment policy shall be adopted by resolution of the District's Board of Directors. This policy shall be reviewed on an annual basis by the Board of Directors. Any modifications made thereto must be formally approved by the Board of Directors. 18.0- GLOSSARY ACCRUED INTEREST: The accumulated interest due on a bond as of the last interest payment made by the issuer. AGENCY: A debt security issued by a federal or federally sponsored agency. Federal agencies are backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. Federally sponsored agencies are backed by each particular agency with a market perception that there is an implicit government guarantee. An example of federal agency is the Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA). An example of a FSA is the Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA). AMORTIZATION: The systematic reduction of the amount owed on a debt issued through periodic payments of principal. BASIS POINT: A unit of measure used in the valuation of fixed-income securities equal to 1/100 of 1 percent of yield, e.g., "1/4" of 1 percent is equal to 25 basis points. BID: The price offered for securities. BROKER: A broker brings buyers and sellers together for a commission paid by the initiator of the transaction or by both sides; he does not position. In the money market, brokers are active Last Amended by Resolution No. 12-032 Adopted: Amended:
Page 10 of 14
208
1/92 3/03, 3/04, 3/05, 3/06, 3/07, 6/09, 3/10,4/10, 1/11,6/12
in markets in which banks buy and sell money and in interdealer markets. COLLATERAL: Securities, evidence of deposit or other property which a borrower pledges to secure repayment of a loan. Also refers to securities pledged by a bank to secure deposits of public monies. COMMERCIAL PAPER: An unsecured short-term promissory note issued by corporations, with maturities ranging from 2 to 270 days. COUPON: The annual rate of interest that a bond's issuer promises to pay the bondholder on the bond's face value; a certificate attached to a bond evidencing interest due on a payment date. DEALER: A dealer, as opposed to a broker, acts as a principal in all transactions, including buying and selling for his/her own account. DELIVERY VERSUS PAYMENT: There are two methods of delivery of securities: delivery versus payment and delivery versus receipt (also called free). Delivery versus payment is delivery of securities with an exchange of money for the securities. Delivery versus receipt is delivery of securities with an exchange of a signed receipt for the securities. DISCOUNT: The amount by which the par value of a security exceeds the price paid for the security. DIVERSIFICATION: Dividing investment funds among a variety of securities offering independent returns. FAIR VALUE: The amount at which an investment could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties, other than in a forced or liquidation sale. FEDERAL FUNDS (FED FUNDS): Funds placed in Federal Reserve banks by depository institutions in excess of current reserve requirements. These depository institutions may lend fed funds to each other overnight or on a longer basis. They may also transfer funds among each other on a same-day basis through the Federal Reserve banking systems. Fed funds are considered to be immediately available funds. FEDERAL FUNDS RATE: Interest rate charged by one institution lending federal funds to the other. FUEL COMMODITY TRANSACTIONS: A financially-settling diesel fuel swap, cap, option or similar transaction (or combination thereof) entered into with a Fuel Hedge Counterparty that enables the District to fix or otherwise hedge its budgeted fuel costs, whether for a pre-paid premium or through regularly scheduled payments, based on a published index. FUEL HEDGE AGREEMENT: A 1992 ISDA Master Agreement, including a Schedule and Credit Support Annex thereto, and a Confirmation reflecting the economic terms of the Fuel Last Amended by Resolution No. 12-032 Page 11 of 14
Adopted: Amended:
209
1/92 3/03 3/04, 3/05, 3/06, 3/07, 6/09, 3/10 4/10 1/11 6/12
Commodity Transactions. FUEL HEDGE COLLATERAL PROVISION: A proviSIOn that requires a Fuel Hedge Counterparty to deliver daily collateral (in the form of U.S. cash or U.S. Treasury obligations) if such counterparty's (or its guarantor's) long-term debt rating becomes rated below "A3" or "A-" by one or more nationally recognized statistical rating organization. FUEL HEDGE TERMINATION PROVISION: A provision that permits the District to early terminate the Fuel Commodity Transaction if the Fuel Hedge Counterparty's (or its guarantor's) long-term debt rating becomes rated below "Baa2" or "BBB" by one or more nationally recognized statistical rating organization. FUEL HEDGE COUNTERPARTY: A financial institution or recognized commodity hedge counterparty which, at the time of execution of a Fuel Commodity Transaction with the District, has (or is guaranteed by a party that has) a long-term debt rating (i) in at least the "Aa" or "AA" category by at least one nationally recognized statistical rating organization and (ii) no less than "A2" or "A" by any nationally recognized statistical rating organization(s). GOVERNMENT SECURITIES: An obligation of the U.S. Government, backed by the full faith and credit of the government. These securities are regarded as the highest quality of investment securities available in the U.S. securities market. LIQUIDITY: A liquid asset is one that can be converted easily and rapidly into cash without a substantial loss of value. In the money market, a security is said to be liquid if the spread between bid and asked prices is narrow and reasonable size can be done at those quotes. LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND: A voluntary investment fund open to government entities in California that is managed by the State Treasurer's office. MARKET VALUE: The price at which a security is trading and could presumable be purchased or sold. MARK-TO-MARKET: The process whereby the book value or collateral value of a security is adjusted to reflect its current fair value. MATURITY: The date upon which the principal or stated value of an investment becomes due and payable. MAXIMUM PERCENTAGE: Eighty percent (80%) of the District's budgeted diesel fuel costs for a fiscal year. MAXIMUM TERM: With respect to each Fuel Commodity Transaction, no more than eighteen months. MONEY MARKET: The market in which short-term debt instruments (bills, commercial paper, bankers' acceptances, etc.) are issued and traded. Last Amended by Resolution No. 12-032 Page 12 of 14
Adopted: Amended:
210
1/92 3/03, 3/04, 3/05, 3/06, 3/07, 6/09, 3/10 4/10 1/11 6/12
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES DEALERS (NASD): A self-regulatory organization (SRO) of brokers and dealers in the over-the counter securities business. Its regulatory mandate includes authority over firms that distribute mutual fund shares as well as other securities. NOTE: A written promise to pay a specified amount to a certain entity on demand or on a specified date. OFFER: An indicated price at which market participants are willing to sell a security or commodity. Also referred to as the "Ask Price." PAR VALUE: The amount of principal which must be paid at maturity. Also referred to as the face amount of a bond, normally quoted in $1,000 increments per bond. PORTFOLIO: Collection of securities held by an investor. PRINCIPAL: The face value or par value of a debt instrument, or the amount of capital invested in a given security. PRUDENT PERSON RULE: An investment standard. California Government Code requires that a fiduciary may invest money only in a list of securities selected by the state-the so-called legal list. In addition, the fiduciary can only invest in a security if it is one which would be bought by a prudent person of discretion and intelligence who is seeking a reasonable income and preservation of capital. PRIMARY DEALER: A group of government securities dealers that submit daily reports of market activity and positions and monthly financial statements to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and are subject to its informal oversight. Primary dealers include Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) registered securities broker-dealers, banks, and a few unregulated firms. QUALIFIED PUBLIC DEPOSITORIES: A financial institution which does not claim exemption from the payment of any sales or compensating use or ad valorem taxes under the laws of this state, which has segregated for the benefit of the commission eligible collateral having a value of not less than its maximum liability and which has been approved by the Public Deposit Protection Commission to hold public deposits. RATE OF RETURN: The yield obtainable on a security based on its purchase price or its current market price. This may be the amortized yield to maturity on a bond or the current income return. REPURCHASE AGREEMENT (REPO): The purchase of securities by a local agency pursuant to an agreement by which the counterparty will repurchase the securities on or before a specified date and for a specified amount and the counterparty will deliver the underlying securities to the local agency by book entry, physical delivery, or by third party custodial Last Amended by Resolution No. 12-032 Adopted: Amended:
Page 13 of 14
211
1/92 3/03, 3/04, 3/05, 3/06, 3/07 6/09, 3/10,4/10, 1/11,6/12
agreement. Refer to section 10.0 for detailed information on the District's collateralization policy. SAFEKEEPING: A service to customers rendered by banks for a fee whereby securities and valuables of all types and descriptions are held in the bank's vaults for protection. SECONDARY MARKET: A market made for the purchase and sale of outstanding issues following the initial distribution. SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION (SEC): Agency created by Congress to protect investors in securities transactions by administering securities legislation. TREASURY BILLS: A non-interest bearing discount security issued by the U.S. Treasury to finance the national debt. Most bills are issued to mature in three months, six months, or one year. TREASURY BOND: Long-term U.S. Treasury securities having initial maturities of more than ten years. TREASURY NOTES: Intermediate term coupon bearing U.S. Treasury securities having initial maturities of from one to ten years. YIELD: The rate of annual income return on an investment, expressed as a percentage. (a) INCOME YIELD is obtained by dividing the current dollar income by the current market price for the security. (b) NET YIELD or YIELD TO MATURITY is the current income yield minus any premium above par, or plus any discount from par in purchase price, with the adjustment spread over period from the date of purchase to the date of maturity of the bond.
Last Amended by Resolution No. 12-032 Adopted: Amended:
Page 14 of 14
212
1/92 3/03, 3/04, 3/05, 3/06, 3/07, 6/09, 3/10 4/10 1/11 6/12
Report No:
T~T
Meeting Date:
13-033 January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Apply for California Proposition lB Transit System Safety, Security & Disaster Response Account Funds
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider Adoption of Resolution No. 13-004 authorizing the General Manager or his Designee to file and execute applications and funding agreements with the California Emergency Management Agency for allocations of Transit System Safety, Security & Disaster Response Account (TSSSDRA) Funds for FY 2012-13 through FY 2016-17. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The District is applying for $2,148,388 million in California Proposition 1B TSSSDRA funding to be passed-thru to the new Transbay Transit Center project as per the previous GM Memo 12-020. CaiEMA has changed its desired governing body resolution text and a new resolution is required . BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
Staff anticipates receiving $2,148,388 million in state funding to be passed-thru to Transbay. There is no matching requirement for these funds.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
In Staff Report 12-020 the board previously approved the application for funds in the remaining years of the Ca lifornia State Proposition 1B Transit System Safety, Security & Disaster Response Account {TSSSDRA) program. With the FY 2012-13 program, CaiEMA has modified the governing body resolution text and is requiring updated resolutions from agencies. As per the previous Staff Report, the funds will be used for the new Transbay Transit Center project Safety and Security Improvements as part of AC Transit's total capital contribution to Transbay. With the FY 2013 funds, the District will have given approximately $12 million of the $38 million commitment it made. For FY 2012-13, the revenues will be directed to the following project: Transbay Transit Center- Emergency Preparedness, Safety & Security Elements This project is consistent with AC Transit's 2010 Short-Range Transit Plan.
213
Report No. 13-033 Page 2 of 2 ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
Not applying for the funds now would cause the District to forgo $2.15 million in state funding to be used to help pay down its capital commitment to the new Transbay Transit Center. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
There are no recommended alternative actions at this point. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES:
Staff Report 12-020 - Adoption of Resolution No. 12-005 Authorizing the Interim General Manager, or Her Designee, to File and Execute Applications and Funding Agreements with the California Emergency Management Agency for Allocations for FY 2011-12 Thru FY 2016-17 of Transit System Safety, Security & Disaster Response Account (TSSSDRA) Funds ATTACHMENTS: 1: Resolution 13-004
2:
Staff Report 12-020/Resolution 12-005
Department Head Approval: Reviewed
by:
Prepared
by:
Tom Prescott, Chief Performance Officer Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel Lewis Clinton, Chief Financial Officer Chris Andrichak, Senior Analyst, Capital Planning & Grants
214
SR 13-033 Attachment 1 ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 13-004 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO FILE AND EXECUTE APPLICATIONS AND FUNDING AGREEMENTS WITH THE CALIFORNIA EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY FOR ALLOCATIONS OF TRANSIT SYSTEM SAFETY, SECURITY & DISASTER RESPONSE ACCOUNT (TSSSDRA) FUNDS FOR FY 2012-13 THROUGH FY 2016-17 WHEREAS, the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006 authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds for specified purposes, including, but not limited to, funding made available for capital projects that provide increased protection against security and safety threats, and for capital expenditures to increase the capacity of transit operators to develop disaster response transportation systems; and WHEREAS, the California Emergency Management Agency (Cal EMA) administers such funds deposited in the Transit System Safety, Security, and Disaster Response Account under the California Transit Security Grant Program (CTSGP); and WHEREAS, the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District is eligible to receive CTSGP funds; and WHEREAS, the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District will apply for FY2013 through FY2017 CTSGP funds in an amount up to $2,148,388 per year for eligible safety and securityrelated capital projects for the Transbay Transit Center; and WHEREAS, the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District recognizes that it is responsible for compliance with all Cal EMA CTSGP grant assurances, and state and federal laws, including, but not limited to, laws governing the use of bond funds; and WHEREAS, Cal EMA requires Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District to complete and submit a Governing Body Resolution for the purposes of identifying agent(s) authorized to act on behalf of Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District to execute actions necessary to obtain CTSGP funds from Cal EMA and ensure continued compliance with Cal EMA CTSGP assurances, and state and federal laws; NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District does resolve as follows:
Section 1.
David J. Armijo, General Manager, or his designee, is hereby authorized to execute for and on behalf of Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, a public entity established under the laws of the State of California, any actions necessary for the purpose of obtaining financial assistance provided by the California Emergency Management Agency under the CTSGP.
Section 2.
This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage by four affirmative votes of the Board of Directors.
Page 1 ofl
Resolution No. 13-004 215
SR 13-033 Attachment 1
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of January 2013
Greg Harper, President Attest:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary I, Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary for the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors held on the 23rd day of January, 2013 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
Approved as to Form:
Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel
Resolution No. 13-004
Pagelofl 216
SR 13-033 Attachment 2
AC TRANSIT DISTRICT Board of Directors
GM Memo No.12-020 Meeting Date: January 25, 2012
Committees: Operations Committee External Affairs Committee Board of Directors
Planning Committee D Finance and Audit Committee ~ Financing Corporation 0
B D
SUBJECT: Consider Adoption of Resolution No. 12-005 Authorizing the Interim General Manager, or Her Designee, to File and Execute Applications and Funding Agreements with the California Emergency Management Agency for Allocations for FY 11-12 Through FY 2016-17 of Transit System Safety, Security & Disaster Response Account (TSSSDRA) Funds RECOMMENDED ACTION:
0
Briefing Item
~ Recommended Motion
Adopt Resolution No. 12-005 Budqetarv/Fiacallmpact: $ 2.1 million yearly for the Security Improvements Project at the Transbay Transit Center as part of AC Transit's Annual Capital Contribution to the new Transbay Transit Center Program. Total of program Is estimated to be $21.5 million over 10-year program, with $8 ..6 million already awarded to the District. Background/Discussion: The Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006, approved by the voters on November 7, 2006, established $1 billion to be deposited in the Transit System Safety, Security & Disaster Response Account (TSSSDRA). The funds were made available to transit operators eligible to receive State Transit Assistance (STA) for security and emergency preparedness. Funds will be appropriated by the State Controller's Office on STA formula. Senate Bill 88 (Perala) established the guidelines and designated the Governor's Office of Homeland Security (OHS) as the program administrator. Senate Bill88 also fixed the fund distribution formula for the life of the bond. The funding formula Is based on an average of the FY 2005-06, FY 2006-07, and FY 2007-08 STA revenue factors. Senate Bill 88 set-aside 25% of the TSSSDRA funds for water transit, 15% for Intercity rail, and 60% for transit operators eligible for STA funds. Like STA funds, fifty percent of the TSSSDRA funds are revenue-based fonnula and fifty percent are population-based fonnula. MTC Is the recipient of the population-based funds for the San Francisco Bay Area and has designated the State Controller to distribute the Bay Area's population apportionment to eligible operators on the revenue formula.
Rev. 8/10 217
GM Memo No. 12-020 Meeting Date: January 25, 2012 Page 2 of2 Approval of the attached Resolution 12-005 would allow the District to receive the estimated remaining $12.9 million of $21.5 million in TSSSDRA funds in yearly increments of $2.1 million from FY 11-12 thru FY 16-17. The funds will be used for the Transbay Terminal Security Improvements as part of AC Transit's annual capital contribution to the Transbay Transit Center. For FY 11-12, the revenues will be directed to the following project: Transbay Transit Center- Emergency Preparedness, Safety & Security Elements
This project is consistent with AC Transit's 2010 Short-Range Transit Plan.
Prior Relevant Board Actions/Policies: GM Memo 11-032; Authorization to Apply for TSSDRA FY2010-11 Funds Attachments: Resolution 12-005 Approved by:
Mary V. King, Interim General Manager Lewis G. Clinton, Jr. Chief Financial Officer Kate Miller, Manager of Capital Development, Legislation & Grants
Prepared by:
Chris Andrichak, Sr. Capital Planning Specialist
Date Prepared:
January 11,2012
218
GM MEMO 12-020 Attachment
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 12-005 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE INTERIM GENERAL MANAGER, OR HER DESIGNEE, TO FILE AND EXECUTE APPLICATIONS AND FUNDING AGREEMENTS WITH THE CALIFORNIA EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY FOR ALLOCATION OF FISCAL YEARS 2011-12 THRU 2016-17 TRANSIT SYSTEM SAFETY, SECURITY & DISASTER RESPONSE ACCOUNT FUNDS WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1266 (Statutes 2006, Chapter 25) establishes the Transportation, Safety, Security and Disaster Response Account (TSSSDRA) as part of the Highway, Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Fund of 2006 (Government Code 8879.20 et seq.); and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 88 (Statutes 2007, Chapter 181) designated that the California Emergency Management Agency (CaiEMA) appropriates the TSSSDRA funds, and establishes the program guidelines and determined that applicants eligible for State Transit Assistance are eligible applicants for TSSSDRA funds; and WHEREAS, AC Transit is an eligible applicant of the population-based State Transit Assistance (STA) funds pursuant to PUC Section 99260; and WHEREAS, the Transbay Joint Powers Authority (the TJPA) is requesting a $57 million dollar (in current dollars) capital contribution from AC Transit for construction of the new Transbay Transit Center; and WHEREAS, the TSSSDRA funding for the project(s) as set forth in Interim General Manager Memo 12-020 attached hereto, will be part of AC Transit's annual capital contribution to the new Transbay Transit Center. NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit AC Transit does resolve as follows: Section 1. The Interim General Manager, or her designee, is authorized to file and execute applications and funding agreements, and revisions, if required, together with all necessary supporting documents, with CaiEMA for FY 2011-12 thru FY 2016-17 TSSSDRA funds. Section 2. A copy of this resolution shall be transmitted to CaiEMA in conjunction with the filing of the application authorized in Section 1 and revisions to the application. CaiEMA is requested to grant the allocations of funds as specified herein. Section 3. AC Transit and its agents shall comply with the provisions of the TSSSDRA Program Guidelines. Section 4. AC Transit approves the certification of assurances as required for allocation of TSSSDRA funds. RESOLUTION NO. 12-005 Page 1 of 3 219
GM MEMO 12·020 Attachment
Section 5. There is no legal impediment to AC Transit in requesting allocation of or implementing projects funded with TSSSDRA funds and there is no pending or threatened litigation which might in any way adversely affect the proposed project, or the ability of AC Transit to deliver such project. Section 6. AC Transit agrees to indemnify and hold harmless CaiEMA, its Governing body, representatives, agents, and employees from and against all claims, injury, suiis, demands, liability, losses, damages, and expenses, whetheF direct or indirect (including any and all costs and expenses in connection therewith), incurred by reason of any act or failure to act of AC Transit, its officers, employees or agents, or subcontractors or any of them in connection with its performance of services under this allocation ofTSSSDRA funds. Section 7. The Interim General Manager, or her designee, is hereby delegated the authority to make non-substantive changes or minor amendments to the application as deemed appropriate. Section 8. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage by four affirmative votes of the Board of Directors. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 25th day of January, 2012
Elsa Ortiz, President Attest:
Linda Nemeroff, District Secretary I, District Secretary for the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors held on the 251h day of January, by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Noes: Absent: Abstain:
Linda Nemeroff, District Secretary RESOLUTION NO. 12-005 Page2 of3
220
GM MEMO 12·020 Attachment
Approved as to Form and Content:
Vincent C. Ewing, General Counsel
RESOLUTION NO. 12-005 Page 3 of 3 221
This page intentionally blank
222
Report No: Meeting Date :
13-036 January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Apply for Metropolitan Transportation Commission Transit Performance Initiative-Incentive Program Funds
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider Adoption of Resolution No. 13-005 authorizing the General Manager or his Designee to file and execute applications to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for MTC's FY2012-13 Transit Performance Initiative -Incentive program. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The District is applying for $1,802,676 million in federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) and/or Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funding for the Spectrum Ridership Growth project. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
Staff anticipates receiving $1,802,676 million in STP/CMAQ federal funding. Local match requirement is 11.47% ($233,556) and is expected to be District capital.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
In May 2012, the MTC adopted the Transit Sustainability Project recommendations including the Transit Performance Initiative (TPI), which is composed of two programs: 1) a capital program focused on regional investment in supportive infrastructure to improve performance in major transit corridors; and 2) an incentive program to reward agencies that improve ridership and service productivity (TPI-Incentive). The TPI is a component of the OneBayArea Grant (OBAG) Program, which is a step towards integrating the region's federal transportation program and its land-use and housing policies. OBAG TPI grants are funded from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) STP and/or CMAQ programs. The TPI-Incentive program is proposed for FY2012-13 through FY2015-16 at $15 million per year and is to be used for projects focused on increasing ridership and/or productivity. The first year (FY2012-13) is a transition year in which funding will be distributed to all operators based on current ridership (FY2010-11 actual). Funding in the remaining years of the program are proposed to be distributed based on a formula with 50 percent based on annual ridership, 25 percent based on the annual increase in ridership, and 25 percent based on the increase in 223
Report No. 13-036 Page 2 of 2 passengers per revenue hour (measure of productivity). Future funding years are not linked directly to the performance of funded projects but to agency performance as a whole (based on National Transit Database reporting). AC Transit's project for this funding is 'Spectrum Ridership Growth,' a spectrum of programs that together will facilitate and encourage new riders among East Bay residents, employees, and visitors, as well as increased ridership among current riders. The principal three areas of focus will be passenger information systems; fare structure, media, and programs; and traditional and new media marketing. The project is eligible for funding under the guidelines of the federal STP or CMAQ programs and is consistent with the District's most recent SRTP.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: Not applying for the funds now would cause the District to forgo $1.8 million in federal funding.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: There are no recommended alternative actions at this point.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Staff Report 12-087- Report on the Initial Recommendations of the MTC's Transit Sustain ability and Comprehensive Operations Analysis Projects and Their Impact on AC Transit
ATTACHMENTS: 1: Resolution 13-005
Department Head Approval:
Tom Prescott, Chief Performance Officer
Reviewed by:
Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel Lewis Clinton, Chief Financial Officer Chris Andrichak, Senior Analyst, Capital Planning & Grants
Prepared by:
224
SR 13-036 Attachment 1 ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 13-005 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO FILE AND EXECUTE APPLICATIONS TO THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (MTC) FOR MTC'S FY2012-13 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE INITIATIVE -INCENTIVE PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (herein referred to as APPLICANT) is submitting an application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for $1,802,676 in funding assigned MTC for programming discretion, including but not limited to, federal funding administered by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) such as Surface Transportation Program (STP) funding, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) funding and/or Transportation Alternatives (TA) funding (herein collectively referred to as REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING) for the Spectrum Ridership Growth Project (herein referred to as PROJECT) for the Transit Performance Initiative - Incentive Program (herein referred to as PROGRAM); and WHEREAS, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (Public Law 112-141, July 6, 2012) and any extensions or successor legislation for continued funding (collectively, MAP 21) authorize various federal funding programs including, but not limited to, the Surface Transportation Program (STP) (23 U.S.C. § 133), the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) (23 U.S.C. § 149) and the Transportation Alternatives Program (TA) (23 U.S.C. § 213); and WHEREAS, state statutes, including California Streets and Highways Code 182.6 and 182.7 provide various funding programs for the programming discretion of the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and the Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA); and WHEREAS, pursuant to MAP-21, and any regulations promulgated thereunder, eligible project sponsors wishing to receive federal funds for a project shall submit an application first with the appropriate MPO for review and inclusion in the MPO's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP); and WHEREAS, MTC is the MPO and RTPA for the nine counties of the San Francisco Bay region; and WHEREAS, MTC has adopted a Regional Project Funding Delivery Policy (MTC Resolution No. 3606, revised) that sets out procedures governing the application and use of federal funds; and WHEREAS, APPLICANT is an eligible sponsor for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING; and WHEREAS, as part of the application for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING, MTC requires a resolution adopted by the responsible implementing agency stating the following:
Resolution No. l3-005
Poge l of4 225
SR 13-036 Attachment 1 1. the commitment of any required matching funds of at least 11.47%; and 2. that the sponsor understands that the REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING is fixed at the programmed amount, and therefore any cost increase cannot be expected to be funded with additional REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING; and 3. the project will comply with the procedures, delivery milestones and funding deadlines specified in the Regional Project Funding Delivery Policy (MTC Resolution No. 3606, revised); and 4. the assurance of the sponsor to complete the project as described in the application, and if approved, as included in MTC's federal Transportation Improvement Program (TIP); and 5. the project will comply with all project-specific requirements as set forth in the PROGRAM; and 6. the project (transit only) will comply with MTC Resolution No. 3866, revised, which sets forth the requirements of MTC's Transit Coordination Implementation Plan to more efficiently deliver transit projects in the region.; and WHEREAS, APPLICANT the APPLICANT is authorized to execute and file an application for funding for the PROJECT for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING under MAP-21 for continued funding; NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District does resolve as follows:
Section 1.
the APPLICANT by adopting this resolution does hereby state that:
1. APPLICANT will provide $233,556 in matching funds; and 2. APPLICANT understands that the REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the project is fixed at the MTC approved programmed amount, and that any cost increases must be funded by the APPLICANT from other funds, and that APPLICANT does not expect any cost increases to be funded with additional REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING; and 3. APPLICANT understands the funding deadlines associated with these funds and will comply with the provisions and requirements of the Regional Project Funding Delivery Policy (MTC Resolution No. 3606, revised) and APPLICANT has, and will retain the expertise, knowledge and resources necessary to deliver federally-funded transportation projects, and has assigned, and will maintain a single point of contact for all FHWA-funded transportation projects to coordinate within the agency and with the respective Congestion Management Agency (CMA), MTC, Caltrans and FHWA on all communications, inquires or issues that may arise during the federal programming and delivery process for all FHWA-funded transportation projects implemented by APPLICANT; and 4. PROJECT will be implemented as described in the complete application and in this resolution and, if approved, for the amount approved by MTC and programmed in the federal TIP; and 5. APPLICANT and the PROJECT will comply with the requirements as set forth in MTC programming guidelines and project selection procedures for the PROGRAM; and
Resolution No. 13-005
Pagelo/4 226
SR 13-036 Attachment 1 6. APPLICANT (for a transit project only} agrees to comply with the requirements of MTC's Transit Coordination Implementation Plan as set forth in MTC Resolution 3866, revised.
Section 2.
APPLICANT is an eligible sponsor of REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING
funded projects.
Section 3.
APPLICANT is authorized to submit an application for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the PROJECT.
Section 4.
There is no legal impediment to APPLICANT making applications for the
funds.
Section 5.
There is no pending or threatened litigation that might in any way adversely affect the proposed PROJECT, or the ability of APPLICANT to deliver such PROJECT.
Section 6.
APPLICANT authorizes its Executive Director, General Manager, or designee to execute and file an application with MTC for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the PROJECT as referenced in this resolution.
Section 7.
A copy of this resolution will be transmitted to the MTC in conjunction with the filing of the application.
Section 8.
The MTC is requested to support the application for the PROJECT described in the resolution and to include the PROJECT.
Section 9.
This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage by four affirmative votes of the Board of Directors.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of January 2013
Greg Harper, President Attest:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary I, Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary for the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors held on the 23rd day of January, 2013 by the following roll call vote:
Page 3of4
Resolution No. 13-005 227
SR 13-036 Attachment 1
AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
Approved as to Form:
Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel
Page4 of4
Resolution No. 13-005 228
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-034 January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance & Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Welfare-to-Work Annual Report
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider Receiving Annual Report on Welfare-to-Work Grant and Lifeline Funding. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This report provides an annual analysis of the Welfare-to-Work funding for existing lifeline routes in Alameda County and Contra Costa County. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
In FY 2013, a total of $17 million is anticipated towards existing eligible lifeline routes in Alameda and Contra Costa counties from multiple funding sources- Lifeline Cycle 3 Program (FY 2011- FY 2013), Regional Measure 2, Measure Band Measure J. This funding is reflected in the District's operating budget. Additional $15.8 million in District operating funds are budgeted to cover the remaining cost of the service.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
Each year staff provides an update to the Board on funding associated with AC Transit's Lifeline eligible service routes. In the past decade, revenues to fund Lifeline services have fluctuated. What follows is a brief history of the funding sources AC Transit has relied on, explanation of funding fluctuations, and recent developments in the Lifeline program. Additionally, Attachment 1 provides a breakdown of the revenues and expenses associated with the Welfare to Work service by route. The Job Access and Reverse Commute (JARC) Program was introduced by the Clinton Administration in the Federal Transportation Authorization Legislation Transportation Equity Act for the 21" Century (TEA-21). Under TEA-21, JARC was distributed through earmarks and AC Transit did very well under this program.
When the next Federal Authorization Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act (SAFETEA) was passed, JARC became a formula program distributed based on low income populations in urbanized areas. This greatly
229
Report No. 13-034 Page 2 of 3
reduced the amount of revenues that flowed to the region and consequently significantly reduced the amount of revenues that AC Transit was eligible to receive. When SAFETEA passed, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) refined the Low Income Flexible Transit program into the Lifeline Program and adopted significant funding increases in the 2005 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Transportation 2030. MTC's Lifeline program prioritizes Lifeline funding for projects developed as part of the Community Based Plans for each Community of Concern. There are 32 Communities of Concern that have developed plans; six of the plans are in the AC Transit service area and they include Alameda, Central and East Oakland, South and West Berkeley, Central Alameda, West Oakland and Richmond. Lifeline program funding sources include the JARC funds and State Transit Assistance (STA). In 2006, the voters approved the Proposition 1B Infrastructure Bond. Included in the Bond Act were $3.6 billion in transit funds distributed on State Transit Assistance. Half of the revenues flow on a population-based formula and, for the Bay Area, MTC is the recipient of these funds. MTC augmented the Lifeline program with almost $12.3 million in Proposition 1B Population Transit funds. In prior years, diversion of STA revenue for other purposes significantly reduced STA revenues available for MTC's Lifeline program. MTC has boosted funding for the lifeline program by $400 million in discretionary funds, raising the amount dedicated to this program to nearly $700 million over the 25-year term of the Transportation 2035 Plan. Possible new emphasis areas could include mobility management services and means-based fare assistance programs. In June 2012, MTC approved Lifeline Cycle 3 Program, a three-year funding cycle from FY 2011 to FY 2013 with a mix of federal and state operating and capital funding sources. As shown in Attachment 1, AC Transit's Cycle 3 apportionment for eligible routes in Alameda County is $4.9 million and for Contra Costa County is $1.3 million as reflected in the FY 2012-2013 Budget. This is significantly less compared to the Lifeline Cycle 2 Program with allocations of $9 million for eligible routes in Alameda County and $2.6 million in Contra Costa County, primarily due to reduced STA revenues available for the Lifeline Program in Cycle 3. The new federal authorization legislation, Moving Ahead with Progress in 21'' Century (MAP-21), eliminates the JARC program and combines JARC functions and funding with the Urbanized Area Formula funds (Section 5307). However, MTC has specified the Lifeline Program as the first priority for Section 5307 funds apportioned by the JARC formula, by setting aside FY 2013 and 2014 large Urbanized Area funds for the Lifeline Program.
230
Report No. 13-034 Page 3 of 3
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: This report is being provided to inform the Board of annual welfare-to-work grants and lifeline funding.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: This report provides an annual analysis on welfare-to-work grants and lifeline funding.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: GM Memo 11-235: Update on Welfare to Work Funding for FY 2011-12 GM Memo 10-246: Update on Welfare to Work Funding for FY 2010-11 GM Memo 09-264: Update on Welfare to Work Funding for FY 2009-10 GM Memo 09-016: Update on Welfare to Work Funding for FY 2008-09 GM Memo 07-267: Update on Welfare to Work Funding for FY 2007-08
ATTACHMENTS: 1:
Welfare to Work Expenses and Revenues by route
Approved by:
Thomas Prescott, Chief Performance Officer
Reviewed by:
Lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer John Haenftling, Director, Project Control & Systems Analysis
Prepared by:
Kiran Bawa, Senior Analyst, Capital Planning and Grants
231
This page intentionally blank
232
-- ·- ··--·Service Description/ Total Route Number Week-day Saturda S d y Platform un ay Hours
yl
•/I
North Richmond Une71 73.23 Line 376 28.43 Line 76 57.13 Sub Total-North Richmond
38.94 27.90 55.87
Alameda Point Line 63 Line 31 Sub Total-Alameda Point
-
67.16
Industrial Line 83 32.43 Line 86 42.96 Line 386 30.05 Line 68 Line 93 31.47 Sub Totai-H ard Industrial
33.97
Fund Source
22,996 Lifeline Grant-Contra Costa County 10,347 Measure C/J 20,770 District Operating Funds 54,112 Lifeline Grant-Alameda County Measure 8 20,896 District Operating Funds 20,896
Budget FY 2008-09
Actual FY 2008-09
Budget FY 2009-10
-
735,447 161,389 2,115,282 $3 012 117
-
285,158 314,981 954,327 $1,554,466
1,561,057 168,860 337,109 $2,067,026
1,855,058 48,128 648,431 $2 551,617
1,550,515 $1,550,515
975,066 205,634 309,068 $1,489,768
1,786,649 250,000 1,955,509
1,266,994 575,776 2,328,581
451,431 2,817,683
$3,992,158
$4,171,351
$3,269,115
1,414,880 3,899,709
3,818,940 768,376 979,376
824,818 4,323,422
$5,314,589
$5,566,692
$5,148,240
-
Actual FY2009-10
591,814 1,511,760 $2,103,574
$0
Budget FY 2010-11
Actual FY 2010-11
Budget FY 2011-12
Actual FY 2011-12
Budget FY 2012-13
-
738,126 366,559 3,267,585 4,372,271
1,301,109 452,268 4,078,010 5,831,387
-
300,359 284,335 1,103,741 1,688,435
503,330 299,185 946,938 1,749,452
643,650 2,667,131
591,289 559,728 2,172,756
990,859 588,961 1,864,071
3,324,480
3,310,781
3,323,774
3,443,891
3,968,160 833,091 787,193
741,096 1,216,161 5,264,537
1,405,884 5,825,642
2,046,313 1,937,102 7,519,466
3,429,129 2,038,269 6,451,181
$2,752,671
$5,588,444
7,221,794
7,231,526
11,502,881
11,918,579
1,033,448 157,479 1,306,308 $2,497,236
134,243 207,182 2,129,814 2,471,239
123,126 2,348,440 2,471 565
$0
189,219 259,049 1,090,015 1,538,283
329,372 1,364,838 1,694,210
370,533 704,945 3,486,851
1,840,037 386,378 365,440
245,870 559,847 2,518,762
$4,562,328
$2,591,855
1,116,849 1,635,822
-
-
Ha~ard
-
East/West Oakland Line 40 204.43 Line 47 8.05 Line 45 81.73 line 62 84.44 Line 98 65.33 Sub Total-East/West Oakland
233
Owl Service Line 800 Line 801 Line 802 Line 805 Line 840 Line 851 Sub Total-Owl Service
7.76 10.54 11.43 26.34
126.26
-
49.98 56.86 29.49
17.83 38.43143.14 26.97 39.98/42.9!; 5.60 5.65 11.98 11.98 6.16 6.16 10.71 10.60
Transbay: Night & Weekend Line F 76.74 Line NL 100.13 line 0 73.09 Sub Totai-Transbay Night/WE Total Welfare to Work Service Budget
71.78 75.63 33.78
8,270 Lifeline Grant- Alameda County 11,816 Measure 8 1,170 District Operating Funds 8,931 10,949 41,136 66,145 Lifeline Grant- Alameda County 2,053 Measure 8 26,389 District Operating Funds 27,844 19,933 142,362
-
-
-
-
9,086 Measure 8 11,487 Regional Measure 2 2,055 District Operating Funds 4,385 2,255 3,908 33,175
1,451,270 1,138,908 154,318
319,347 1,138,908 855,333
403,248 1,138,908 974,785
549,648 1,333,623 829,305
390,436 1,138,908 1,089,733
436,465 1,333,623 821,723
504,553 1,333,623 757,123
451,407 1,333,623 895,509
474,982 1,333,623 968,805
$2,744,496
$2,313,589
$2,516,942
$2,712,576
$2,619,076
2,591,811
2,595,299
2,680,539
2,777,410
27,536 Measure 8 33,928 Regional Measure 2 22,388 District Operating Funds 83,852
2,533,922 3,052,326 $5,586,248
844,882 2,505,521 2,770,552 $6,120,956
980,660 3,836,832 1,303,463 $6,120,956
1,542,322 3,836,832 2,232,381 $7,611,535
1,009,445 3,836,832 1,925,169 S6,n1,446
1,128,450 4,348,321 1,224,182 6,700,953
1,303,762 4,348,321 1,054,154 6,706,237
1,140,959 4,348,321 1,285,953 6,n5,233
1,200,547 4,348,321 1,471,212 7,020,080
$21,441,474
$22,446,654
$19,391,508
$23,768,758
$20,068,057
$23,848,560
$24,009,618
$30,343,133
$32,740,800
en
;o ~
'f'
Funding Summar:y: Lifeline Grants Regional Measure 2 Measure 8 Measure C/J District Operating Funds Total Welfare to Work Revenues
4,762,586 3,672,830 1,701,270 168,860 11,135,928 $21,441,474
7,916,058 3,644,430 2,746,133 48,128 8,091,905 $22,446,654
-
4,975,740 2,697,437 591,814 11,126,517 $19,391,508
2,507,987 5,170,455 5,064,441 161,389 10,864,486 $23,768,758
6,841,645 4,975,740 2,619,350 157,479 5,473,843 $20,068,057
1,310,429 5,681,944 3,599,972 207,182 13,049,033 $23,848,560
5,681,944 4,187,221 123,126 14,017,327 $24,009,618
Notes: 1) Hours shown are existing summer 2012 hours. The last service change was in August 2011. 2) Regional Measure J revenues apply to Contra Costa County operations and are not apportioned on a line-level basis by CCTA. Amounts apportioned are based on total revenues and platform hours by line. 3) Regional Measure 8 revenues apply to all Alameda County operations and are not apportioned on a line-level basis by ACTIA. Amounts apportioned are based on total revenues and platform hours by line. 4) Lifeline Cycle Ill shown in FY 2012-13 budget is a three year finding cydefrom FY 2011 to FY 2013.
3,676,088 5,681,944 4,373,531 366,559 16,245,010 $30,343,133
6,224,427 5,681,944 4,601,944 452,268 15,780,218 $32,740,800
0
't
?:;
"'J (")
3
CD
a ~
This page intentionally blank
234
SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE January 23, 2013 Agenda Items C‐1 – C‐4
235
236
Report No: Meeting Date:
12-171a January 23, 2012
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Operations Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Emeryville Hydrogen Fueling Station Recommissioning Efforts
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider Receiving a report on milestones completed and current recommissioning efforts for the Emeryville Hydrogen Fueling Station EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Since the May 4, 2012 valve failure at the Emeryville fueling station, staff has worked with outside agencies to conduct an exhaustive investigation of the root cause of the incident, analysis of system component compatibility, implementation of design enhancements recommended
by Sandia
National Laboratories, and review of independent outside
assessments of the recommissioning plan by a professional licensed engineer from the California Air Resources Board. With completion of the recommendations from the industry experts and verification from independent outside agencies, staff has begun to recommission the Hydrogen Fueling Station with the following milestones for full resumption of fueling and fuel cell bus service: •
Deliver Liquid Hydrogen
•
Re-commission
•
Commercial Fueling
•
Complete driver training for new employees
February 14, 2013
•
Begin Fuel Cell Service
February 14, 2013
I
January 21, 2013
Restart Station activities
January 21- February 1, 2013 February 4, 2013
BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report. The resumption of fuel cell bus service will result in higher expenditures for hydrogen fuel and lower expenditures for diesel fuel. Staff will report back to the Board in future months on hydrogen bus performance and any budgetary impacts.
237
Report No. 12-171a Page 2 of 3 BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
On May 4, 2012, a valve failure at the Emeryville hydrogen fueling station resulted in the release of approximately 300 kilograms of hydrogen gas. The Sandia National Laboratories conducted a review of the failure and issued a report with several recommendations to ensure the integrity of the fuel station. Staff has worked with the station designer, Linde, to complete the fueling station upgrades. The Linde station upgrade plans and station recommissioning plans were reviewed and supported by an independent outside professional licensed engineer from the California Air Resources Board. The following recommendations from the Sandia National Laboratories have been completed: •
Replace the pressure relief valves with valves appropriate for hydrogen service.
•
Re-configure the vent stack system and increase the height above the dispenser canopy.
•
Re-design the high-pressure storage system so that one valve does not empty the content of the storage tubes.
•
Install an Emergency Shutdown (ESD) switch in the OCC and an annunciator panel to alert staff and first responders to station status at the start of an incident.
•
Rigorously analyze the entire station to ensure materials used are appropriate for hydrogen service and have been properly manufactured and installed.
•
Update the District's Emergency Response Plan to improve on District's response procedures and the timeliness of providing critical information to first responders and the District's senior management.
•
Increase and update training and support materials for District staff and on site personnel.
•
Conduct refresher training for on-site personnel on the new training materials, documenting the training in permanent training records.
•
Establish a schedule for refresher training to continue indefinitely. The refresher training will include both AC Transit personnel and fire department personnel.
•
Establish an employee communications plan so District employees are informed of events and activities at the station.
•
Establish a protocol and schedule for recurring, periodic drills to practice response to events at the hydrogen fueling station.
•
Evaluate and implement process system improvements to provide better isolation of components of the station.
•
Re-design the fire detection system to improve its ability to determine the location of the fire.
With completion of the recommendations outlined above from the industry experts and verification from independent outside agencies, staff has begun to recommission the Hydrogen Fueling Station with the following milestones for full resumption of fueling and fuel cell bus service: 238
Report No. 12-171a Page 3 of 3 •
Deliver Liquid Hydrogen
•
Re-commission
•
Commercial Fueling
•
Complete driver training for new employees
February 14, 2013
•
Begin Fuel Cell Service
February 14, 2013
I
January 21, 2013
Restart Station activities
January 21- February 1, 2013 February 4, 2013
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: The advantage of recommissioning the station is that it will allow the District to place the twelve fuel cell buses back into operation and complete obligations to the California Air Resources Board and the Federal Transit Administration. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: •
Decommission the station- This alternative is not recommended since it would leave the
District with 12 hydrogen fuel cell buses and no capability to refuel them. This action would also be contrary to agreements the District has with the California Air Resources Board and the Federal Transit Administration, which may result in the requirement to repay grant funds secured for this program. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: GM Memo 08-256- Emeryville CEQA Exemption GM Memo 09-297- Linde Contract Award Resolution 08-047- CARB $2.7 Million Grant Staff Report 12-171- Hydrogen Gas Release at Emeryville Fueling Station; Plan to reopen the Emeryville Fueling Station ATTACHMENTS: None.
Department Head Approval:
James D. Pachan, Chief Operating Officer
Reviewed by:
Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel
Prepared by:
James D. Pachan, Chief Operating Officer
239
This page intentionally blank
240
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-030 January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Operations Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Federal Transit Administration Charter Service Rules
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider receiving report on the Federal Transit Administration's Charter Service Rules . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In January, 2008, the Federal Transit Administration issued Charter Service Rules in the Federal Register (Volume 73, Number 9, 49 CFR, Part 604). These rules were originally established, in part, to protect private bus charter providers from undue competi.t ion from public transit operators receiving federal funding. These rules have evolved over time to be more restrictive of the amount and types of se rvices considered to be charter related and provided by the transit industry. It is the intent of AC Transit to review and refine current charter request and scheduling methods to ensure compliance with the FTA's adopted charter service rules. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
Effective management of charter service will result in a limited reduction in operating costs. The actual cost savings are not known, since requests for charter service were not managed through a centralized point of contact. The implementation of the new monitoring process will minimize the costs to the District for charter service in accordance with Federal regulations.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
The evolution of charter service rules and their interpretation by the FTA date back to the mid 1970's when costing competitiveness with private providers was of primary concern. Throughout the progression of the rule interpretation, the FTA began to address operational related issues such as: availability of accessible vehicles for persons with disabilities; service for non-profit, social service agencies; and availability of services in non-urbanized areas that are largely related to demand responsive services. This development, occurring in the late 1980's led to the current rules and current interpretation by the FTA.
241
Report No. 13-030 Page 2 of 3 Today's charter service rules were initiated with the passage of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, A Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) in late 2005. committee of public and private providers, union representation, and the FTA was convened, Through the the Charter Bus Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory Committee {CBNRAC). negotiated rulemaking committee, the current charter service rules were adopted in 2008. The current charter service rules, while addressing the issues that arose during the rulemaking evolution, contain more specific examples of what a public transit provider receiving federal funds can allow. For example, if the service provided is demand responsive, it is, by definition, not considered charter service. The rules also address exemptions that allow some discretion for the public transit agency to provide service. These include transporting employees for operational needs or training, emergency response/preparedness, transporting governmental officials (up to 80 hours annually), and transporting only clients from Qualifying Human Sources Organizations (any organization providing service to persons with disabilities, low income, or to the elderly). Attachment 1, the FTA's Charter Service Identification Flow Chart more clearly displays how the current rules are interpreted. In dealing with requests for charter service and bus requests AC Transit has not had a centralized point of contact and strict adherence to the rules cannot be confirmed. To ensure compliance with the charter rules all requests are to be directed to the Operations Department where the appropriate tracking mechanism will confirm compliance with the FTA rules. This process will allow the review of requests to determine if they are subject to the FTA Charter Service Rules. If the request does not comply with the rules, the request will be denied. If the request meets the rules, it will be forwarded to the Chief Operating Officer or General Manager for approval based on resource availability. By controlling and accounting for the total number of charter eligible hours, 80, it is expected that AC Transit will reach the cap within the calendar year. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
The advantages of revising AC Transit's monitoring and enforcement of the FTA Charter Service Rules include reducing the cost associated with offering services and increasing resources available to offer revenue service. A potential disadvantage could arise if a requesting group or person is denied charter service based on the FTA criteria and seeks the Board's or Senior Management's intervention to provide the service. These situations should be anticipated and a unified approach must be adopted to avoid exceptions to the rules. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
There are no reasonable alternative actions. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES:
There are no prior relevant Board Actions or Policies
242
Report No. 13-030 Page 3 of 3
ATTACHMENTS:
1:
Section 5311 Charter Service Identification Flow Chart
Department Head Approval:
Thomas Prescott, Chief Performance Officer
Reviewed by:
Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel
Prepared by:
John Haenftling, Director of Project Controls & Systems Analysis
243
This page intentionally blank
244
SR 13-030 Attachment 1
SECTION 5311 CHARTER SERVICE IDENTIFICATION FLOW CHART May 2010
Is transportation service provided by grantee Demand Responsive*?
Not Charter Service by definition
Is service provided by grantee associated with emergency response and preparedness.?
Not Charter Service by definition Is service provided by grantee transporting government officials {<80 hours/year)?
(Charter Exemption)
Yes, Charter Service
Review Charter Regulationst for further guidance. This chart was prepared by DPIT to guide your organization with basic scenarios. Please, rely on the FTA Charter Regulationst for final determination of service if your scenario In review does not meet any of the exceptions above.
r-......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... . . . . ...................................1 ! *Demand Responsive:
I Any Non-fixed route service to individuals that require advanced scheduling by the customer
I
I i \.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................i
!
**Qualifying Human Sources Organization:
I Any organization providing service to persons with disabilities, low income, or to the elderly.
r. t. .
.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .l FTA website at: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/08-86.pdf I
ch·~·rt~; R:~9·~ ·i;ti· ~·~·~ ·;
i
Can be found on the
:, ....................................................................................................................................................................................... .................... ........ ........................... ...... ... ........................... ........ ..................... . . ........................... .............................. .............:1
245
This page intentionally blank
246
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-045 January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Operations Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Authorizing the General Manager to sign an assignment and consent agreement
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Authorize the General Manager to sign an assignment and consent agreement between AC Transit, Architecture/VBN and STV for on-call architectural and engineering services. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Architecture/VBN was awarded Contract No. 2012-1174A commencing on August 1, 2012 through July 31, 2014 for the performance of on-call architectural and engineering services. The firm was in negotiations with AC Transit to provide architectural services for the first Task Order 1 under the contract to renovate the former "Call Center" spaces on the 8 h Floor of the General Offices. On October 1, 2012, the District was informed that certain of its assets have been purchased by STV, which includes the performance of this on-call/as needed architectural and engineering services contract under the new name of STV vbn. Staff has investigated the ability of STV vbn to perform the duties and obligations of Architecture/VBN under Contract No. 20121174A and is satisfied that the new firm STV vbn can meet those duties and obligations, including insurance requirements. If the requested assignment is not granted the District will not have a sufficient number of specialized firm s under contract to perform needed architectural/engineering services. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
None, the rates for work performed remain the same.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
On October 27, 2011, a Request For Qualifications (RFQ) No. 2012-1174 was issued seeking the on-call services of three (3) general practice Architectural and Engineering firms for District projects with fees not to exceed $100,000 per year and three (3) similarly qualified firms for District projects with fees not to exceed $250,000 per year (the A-E On-Call Contractor Pool). Architecture/VBN was a successful qualifier for a $100,000 fee contract and has been in 1
negotiations for two tasks under the contract. One task is to provide designs for the GO 8 h floor "Call Center" renovation and an equitable fee has been negotiated, the second task concerns 247
Report No. 13-045 Page 2 of 2 the GO Board Room Audio Upgrade Project and is in the technical scope discussion stage and has not been negotiated. On October 1, 2012, the District was advised by Architecture/VBN that certain of its assets were being acquired by STV including its services under Contract No. 2012-1174A. However, before the District's contract can be performed by STV vbn, the District must consent to the assignment. Both firms are Oakland based firms. Architecture/VBN has been a Small local Business Enterprise (SLBE). The new firm, STV vbn, will be a local Business Enterprise (LBE). ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: By keeping the A-E On-Call Contractor Pool intact provides the District's project managers a superior selection of qualified and specialized firms, enables them to spread the workload among the members of the A-E On-Call Contractor Pool and have enough firms available for upcoming projects. Dropping just one of the A-E On-Call Contractor Pool firms will force the District's project managers to issue a new RFQ much sooner than originally contemplated and will cause delays in design and construction starts. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: The District Board could deny the requested assignment. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Board Policy 350 ATTACHMENTS: There are no attachments associated with this report.
Department Head Approval:
Dennis Butler, Chief Planning and Development Officer
Reviewed by:
Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel Lewis Clinton, Chief Financial Officer Magnus J. Hienzsch, Special Projects Manager
Prepared by:
248
13-035
Report No: Meeting Date:
January 23, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Operations Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Elevated PV Solar at D6- the Hayward Facility (Project 2037)
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Approve contract award to ATI Architects & Engineers Services, Inc. (ATI) of Danville, CA, regarding design and construction phase services for the Photovoltaic Solar System at Division 6. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In March of 2010 the District was awarded $6.4M in Federal American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 (ARRA) funds to install photovoltaic solar systems on District properties. Phase One of this development was the installation of a 510 kW system on the roof at the Central Maintenance Facility. Phase One is complete and operational at a cost of $3.4M of the allocated funding leaving $3.0M. Phase Two will install a photovoltaic solar system at Division 6. Upon approval by the Board, ATI will prepare all plans and specifications, construction cost estimates, provide permitting and bid support, as well as the construction phase services required to complete the Phase Two installation. This recommendation for award is the result of a procurement process that is fully compliant with Brooks Act procurement procedures. This was a publicly solicited Request for Qualifications (RFQ) where 215 firms were solicited by direct email and advertisements were placed in local publications and posted on the District's web site. A total of six firms responded to the solicitation. After evaluation of the GSA Standard Form 330 (SF330) submitted by each of the six respondents, District staff selected the three most qualified firms for interviews. Final evaluations by District Staff based on the evaluation criteria in the RFQ determined ATI to be the most qualified respondent for this project. Once ATI was determined to be the best qualified respondent, contract terms were negotiated that are within the parameters of the independent cost estimate and that conform to the District's standards of fair and reasonable contracting. $299,980 and a term extending through October of 2013.
249
The contract has a fixed fee value of
Report No. 13-035 Page 2 of4
BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: Project Funding P2037 - PV 591ar at D6-Hayward .
A&E Contract (This contract award)
TIGGER/ARRA Grant
District Funds
$299,980
-0-
Total Contract
....
Construction Contracts (Estimated)
Total: i
,.
$299,980
$2,400,000
-0-
$2,400,000
$2,699,980
-0-
$2,699,980
The energy produced by this system will replace grid power currently purchased from PG&E providing a savings in utility costs.
There will be an additional operating cost to provide for the ongoing
operations and maintenance of the system. Although the actual capacity of this system will be determined during engineering, initial estimates indicate that the combined utility power savings and cost for system operations and maintenance will provide the District with a net reduction in operating costs of approximately $40,000 a year. BACKGROUND:
In March of 2010 the District was awarded $6.4M in Federal American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 (ARRA) funds to install photovoltaic solar systems on District properties. Phase One of this development was the installation of a 510 kW system on the roof top at the Central Maintenance Facility. Phase One is complete and operational. The second and final phase of this development is the installation of an elevated photovoltaic solar system at D6 - the Hayward facility. These photovoltaic solar system installations are fully funded by the TIGGER I ARRA grant so the systems and energy produced will belong to the District without additional cost except for nominal routine operations and maintenance expenses. The power produced by these systems directly offsets power that we are currently purchasing from the grid. ATI Architects and Engineers were selected by a process that is compliant with federal requirements at 49 U.S.C. 5325(b) requiring the use of Brooks Act procurement procedures. This procurement is an Architectural I Engineering services type of procurement. By definition that signifies that the procurement methodology that must be employed is a Request for Qualifications (RFQ). In this process, the qualifications of offerors are reviewed and ranked. Price is not considered, nor is it a factor in the review of qualifications. Negotiations begin only with the most qualified firm. If an agreement cannot be reached, negotiations with the next most qualified firm occur until a contract award can be made to the most qualified Offeror whose price is deemed fair and reasonable by the district. The qualifications based procurement method can only be used for the procurement of A & E services.
250
Report No. 13-035 Page 3 of 4
The District advertised a Request-for-Qualifications (RFQ) for A-E firms specializing in elevated photovoltaic solar systems through 215 email contacts, in local publications, and on the District website. The District received six responses. After evaluation of the GSA Standard Form 330 (SF330) submitted by each of the six respondents, District staff selected the three most qualified firms for presentations. During the presentations, ATI Architects and Engineers demonstrated a superior understanding of the requirements of the project and were able to articulate a well-defined approach to completing it. Of particular note was ATI's documented inspection, schedule management, cost management and change control processes that described exactly how the company would help ensure project success. Final evaluations by District Staff based on the qualifications demonstrated in the SF330 and in the presentations determined ATI to be the most qualified respondent for this project.
The scores are summarized in the table below.
Kitchell
San Jose, CA
None Listed
87.33
Yes
88.30
175.63
EDesignC
San Francisco, CA
WBE I SBE
88.67
Yes
81.70
170.37
Campbell, CA
None Listed
75.33
No
nla
nla
San Francisco, CA
WBE I SBE
71.33
No
nla
nla
Palo Alto, CA
None Listed
70.00
No
nla
nla
+
Allana, Buick, & Bers
None of the responding firms had a primary location situated in the AC Transit service area. ATI is certified by the State of California as a "Small Business Enterprise." A firm, fixed fee of $299,980 was negotiated with ATI as the best qualified firm. performance is estimated to be from contract award through November 2013.
The period of
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
Advantages of installing the elevated photovoltaic solar system include: • • • • •
Contributes to the goals of the Board-adopted Climate Action Plan. Utilizes specifically dedicated grant funds without any District match to install a PV Solar system. Reduction in the District's reliance on grid power. Reduction in utility costs as the solar power will replace grid power currently purchased from PG&E. All power generated by the PV Solar System will be 100% green and renewable. 251
Report No. 13-035 Page 4of4 Staff cannot identify disadvantages associated with installing the PV Solar System at D6.
AlTERNATIVE ACTIONS: There is one alternative the District could select. •
Do nothing. Give up the balance of the ARRA grant and continue to purchase this electrical capacity from PG&E at their full commercial rate which is subject to future price escalations.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: GM Memo 09-061b, Resolution No. 09-025 authorizing the General Manager to apply for Federal American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 funds.
ATIACHMENTS: There are no attachments.
Approved by:
Dennis W. Butler, Chief Planning and Development Officer
Reviewed by:
Chris Andrichak, Capital Planning and Grants Kenneth C. Scheidig, Interim General Counsel Joe Callaway, Senior Project Manager
Prepared by:
252
REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES
The District Secretary will report on the recommendations made by the Committees, including those items referred to the Consent Calendar Addenda.
PLEASE REFER TO THE COMMITTEE SECTIONS OF THIS BINDER FOR STAFF REPORTS 253
This page intentionally blank
254
AGENDA PLANNING/ STANDING COMMITIEE PENDING LISTS .- ,··->--
AC TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
·!
Monthly Legislative Report [Updates on State, Federal, Regional and Local Legislation, including Measure Band the APTA Reauthorization process forT-4]. Annual • State/Federal Advocacy Program Pending Not Scheduled Status report on the Oral History Project. [Request from Director Peeples to retain on long-term pending. Staff to continue efforts to locate funds, hire personnel utilizing grant funds, and contact local museums to determine if there is interest in taking on the project]. • Planning staff provide comments and recommendations pertaining to California Environmental Quality Act {CEQA) Reform. [Requested by Director Peeples -10/24/12] Submission of request to hold a future California Transit Association conference in Oakland. [Requested by Director Williams -11/14/12]
February • Rescission of the resolution which voluntarily reduced the Board's compensation by 5%. [Requested by Director Davis 1/9/13]. • Review of Board Policy 138- Health and Welfare Benefits for Retired Elected Officials. [Requested by Director Young- 9/19/12] • Audit of the legal department, particularly the cost for outside counsel, with comparisons to prior years. [Requested by Director Peeples -12/12/12]. June • Development of a policy concerning ex parte communications and disclosures by Directors during the entire procurement process from issuance of an RFP, IFB, or RFQ through protest. It was suggested
that staff review the policies of the California Public Utilities Commission pertaining to ex parte situations. [Requested by Director Peeples- 9/5/12] Monthly • Report on Investments Fiscal Policies {Review one per month) Quarterly Reports (Nov. Feb. May, Aug) • Board/Officer Travel/Meeting Expense • Employee Out-of-State Travel • Surplus/Obsolete Materials • Financial Performance/Quarterly Budget Update • Update on DBE Goal
Agenda Planning January 23, 2013
Page 1 of4
255
AGENDA PLANNING/ STANDING COMMITTEE PENDING LISTS
AC TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Finance and Audit, Cont. Semi Annual Reports DBE/FTA Report (May/Nov) Annual Reports • Appropriations Limit (June) Audit Engagement Letter (June) Budget Calendar (Biennial) Externally Funded Welfare to Work (Nov) • Parcel Tax Oversight Committee (Dec to Board) • Year-End Audited Financial Statements (Nov)
1····.....
·-._o
--,_::.-:-
":-'·,'-:::::'
•.-"
Februarv Development of a civil infraction process for fare evasion pursuant to AB 492 (Galgani). [Requested by Director Peeples- 10/24/12] • Request that the next quarterly operations performance report include a break down of calls and complaints by ward. [Requested by Director Wallace 9/5/12] Report on the reopening of Division 3. [Requested by Director Wallace -12/12/12] Report on AC Transit's hiring practices (direct hire, competitive recruitment, temporary employees, grant funded employees) and the benefits associated with each category, including whether temporary or limited term employees become vested upon hiring and what happens when employees change from one category to another. [Requested by Director Ortiz 1/9/13] Amend Board Policy 180A (Travel and Meeting Expense Reimbursements for Directors and Board Officers) with regard to the mileage policy for attendance at meetings at the General Offices. [Requested by Director Davis 1/9/13]. March • Review of the District's policy on service animals. [Requested by Director Wallace -11/14/12] June Discussion regarding the development of a policy concerning ex parte communications and disclosures by Directors during the entire procurement process from issuance of an RFP, IFB, or RFQ through protest. It was suggested that staff review the policies of the California Public Utilities Commission pertaining to ex parte situations. [Requested by Director Peeples- 9/5/12] Quarterly Reports !Nov. Feb. May. Aug) Operations Performance Report (Combination of On-Time Performance and Service Cancellations and Outlates Reports) Semi Annual Reports !Jan/Junl • Environmental Sustainability Plan and Progress Report on Climate Action Plan Implementation. • Outreach efforts for the transition to Clipper. [Requested by Director Young- 7/8/09] Customer Service Call Center. Agenda Planning January 23, 2013
Page 2 of 4 256
AGENDA PLANNING/ STANDING COMMITTEE PENDING LISTS
AC TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Operations Committee, Cont. Pending Not Scheduled
•
•
Report on whether we can keep the existing NABI high floor buses and get rid of the 4000 and 7000 NAB I low floor buses. [Requested by Director Peeples- 9/1/10] Report on what additional security measures can be taken at Board meetings to ensure that everyone is in a safe environment. [Requested by Director Young- 1/12/11] Report on the procedure operators use when handling a slip and fall incident on a bus and whether courtesy cards can include an option which allows riders to waive their right to sue the District. [Requested by Director Harper- 1/17/11.] Request for staff investigate reports that bus stops are being painted over with grey paint and provide a report on whether there is a cost effective way to determine if these incidents were isolated or more frequent occurrences and what could be done. [Requested by Director Peeples -7/9/11] Report on the savings associated with the October service cuts. [Requested by Director Harper 2/23/11] Report on the closure of the print shop. Retained in Committee pending further study of the placement of Print Shop employees into other positions, the anticipated cost savings, capital investments and useful life of capital equipment, and to explore whether the Print Shop can in-source work from outside of AC Transit (Retained in Committee 8/15/12). Report on emergency preparedness and business continuity, including preparation for the Major MTC Drill in 2013 and whether all road supervisors and division superintendents should be required to take NIMS 100 and 200 training. [Requested by Director Peeples -7/13/11] Report on a report on a District-wide calendaring system to track contracts, license renewals, etc. [Requested by Director Peeples- 4/25/12] Development of a policy on exit interviews and to what extent the reporting of the interviews should be different if the employee exiting reports directly to a Board Officer. [Requested by Director Peeples- 11/14/12]
Februarv
•
Report in the next 9 months on AC Transit's attitude toward shuttles. [Requested by Director Harper5/9/12] Forward to Board Retreat Report regarding discussions about BRTon MacArthur [Requested by Director Peeples- 6/27/12]
Quarterly Reports (Nov, Feb. May. Aug)
• • •
Bus Rapid Transit Project MTC Sustainability Process Trans bay Transit Center Project Update on District Involvement in External Planning Processes. •!• lake Merritt Area Plan [Requested by Director Peeples- 3/9/11] 1 •!• Oak to 9 h Street project and details of the commitments made by and to Signature Properties [Requested by Director Peeples- 3/25/06]
Annual Reports
•
Update on CARB (Jun) Update on Service and Operations Special District 2 (Oct)
Agenda Planning
Page 3of4
January 23, 2013
257
AGENDA PLANNING/ STANDING COMMITTEE PENDING LISTS
AC TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Planning Committee, Cont. Pending Not Scheduled
• •
•
•
Report on supplemental service guidelines. [Requested by Director Young -10/14/09] Update of the Designing with Transit document which is to include the development of bus shelter design standards. [Requested by Director Peeples -10/27 /10] Review Board Policy 163 with respect to environmental issues. (Board Policy 512) [Requested by Director Peeples] Amendments to Board Policy 550 - Service Standards and Design. [Requested by the Board 12/17/08] ·:· Development of a policy to officially require regular ridership surveys every four or five years. [Requested by Director Peeples- 6/24/09] Report on the implications of a study by the California Transportation Commission on anticipated transportation needs in California and the implications to AC Transit. [Requested by Director Peeples -11/16/11] Report on transit signal priority associated with the Bus Rapid Transit Project [Requested by Director Harper- 5/9/12]
Pending Not Scheduled [Parked Items)
• •
•
Follow-up report regarding staffs investigation of alternative Traffic Signal Priority (TSP) Systems. [Requested by Director Harper- 9/30/09] Update on the use of freeway shoulders as bus lanes. Staff to monitor the San Diego study and identify potential areas for use locally. [Requested by Committee -7/25/07] Update on the status of the customer satisfaction survey. Matter was retained in committee on July 9, 2008 pending receipt of proposed survey. On 9/30/09 Director Peeples requested the report include staff's analysis of surveys conducted in Europe, specifically surveys conducted in Helsinki Finland, to determine how surveys can be done cheaper, better and more often. [Requested by Director Peeples - 5/28/08] Report on how to better serve lower density diffuse communities and increase the use of public/private shuttles, including: ·:· General Purpose Demand Rapid Transit [Requested by Director Davis -1/28/09] ·:· Trends regarding the use of private shuttles, carpools, van pools and taxis to serve the public and how it has changed over time [Requested by Director Davis- 2/9/11]
Agenda Planning
Page 4 of4
January 23, 2013
258
