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 AC Transit General Offices 2nd Floor Board Room 1600 Franklin Street Oakland, CA 94612
Wednesday, January 28, 2015 at 5:00 p.m. Closed Session: 4:00 p.m. (Items 8A-8D)
Committee meetings will commence when the Board of Directors recesses to a Committee of the Whole
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS H. E. CHRISTIAN PEEPLES, PRESIDENT (AT-LARGE) ELSA ORTIZ, VICE PRESIDENT (WARD 3) JOE WALLACE (WARD 1) GREG HARPER (WARD 2) MARK WILLIAMS (WARD 4) JEFF DAVIS (WARD 5) JOEL YOUNG (AT-LARGE) BOARD OFFICERS DAVID J. ARMIJO, GENERAL MANAGER DENISE C. STANDRIDGE, GENERAL COUNSEL LINDA A. NEMEROFF, DISTRICT SECRETARY STANDING COMMITTEES MEETING DAYS* nd Planning Committee 2 Wednesday nd Operations Committee 2 Wednesday th External Affairs Committee 4 Wednesday th Finance and Audit Committee 4 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 28, 2015 1
Page 1 of 6
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 th service is provided at the intersection of Broadway and 17 Street in Oakland. The nearest accessible BART station th is the 19 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 28, 2015 2
Page 2 of 6
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING – H. E. Christian Peeples, President Wednesday, January 28, 2015 at 5:00 p.m. 1.
ROLL CALL
2.
PUBLIC COMMENT
3.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Staff Contact or Presenter
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.
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.
3A. Consider approving Accessibility Advisory Committee minutes of November 11, 2014 (Report 15-001).
Aida Asuncion 891-4979
3B. Consider receiving Retirement Board minutes of December 15, 2014 (Report 15-015).
Hugo Wildmann 891-4889
4.
REGULAR CALENDAR
4A. Consider approving amendments to Board Policy 364 – Revenue and Grant Policies regarding pass-through funding arrangements (Report 14-285b).
James Pachan 891-7215
4B. Consider approving the first amendment to the General Manager’s employment agreement (Report 15-052a).
President Peeples
4C. Discussion and/or announcement of Standing Committee Chair assignments and Liaison Committee assignments. (Verbal)
President Peeples
5.
BOARD WORKSHOP
5A. Consider receiving an update on the planning process for the next generation of Clipper (Report 15-016).
Tom O’Neill 891-7278
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.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
January 28, 2015 3
Page 3 of 6
A.
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE – Elsa Ortiz, Chairperson Held immediately following the Board Meeting recess.
Staff Contact or Presenter(s)
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 15-018).
Aida Asuncion 891-4979
A-2.
Consider recommending approval to sell full bus wraps on up to five percent of the District’s revenue fleet (Report 14-048).
Tom O’Neill 891-7278
A-3.
Consider recommending authorization to release a solicitation for revenue-yielding advertising on District vehicles (Report 14-049).
Tom O’Neill 891-7278
B.
FINANCE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE – Jeff Davis, Chairperson Held immediately following the External Affairs Committee meeting.
Staff Contact or Presenter(s)
Public Comment (for items not on the agenda) Consent Items: B-1.
Consider recommending receipt of the Monthly Report on Investments for the month of November, 2014 (Report 15-019).
James Pachan 891-7215
B-2.
Consider recommending approval to dispose of retired buses through sale or by means most advantageous to the District (Report 15-038).
James Pachan 891-7215
B-3.
Consider recommending that the General Manager or his designee be authorized to file and execute applications and funding agreements with the California Energy Commission for the Medium- and HeavyDuty Advanced Vehicle Technology Demonstration grant program (Report 15-040).
James Pachan 891-7215
Briefing/Action Items: B-4.
Consider recommending receipt of the FY 2014-15 Mid-year Budget Review and adoption of Resolution No. 15-005 amending the FY 201415 Annual Operating and Capital Budget (Report 15-029).
James Pachan 891-7215
B-5.
Consider recommending receipt of staff's proposed FY 2015-16 budgeting framework (Report 15-033).
James Pachan 891-7215
B-6.
Consider recommending approval of amendments to Board Policy 312 – Budget Policy (Report 15-020).
James Pachan 891-7215
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
January 28, 2015 4
Page 4 of 6
B-7.
Consider recommending receipt of report on fare utilization trends and financial results associated with the implementation of the new fare policy on July 1, 2014 (Report 15-021).
James Pachan 891-7215
B-8.
Consider recommending adoption of Resolution No. 15-001 approving amendments to Board Policy 354 – Procurement Protest Procedures and repeal Resolution No. 07-049 (Report 15-023).
Phillip McCants 891-5443
RECONVENE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING H. E. Christian Peeples, 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 approve legislative positions (Report 15-018). A-2. Consider approving the sale of full bus wraps on up to five percent of the District’s revenue fleet (Report 14-048). A-3. Consider authorizing the release of a solicitation for revenue-yielding advertising on District vehicles (Report 14-049). B. FINANCE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE: B-1. Consider receiving the Monthly Report on Investments for the month of November, 2014 (Report 15-019). B-2. Consider approving the disposal of retired buses through sale or by means most advantageous to the District (Report 15-038). B-3. Consider authorizing the General Manager or his designee to file and execute applications and funding agreements with the California Energy Commission for the Medium- and Heavy-Duty Advanced Vehicle Technology Demonstration grant program (Report 15-040). B-4. Consider receiving the FY 2014-15 Mid-year Budget Review and adoption of Resolution No. 15-005 amending the FY 2014-15 Annual Operating and Capital Budget (Report 15-029). B-5. Consider receiving staff's proposed FY 2015-16 budgeting framework (Report 15-033). B-6. Consider approving amendments to Board Policy 312 – Budget Policy (Report 15-020). B-7. Consider receiving report on fare utilization trends and financial results associated with the implementation of the new fare policy on July 1, 2014 (Report 15-021). B-8. Consider adoption of Resolution No. 15-001 approving amendments to Board Policy 354 – Procurement Protest Procedures and repeal Resolution No. 07-049 (Report 15-023).
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
January 28, 2015 5
Staff Contact or Presenter(s) Linda Nemeroff 891-7284
Aida Asuncion 891-4979 Tom O’Neill 891-7278 Tom O’Neill 891-7278
James Pachan 891-7215 James Pachan 891-7215 James Pachan 891-7215
James Pachan 891-7215 James Pachan 891-7215 James Pachan 891-7215 James Pachan 891-7215 Phillip McCants 891-5443
Page 5 of 6
7.
CONSENT CALENDAR ADDENDA
8.
CLOSED SESSION/REPORT OUT
The Board is requested to authorize as recommended from the committee meetings above. Denise Standridge
The items for consideration are listed below and will be reported on by the General Counsel as necessary at the end of the meeting.
8A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(b)) (Two Cases)
8B. 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
8C. Conference with Labor Negotiators – Board Officers
(Government Code Section 54957.6): Agency Designated Representative: H. E. Christian Peeples, Board President Title: General Manager
8D. Public Employee Performance Evaluation
(Government Code Section 54957) Title: General Manager, General Counsel, District Secretary
9.
GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT
10.
BOARD/STAFF COMMENTS (Government Code Section 54954.2)
11.
AGENDA PLANNING
12.
ADJOURNMENT Next Meeting: February 11, 2015, at 5:00 p.m.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
David Armijo
January 28, 2015 6
Page 6 of 6
BOARD OF DIRECTORS CONSENT CALENDAR
January 28, 2015 Agenda Items 3A – 3B
7
This page intentionally blank
8
Report No: Meeting Date:
15-001 January 28, 2015
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Accessibility Advisory Committee Minutes of November 11, 2014
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider receiving the Accessibility Advisory Committee minutes of November 11, 2014. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Minutes for November 11, 2014 were approved by the Accessi bility Advisory Committee on January 13, 2015. Major topics included: Discussion of Bus Stops and Report on AAC Involvement in Driver Training on November 5, 2014. 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 se niors and people with disa bilities. The committee consists of 14 members with two members being appointed by each of the seven elected members of the Di strict'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. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: This report does not recommend an action.
9
Report No. 15-001 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 November 11, 2014
Department Head Approval: Reviewed
Prepared
by:
by:
Aida R. Asuncion, Interim Chief Planning, Construction & Engineering Officer Robert del Rosario, Director of Service Development Mallory Nestor-Brush, Accessible Services Manager Kim Ridgeway, Accessible Services Specialist Tammy Kyllo, Administrative Coordinator
10
Staff Report 15-001 Attachment 1
AAC Minutes
November 11, 2014
REGULAR MEETING OF THE AC TRANSIT ACCESSIBILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AAC) NOVEMBER 11, 2014 The meeting came to order at 1:05 p.m.
1. Roll Call and Introduction of Guests AAC members present: Janet Abelson PamFadem Jim Gonsalves (arrived at 1:24 p.m.) Don Queen Will Scott Marina Villena
Scott Blanks, Chair Steve Fort Yuli Jacobson James Robson Deborah Taylor Hale Zukas, Vice Chair (arrived at 1:07)
AAC members absent: Shirley Cressey (excused) Staff:
Mallory Nestor-Brush, Accessible Services Manager Kimberly Ridgeway, Accessible Services Specialist Mary Archer, Transit Project Supervisor Michael Flocchini, Training and Education Department Manger
Guests:
H.E. Christian Peeples, Board of Directors Mary Fowler Randall Glock Jerry Grace
2. Order of Agenda The order of the agenda was approved after moving Item 6 to follow Item 3: Approval of Minutes. 3. Approval of Minutes MOTION: TaylorNillena approved the October 14, 2014 AAC meeting minutes. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES - 9: Blanks, Fadem, Gonsalves, Jacobson, Queen, Scott, Taylor, Villena, Zukas ABSTENTIONS- 3: Abelson, Fort, Robson ABSENT- 1: Cressey Page 1 ofS 11
4. Discussion of Bus Stops Mary Archer, Transit Project Supervisor, reported on lighting at bus shelters within AC Transit's service area. Mary explained that bus shelters with lighting are under the jurisdiction of the 3'd party vendor, Clear Channel. In general, shelters which have no lighting and no advertising are the responsibility of local jurisdiction (i.e. city or county). AC Transit does not own, install, or maintain shelters or any "furniture" at the bus stops (e.g. benches, trash receptacles, newspaper stands). Tree care is also the responsibility of the local jurisdiction unless the tree is on private property, which is the responsibility of the owner. AC Transit also has limited influence on the design of a shelter, or whether or not a shelter has lighting. Will Scott stated that he's concerned that the drivers are unable to see passengers waiting for a bus if there is no lighted shelter. Will suggested the possibility of educating the public on the use of ambient light or flash light apps on their cell phones or items that have "blinkie lights", such as key chains. Director Peeples stated that some other agencies throughout the country have reflectors on the bus stop poles in which an individual can activate when the bus is approaching to alert the driver to an awaiting passenger when the shelter is unlit. Randall Glock stated that reflector tape on bus stop poles is common. He also stated that solar lights are an option but are expensive to maintain. Deborah Taylor suggested that the AAC make a recommendation to the Board of Directors especially if the result is a system wide change. Chair Blanks suggested that we add "Discussion of Recommendations for Bus Stop Lighting" to the December 2014 agenda to review the options. 5. BRT-Access and Functional Needs Subcommittee (AFNS) Report Scott Blanks, Chair, reported that the last AFNS was in July. The topic was Service Design and Operations presented by AC Transit Service Development Staff. The presentation included the basic BRT route structure and, more importantly, the impact on existing, connecting AC Transit lines to the BRT. Prior to the July meeting four major issues had been addressed: buses, stations, access to stations, and intelligent transportation systems. There was also a discussion of including street intersections in addition to a landmark for announcing and identifying BRT stops. Scott stated that once the City of Oakland approves the 100% design, the BRT team should bring follow up presentations to both the AFNS and the AAC. Deborah Taylor stated that the Oakland City Council meeting to approve the BRT will be held on November 181h. Director Peeples stated that the major work on the BRT project will begin in Fall 2015. Revenue service will begin in 2017. Page 2 of5 12
6. Report on AAC Involvement in Driver Training on November 5, 2014 Michael Flocchini, Training and Education Department Manager, reported that five AAC members, Janet Abelson, Yuli Jacobson, Jim Robson, Will Scott and Marina Villena, attended the New Bus Operator (NBO) Training Class on Wednesday November 5, 2014. Along with Accessible Services Specialist, Kim Ridgeway, the committee members were introduced to a class of 12 NBOs who were in week four of their nine week training as well as four training instructors. The AAC members shared stories and experiences with the drivers followed by a Q&A then a brown bag lunch. After lunch the drivers and AAC members participated in hands on training using two buses to board, alight and secure. Drivers interacted with each committee members, used their customer service skills to communicate their actions and discuss any needs each passenger had. Michael expressed that the AAC involvement with Drivers Training was very successful ad suggested that the structure be adjusted to include more time for hands on training. Michael also stated that depending on the training schedule, the AAC and drivers training interactions could take place with NBO's or seasoned drivers who have scheduled annual refresher training.
Yuli Jacobson stated that she thought the training was a success and that the drivers had good questions for the committee members. She also states that there was a great discussion of hidden disabilities. Yuli would like to see a more structured agenda for future AAC/Driver Training sessions. Marina Villena stated that it was a very interesting process, which hopefully leads to better communication between drivers and passengers. She noted that the NBO's were very interested to learn how to service the community. Janet Abelson states that it was one of the best of these types of trainings that she's attended. She appreciated the free flowing discussions between the drivers and the committee members. Will Scott noted that there was definite interest on the faces of the drivers and he felt this process made training more humanistic. Will stated that there is a definite need to continue conducting AAC/Driver Training sessions in the future. Jim Robson states that he appreciated the motivation and enthusiasm of the trainees. He felt drivers' interactions with the AAC members were helpful and encouraged that training be provided for each group ofNBOs. Jim Gonsalves states that it's important that bus operators understand that people with disabilities have the right to ride transit and should not be pushed toward paratransit. Pam Fadem stated that the attitude of the bus drivers is very important and it sets the tone for all other passengers on the vehicles.
Page3 ofS 13
Scott Blanks suggested that AAC members participate when able and that only 2-3, rather than 4-5, members attend per session, including an AAC member who has already experienced the training. Michael Flocchini stated that future trainings would be held at the Training and Education Center for safety and because of the access to vehicles. Michael will work with Accessible Services Staff on behalf of the AAC to schedule future AAC/Driver Training sessions. 7. Chair's Report None. 8. Board Liaison Report Director Peeples reported that: • The Board of Directors received a review of the financial statements from the auditor on October 22nct. Things are positive. Both Real Estate and Sales Taxes have increased. • The Board retreat on October 29th included a discussion of Policy 550: Service Standards and Design Policy, Workers Compensation and benefits. • At an event sponsored by Kaiser on November st\ AC Transit was awarded $81M in Federal funding for the BRT project. These funds must be approved by the Appropriations Committee. • The Board of Directors is voting on two BRT contracts for parking lots and improvements to the lih Street, 14th Street and Fruitvale intersections as well as the renewal of the Sherriffs Contract at the November 12th Board Meeting. • The Transbay Terminal is somewhat behind schedule but is moving forward. • All of the AC Transit Board of Directors who ran in the November election were reelected. BART Board of Director Robert Rayburn was also reelected. 9. Review of Lift/Ramp Road Call Report The report for the period of September 28, 2014- November 1, 2014, showed 22 lift/ramp road calls. Of these 22 road calls, six were chargeable or mechanical. Pam Fadem stated that several road calls were due to debris iri the tracks and stated that drivers should have the ability to remove debris from the ramp in order to avoid a road call. 10. Review of MCI Fleet Lift Report and Wheelchair Lift Cycling Report- MCI (6000 Series) The Committee reviewed the MCI Fleet Lift Report and Wheelchair Lift Cycling Report. Drivers are continuing to do a great job in cycling the lifts during the pre-trip with the average percentage of cycled lifts above 91% daily. The Committee will continue to see this report through February 2015. 11. Service Review Advisory Committee (SRAC) Report The SRAC meeting was held on November 4, 2014. The Committee received a presentation on Emergency Planning, the Broker's Office Report, and an update on Measure BB, which Page 4 ofS 14
would allot 60% of Paratransit Revenues to AC Transit and BART (for East Bay Paratransit), 30% to city and county paratransit programs and 10% to grant funding.
12. Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC) P APCO Report None. 13. Public Comments Jerry Grace commented the Automated Voice Announcements (AVA) on line 72R were inconsistent. 14. Member Communications and Announcements Jim Robson stated the importance of having buses available for the AAC to review along with the Board of Directors, pertinent AC Transit Staff and representatives from Gillig. He would like to see a side by side comparison of the 1300 and 1400 series buses. 15. Staff Communications and Announcements None 16. Set Next Agenda & Meeting Date The next AAC Meeting will be held Tuesday, December 9, 2014 at 1600 Franklin Street, 2nd Floor, Oakland, CA. Agenda items include Discussion of Recommendation for Bus Stop Lighting. 17. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 3:22 p.m.
Page 5 ofS 15
This page intentionally blank
16
StaffReport 15-015 Approved Minutes Special Meeting of the AC TRANSIT RETIREMENT BOARD December 15, 2014
ROLLCALL
Chair Jeffrey Lewis called the meeting to order at 9:04 AM Members Present: Sue Lee, Davis Riemer, Vice Chair Yvonne Williams, and Chair Jeffrey Lewis Absent at Roll Call: Joyce Willis Members Absent: None Also Present: Hugo Wi1dmann, Retirement System Manager; Adelle Foley, Retirement System Administrator; Russell Richeda, Legal Counsel; (the following individuals were at part of the meeting); David Armijo, ACT General Manager; Denise Standridge, ACT General Counsel; Shawn Groff, ATU Counsel; Carolyn Smith, and Kevin Novak, NEPC; David Dowsett, BlueBay, and Tom Heflin, RBC Global Asset Management; Mark Weiller, Ashmore, and Alexis de Mones (by phone) Ashmore; Jack Coan and Grant Webster (by phone), Investec. CONSENT CALENDAR
Chair Lewis pointed out a typo in the November 7, 2014 minutes. MOTION: WILLIAMS/RIEMER to adopt the Consent Calendar. (4-0-0-1)
Ayes: Noes: Abstain: Absent:
Members Lee, Riemer, Vice Chair Williams, and Chair Lewis -- 5 None None Member Willis
APPROVED A. Approval of Minutes for November 7, 2014 With correction of the typo noted above. Approved B. Approval of the Minutes for the September 24, 2014 Joint Meeting APPROVED
17
AC Transit Retirement Board December 15,2014 C. Approval ofFinancials for October 2014 APPROVED D. Approval oflnvoices in the Amount of $250,574.34 APPROVED E. Approval of Retirements for January 2015 I. 2. 3. 4.
Mary J. Jones Darlene Nusom Sharon Sexton Louis Dill
#30713 #72114 #70931 #32415 Term Vested
APPROVED REGULAR CALENDAR Hugo told the Board that the time required for presentations by three money managers could result in postponing discussion of some agenda items until a future meeting. Other time-sensitive items were taken out of order. F. Approval of Retirements for November/December 2014 with conditions, if any:
I. Jean Budd #30994 (December) Contingent upon completion of the Benefit Option Form in December. Hold back an amount per month until Mr. Budd's wife signs the Benefit Option Form. 2. Antonio Corpuz #41179 (December) 3. George Lomax #1984 (January) Contingent upon completion ofthe Benefit Option Form in December. 4. Edward Nash #30554 (January) Contingent upon completion of the Benefit Option Form in December. Amount is interim pending resolution of pension amount for former ATU Officer James Gardner. 5. Cody Wallace #40439 (January) Hold back estimated amount pending completion of Domestic Relations Order with former spouse. 6. Deborah Wendt #41804 (December) MOTION: RIEMER/WILLIAMS to approve the retirements listed above effective in December 2014 and January 2015 with the conditions as stated. (4-0-0-1) The Board congratulated retirees Darlene Nusom and Sharon Sexton for 37 years of service; retiree George Lomax for 32 years of service; retiree Gary Bennett for 29 years of service; retirees Edward Nash and Cody Wallace for 28 years of service; and retiree Mary J. Jones for 25 years of service.
2 18
AC Transit Retirement Board December 15,2014
(Carolyn Smith ofNEPC joined the discussion of Agenda items G through 0.) G. Draft of the Investment Policy Statement Carolyn told the Board the document "redlined" (marked) the changes resulting from the November Board discussion. Some changes were for clarification and to make the document internally consistent. MOTION: RIEMER/WILLIAMS to approve the revised Investment Policy Statement. (4-0-0- I).
H. Asset Allocation and Investment Manager Update I. International Small Cap Value Equity Manager (DFA) Update J. Park Square Update Hugo reported the following funding activity: • the Plan would be funding DFA at the end of the week. • the contract had been signed with Park Square, and $3.8 million would be paid into this investment by the end of the week. • the Fund would be moving $3.4 million in response to a call from Crescent and $140 thousand in response to a call from Westport.
K. Emerging Market Debt Manager Review (Stone Harbor) Carolyn pointed out that Stone Harbor has performed consistently below its benchmark. She added that the emerging market universe is very large and diverse. Some are investments in local currency, others in hard currencies. Most managers do not hedge foreign exchange movements because there are many currencies and it would be very expensive. Investments may be in sovereign assets (government bonds) or even corporate debt. She concluded that NEPC was looking for managers with a blend of assets. (Member Willis joined the meeting at this point.) (Kevin Novak ofNEPC joined the discussion of Agenda Items L through N.) L. Emerging Market Debt Manager Presentations
Kevin referred to the NEPC Emerging Markets Debt - Blended Summary, included in the Board Package. He provided the main characteristics of each of the three managers, their pros and cons. Ashmore has proposed a Mutual Fund, while the other two proposed Comingled Funds. Ashmore uses their close ties to public and corporate officials to gather information on emerging bond markets, providing them an information advantage. They are one of the largest managers in the asset class,
3 19
AC Transit Retirement Board December 15, 2014 with investment professionals located in emerging markets. However, they have a relatively high tracking error and relatively high fees. BlueBay focuses on absolute risk rather than the benchmark relative risk. They integrate hard and local-currency investment opportunities and the direction of CoCIO's. They have a relatively high tracking error, and have a relatively low exposure to corporate debt. The Investec team's expertise in managing local bonds in Africa and knowledge of those markets are key to their value. They combine bottom-up country and security selection and quantitative relative value analysis. They have a relatively low tracking error, and have underperformed recently due to an overweight to local currency markets when the dollar has been strong. Each firm spent about one hour with the Board, presenting material on their strategy, team, investment process and performance, and answering questions. (David Dowsett from BlueBay and Tom Heflin, ofRBCjoined the meeting).
1. BlueBay David told the Board that RBC acquired BlueBay in 2010, but BlueBay still operates independently. It began as a Hedge Fund and now managers over $65 billion in assets. The large, experienced team of specialists in local and hard currency sovereign and corporate debt are drawn from, and understand, Emerging Markets. They analyze interest rate, currency and credit factors of sovereign bonds, and the companies and their management, as well as the macro outlook and industry and country factors of Emerging Market corporate bonds. David cited liquidity risk as especially important in today's market and noted that BlueBay had never owned any sovereign debt that went into default. They are not a frontier manager. In response to Board questions David said that they seek good returns over the cycle, not in the short run. He added that they are underweight to Russia, but have not exited entirely. They invest no more than 20% in any country and they were surprised by the foreign exchange market weakness and less-than expected growth in Emerging Markets in the last few years. (The BlueBay team left that meeting at this point.) Carolyn told the Board that BlueBay is not shorting bonds. Chair Lewis called a recess at I 0:30AM The meeting reconvened at 10:44 AM
4 20
AC Transit Retirement Board December 15,2014 (Mark Weiller and Alexis de Mones (phone)joined the meeting. 2. Ashmore Mark told the Board that Ashmore manages $70 billion in assets and specializes in Emerging Markets and Fixed-Income investments, with 10 offices world-wide. They offer a variety of vehicles, including a $20.7 billion blended debt fund. Their investor base includes public and private pension funds and investors from around the world. Alexie explained that Ashmore seeks to capture the upside of local cycles. They seek returns without adding to volatility. They are valueoriented, investing based on the risk of credit default as well as the price. They focus on liquidity and are comfortable diverging from the benchmark. Their performance target is an alpha of 250 basis points. Responding to a question regarding relatively high fees, Mark attributed that to the Mutual Fund Vehicle. He noted that Ashmore's offshore fund has lower fees. Their turnover is high due to local tactical trades. Alexis added that they had increased their hard currency holdings. (The Ashmore team left the meeting at this point.) Chair Lewis called a recess at 11:42 AM The meeting reconvened at II :52 AM (Jack Coan and Grant Webster (phone) oflnvestec joined the meeting). Jack told the Board that Investec's roots were in Emerging Markets investments, since it was founded in Cape Town in 1991, and expanded into global markets. Employees own 15% of the business; and portfolio managers have research responsibilities. Top people have long tenure, but are relatively young (in their 50's). The Emerging Markets blended fund has $2.3 billion. Grant described the specialties of the team. He described the team's process -top down, including overall risk and market timing, and bottom-up based on valuation and fundamentals. The result is broad asset class exposure. Investec is distinguished by treating foreign exchange as a separate category, apart from local bonds, dollar-denominated bonds and corporate debt. He described the score card developed by asset class for each country, based on risk units, the quantitative analysis and concern with liquidity. Turnover of all kinds is 90 to I 00%. In closing, Grant noted that CalPERS was their newest client. (The Investec presenters left the meeting at this point.) M. Analysis of Presentations by Emerging Market Debt Managers N. Next Steps in Emerging Market Debt Manager Review/Presentations 0. NEPC Work Plan
5 21
AC Transit Retirement Board December 15,2014 The Board discussed the three presentations. Hugo noted the similarity of the managers'·retums, and discussed the differences between the 40 ACT (Mutual Fund) and the Comingled fund. The Board asked NEPC to provide a chart on all three managers and requested more information regarding the ethnicities of the work forces. The discussion on the Emerging Market debt managers will continue at the January Board meeting. (David Armijo, General Manager, Denise Standridge. General Counsel. AC Transit and Shawn Groff, ATU Locall92 Counsel joined the Board for Agenda Items T and U.) T. Update on Calculation of Pension Benefit for Former Union Officer James Gardner U. Authorization to Distribute Counsel's Draft Statement of Facts (Gardner) to Local 192 and the District Counsel Richeda referred to his memorandum entitled "Update and Requests for Direction Concerning Claim by James Gardner", included in the Board Package. In it he asks the Board to authorize him to release a memorandum of facts in the Gardner case to ATU and to the District, as the first step toward resolution of this claim. Denise explained that she is new to her position, and her office has a great volume of paperwork that could apply to this issue. Therefore, it might take some time to review the paperwork. Chair Lewis noted that this issue has been pending for some time and a date should be set. He suggested putting it on the agenda for February. Shawn preferred to target the January meeting, and Vice Chair Williams wanted to move forward as soon as possible. Counsel Richeda said that his goal is to distribute a statement of facts by the end of December. Chair Lewis suggested dividing the issue in two parts - a decision regarding current and future ATU officers, and a decision regarding past officers. MOTION: RIEMER/LEE to release the statement of facts at the end of December; comments on the facts to be received by the January meeting, and resolved by the February meeting. Action on the current and future officers would occur in March; action on the past officers in April
Chair Lewis called a recess at I :26 PM The meeting reconvened at I :31 PM (General Manager Armijo, General Counsel Standridge and ATU Counsel Shawn Groff left the meeting at this point) MOTION: RIEMER/LEE as amended by WILLIAMS Release the statement of facts at the end of December Agreement on the statement of facts at the January meeting Action on current and future ATU officers at the February meeting
6 22
AC Transit Retirement Board December 15, 2014 Action on past ATU officers at the March meeting (5-0-0-0) P. Q. R. S. V. W. X.
Calendar for 2015 Final Quarterly Report to the District Board District Recruitment for Non-ATU Retirement Board Members Update on Plan Amendment 14-A-17 Hearing Officer Update Disability Determination Retirement System Manager Report I. Public Pension Issues in the News 2. Report on CALAPRS Board Meeting in Burbank (December 5) 3. CALAPRS Schedule of Roundtables for 2015 4. CALAPRS GAin Monterey (March 8-10, 2015) 5. Report on November Division Visits These items were held over until a future meeting.
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. Aubrey Johnson- Total and Permanent Disability b. Arsenia Legaspi- Total and Permanent Disability c. Ray Dunhams- Total and Permanent Disability d. Terence Chrisman- Total and Permanent Disability e. Gary Bennett - Occupational Disability f. Kelryn Johnson- Occupational Disability g. Vaughn Roberts- Total and Permanent Disability h. Robin Cobb -- Occupational Disability 1. Harold Peters- Occupational Disability J. Michael Jefferson- Total and Permanent Disability k. Michael Garay - Occupational Disability
2) Matters Relating to Pending or Threatened Litigation a. Conference with Legal Counsel- (Government Code Section 54956.9(a)): I) Ansar Muhammad - Appeal of Denial of Occupational Disability Application 2) Gwendolyn Randle - Appeal of Denial of Total and Permanent Disability Application 3) Iris Oliver- Survivorship Benefits Z.
(RESUME OPEN SESSION) I) Report and/or Action on Closed Session Items Counsel Richeda reported:
7 23
AC Transit Retirement Board December 15,2014
a. Y)l)f)
Gary Bennett - Occupational Disability Retirement
The Board unanimously approved Mr. Bennett's application for an Occupational Disability Retirement effective October 2014. b. Y)l)d)
Terrence Chrisman- Total and Permanent Disability Retirement
The Board unanimously approved Mr. Chrisman for an Occupational Disability Retirement, effective July I, 2014, and held open the question of a Total and Permanent Retirement. c. Y)2)a)l) Ansar Muhammad - Appeal of Denial of Occupation Disability Application The Board considered and did not reject the recommendation of Hearing Officer Norman Brand that " ... the Board deny Mr. Muhammad's request for Occupational Disability." This recommendation becomes the decision of the Board. STAFF COMMENTS
None RETIREMENT BOARD COMMENTS
None ATTORNEYS' REPORT
None ADJOURNMENT MOTION: RIEMER/LEE to adjourn (5-0-0-0)
The meeting adjourned at I :49 PM
8 24
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR CALENDAR
January 28, 2015 Agenda Items 4A – 4C
25
This page intentionally blank
26
Report No: Meeting Date:
14-285b January 28, 2015
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Board Policy 364- Revenue- Pass-Through Funding
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider approving amendments to Board Policy 364 - Revenue and Grant Policies regarding Pass-Through Funding arrangements. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Board's existing Revenue Policy does not specify any rules or guidelines relating to the acceptance of pass-through funding arrangements. While pass-through funding comes with additional burden to the District and staff, there may be situations where it is beneficial to the District to support pass-through funding arrangements for specific projects. Staff is recommending additions to the Revenue Policy to specify situations and stipulations the District should consider for pass-through funding arrangements. The title of the Policy will also be changed to Revenue and Grant Policies, to better reflect the contents. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: The recommended changes to Board Policy 364 do not directly have any fiscal impact, but will guide Board and staff decisions that do. BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Pass-through funding is when an agency or organization that cannot directly receive grant funding for their own project requests the District to be the recipient of the grant funds. The District then passes the funding on to the other party, or sub-recipient, through a separate funding agreement. The District does not currently have any Board Policies or Administrative Regulations that deal with pass-through funding. Pass-through funding can expose the District to various liability issues, and there is a burden upon staff to administer and process the funding. However, there are situations where agreeing to be the pass-through 'fiscal sponsor' could be advantageous to the District. A common situation would be where an outside agency or organization is better suited to implement a project that benefits the District. Another potential situation is where a funding agency
27
Report No. 14-258b Page 2 of 3 requests the District to act as a pass-through sponsor as part of a funding arrangement that is beneficial to the District. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Lifeline Cycle Four Program (detailed in SR 14-285a) has presented the District with two possible pass-through funding situations. While the District has no obligation to act as a pass-through sponsor for the Lifeline program, there are some advantages that can be identified for both of the projects on pass-through funds. The additions to Board Policy 364 suggested below are an attempt to provide guidance on passthrough funds while still giving the Board and staff the flexibility to deal with the particular details of the specific requests.
Existing Pass-Through Agreements The District currently has two pass-through funding arrangements. In September 2008 (SR 08159), the Board agreed to a request by the City of Emeryville to act as a pass-through for earmarked Federal Transit Administration Section 5309 Bus & Bus Facilities program funds. Emeryville had secured four funding earmarks, but as a non-transit agency could not be the direct recipient of the funds. The City was developing a public-private partnership project for the Emeryville lntermodal Transit Center, a development on top of the parking and bus loading lot located at the Emeryville Amtrak station. The funding will support the construction of the public plaza next to the development. In November 2009 (SR 09-240a), the Board agreed to a request by the Alameda County Public Works Agency to pass-through 1-Bond funding from the Lifeline Cycle Two Program for sidewalk, bus access, and Americans with Disabilities Act improvements on Hacienda and Meekland Avenues in Cherryland.
Pass-Through Policies 1) Federal Funding The most onerous pass-through requirements come with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding. With FTA funding, the District is responsible for ensuring that the sub-recipient is following essentially all of the same rules that the District is subject to, including Title VI requirements. Due to these burdens, staff recommends that the Board's policy permit such funding arrangements only in cases where the benefit to the District is substantial and the subrecipient agency is sufficiently prepared to meet the pass-through grant requirements.
2) Non-Competitive Projects Staff recommends that the Board Policy allow pass-through funding, but only for projects that are not competitive with existing or planned District projects. For services, pass-through funding will not be allowed if operated by others when the District is able to operate the service.
28
Report No. 14-258b Page 3 of 3
3) Administrative Reimbursement Staff recommends that the Board Policy allow the District to request a small (less than 10%) amount of the pass-through funding be withheld by the District to offset the administrative burden of the agreement. Whether this is possible may depend on the funding source and/or funding agency. The amount would depend on the requirements associated with the funding source and project.
4) Contractual/Indemnification Terms Staff recommends that all pass through agreements contain terms that indemnify the District from all legal liability associated with the project, cost overruns in the subject project(s), and providing funds in lieu of the original funding source.
5) Staff Burden The Board should ask staff to indicate whether the administrative burden of the agreement is within reason and can be handled by existing resources.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: The advantage of amending the policy is to provide clear guidance when making future decisions on whether to accept pass-through funding arrangements. There is no disadvantage to adopting the policy.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: The alternative is to not amend the policy and allow things to continue as they are now. This is not recommended because the District will be presented with pass-through funding requests in the very near future and needs a policy basis to make decisions.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Board Policy 364- Revenue Policies
ATTACHMENTS: 1:
Proposed Board Policy 364
Department Head Approval:
James D. Pachan, Interim Chief Financial Officer
Reviewed by:
Denise C. Standridge, General Counsel linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary Chris Andrichak, Acting Manager, Capital Planning & Grants
Prepared by:
29
This page intentionally blank
30
SR 15-28Sb
AC Transit
Policy No. 364
BOARD POLICY Category: FINANCIAL MATTERS
REVENUE AND GRANT POLICIES Purpose: This policy establishes District Guidelines involving Revenues and Grants: • • • • • • • • •
Avoiding Dependence on Bond Financing Annual Review of Investment Policy Capital Improvements to be m Made sConsistent with Capital Improvement Plan Approval of Grant Applications Grant Management Paying Current Expenditures with Current Revenues Projecting Revenues Conservatively Maintain and Diversify the Revenue Base Pass-Through Funding Agreements
Definitions 1.
One-time Revenues: The District shall avoid dependence on bond financing to fund on-going operations. One-time revenues shall be used only for one-time expenses or to fund District Reserves, or to repay outstanding debt. When fund balances are greater than budget estimates, it should be considered one-time resources and shall not be used to fund on-going expenses.
2.
Investments: The Board of Directors shall review the District Investment Policy annually to ensure that it meets the following objectives (in order of priority):
A. Compliance with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, and regulation requirements. B. Preservation of capital~ to ensure safety of principal. C. Liquidity to meet required cash demands. D. Maximization of income; to maximize yield consistent with risk limitations identified in the District's Investment Policy No. 336.
Page 1 of 3
Adopted: Amended:
31
04/92 07/01 : 06/05: 03/08: 05/12: 06/14 ; 01/15
3.
Inter-governmental Capital Grants: inter-governmental capital grants shall be used to finance only those capital improvements consistent with the Capital Improvement Plan, part of the Short-Range Transit Plan, approved or amended by the Board of Directors and those operating costs have been included in the District Budget approved by the Board of Directors. If additional operating costs resulting from a capital improvement have not been included in the District Budget, the Board of Directors shall approve the expenditure of such funds prior to the implementation of such capital improvements. Projects that are included in the Short-Range Transit Plan may be submitted for funding without further action by the Board. Exceptions include unforeseeable circumstances.
4.
Board Approval of Grant Applications: The General Manager shall ensure that all grant applications go through the regular agenda process, including review and sign-off by the Legal Department, the Chief Financial Officer, the Budget Manager and the Manager of Capital Planning and Grants and be approved by the Board of Directors, prior to application to ensure that the availability of grant funds does not direct (or misdirect) the priorities and financial capabilities of the District.
5. Grant Management: The Chief Financial Officer and the Grant Manager shall maintain a system of grant control to ensure that the District maintains a proper grant inventory and associated information records . The system should establish a strategy to align the short-term and long-term capital priority process with grant cycles. 6. Current Expenditures are Budgeted with Current Revenues : The District shall not budget recurring expenses in excess of revenues it expects in the same fiscal year. Any increase in expenditures or decrease in revenues that results in a budget imbalance will require cost cutting and/or revenue enhancement. The District shall avoid expending inappropriate surpluses or designated reserves to support ongoing operations. 7. Revenue Projections: The District shall use an objective and analytical process to make revenue projections. In cases of economic uncertainty, conservative projections will be utilized. It is fiscally prudent to budget revenues conservatively, using the lower end of the expected range. 8. Maintain a Diversified and Stable Revenue Base: To the extent possible, the District shall pursue a diverse and stable revenue base. It is in the District's best interest to have economic development policies that encourage a more diverse revenue base. 9. Pass-Through Funding Agreements: The General Manager shall ensure that all pass-through funding agreements go through the regular agenda process, including Adopted: Amended:
Page 2 of 3
32
04/92 07/01 ; 06/05; 03/08; 05/12: 00/14 : 01/15
review and sign-off by the Legal Department, the Chief Financial Officer and the Manager of Capital Planning and Grants and be approved by the Board of Directors. The following rules shall guide staff and the Board in entering into passthrough agreements: A. Agreements for the pass-through of Federal Transit Administration Funds are not recommended due to the high administrative and regulatory burden. B. Projects covered ffH:ffi.tshall not compete with or oppose existing or planned District projects. Services covered RlliS!-shall not be operated by others if the District can operate the service. C. lf allowable and appropriate, the District shall request a small (<5%) amount of the funding to offset the administrative costs of the agreement. D. Agreements shall contain non-negotiable terms that indemnify the District from : all legal liabilities associated with the project; covering project cost overruns; and providing funding in lieu of the original funding source. E. Staff shall provide assurances to the Board that the responsibilities associated with administering the agreement are within the capability of current resources.
Page 3 of 3
Adopted: Amended:
33
04/92 07/01: 06/05; 03/08; 05/12 : 06/14 : 01115
This page intentionally blank
34
BOARD OF DIRECTORS January 28, 2015
Staff Report 15-052a Consider approving the first amendment to the General Manager's employment agreement
CURRENTLY NOT AVAILABLE WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AT THE TIME IT IS PROVIDED TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
35
This page intentionally blank
36
Board of Directors January 28, 2015 2015 LIAISON COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS REQUESTED Item No. 4C I
'
2015 REQUESTS
'
Member{s)
Alternate{s)
Member{s)
Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC)
Peeples
***
Peeples
AC Transit/City of Berkeley Interagency Liaison Committee
Young, Peeples
***
Peeples
AC Transit/City of Emeryville liaison Committee
Harper, Young
***
Harper
INTERNAL Liaison Committees
BART/AC Transit Liaison Committee Bus Rapid Transit Policy Steering Committee Central Alameda County Policy Committee [PACHayward/San Leandro]
Harper, Ortiz,
Wallace
Young
Harper, Ortiz,
Peeples
Young
Alternate(s)
#of Reps/ Voting {V) 1
Peeples
2V 2V
Peeples, Ortiz, Harper
Harper, Ortiz
Williams,
Wallace Peeples
2V
Peeples
3V [Wards 2, 3, 4)
Peeples
2V
Peeples
2V
Williams, Peeples
***
City of Alameda/AC Transit Interagency liaison Committee (ILC)
Ortiz, Peeples
***
District Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee
Harper
***
Retirement Board
Peeples
***
Peeples
1
Service Review Committee (SRC)/Advisory Comte (SRAC)
Peeples
***
Peeples
1
Davis, Young
***
Peeples
Peeples
2V
Harper
Peeples
Peeples
Peeples
1
South Alameda County Policy Committee [D-2 Fremont/Newark) Transbay Task Force
2014 ASSIGNMENTS
Peeples
Ortiz, Peeples
1
2015 REQUESTS
Member{s)
Alternate{s)
Member{s)
Alternate{s)
#of Reps/ Voting {V)
Alameda County Transportation Commission * [Compensation of $250 per meeting attended]
Ortiz
Harper
Ortiz Williams
Peeples
1V
Alameda Co. Conference of Mayors Conference
Young
Williams
Peeples
Williams Peeples
1
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)**
Williams
***
Williams Peeples
Peeples
1
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
Peeples
Harper
Peeples
Peeples
1
EXTERNAL Liaison Committees
Organization no longer
Bay Area Alliance for Sustainable Communities
meets
1
Wallace
***
Contra Costa Transportation Authority {CCTA)
Peeples [Ward 1 or At-Large]
Young
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)
Davis, Harper
***
Emeryville-Berkeley-Oakland Transit Study Policy Advisory Committee
Harper
***
Peeples
Peeples
1V
Transbay Joint Powers Authority*
Harper
Ortiz
Harper
Peeples
1V
West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee*
Wallace
Peeples
Wallace
Peeples
1V
Contra Costa Conference of Mayors
Bold Text- Indicates Prior Year's Committee Appointment Unbolded Text -Indicates New Request for Appointment 37
Wallace
1 Peeples
1 non-voting Ex-Officio 2
2015 STANDING COMMITTEE REQUESTS- CHAIR External
Finance &
Affairs
Audit
Wallace
I Operations I
Planning
accept any assignment
1st Choice 1st Choice
Harper Ortiz Williams
1st Choice
2nd Choice
Davis Young
38
!comments
WORKSHOP
January 28, 2015 Agenda Item 5A
39
This page intentionally blank
40
Report No: Meeting Date:
15-016 January 28, 2015
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: SUBJECT:
AC Transit Board of Directors David J. Armijo, General Manager C2- Clipper Next Generation Planning Update
BRIEFING ITEM
·' RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider receiving an update on the planning process for the next generation of Clipper. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Metropolitan Transportation Commission's (MTC) current Clipper contract with Cubic Corp. ends in November 2019. The Clipper next generation planning process (C2) continues at an aggressive pace to plan for the next generation regional fare payment system. Executive, Steering, and Long-Range Planning committees comprised of representatives from all agencies, and MTC and their consultants, made significant progress in the past year in the initial Planning Phase. The Procurement Phase, now in progress through 2016, encompasses the refinement of a new governance model, fare coordination, the collection of public input, and most importantly defining the system structure and functionality through the System Description Document. The Implementation Phase will begin in 2017 with transition to the new system in 2018-2019. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: In April 2014, staff presented an overview of C2 Next Generation Planning, and this report provides an update on that process with a focus on the proposed system description and features. In 2014 the Executive, Steering, and Long-Range working groups comprised of operator and MTC participants accomplished several milestones by developing the Vision, Mission and Goals for the new system; assessing the state of the current system; conducting peer analysis and review, compiling and analyzing current fare collection costs; and identifying high level functional requirements. Currently in Progress-Procurement Planning 1. Structure for Governance and Program Management-Discussions are centering around the creation of a Regional Fare System partnership made up of large and small transit operators and MTC, with an Executive Director hired, managed and jointly funded by 41
Report No. 15-016 Page 2 of 3 the Partnership Board. The Executive Director would be responsible for agency coordination, consultant management, and contract oversight. 2. Fare Policy Coordination-Identification and analysis of alternatives for reducing and/or simplifying the number and types of fares and fare products; ensuring a system that is easy for customers to understand, and one that enables agencies to meet their specific needs. 3. Public Input Plan-Several outreach mechanisms, such as website and phone surveys, public meetings, and take-ones on transit vehicles, will solicit input and feedback from customers. 4. Systems Description Document--The draft document, currently under review by all agencies, is a living document that specifies the key elements of the system. It will be used as a basis for a Request for Information (RFI) from the fare systems vendor community. Key elements are: Open Architecture--The system will be vendor-independent, non-proprietary, and based on official or popular standards. It will provide flexibility as new and additional services are added to the program, and as new technologies become available. It will accommodate payment changes without costly hardware replacement in either the back office or the front-end components. The ease of implementing fare changes would depend upon the software design. Account-Based Fare Management--The master record of customer accounts will be stored in a central backend database. This approach provides multiple benefits and has been adopted by some of the largest transit agencies in the world. The system will initially support the use of agency-issued contactless smartcards (e.g., cards that communicate via radio waves) and tickets, but will be capable of supporting other contactless media in the future, such as bank-issued contactless cards, mobile phones equipped with near-field communications (NFC) and Bluetooth, and student/employee/government ID's. This provides flexibility in that users merely need a unique token or identifier linked to their account, and the device doesn't need to store value. Expanded Distribution Network--In addition to online and point of sale access, the retail sales channels will be significantly improved. The C2 system will integrate with a retail distribution partner to provide fare media and value through a broad network of existing sales locations. No C2-specific hardware will be required at integrated retail partner locations. Open Payment Options--The system will be designed to have the option to accept payments such as contactless credit and debit cards and mobile wallets (e.g., Apple Pay, Google Wallet). As technology develops, this option will be evaluated as to costs, security, and potential use by the public.
42
Report No. 15-016 Page 3 of 3
Future Planning Technical planning and the procurement strategy, together with development of cost estimates and a preliminary transition plan will progress from 2015 through 2016. The planning groups will formulate the Technology and Operations Plan, technical specifications and RFP development, with the ultimate selection of a contractor. Implementation will begin in 2017 for a completion transition to the new system by November 2019. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
This report is being provided to inform the Board of Directors of the C2 planning process and to serve as the basis for discussion. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
None. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES:
None. ATTACHMENTS: 1. C2- Clipper Next Generation Planning Update (PowerPoint Presentation)
Department Head Approval:
Tom O'Neill, Interim Chief Information Services Officer
Prepared by:
Victoria Einhaus, Customer Services Manager
43
This page intentionally blank
44
More Jobs, More Economic Development & Less Traffic
Clickto toedit editMaster Mastertitle titlestyle style Click C2 - Clipper Next Generation Planning Update Click to edit Master text styles Tom O’Neill Information Services January 28, 2015
CLICK TO EDIT MASTER TITLE STYLE
1/23/2015 1/23/2015
45
1
1 11
Overview Click to edit Master title style • Review of C2 Planning Process • Progress to Date • Tasks in Progress • Fare Policy Coordination • System Description
• Upcoming • Timeline & Path Forward 1/23/2015
46
2
2
Project Phasing
Click to edit Master title style 2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
PLANNING PHASE PROCUREMENT PHASE IMPLEMENTATION PHASE
Planning Process Detail 2014 Q2
Q3
Q4
2015 Q1
Begin C2 Operations TRANSITION Nov. 2019 – End of Current Contract
Q2
Needs Assessment Cost of Fare Collection Public Input Plan
Phase I Outreach
Phase II Outreach
High-level System Requirements Fare Policy Coordination System Description Consultant RFP/Selection Procurement Strategy Cost Estimates Preliminary Transition Plan
1/23/2015
47
3
3
Planning Phases Completed 2014 Click to edit Master title style • • • • •
Mission & Vision Goals Industry Analysis & Peer Review Costs of Fare Collection Needs Assessment & Design Summary
1/23/2015
48
4
4
Planning In title Progress Click to editPhases Master style • • • •
Governance & Program Management Fare Policy Coordination Public Input Plan Systems Description Document
1/23/2015
49
5
5
Planning In title Progress Click to editPhases Master style Governance & Program Management • Regional Fare System Partnership • Executive Director Under Partnership’s Direction
• Fare Policy Coordination • Public Input Plan • Systems Description Document
1/23/2015
50
6
6
Planning In title Progress Click to editPhases Master style • Governance & Program Management Fare Policy Coordination • Simplicity & Flexibility • Core Products & Custom Products
• Public Input Plan • Systems Description Document
1/23/2015
51
7
7
Planning In title Progress Click to editPhases Master style • Governance & Program Management • Fare Policy Coordination Public Input Plan • Surveys – phone & online • Websites, social media, take-ones on buses • Public meetings
• Systems Description Document
1/23/2015
52
8
8
Planning In title Progress Click to editPhases Master style • • •
Governance & Program Management Fare Policy Coordination Public Input Plan Systems Description Document • Open Architecture • Account-Based Fare Management • Fare Distribution
1/23/2015
53
9
9
Architecture Click toOpen edit Master title style • A system that: • Is vendor-independent & non-proprietary, based on official or popular standards • Allows vendors to create add-on products that increase a system’s flexibility, functionality, interoperability and useful life • Enables users to customize & extend system capabilities to suit individual requirements • Fare changes – ease or difficulty is dependent upon software design 1/23/2015
54
10
10
Account-Based Fare Management
Click to edit Master title style
• Master records of customer accounts are stored in the central backend database • Benefits & Needs Met: • Improved transaction speeds for local authorizations • Real time account management & customer service • Reduce field device software development, testing, and distribution cycles • Cheaper, cost efficient media options that can be delivered quickly in bulk • Manage business rules from a single location without requiring software deployment 1/23/2015
55
11
11
Communications with Click to edit Master title style Account-Based Fare Management • Supports off-line transactions when necessary • Transmission to back office when restored • Many systems assume first ride risk, then suspend account
• Multiple mitigation practices for offline risk management
1/23/2015
56
12
12
Forms of Payment ClickOther to edit Master title style • Account-based architecture supports the use of agency-issued contactless smartcards and tickets, and also capable of supporting other media such as: • Bank issued contactless cards • NFC mobile phones with closed-loop and open payment credentials • Student, employee, government ID’s
1/23/2015
57
13
13
Distribution Click toInitial edit Master title style • Online • Customer website • Institutional programs website
• Point of sale devices • Retail sales channels • Standard gift cards used for retail distribution
• Top up available through the retail payment network & ticket vending machines 1/23/2015
58
14
14
Future - Opentitle Payments Click toOptions edit Master style • Enables use of bank issued instruments in multiple formats – contactless credit/debit cards & mobile wallets • Requires payment of fees (7%) • System must be Payment Card Industry (PCI) Compliant • High cost & high risk development for small percentage of Clipper usage 1/23/2015
59
15
15
Payments Click to Mobile edit Master title style Applications of Mobile Technology Account Management
Mobile Ticketing
Mobile Payment Mobile Payment (Closed-Loop) (Open-Loop)
Fare Inspection
Allows customers to manage transit accounts (e.g., balance, transaction history, load value, setup autoload) via mobile device
Allows: customer.s to purchasevisual and/or barcode virtual tickets using their mobile device
Allows customers t o provision a virtual Clipper card to an NFCequipped device and tap to pay
Allows customers to pay fares using an NFCequipped device with existing IITlObile wallet app lications
A llows fare inspectors to use commercially available devices to perform fare inspection
Can be accomplished via native applications, mobile website, or both
Requires vi sual fare irnspection, or optical barcode scanning to be supported by fare validation devices
Requires development of a complex INFC payment application; only si!Jpported on NFCequipped devices
Requires system supp:>ort for acceptance of open paym ents
Requires usoe of NFCequipped devices; may have PCI implicat ions if supporting open payments
1/23/2015
60
16
16
Examples Elsewhere: Click to edit Master title style TriMet eFare Project Overview .1
Syst em Integrator: INIT
.1
Account based system
.~
Closed loop and Open Payment
.t
Open Architecture
.1
1.100 Validators on board and on platform
.1
4G/LTE Communication on buses and streetcars; fiber at rail platforms
.t
Mobile app for riders, Fare inspector app for enforcement
.1
Expanded retail network via gift card processor
.1
1-Day and 1-Month f are caps
.1
Approx 2.5-3 years from Kickoff to Go Live
15
Electromc fare Mana&ement System
1/23/2015
61
17
17
TriMet Account Based System
Click to edit Master title style Customer Benefits Pricing equity (Daily and Monthly Caps) Unbanked customers can load value via retailers Expanded retail network in low income and minority demographics No fees to load value at retailers Balance protection on lost cards Regional fare; easy to transfer Simple green light I red light fare validation Increased equipment reliability Improved service planning with better data Use payment method already in purse/pocket (e.g . smart phone, bank card) Online account management and automatic reload online
14
Elearonoc Fare Management System
1/23/2015
62
18
18
Trimet: Achieving Transit Click to edit Master title Equity style • Spread discounts to low income & minorities through daily & monthly caps • Increased retailers selling fares in low income & minority areas • Stored value E-fare products available to all, including cash/unbanked customers
1/23/2015
63
19
19
ACto Transit – Filling the Click edit Master titleGaps style IC lipper Vendor Need I
r- \ #
There is a small need for additional vendors_ There is a moderale need for additional vendors_ There is a good need for additional vendors.
1/23/2015
64
20
20
Planning Phases Ahead
Click to edit Master title style
• Technical Planning (2015)
• Procurement and Contracting Strategy • Costs Estimates • Preliminary Transition Plan
• Procurement Process (2015-2016) • Technology and Operations Transition Plan • Technical Specifications • RFP Development & Contractor Selection
• Implementation (2017-2019) 1/23/2015
65
21
21
Project Phasing
Click to edit Master title style 2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
PLANNING PHASE PROCUREMENT PHASE IMPLEMENTATION PHASE
Planning Process Detail 2014 Q2
Q3
Q4
2015 Q1
Begin C2 Operations TRANSITION Nov. 2019 – End of Current Contract
Q2
Needs Assessment Cost of Fare Collection Public Input Plan
Phase I Outreach
Phase II Outreach
High-level System Requirements Fare Policy Coordination System Description Consultant RFP/Selection Procurement Strategy Cost Estimates Preliminary Transition Plan
1/23/2015
66
22
22
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
January 28, 2015 Agenda Item A-1 – A-3
67
This page intentionally blank
68
Report No: Meeting Date:
15-018 January 28, 2015
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): Consider recommending receipt of the monthly legislative report. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The 114th Congress has convened, some committee assignments have been announced. A $1.1 trillion continuing resolution omnibus appropriations bill was passed on December 19, 2014 for FY'15. Governor Brown released his proposed state budget for FY 1015-16 which generally maintains transportation spending at its current levels. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report. BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Federal Legislation Update 1} The 114th Congress convened on January 6, 2014.
Speaker John Boehner was relected as Speaker of the House of Representatives as expected and Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) will be the Majority Leader. Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was reelected as the Minority Leader as was Steny Hoyer (D-MD) to be the continuing Minority Whip . The Hou se Transportation and Infrastructure Committee will continue to be chaired by Bill Shuster (R-PA) and the ranking member is Peter Defazio (D-Or). The Senate Banking Committee will be chaired by Richard Selby (R- AL) and the ranking member is Sherrod Brown (D-OH). The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee will be chaired by Jim lnhofe (ROK) and the ranking member will be Barbara Boxer (D-CA).
69
Report No. 15-018 Page 2 of 2 2) A $1.1 trillion FY'15 continuing resolution appropriations package passed on December 29, 2014.
The spending bill will fund most federal government departments through September 30, 2015. A notable exception is the Department of Homeland Security which is only funded through February 28, 2015. The Department of Transportation was funded at the same levels as last year. State Update
1) Governor Brown released his proposed FY 2015-16 budget proposal Transportation spending is flat as is the projected State Transit Assistance allocation. The Governor has made it a point to focus on highway spending as opposed to local streets, roads and transit.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: This report is being provided to inform the Board of monthly legislative activities and to seek its approval to support or oppose legislation affecting AC Transit. This provides clear direction to legislators, and other bodies of AC Transit's positions.
ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS: This report provides an update of monthly legislative activities. AC Transit could opt to defer from legislative positions and operate without making its positions known, leaving the District vulnerable to unfavorable legislation.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Staff Report 12-253: 2013 Federal and State Legislative Advocacy Programs
ATTACHMENTS: 1: Transportation Update from Van Scoyoc Associates 2: Monthly Federal Report from Van Scoyoc Associates 3: State Legislative Report from Platinum Advisors 4: FY 2015 Federal Advocacy Program 5: FY 2015 State Advocacy Program
Department Head Approval: Aida R. Asuncion, Interim Chief Planning, Construction and Engineering Officer Prepared by: Beverly Greene, Director of Legislative Affairs & Community Relations
70
SR 15-018 Attachment 1
VANSCOYOC A
S
S
0
C
I
A
T
E
S
Transportation Update January 12,2015
Steven 0. Palmer, Vice President Dan Neumann, Director David Haines, Manager
This Week The Senate and House are both in session his week, but will recess on Thursday and Friday for the Republican Party's annual Member retreat.
FY 2015 Homeland Security Appropriations. The House is expected to begin debate on legislation to fund the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for the remainder ofFY2015. DHS is currently funded through February 27, 2015 .
Last Week Congress returned to Washington on January 6 to begin the 114111 Congress. John Boehner was reelected as Speaker of the House, despite several defections among House Republicans. Republicans officially took control of the Senate for the first time since 2006.
FY 2015 Homeland Security Appropriations. Late Friday, it was announced that House and Senate leaders had agreed to legislation that will fund the Department of Homeland Security for the remainder of FY2015. The bill funds TSA at $4 .8 billion, a decrease of $94 million over FY2014. While most programs will have a slight reduction in their funding, the bill does increase funding for private screening at airports and for procurement and installation of Explosive Detection Systems. The bill also directs TSA to continue staffing airport exit lanes where the agency had been providing this service on December I, 2013. House Republicans are expected to attach a provision to the bill addressing President Obama's recent Executive Order on immigration. Floor Passage: Terrorism Risk Insurance. The House and Senate both passed legislation to renew the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act through 2020. This program, enacted in the wake of the September 11 th attacks in 2001, provides a federal "backstop" to private insurers in the case of a major terrorist attack. The President is expected to sign the legislation.
Retirement: Senator Barbara Boxer. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), the Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee, which has jurisdiction over highway issues, announced that she will not run for re-election in 2016. Senator Boxer previously chaired the
71
2 EPW Committee from 2007-2014. She has served in the Senate since 1993 and prior to that served ten years in the House of Representatives.
Appropriations Subcommittee Ranking Members. On January 9, Ranking Member Barbara Mikulski (R-MD) announced the Ranking Members for the twelve subcommittees of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Senator Jack Reed (D-R!), will be the new Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Transportation and Housing and Urban Development. He replaces Patty Murray (D-WA) who will now be the top Democrat on the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education. The new Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Homeland Security will be Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), replacing Mary Landrieu (D-LA), who was defeated for reelection .. Senate Commerce Subcommittee Chairs. On Friday it was announced that Senator Deb Fischer (RNE) will be the new Chairman of the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, Safety, and Security. Senator Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) was named as the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Aviation. Department of Transportation
Nomination: FTA Administrator. On January 8, President Obama again nominated Therese McMillan to be Administrator of the Federal Transit Administration. The Senate returned her nomination to the President at the end of the 113'h Congress last month. Nomination: FRA Administrator. President Obama intends to nominate Sarah Feinberg to be the next Administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration. Ms. Feinberg currently serves as the ChiefofStaffto DOT Secretary Anthony Foxx. Rulemaking: Safety Management Systems. The FAA has issued a final rule that requires U.S. cargo and passenger airlines to have a Safety Management System (SMS) in place by 2018. SMS systems are comprehensive approaches to managing safety risks on an airline. Each airline will be required to submit its implementation plan to the FAA by September 2015, with full implementation of the plan required by March 2018. Government Accountability Office
Report: Nonemergency Medical Transportation. On January 9, GAO released a report on nonemergency medical transportation services provided across six federal departments, including the Department of Transportation. GAO found that these programs are not well coordinated, and recommended that DOT publish a new strategic plan for coordinating these programs. ###
72
SR 15-018 Attachment 2 VANSCOYOC ASSOCIATES, INC. 101 CONSTITUTION AVENUE, N.W. SUITE 600 WEST WASHINGTON, D.C. 20001
MONTHLY REPORT FOR ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT DECEMBER2014
In accordance with the agreed-upon terms and conditions of the consulting agreement between Van Scoyoc Associates ("VSA") and Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District ("AC Transit"), what follows is a memorandum noting actions and duties performed on behalf of AC Transit in December 2014.
Congressional •
Arranged and participated in meetings with the offices of Representatives Eric Swalwell, Barbara Lee, and Mike Honda, to discuss the East Bay BRT project, as well as to update them on other transit service issues.
•
Informed AC Transit officials that Congress would be debating/voting on the tax extenders bill, which includes a one-year extension of both the alternative fuels tax and the transit benefits provisions. Subsequently, VSA informed AC Transit officials of the tax extenders bill passing the Senate and being sent to President Obama to become law.
•
Provided AC Transit officials with summary of omnibus appropriations bill, as well as highlights of areas of that bill that impact AC Transit, including AC Transit's prospects for receiving Small Starts funding in FY 2015 under the agreement. VSA also informed AC Transit officials on the lack of funding for high speed rail projects (Trans bay Terminal) and on final passage of the funding bill.
•
Attended a lunch held by the Golden State Society, at which Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy ~R-CA) spoke. Summarized Mr. McCarthy's speech on the agenda for the 1141 Congress for AC Transit.
•
Provided information to AC Transit officials on Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee's hearing reviewing Dr. Mark Rosekind nominated to be NHTSA Administrator, Mr. Carlos Monje Jr. nominated to be Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy, and Dr. Tho Bella Dinh-Zarr nominated to be a Member of the National Transportation Safety Board. Later, informed AC
73
2
Transit officials that Mr. Rosekind had been confirmed as NHTSA Administrator, while the nominations of Mr. Monje and Ms. Dinh-Zarr had not been acted on. •
Informed AC Transit that the Senate had adjourned without approving the nomination of Therese McMillan to be FTA Administrator.
•
Informed AC Transit that Congressman John Delaney (D-MD) had introduced a bill to fund the Highway Trust Fund through taxes on repatriated funds.
•
Alerted AC Transit when the 113 1h Congress adjourned for the remainder of2014.
Administration
•
In response to an inquiry from AC Transit, provided information on the expected timeline for FTA's announcement ofNew Starts and Small Starts funding allocation for FY20 15.
Other
•
Represented AC Transit in regular meetings of the Bus Coalition, a coalition working to increase federal funding for bus transit systems. This included an inperson meeting of Bus Coalition members during the annual APTA conference in early Decem her.
•
Participated on AC Transit's behalf in a webinar and conference call hosted by the Eno Center for Transportation and the American Society of Civil Engineers on Life Cycle Cost Analysis for highway materials. Provided AC Transit with a summary of the call.
•
Reviewed the discussion held during the December AC Transit Board meeting on the Lifeline program. VSA subsequently responded to inquiries on the federal role in funding JARC and other related local programs.
•
Attended the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) Legislative Committee meeting with AC Transit officials.
•
Met in Washington, D.C. with the General Manager and Director of Legislative Affairs and Community relations to discuss AC Transit's federal agenda.
•
Confirmed VSA participation at the January 28,2015 AC Transit Board meeting.
•
Alerted AC Transit to Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on federal programs that provide transportation services for older adults.
•
Informed AC Transit of GAO report on the efforts of transit agencies to make their systems resilient to catastrophic events.
74
3
•
Provided weekly summaries that included information on transportation-related activity in Washington. The summaries noted relevant hearings, announcements, and legislative proposals.
•
Maintained regular contact with AC Transit government affairs officials.
•
Participated in the bi-monthly New Starts Working Group calls, representing AC Transit in discussions about pending federal issues. ###
75
SR 15-018 Attachment 3
January 13, 2015 TO:
Beverly Greene, Director Community Relations & Legislative Affairs
FR:
Steve Wallauch Platinum Advisors
RE:
2015-16 Budget Summary
Governor Brown released his proposal for a $114.8 billion budget for 2015-16. This includes about $113 billion in 2015-16 revenues and a carryover of $1.4 billion from 2014-15. Total reserves will reach $3.3 billion, which includes $534 million in regular reserves and $2.8 billion in the Rainy Day Fund. Governor estimated that 2014-15 revenue will end $2 billion higher than the original estimate, and revenues will continue to grow in 2015-16 by nearly $6 billion . The Governor stays the course on prioritizing the retirement of existing debt and tackling longer term liabilities. The budget repays the final $1 billion owed to schools and makes the last payment on the $15 billion in Economic Recovery Bonds. It al so pushes for a cost sharing agreement for retiree health costs as part of renewal of labor contracts . While spending is marginally up in most program areas, the budget proposal does not begin to address the restoration of cuts that social programs endured during the recession. From the Legislature's perspective the release ofthe budget is a starting point for its 6 month review. In light of the increased state revenue and rebound ing economy many Democrats in the Senate and Assembly will pursue proposals to ensure that the budget invest s in the needs of all Californian s. LAO's initial review finds the Governor spending plan prudent overall. While the Governor includes robust revenue growth, the LAO predicts revenues could likely exceed the Governor's projections in 2015-16. Baring a sustained drop in the stock market, the LAO estimates revenues could grow beyond the nearly $6 billion assumed by the Governor by another $2 billion. However, this growth is dependent on the volatile stock market, where down turns emerge without warning.
Transportation: The Budget summary essentially maintains the status quo for tran sportation spending, and instead focuses on the looming need to address how the state will maintain the existing transportation system. As stated in the Budget Summary, "Of nearly $11 .5 billion in ongoing transportation revenues available for the state's transportation infrastructure, about 70 percent is devoted to local streets and roads, transit, capacity expansions, and debt service. As a consequence, the state's highway system has deteriorated over time." 1
76
SR 15-018 Attachment 3
The Summary outlines the existing investments being made in local streets and roads, public transit, and capacity improvements, and contrasts that with the relatively small portion of funds directed to highway repairs and maintenance. The summary also mentions the significant investment Self-Help counties have made toward local transportation improvements, as well as how some of these improvements further compound unfunded state maintenance costs. To address the need to provide $6 billion in annual unfunded maintenance needs the Summary mentions a wide range of options being examined as outlined below- except bonds. The Summary states, "Additional borrowing through bonds would not be appropriate, not only
because the funding gap is an ongoing one, but also because roughly one out of every two dollars spent on bond funded infrastructure goes to pay interest costs rather than construction costs, and currently 9 percent of total transportation revenues are spent on debt service." •
•
•
•
Road User Charge Pilot Program- CaiSTA and CTC have commenced the process of studying the use of a road user charge in California. SB 1077 (Chapter 835, statutes of 2014) direct the completion of a report that will lead to a pilot program by June 30, 2018. At the press conference, Governor Brown stated, "I'm going to speed it up." To accelerate this process the 2015-16 budget includes $9.4 million and 5 position to implement SB 1077 and implement a pilot program to explore a potential mileage based revenue collection system. Toll Roads- The Summary points to the extensive network of carpool lanes which have unused capacity during rush hour. These lanes could be converted to express lanes. The Administration is proposing legislation that will restore the authority to for new high-occupancy toll lane projects, including the conversion of existing carpool lanes to toll lanes. The state must consider other funding options that address the funding needs, including pay-as-you-go funding structure that aligns funding with use of the system. The options should also consider the weight of vehicles. Specific examples were not provided. New local-option funding revenues should also be considered.
Transportation Management Systems:_The Budget includes an increase of $6.9 million and 64 positions to maintain and improve the Transportation Management System, such as ramp meters, and the associated communication links with traffic management centers. Of these
resources, $3 million and 20 positions will be used to complete a data-driven, performancebased pilot study of the effectiveness of Transportation Management System elements in increasing throughput and managing capacity in two primary corridors; one in the north and one in the south.
Streamline Relinquishments- The Governor is proposing budget trailer bill language that will streamline the state highway relinquishment process for segments that primarily serve regional or local transportation needs. Draft language should be available by the end of the month. While relinquishments will reduce the state's long-term maintenance costs and provide local government's greater flexibility for projects along these routes, reducing the number of highway miles in a given county will also reduce the amount of "county share" dollars allocated to a county through the STIP. 2
77
SR 15-018 Attachment 3 Project Initiation Documents: The Budget includes $3.4 million and 25 positions to support an additional $800 million in project development work for various state and local transportation projects. The estimated $800 million in project development work includes $300 million in increased SHOPP and local sponsored projects, and the need to develop a $500 million "shelf" of projects. The creation of the shelf projects will be on a first-in-first-out basis for priority projects, such as pavement, bridge and mobility projects. State Transit Assistance: The budget estimates that $388 million will be allocated to transit operators through the "base" STA allocation. This is roughly on par with the $386 million expected for the current fiscal year. However, it is unclear if these estimates have taken into consideration the significant drop in diesel fuel prices. In addition, the STA line item in the budget also includes the estimated $50 million in cap & trade revenue that will be allocated through the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program. Cap & Trade Expenditures: The Governor's Budget estimates that the cap & trade auction will generate $1 billion in 2015-16. The allocation of these funds follows the distribution formula enacted this year and the 40% "discretionary" portion largely mirrors the allocations made in the 2014-15 budget. The funds are proposed to be allocated as follows:
2015-16 Cap and Trade Expenditure Plan ( Dollars i n Millions) l~tment Categex
Progam
Deg:rlment
High-Speed Rail Authority Hgh-Speed Rail Pr<;1ect Str.e Transit Assistance
low Carbon TtanSit
AmoiK!t
S250 $50
Sustain~e
5100
Communities and Transportation PQency Oean Transportation -
Strategic Gf~\th Co~d l
S200
Low Carbon Transportation
Alr Resources Board
Department of Conmwvty Energy Efficiency Services aoo Dev~opment Upgrades/Weathenzaaon Energy Effioency and - - - - - - ~-~~~~~~ Clea-J Energy En"""y Comm ssion Energy Efficiency for Public - ·u Buildn Department~ Food
and
Agricu W31 Energy and
DEpartment oi Fish and
Operationa! Efficiency Wedands and Wa1ershed
Wadre
Restor.1tion
Agriculture
Natural R~~ "bepartment -~~":":F ='ore _stry _ _ _F :i' ~e-:P::-rev --ent --:ion - and UJban Forest p ·ects
and Waste DIVerSIOn and Fire Protection Cai R~e
S200 $75 $20
$1 5 $25 $42
$25 $1 .002
Total
3
78
SR 15-018 Attachment 4
2015 Federal Advocacy Program Funding
•
FY 2014 Grant Opportunities- Secure federal funds for key capital projects and support funding for 2015 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 o Zero Emission Bus Programs
•
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 20 11.
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.
•
Support broad funding eligibility for BRT projects in federal transit programs, including New Starts and Small Starts programs,
Pagel 1
79
•
Seek revisions to the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) grandfather clause that supports the direct representation of transit properties on local transportation policy boards.
•
Support legislation through MAP-21 for safety requirements based on agency size
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.
•
Support legislation that encourages Single Payer health insurance.
•
Advocate for American with Disabilities Act improvements
Page [2
80
SR 15-018 Attachment 5
2015 State Advocacy Program Funding •
Support efforts to implement the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) and future transportation authorizations 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.
•
Pursue and support funding for Zero Emission Bus Programs
•
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 to offset the costs of global warming initiatives, clean air and clean fuels and implementation of AC Transit's Climate Action Plan.
•
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 transit 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.
Pagel 1 81
•
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 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 82
o
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.
o
Support legislation that requires reporting of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) annually through DMV renewal.
Policy Interests o
Support simple majority vote for local transportation ballot tax initiatives.
o
Support legislation to allow District to ban persons for specified offenses from entering district property.
o
Seek revisions to the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) grandfather clause that supports direct representation of transit properties on local transportation policy boards.
o
Support legislation for STA formula reform that includes federal operating funding as eligible revenue.
o
Support efforts that maintain existing Workers' Compensation regulation.
o
Consider efforts to reform tort general damages
Page
13 83
This page intentionally blank
84
Report No: Meeting Date:
TR/?NS/T
14-048 January 28, 2015
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
External Affairs Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Full Bus Wrap Pilot Program
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S}: Consider approving the sale of full bus w raps on up to five percent of the AC Transit revenue fleet. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On December 11, 2013, the Board approved a one-year pilot program to sell full wraps on up to five percent of the AC Transit fleet, excluding fuel cell buses. The pilot provided District staff the opportunity to evaluate rider reaction, maintenance costs, and safety issues associated with the sale of full wraps. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: The budgetary impact of continuing the sale of full wraps is expected to be an increase in revenue given the higher value of full wraps compared to other available bus media.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Prior to December 2013, full wraps were not sold on AC Transit buses. The current contract with the District's advertising sales contractor, Titan 360, allowed for the sale of partial wraps covering no more than 30 percent of window space on any single side, except for the rear of the bus. There are no Board policies that specifically prohibit the sale of full bus wraps. Upon conclusion of the pilot program, staff conducted a full analysis of revenues, customer feedback, maintenance costs, and safety concerns. Revenue Impact Titan sold one full bus w rap for a period of eight weeks during the summer months. The contract for the wrap was secured as part of a multi-agency purchase. For this wrap, the District realized $8,743 in revenue, or 65 percent of the total revenue billed by Titan. Despite the limited usage of the format, the District can realize greater financial return with the sale of full bus wraps. Full wraps have the potential to generate substantial revenue by offering unique and exclusive advertising opportunities. Being able to utilize this format allows an 85
Report No. 14-048 Page 2 of 3 advertising contractor to secure revenue for multi-market and/or multi-transit agency buys that request consistent formats across the board. Further, full wraps allow the District to maximize revenue on a single vehicle as opposed to using multiple vehicles to realize equivalent revenue. Also during the pilot, AC Transit utilized a full bus wrap for the Holiday Bus during a three-week period. This was purely a promotional vehicle for the District and was not designed to generate revenue. Other Impacts To ensure feedback would be collected during the pilot, key district staff was notified in advance of the District's first full wrap. Distribution included customer service, maintenance, operations, labor relations, service planning, accessible services, community relations and security departments. All feedback regarding the wrap was requested to be forwarded to the Director of Marketing & Communications. During the pilot program, there was no public reaction to the full bus wrap directed to AC Transit. There were no customer complaints, nor were there any comments forwarded by District staff. No reports of vehicle damage or safety concerns were received. Staff recommends Board approval of the continued sale of full bus wraps on up to five percent of the District's available revenue vehicles. As in the past, full wraps will not be available on the 12 branded fuel cell buses in the fleet. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: The advantage to continuing to allow full bus wraps is a potential increase in non-farebox revenue. While safety, security or maintenance concerns may be raised in the future, the pilot program analysis demonstrates there are no discernable disadvantages to continuing the sale of full bus wraps. Staff will address any concerns of future vehicle damage by working collaboratively with the vendor. Future contracts for bus advertising can include a clause holding the advertising vendor liable for damage caused by the installation or removal of advertising. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: The alternatives to approving the continued sales of full bus wraps on five percent of the fleet are to cease the sale of full bus wraps, or to increase the percentage of buses available for full bus wraps. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Board Approval of Recommendations in Staff Report 09-128b- Titan Contract Extension and Pilot Program to Sell Full Bus Wraps -12/11/2013
86
Report No. 14-048 Page 3 of 3
ATTACHMENT: 1: Staff Report 09-128b- Titan Contract Extension and Pilot Program to Sell Full Bus Wraps
Executive Staff Approval:
Tom O'Neill, Interim Chief Information Services Officer
Reviewed by:
Denise C. Standridge, General Counsel James Pachan, Interim Chief Financial Officer Michele Joseph, Director of Marketing & Communications
Prepared by:
87
This page intentionally blank
88
Report 14-048 Attachment 1 Report No: Meeting Date:
09- 128b December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
External Affairs Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Titan Contract Extension and Pilot Program to Sell Full Bus Wraps
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S}: Consider approving proposal to exercise the first one-year option to extend AC Transit's contract with Titan through June 30, 2015. Consider approving a one-year pilot program to evaluate rider reaction, maintenance costs. and safety issues associated with allowing Titan to sell full wraps on up to 5% of the District's fleet. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: AC Transit entered into a contract with Titan that began on July 1, 2009 for the sale of advertising on AC Transit buses. The contract duration is five (5) years, with five (5), one-year extension options. The initial five-year contract period ends on June 30, 2014. Titan has performed well during the past four and half years, with revenues that consistently exceed the contract's Minimum Annual Guarantee (MAG). Staff believes it is in the District's best interest to exercise the first option so as to extend the contract for an additional year. AC Transit would also like to amend the current contract to allow Titan to stage a one-year pilot program to sell full wraps on up to 5% of the AC Transit fleet. By aUowing the sale of full wraps on a portion of the fleet, AC Transit has the opportunity to significantly increase ad revenue. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: There is no expected budgetary impact of exerdsing the one-year contract extension. The budgetary impact of allowing the sale of full wraps is expected to be an increase in revenue given the higher value of full wraps compared to other available bus media. In the event that full wraps are not sold, revenue would remain the same and there would be no budgetary impact.
89
Report No. 09·128b Page 2 ofS BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Transit advertising is an important source of non-fare revenue for AC Transit, providing support for service enhancements and/or the restoration of services that were previously eliminated or reduced. Since the start of the contract, Titan has had a positive track record of increasing ad revenue despite the reduction in AC Transit's fleet. AC Transit has consistently earned 65% of revenue rather than the MAG, and fiscal year 2012/13 was the highest revenue year of the contract to date. With continued improvement of the overall economy, staff expects this trend to continue and has no reason to believe that rebidding the contract would result in superior performance by another vendor. The table below summarizes Titan's sales performance over the past four and half years.
Revenue Share
Minimum Annual Guarantee
True Up (revenue share minu s
Year
Revenue
(65")
(MAG)
MAG)
2009/2010
$1,742,840
$1,132,846
$780,000
$352,846
2010/2011
$1,695,736
$1,102,229
$1,000,000
$102,229
2011/2012
$1,643,118
$1,068,027
$1,030,000
$38,027
2012/2013
$2,129.451
$1,384,216
$1,060,900
$323,316
2013/2014 (July-Oct}
$734,189
$477,223
$1,245,794
The small decreases in revenue seen in FY 2010/11 and in 2011/12 is attributed to the reduction in AC Transit's fleet that in 2009, when the contract began, included 634 buses but now includes 569 buses. In light of the fact that the bus fleet has been reduced by more than 5%, the base MAG may be adjusted in 2014 to reflect this smaller fleet size. According to the contract, Titan can adjust the MAG anytime the fleet size deviates by more or less than 5%; however, to date they have not chosen to exercise this option. Staff would attempt to maintain the current MAG. AC Transit has been satisfied with Titan's sales performance to date and expects continued revenue growth should the District exercise the option to extend the contract through June 2015. Out of a total current fleet of 569 buses, AC Transit has 563 buses for which Titan has exclusive rights to sell advertising. The availability of specific ad types is shown below by vehicle type. The only buses on which advertising is not permitted are the 12 fuel cell buses and the four 30-foot buses used for the Oakland Shuttle.
90
Report No. 09-128b Page 3 ofS Bus Type
In Fleet
King Ads
Queen Ads
Tall Ads
Interior Ads
30' VanHools 35' VanHools
32 50 128 89 65 68
0
0 0
0 0
65 68
32 0 0 0 65 68
0 0 65 68
0 0 1,300 1,360
31
38
24
31
620
23
46
23
77
77
0 0
0
563
650
189
187
667 0 3,947
40' VanHools 60' VanHools 40' Gillig 40' NABIIow-floors 40' NABI 3000/3100s 60' New Flyers 45' MCI coaches TOTAL
so 128 178
The following are Titan's four-week rates for one unit of each ad type on an AC Transit bus: Unit
Rate
Tail
$382
Queen King
$445
Partial Wrap (max 30% window coverage)
$954 $9,600
Full wrap
$10,500
Currently the revenue from a typical AC Transit bus ad configuration - one king, one queen, and one tail - is $1,781 per month. If that same bus instead had a full wrap, the revenue would be $10,500, a potential revenue increase of 489% for one bus. According to the current contract with Titan, full wraps are not allowed on AC Transit buses; however, modified wraps covering no more than 30% of window space on any single side except for the rear of the bus are allowed. Other than the contract restrictions, staff is unaware of any Board policies that specifically prohibit the sale of full wraps. While the modified or partial wrap is priced almost as high as a full wraps, it is, according to Titan, an unpopular option for advertisers and has not been sold on an AC Transit vehicle in over a year. Furthermore, since other transit agencies, including Muni, do allow full wraps, advertisers, according to Titan, would prefer not to have to develop custom creative work to accommodate AC Transit's restrictions. If the Board approves the pilot program to sell full wraps, staff recommends that Titan be required to restrict the number of buses with full wraps at any one time to no more than 5% of the existing fleet that accommodates ads - or 28 buses out of 563- during the pilot test period. Additionally, the full wrap option would be offered as a one-year pilot program starting immediately upon approval by the Board. During the pilot period, AC Transit staff and Board 91
'
Report No. 09-128b Page4of5 would evaluate the program to ensure that the wraps are not contributing to a higher number of passenger complaints, increased maintenance costs, or safety concerns. In consulting with multiple transit agencies across the country in preparation for this report, staff found that visibility and security were the most common issues raised when agencies considered offering full wraps. Most agencies, however, found that in practice, these issues were not ultimately problematic and were outweighed by solid revenue increases. The following transit agencies are among the many that currently offer full wraps: • •
Muni-SFMTA County Connection-CCTA
• • •
Boston·MBTA Philadelphia-SEPTA Los Angeles-MTA
Titan has provided AC Transit with a sample of the material used on windows for full wraps. This widely-used material is a calendared adhesive-backed PVC vinyl that is perforated with a pattern of round, evenly spaced holes. It allows graphics printed on the surface of a window to be seen from the outside, but appears invisible to the people inside looking out. The natural light inside the vehide is dimmed slightly by the window covering, which is why AC Transit staff proposes full wraps Initially as a one-year pilot. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES; Exercise One Year Option: The advantage of exercising the first-year option in the contract with Titan is that AC Transit is able to maintain what has thus far been a positive contract relationship. As mentioned earlier, Titan has performed well financially, and AC Transit has benefitted by consistently earning 65% of revenue instead of the MAG. Staff has no reason to believe that rebidding the contract would improve the District's position. Sale of Full Wraps: Transit buses:
There are two primary advantages to allowing the sale of full wraps on AC
1. First, full wraps generate more revenue than conventional transit advertising. 2. Second, full wraps may allow the District to participate in multi-agency advertising programs with other Titan clients. According to Titan. clients prefer to implement one campaign across multiple Bay Area transit properties and do not want to Incur the e)(tra work and expense of developing custom creative work for individual agencies. This is particularly true for national advertisers such as Coca Cola,' Proctor and Gamble, and Geico, who use wrapped buses and pay premium national rates for the privilege.
92
Report No. 09-128b Page5of5 AC Transit's primary concerns with full wraps are visibility and safety/security. Visibility is a subjective measure and refers to the extent to which passengers looking outside the bus have a clear and unobstructed view. Safety and security concerns refer to potential emergency situations in which it might be necessary or desirable for law enforcement officials or AC Transit staff to have an unobstructed view inside the bus from the outside. Full wraps have been used on public buses since the early 1990s, and to the best of staff's knowledge, there have been no serious safety-related Issues reported. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
The alternative to exercising the first one-year option in the Titan contract is to go out to bid for a new advertising contract starting July 1, 2014. The alternative to allowing the sale of full wraps is to maintain the status quo as defined in the current contract or to adjust the requirements proposed in this report. For example, AC Transit could restrict the number of fully wrapped buses to a flat number rather than a percentage of fleet, or fully wrapped buses could be restricted to vehicles coming out of certain divisions and/or to certain vehicle types. The Board could also consider allowing full wraps on an ongoiog basis, rather than as a one-year pilot.
PRIOR RElfVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POUCIES: GM Memo No. 09-128a Approval of five-year contract with ntan ATTACHMENTS: 1: Image of bus with full wrap
Department Head Approval:
Tom Prescott, Chief Performance Officer
Reviewed by:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel Lewis G. din ton, Chief Financial Officer John Haenftling, Director of Project Controls & Systems Analysis Victoria Wake, Manager of Marketing & Community Relations Karen Bakar, Marketing Administrator
Prepared by:
93
TITAN
commuter bus - full wrap
::-.an360 .cvm
94
Report No: Meeting Date:
14-049 January 28, 2015
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
External Affairs Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Solicitation for Advertising on District Vehicles
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S}:
Consider authorizing the release of a solicitation for revenue-yielding advertising on District vehicles. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The purpose of this solicitation, proposed for a five-year period, is to generate non-farebox revenues to supplement marketing initiatives designed to increase ridership and enhance the image of the District. On December 11, 2013, the Board approved a one-year extension of an existing five-year contract with the District' s bus advertising contractor, Titan 360. The original contract term began on July 1, 2009, and ended on June 30, 2014; with the Board's approval of the first one-year extension, the contract was extended until June 30, 2015. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
Based on the current sales trends and the continued strengthening of the economy, the estimated revenue impact of a new five-year bus advertising contract could likely exceed $10 million over a five-year period.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
Non-traditional forms of revenue generation such as transit advertising are integral to funding the District's strategic marketing and communications initiatives to increase ridership, improve image and garner support of AC Transit in the community. Over the past thirteen years, revenue achieved through the bus advertising program alone has netted the District between $1 million and $2.5 million annually. The District contracted with CBS Outdoor from 2002 until 2009, at which time it entered into the current contract with Titan 360. As demonstrated by the following chart, the District experienced a significant revenue loss coinciding with the economic downturn in 2009 and the change of advertising vendor from CBS Outdoor to Titan 360.
95
Report No. 14-049 Page 2 of 3
ACTransit Bus Advertising Revenues FY 2001- FY 2014 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000
$-
•
CBS Outdoor
•
Titan 360
• Revenue reflects partial-year contract.
Based on the latest available revenue report, the District has realized total bus advertising revenues of approximately $6.2 million during the current contract period from July 2009 through November 2014. In Fiscal Year 2014 alone, AC Transit received nearly $1.5 million in advertising revenue, a six percent increase over the previous fiscal year. Notably, revenues for the first five months of Fiscal Year 2015 increased 25 percent over the same period last year. With positive sales trends and a strengthened economy, along with an expiring contract, staff believes it is in the District's financial interest to release a solicitation. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
The Board's approval of releasing a solicitation allows the District to capitalize on an improved economy, potentially resulting in more competitive revenue proposals and increased nonfarebox revenues. Additional revenue allows the District's continued investment in initiatives designed to increase ridership and fare revenues, promote new services and amenities, and position the District as the Bay Area's premiere transit service. There are no perceived disadvantages to releasing a solicitation. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
One alternative to releasing a solicitation is to extend the current contract with Titan 360 until June 30, 2016, upon direction from the Board. The other alternative is that the District neither extends the current contract nor issues a solicitation. This would result in an interruption of the bus advertising program, and the decline in revenues received by the District as of July 1, 2015. Staff does not recommend this option.
96
Report No. 14-049 Page 3 of 3
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Board Approval of Recommendations in Staff Report 09-128b- Titan 360 Contract Extension and Pilot Program to Sell Full Bus Wraps -12/11/2013
Executive Staff Approval:
Tom O'Neill, Interim Chief Information Services Officer
Reviewed by:
Denise C. Standridge, General Counsel James Pachan, Interim Chief Financial Officer Jon Medwin, Director of Procurement Michele Joseph, Director of Marketing & Communications
Prepared by:
97
This page intentionally blank
98
FINANCE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE
January 28, 2015 Agenda Items B-1 – B-8
99
This page intentionally blank
100
Report No: Meeting Date:
15-019 January 28, 2015
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(5):
Consider receiving the Monthly Report on Investments for November 2014. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As of November 30, 2014, the District had the following investments: Repurchase Agreement (REPO)
$15 million (Collateralized 102%)
Money Market Account
$81.36 million (Collateralized 110%)
Money Market Account
$1.76 million (small banks; FDIC insured)
BUDGETARY/FISCALIMPACT:
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 Report on Investments for November 2014 is forwarded to the Board of Directors for review. The portfolio contained in the report 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 collateralized money market accounts is done with preservation of principal foremost in mind.
101
Report No. 15-019 Page 2 of 2
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: This report does not recommend a course of action with notable advantages or disadvantages.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: 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 for November 2014.
Department Head Approval:
James D. Pachan, Interim Chief Financial Officer
Reviewed by:
Sue Lee, Treasury Manager
Prepared by:
Beverly Abad-Fitzgerald, Treasury Administrator
102
ALAMEDA - CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT MONTHLY REPORT ON INVESTMENTS FOR THE GENERAL FUND NOVEMBER 30,2014
en
I 0
~
103
ALAMEDA - CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT MONTHLY REPORT ON INVESTMENTS
Table of Contents
Investment Summary
1
Investment Overview
2
Return on Investments
3
Detail of Portfolio
4
Repurchase Agreements
5
Government Securities (General Fund)
6
104
INVESTMENT SUMMARY FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS/OTHER FUND NOVEMBER 30, 2014
TYPE
Average Interest Rate%
MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS REPO'S TREASURY BILLS DISCOUNT NOTES AGENCY BONDS
0.248% 0.030% 0.000% 0.000% 0.000%
TOTAL GENERAL FUND INVESTMENTS
Carrying Value
Par Value
Fair Value
%of Total
$40,820,106.46 $15,000,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$40,820,106.46 $15,000,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$40,820,106.46 $15,000,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
73.13% 26.87% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
$55,820,106.46
$55,820,106.46
$55,820,106.46
100.00%
.
TYPE MONEY MARKET REPO'S DISCOUNT NOTES AGENCY BONDS
Average Interest Rate% 0.070% 0.000% 0.000% 0.000%
TOTAL OTHER (CaiOES/Bus Proc.) INVESTMENTS
Carrying Value
Par Value
Fair Value
%of Total
$42' 300' 025.92 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$42,300,025.92 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$42,300,025.92 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
$42,300,025.92
$42,300,025.92
$42,300,025.92
100.00%
Page 1
105
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT INVESTMENT OVERVIEW FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS PROCUREMENT/OTHER FUND NOVEMBER 30, 2014
2014 DESCRIPTION
YTD
2015
JUL
SEP
AUG
NOV
OCT
DEC
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
JUN
MAY
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)
0.033% 0.070%
0.070%
0.020% 0.070%
0.030% 0.070%
0.030% 0.070%
0.029%
0.024% 0.070%
0.025% 0.070%
0.025%
0.070%
0.070%
0.025% 0.070%
0.025% 0.070%
0.110% 0.030% 0.112% 0.042%
0.090% 0.030% 0.110% 0.041%
0.100% 0.015% 0.110% 0.042%
0.090% 0.020% 0.110% 0.040%
0.100% 0.020% 0.111% 0.035%
0.098% 0.023% 0.111% 0.040%
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
9
10
8
7
7
8
$25,000,000 $73,097,085
$25,000,000 $73,102,837
$15,000,000 $83,109,517
$15,000,000 $83,114,941
$15,000,000 $83,120,132
$19,000,000 $79,108,902
$98,097,085
$98,102,837
$98,109,517
$98,114,941
$98,120,132
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$98,108,902
$98,097,085
$98,102,837
$98,109,517
$98,114,941
$98,120,132
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$40,878,709
0.030%
0.070%
AVERAGE INTEREST RATE 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)
0.024%
!HVESTMENT 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)
AVERAGE 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 MoneyMarJc::et Treasury Bills Discount Notes Agency Bonds
INVESTMENTS AT COST
Page 2
106
ALAMEDA -CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RETURN ON INVESTMENTS FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS PROCUREMENT/OTHER FUND NOVEMBER 30, 2014
RETURN ON INVESTMENTS Repurchase Agreements Money Market Treasury Bills Discount Notes Bonds Total return on investments
JUL
AUG
$736 4,645
$646 4,242
2013 SEP $288 4,662
YTD
2014
OCT
NOV
$279
$379 4,682
4,837
DEC
JAN
MAR
FEB
APR
MAY
JUN
TOTAL
$2,328 $23,068 $0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
$5381
$4 888
$4950
$5116
$5061
!0
$0
!0
$681 4 700 $5381
$583 4,305 $4888
$429 4521 $4950
$233 4,883 $5116
$354 4,707 $5061
0 $0
0
0
$0
!0
$51,763,009 $28,225,806
$55,350,229 $29,032,258
$35,550,970 $27 ,666 ,667
$36,508.471 $16,935,484
$33,106,757 $17,500,000
$42,455,887 $23,872,043
54.53%
52.45%
77.82%
46.39%
52.86%
56.23%
Interest received Accrued interest
Total return on investments
0 0 $0
0 $0
!0
0 0 $0
0 0 $0
$25 396
0
0
$0
!9
0 $0
$2,280 $23.116 $25 396
0 0
$0 $0
POR!FOLIO INVESTED Average daily portfolio available for investment Average daily portfolio invested % of average dailY portfolio invested
CARRYING VALUE GENERAL FUND PORTFOLIO
FY 14115
.....
Jul 2014 Sop
Oct Nov D
$55,807,524 $55,810,762 $55,814,440 $55,817,430 $55,820,106
FY 13114
Jul 2013 Sop
Oct Nov Doo Jan 2014 Fob
.,,
.,,
J""
J""
Mac
Mac
May
CARRYING VALUE BUS/OTHER PORTFOLIO
May
FY 14115
Jul 2014 A"g Sop
Oct Nov Doc Jan 2015 Fob
.,,
Mac
May Jun
$45,496,647 $46,135,214 $46,136,641 $47,548,538 $47,550,347 $47,552,300 $50,167,447 $50,168,951 $50,171,126 $50,171,978 $50,177,068 $70,805,756
.....
$42,289,561 $42,292,075 $42,295,077 $42 ,297 ,511 $42,300,026
FY 12/13
.....
Jul 2012
Sop
Oct Nov Doc Jan 2013 Fob
.,,
Mac M'Y
J""
FY 13114
Jul 2013
.....
$73,128,770 $72,495,973 $72,500,284 $71,093,538 $63,356,709 $63,360,651 $60,749,907 $60,753,670 $62,905,320 $62,908,820 $62,909,030 $42,286,280
Sop
Oct Nov Doc Jan 2014 Fob
.,,
Mac M'Y Jun
Page3
107
$42,603,947 $42 ,607' 123 $42,610,779 $42,931,605 $42,935,324 $42,939,037 $42,940,095 $43,416,351 $45,493,510 $44,777,188 $45,220,228 $45,493,510
FY 11/12
.....
Jul 2011
Sop
Oct Nov Doc Jan 2012 Fob
.,,
Mac M'Y
FY 12/13
.....
Jul2012
Sop
Oct Nov D
.,,
Mac May J"n
$34,705,371 $34,707,265 $34,709,158 $49,291,355 $49,293,816 $49,296,513 $49,299,100 $50,975,655 $48,916,111 $49,623,413 $49,184,941 $48,916,111
$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 FY 11/12
.....
Jul2011
Sop
Oct Nov Doc Jan 2012 Fob
.,,
Mac May J"n
$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 $34,703,831
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT DETAIL OF PORTFOLIO FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS PROCUREMENT/OTHER FUND NOVEMBER 30, 2014 Purchased
Settlement Date
From
TYPE
Maturity Date
Days to
Purchased
Maturity
Maturity
Rate%
Rate%
MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS Wells Fargo Local Banks
0.070%
REPO'S
Bank of America
Fair Value
Par Value
39,063,563.46 1,756,543.00
39,063,563.46
1,756,543.00
39,063,563.46 1,756,543.00
0.248%
0.070% 0.425% 0.248%
40,820,106.46
40,820,106.46
40,820,106.46
0.030%
0.030%
15,000,000.00
15,000,000.00
15,000,000.00
TOTAL DISCOUNT NOTES
0.00
0.00
0.00
TOTAL BONDS
0.00
0.00
0.00
55,820.106.46
55,820,106.46
55,820,106.46
0.425% TOTAL MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS
TREASURY BILLS:
Carrying Value
TOTAL REPO
11/25114
7
12102/14
TOTAL TREASURY BILLS
AGENCY DISC NOTES:
AGENCY BONDS:
IPORTFOliO - GENERAL FUND MONEY MARKET:
Wells Fargo MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS
CalCES Bus Procurement
0.070% 0.070%
0.070% 0.070%
0.070%
0.070%
TREASURY BILLS:
2,149,344.17
2,149,344.17
40,150,681.75 0.00
40,150,681.75 0.00
2,149,344.17 40,150,681.75 0.00
42,300,025.92
42,300.025.92
42,300,025.92
98,120,132.38
98,120,132.38
98,120,132.38
AGENCY DISC NOTES:
AGENCY BONDS:
IPORTFOLIO - OTHER {CaiEma/Bus Procurement) jTOTAL PORTFOLIO
GENERAL FUND
COMPOSITION OF PORTFOLIO : Money Market
73.13% 26.87% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00%
Repurchase Agreements Treasury Bills Discount Notes Bonds
Page4 108
OTHER (calCES/Bus Procurement) 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00%
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS FOR THE MONTH ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 2014
SETTLEMENT DATE
MATURITY DATE
DAILY "REPO" INVESTMENT$
CURRENT # INTEREST OF DAYS RATE
INTEREST EARNED
INTEREST RECEIVED
CASH RECEIPT
AIR ACTIVITY
NET ACTIVITY
AVERAGE INVESTMENT AMT. INV • #OF DAYS/ DAYS IN MONTH:
30
BANK OF AMERICA
10/28/14 11/04/14 11/12/14 11118/14 11/25114 TOTAL
11/04/14 11/12/14 11/18/14 11/25/14 12/02/14
$15.000,000.00 $15,000,000.00 $15,000,000.00 $15,000,000.00 $15,000,000.00
7 8 6 7 7
0.0300% 0.0300% 0.0200% 0.0400% 0.0300%
37.50 100.00 50.00 116.67 75.00
87.50 100.00 50.00 116.67 0.00
15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00
-50.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.50
-15,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15,000,000.00
3,500,000.00 4,000,000.00 3,000,000.00 3,500,000.00 3,500,000.00
7
0.0300%
$379.17
$354.17
$75,000,000.00
-$37.50
$0.00
$17,500,000.00
28
416.67
4 7.0000
PageS 109
0.00.
ALAMEDA· CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT GENERAL FUND GOVERNMENT SECURITIES SUMMARY FOR THE MONTH ENDED
NOVEMBER 30, 2014
Treasu
Bills Held at Month End:
TOTAL TREASURY BILLS
0.00
0.00
0.00
o.oo
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
o.oo
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
o.oo
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
Discount Notes Matured:
Dlsc:ount Notes Held at Month End:
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
0.00
Government Securities 90 days and less
0.00
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 Securities- Aged
000 0.00
0.00 000
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
Variance
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
PageS
110
0.00
Report No: Meeting Date:
15-038 January 28, 2015
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Equipment Disposal
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider approval to dispose of retired buses through sale, or by means most advantageous to the District. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The buses identified herein have surpassed their useful equipment life expectancy for the District's needs. Rehabilitation or repair costs for the vehicles outweigh their net book value and are recommended for disposal in accordance with methods outlined in Board Policy 356. Concessions to the applicable Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding source are not required from the District on fully depreciated equipment. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: It is anticipated that, depending on what method the District selects to dispose of the buses, this should result in a reimbursement of $650 to $3,500 per vehicle, based on the fair market value at time of sale.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: The FTA requires that transit agencies operate transit buses funded by that agency for a period of 12 years or 500,000 miles to fulfill all financial obligations. The sale of the buses in the following disposition list is expected to result in proceeds of approximately $650 to $3,500 per bus depending on the condition of the equipment. Fair market value is calculated on the basis of straight-line depreciation, which is an acceptable method of depreciation under FTA Circular 5010.1D, Chapter IV, "Grant Management Requirements."
111
Report No. 15-038 Page 2 of 2
Disposition List ID
Equipment Number
Year
Description
Asset Tag
Mileage
Acquisition
Cost
Funding Source
2015
42901
2003
Bus: Van Hool, 60'
42901
397,141
$459,454
District Capital
1038
42850
2003
Bus: Van Hool, 40'
42850
470,785
$283,894
District Capital
4067
42670
2002
Bus: NAB I, 40'
42670
486,794
$269,641
CA·90-X542, CA· 90-X597, CA-90X690, CA-03-0438
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: Advantages: The disposal of this equipment will ensure compliance with the FTA's 20 percent spare ratio requirements and make parking spaces available at the operating division for replacement vehicles. Disadvantages: Failure to dispose of this equipment may result in a violation of the FTA spare ratio requirements and a reduction in the operating area at the divisions. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: The Board can decide not to act; however, this alternative is not recommended as the District will be procuring additional buses to replace vehicles that have surpassed their life cycle. In addition, division operating areas will be impacted, as space will be needed to store retired buses and to accommodate new buses which are anticipated to arrive in Fiscal year 2015-16. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Staff Report 14-027- Equipment Disposal Board Policy 356- Disposition of Surplus Equipment ATTACHMENTS: None
Department Head Approval: Reviewed by:
James D. Pachan, Chief Operating Officer/Interim Chief Financial Officer Denise C. Standridge, General Counsel
Prepared by:
Stuart Hoffman, Technical Service Manager
112
~I
Report No: Meeting Date:
15-040 January 28, 2015
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Application for California Energy Commission Grant for Replacement Fuel Cells
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider authorizing the General Manager or hi s designee to file and execute applications and funding agreements with the California Energy Commission (CEC) for the Medium- and HeavyDuty Advanced Vehicle Technology Demonstration grant program for replacement fuel cells. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Staff is proposing the submittal of applications for up to $2,100,000 in funding from the CEC for a project to acquire up to six replacement fuel cells for retrofit into some of the existing Van Hool hydrogen fuel cell buses. The current fuel cells are approaching or have exceeded their originally predicted maximum operating life of 10,000 hours. While the fuel cells are generally performing well, it is unknown how much longer they will operate and, in turn, how much longer the fleet can be kept running. By acquiring and retrofitting new replacement fuel cells into several of the buses, the District will be able to keep the fleet of buses running for a longer period, and gain valuable experience with a newer generation of fuel cells. The non-retrofitted buses will continue to run the oldest existing fuel cells to determine the limits of their service life and performance. The retrofits will also leave the District with several spares of the older fuel cells. The spare fuel cells will replace older fuel cells as major failures occur in order to continue the operation of the fu el cell fleet. BUDGETARY/FISCALIMPACT: Staff anticipates receiving up to $2,100,000 in funding to retrofit new fuel cells into existing Van Hool fuel cell buses. There is a 35% matching requirement for these fund s, so the matching funds required could be up to $1,130,769 , for a project total of up to $3,230,769. There is currently enough remaining hydrogen program fundin g for ca pital investments to cover the match requirement. ·
113
Report No. 15-040 Page2of3
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: The CEC, under AB 118 (2007, Nuiiez) and AB 8 (2013, Perea), has continuing funding to develop new technology solutions under the Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program. The CEC has released a 'program opportunity notice' to fund up to $25 million in medium- and heavy-duty advanced vehicle technology demonstration projects. Demonstration projects must enhance market acceptance of advanced vehicle technologies that will lead to vehicle production and commercialization, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and reduce petroleum use. Grants are available from $500,000 to $3 million, and include a 35% matching fund requirement. In particular, Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (Cap & Trade) monies may not be used to meet the funding match requirement. Applications are due February 5, 2015. Staff is proposing to apply for funding for up to six replacement fuel cells for the current fleet of Van Hool fuel cell buses. The project will acquire and retrofit the new fuel cells into the existing buses. The purpose of this project will be to extend the useful life of the current fuel cell buses. While the buses and the US Hybrid fuel cells are currently performing well, many of the fuel cells have surpassed their originally predicted maximum 10,000 hour service life, and it is not known when or how they will fail. By retrofitting part of the fleet to run with new fuel cells, the buses (regardless of the type of fuel cell propulsion unit) will be able to remain in service longer, possibly coming near their normal12-year useful life. By replacing some of the existing fuel cells, the District will effectively have two sub-fleets of fuel cell buses based on the fuel cell type. The newer fuel cells, based on more mature technology, should be able to at least match the lifespan of the current fuel cells. The District will also have several spare original fuel cells available as replacement units that can be used to keep the fuel cell bus fleet in operation for a longer period as the older fuel cells begin to fail. This will provide useful data on the longevity of the existing fuel cells, and also allow for comparison of the different fuel cell technologies on the same buses and routes. The specifics of the program make it likely that the District will need to partner with a particular fuel cell manufacturer and/or other partner to effectively plan and compete for the funding. Partner companies or organization(s) have not yet been determined.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: The advantage to applying for this grant program is that, if awarded, the District will have a want funded plan to address the pending need for replacement fuel cells in part of the fuel cell bus fleet. The disadvantage to applying for this grant program will be that if awarded, the District will be required to operate the retrofitted buses for a longer period than is currently planned. The
114
Report No. 15-040 Page 3 of 3 current fuel cells can also significantly outlast their predicted lifespan as a group, making this replacement program premature, although the partial nature of it mitigates that somewhat. ALTERNATIVES ANALVSIS: The alternative to applying for the grant program would be to not apply for funding. In that case, the District will have to either consider an alternative plan for replacement of the current fuel cells or plan to discontinue operation of the fleet as the fuel cells begin to fail. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: There are no prior relevant board actions/policies associated with this report. ATTACHMENTS: There are no attachments for this report. Department Head Approval:
James D. Pachan, Interim Chief Financial Officer
Reviewed by:
Denise C. Standridge, General Counsel Salvador llamas, Director of Maintenance Chris Andrichak, Acting Manager, Capital Planning and Grants
Prepared by:
115
This page intentionally blank
116
Report No: Meeting Date:
15-029 January 28, 2015
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
FY 2014-15 Mid-Year Operating and Capital Budget Review
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider receiving the FY 2014-15 Mid-Year Budget Review and adopt Resolution No. 15-005 amending the FY 2014-15 Annual Operating and Capital Budget. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The mid-year budget for FY 2014-15 shows positive developments. Preliminary indications show that revenues (e.g., Transportation Development Act, AB1107, and property taxes) are higher than budget. Farebox revenues are showing positive trends, with a year-over-year increase in receipts. Staff is also including the expected receipt of proceeds associated with the new Measure BB in late FY 2014-15. Operating expenses for the first 5 months of the fiscal year show continued signs of improved salaries and wages cost management, particularly in the Operation s area. Non-labor costs have been a contributor to the lower than budgeted cost s during th e period. Operations efficiencies continue as an important part of the positive budget outlook for the current fiscal yea r. The FY 2014-15 Mid-Year budget changes reflect positive revisions to revenues totaling $5.9 million, or 1. 7% over the original adopted budget. Th ese additional revenues more than offset projected increases in operating costs of about $1.3 Million or 0.4% of the original adopted budget. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT
The District's general fund budget for FY 2014-15 will show a projected year-end surplus of $6.7 Million as of June 30, 2015.
117
Report No. 15-029 Page 2 of 5 BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: This report presents the operating results for the first five months of FY 2014-15, including early data available for November 2014, as well as the revised recommended budget projected to be executed for the full fiscal year 2014-15. For the period July to November 2014, this Mid-Year Review highlights the following: •
Operating revenues in general trended as expected for the period. Fare box receipts are trending at a slightly lower growth rate than projected in the adopted budget. Key Performance Indicators factors continue to improve, which contributes to gaining and retaining ridership. The only softness was in the receipts of proceeds from Contracts Services, Advertising Services and BART Transfers.
•
Subsidies revenues are showing strong indications of enhanced long-term sustainability for the District. This category overall is performing as expected during the period. Staff anticipates that stronger than expected receipts will be reported for retail taxable sales based subsidies as well as for property tax based subsidies. One notable exception is the rescission in STA funds, caused by a decline in statewide consumption of diesel fuel and a decrease in the average price of diesel fuel.
•
Operating Expenses for the District's General Fund, are under budget by approximately $2.1 Million or 1.5% as of the end of November 2014. Overall, the District's labor costs, which include Wages, Salaries and Fringe Benefits, were at budget for the period due to an evenly divided positive variance of $1.2 Million and Fringe Benefits being over budget by $1.1 Million. Non-labor expenditures are currently below budgeted levels, with . services expenditures $1.4 million under budget. The Fuels and lubricants account, along with the Materials and Supplies account have expenses that are currently over the budgeted levels as a consequence of one-time expense adjustments not associated with the regular period costs, including obsolete inventory write-offs, and diesel fuel charges incurred in June 2014. In conclusion, YTD operating costs continue to trend under budget, with the non-labor cost activity having the largest impact with a positive variance of $1.8 million on an YTD November preliminary basis.
Staff presents the revised recommended budget for the full fiscal year 2014-15. The projected operating results for the general fund after mid-year review show a net increase of $4.6 Million compared to the previously adopted budget, which is due to the new Measure BB projected receipts and projected additional receipts on taxable sales subsidies and property tax subsidies. These increased projected revenues will be partially offset by higher operating expenses, labor costs for 26 new positions that are recommended for service enhancements. The following summarizes the main District budgetary recommended changes and adjustments and projected year-end results, including Staff's recommended budget for FY 2014-15:
118
Report No. 15-029 Page 3 of5
FY 2014-15 Operating Budget Recommended Changes: Revenues: •
Other operating revenues reduced by $0.3 Million due to a reduction in receipts from parking ticket citations.
•
TDA and AB1107 projected increase of approximately $1.3 Million as a consequence of the expected revision of allocations by MTC in their February Fund Estimate. MTC allocation rescission of STA funds of $-1.1 Million, due to a statewide reduction in taxable sales for diesel fuel.
•
Property taxes revenues increase of $0.9 Million, not including any potential new redevelopment funds.
•
Other grants and subsidies increased by $5.0 Million as a consequence of the projected recognition of receipts on the new Measure BB, as well as a small increase in reimbursement for labor costs.
•
Total Fa reb ox revenue during the Jui-Sept 2014 quarter showed growth in ridership over 4 percent for the period. The change in the fare structure last July has resulted in continued ridership growth trends, along with continued revenue growth. With the positive benefits of the new fare structure, staff is not recommending any changes for the Mid-Year budget for Fare box receipts for FY 2014-15.
Expenses: •
Operating Expenses are being adjusted to recognize the need to strengthen the Operations in Maintenance and Inventory Management and support the increase in service that was implemented over the past two years with several capital programs underway, a project manager and contract specialist were added to properly develop, implement, and manage construction contracts. In total, 26 new positions are being added (Attachment 4), with 18 positions being directly tied to service enhancement activities, while the remaining 8 are support positions. Of the 8 support positions, 3 positions do not cause a budgetary fiscal impact this FY1415. Twenty-five positions are represented and only one position is unrepresented. The effect of all these adjustments is an increase in the operating expense budget of $1.3 Million or 0.5% of the original adopted Operating Expense budget.
•
A total of $0.9 million in District Capital funds is being requested for the list of capital projects shown in Attachment 3.
The District's General Fund Operating Budget is based on 1.7 Million Revenue Vehicle Hours, 21.9 Million total miles operated, and 1,947 authorized positions, including grant-funded positions.
119
Report No. 15-029 Page 4 of 5 FY 2014-15 Capital Budget
In early 2014, staff applied for $75.8 million for FY 2015 and $44.2 million in FY 2016 funding through the Metropolitan Transportation Commission Transit Capital Priorities (TCP/Core Capacity programs (CC). The TCP is MTC's process for distributing Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307/5337/5339 Formula and other related capital funds. At the end of 2013, MTC also introduced the Core Capacity program, which is meant to provide additional funding to AC Transit, BART, and SFMTA for vehicle replacements, vehicle expansion, and facilities projects. The Core Capacity program is based on a variety of funding sources Federal, Cap & Trade, local, and a financing component to allow for front-loading the investments. Of the $75.8 million in the District's application for FY 2015, $41.4 million was for facilities and vehicle expansion projects. The MTC was only able to fund $10.2 million under the Core Capacity program. Staff was not informed of the reduced funding amount until October, which required the mid-year adjustments before the Board. The anticipated, but not awarded funding was originally programmed for the CAD/AVL Replacement, OCC Relocation, and Division 3 Rehabilitation projects, so staff reallocated $2.9 million in various funds remaining from recent bus purchases and $7 million in District capital that was originally earmarked as part of the District's capital commitment to Transbay to fund these programs. The proposed adjustments for the Division 3 Rehabilitation from the budget will be reprogrammed in the FY 2016 Capital Budget. Staff also plans to program $21 million in 1-Bond funding in the FY 2016 Capital Budget for Transbay, which will fulfill the majority of the District's capital commitment for Phase 1 of Transbay. The $21 million is the remainder of the District's total allocation in Proposition 1B Public Transit Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement (PTMISEA) revenue-based funds and will be available after State bond sales in early 2015. Staff is recommending the addition of $896,000 in District Capital to fully fund three smaller projects that did not receive the TCP/CC funding requested in FY 2015. As shown in Attachment 3, pending Board approval, the overall Capital Budget will be reduced by $21.0 million. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
This report is being provided to inform the Board of the activities of the last five months, and to provide a projected recommended budget for the remainder of FY 2014-15. This includes, the case of the Capital Budget, the realignment of funding for facilities repairs and vehicle and other equipment replacements. The advantage ofthe recommended changes is that the budget will be aligned more closely to projected revenues and expenses. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
Staff found no practical alternatives to the course of action recommended in this report.
120
Report No. 15-029 Page 5 of 5
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Resolution 14-023 Operating and Capital Budget Adoption, May 28, 2014 Board Policy 312 Budget Policy Department Head Approval:
James D. Pachan, Interim Chief Financial Officer
Reviewed by: Prepared by:
Denise C. Standridge, General Counsel Hernan Vargas, Budget Manager Chris Andrichak, Acting Manager, Capital Planning & Grants
ATTACHMENTS: 1: Resolution No. 15-005 with Exhibit A 2: Mid-Year General Fund Operating and Capital Budget Review FY 2014-15 3: Mid-Year FY 2014-15 Capital Program Budget Changes 4: Recommended Positions to be added at Mid-Year
121
This page intentionally blank
122
SR 15-029 Att.l
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 15-005
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE GENERAL FUND OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014-15 AT MID YEAR FY 2014-15
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors approved the Calendar and Process for the Development of the General Fund Operating and Capital Budgets for FY 2014-15 on November 13,2013;and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors reviewed and established the Budgetary Principles, Budgeting Model, Goals and Objectives and KPis Framework, and Strategic and Fiscal Priorities for the Development of the General Fund Operating and Capital Budgets for FY 2014-15 on Budget meetings held on March 23, 2014, according to the approved Budget Development Calendar and Process; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors approved the FY 2014-15 Operating and Capital Budget per Resolution 14-023 on May 28, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has received and reviewed the General Manager's Recommended Mid Year Budget Revisions for FY 2014-15 General Fund Operating and Capital Budget; and NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District does resolve as follows:
Section 1. Amend the Fiscal Year 2014-15 General Fund Operating and Capital Budget for Fiscal Year 2014-15 Mid Year Revisions as identified on the FY 2014-15 Mid Year Budget Review Summary: a. Total Operating Revenues for the Fiscal Year 2014-15 is revised to $ 350.2 Million as identified on the FY 2014-15 Mid Year Budget Review Summary. b. Total Operating and Non-Operating Expenses for the Fiscal Year 2014-15 is revised to $ 343.5 Million as identified on the FY 2014-15 Mid Year Budget Review Summary. c. Total Capital Program for the Fiscal Year 2014-15 is revised to$ 63.2 Million as identified on the FY 2014-15 Mid Year Budget Review Summary. d. Total Capital Program Contributions for the Fiscal Year 2014-15 is revised to $ 63.2 Million as identified on the FY 2014-15 Mid Year Budget Review Summary. e. Transfer to Unrestricted Net Assets is revised to $ 1.86 Million, as identified on the FY 2014-15 Mid Year Budget Review Summary f. Transfer to Reserves is revised to $ 4.85 Million, as identified on the FY 2014-15 Mid Year Budget Review Summary
Resolution No. 15-005
123
Page 1 of2
Section 2. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage by four affirmative votes of the Board of Directors. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of January 2015.
H. E. Christian Peeples, 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 28th day of January, 2015 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
Approved as to Form and Content:
Denise C. Standridge, Interim General Counsel
Resolution No. 15-005 124
Page2of2
AC TRANSIT DISTRICT Resolution No 15-005 (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS)
F'i< 291:4::1~
::::::::Mii:l~vear.:::
< :a;)it{# <
< 11281:zjltS OPERATING REVENUES & SUBSIDIES:
Farebox
55,650
Other Operating Revenue Total Operating Revenues
13,237 68,887
Sales-Tax based subsidies
138,231
Property-Tax based subsidies
110,083
-
Preventive Maintenance and related Subsidies
ADA Paratransit related operating subsidies
11,395
Other Federal, State and Local grants subs
21,628 281,337
Total Operating Subsidies TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES & SUBSIDIES
J
Total Revenues FY 2014-15 $ 350.2M
350,224
I
OPERATING EXPENSES: Adjusted Labor Costs
240,387
Services Fuel & Lubricants Other Materials & Supplies Utilities & Taxes Casualty & Liability Interest Expense Other ADA and DB purchased transp
23,700 18,314 15,013 6,129 10,000 1,140 2,613 26,211 343,507
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSE OPERATING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT)
6,717
---------------
Total Expenses FY 2013-14 $ 343.5M
I
-
Net Non-Operating Expenses ADJUSTED OPERATING SURPLUSI(DEFICIT)
6,717
CAPITAL PROGRAM District Funded Capital Program Grant Funded Capital Program District Contribution to Capital Program Grants Contribution to Capital Program
11,796
51,397 (11,796) (51,397
-
Total Capital Program, Net of Funding
Total Capital Program FY 2014-15 $ 63.2M
en
:IJ
Total Contributions to
~
Fund Capital Program
"' "'m I
FY 2014-15 $63.2M
0
-··-··-··-··-··-··-··- ·-··-··-··-··-··-·· Transfer From I (To) Unrestricted
REVENUE I EXPENSE ADJUSTMENTS:
(1,864) r-·-- ·-··- ·- Net Assets and Reserves (4,853) r-·-- ·-··- ·- FY 2014-15 $ 6.7M 6,717 ·-··-··- ·-··-··-··-··-··
Transfer From I (To) Unrestricted Net Assets Transfer From I (To) Reserves TOTAL ADJUSTMENTS
-
ADJUSTED SURPLUS I (DEFICIT)
125
·-··-··-··-··-··-
X
-
:!: !!! -l
>
This page intentionally blank
126
SR 15-029 ATT.2
ACTRANSIT Mid-Year Budget Review FV 2014-15 Summary- Recommended Budget, Compariso and Budget Changes January 28, 2015 FY1415 Mid-Year vs Adopted Recom MidAdopted Bdg Mid-Year Budget Year Var Fav I FY 14-2015 Adjustments FY 14-2015 (Unfav)% REVENUES AND SUBSIDIES Operating 1 Total Farebox 1a Contract Services 2 BART Transfers 3 Interest Income
55,650 5,600
0.0% 0.0%
3,600
3,600 70
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% -15.5%
70 1,977 1,940
4 Advertising 5 Other Revenue 6 Rental Income 7 Other Operating Revenues
\8
55,650 5,600
(300)
1,977 1,640
350 .............................. 0.0% 350 .................................. ................................. ................................ 7,937
Total Operating Revenues
69,187
Subsidies 9 Transportation Develop. Act (TDA)
-3.8% -0.4%
61,028
1.5% 1.3%
900 500
9,730 4,475 137,976
(1,145)
8,585 4,475
255
138,231
79,942 29,241 r--io9,183
900
80,842 29,241
900
110,083
12 State Transit Assistance (STA) 13 Measure! 14 Total Sales-Tax based Subsidies
17 Total Property Taxes based Subsidies
7,637 68,887
60,128 37,643 26,000
10AB1107 11 Measure B
15 Property Taxes 16 Measure ANBBNV
(300) (300)
18 ADA Paratransit Fund (inc. fares) 19 Federal Assistance (ADA) 20 ADA Paratransit Vehicles 21 Total ADA related Subsidies 22 Fed Assis - Prev Main!. 23 Capital Funds Exchange 24 Total Prev Main! and related Subs 25 Supplemental Service
0.0% -11.8% 0.0% 0.2% 1.1% 0.0% 0.8%
5,812 4,107
5,812 4,107
0.0%
1,476 11,395
1,476 11,395
0.~~
-
0.0% 0.0%
-
-
-
-
N/A N/A
-
N/A
-
2,225
26 Labor Reimbursement 27 RM2 subsidies, DB local assistance 28 New Measure BB
38,143 26,000
1,800 12,600
-
150
2,225 1,950 12,600
4,853
4,853
-
0.0% 8.3% 0.0% N/A
5,003 6,158
21,628
N~~-1%
\34 Total Subsidies
16,625 275,179
281,337
2.2%
135 Total Revenues and Subsidies
344,366
5,858
350,224
1.7%
32 Lifeline STA JARC, AB664 33 Total Other Federal, State and Local grants s
127
-
1/6/2015 1:36 PM
ACTRANSIT Mid-Year Budget Review FV 2014-15 Summary- Recommended Budget, ComparisCl and Budget Changes January 28, 2015 FY1415 Mid-Year
vs Adopted Adopted Recom MidBdg Budget Var Fav I Mid-Year Year FY 14-2015 Adjustments FY 14-2015 (Unfav)% OPERATING EXPENSES 36 Salary & Wages
115,320
704
116,024
-0.6%
37 Fringe Benefits
86,022
561
86,583
-0.7%
38 Pension Fund
39,780
-
39,780
0.0%
241,122
1,265
242,387
-0.5%
39 Total Labor Costs Labor Contra to Capital
_______(~,QSJg)
39.d Adjusted Total Labor Costs
239,122
N/A - ______ j?,QQ9) ----------------------------1,265 240,387
-0.5%
40 Services
23,700
-
23,700
0.0%
41 Fuel & Lubricants
18,314
-
18,314
0.0%
42 Other Materials & Supplies
15,013
-
15,013
0.0%
6,129
0.0%
10,000
0.0%
1,140
0.0%
-
26,211
0.0%
2,613
0.0%
342,242
1,265
343,507
-0.4%
2,124
4,593
6,717
216.2%
55 District Funded Capital
10,900
896
11,796
8.2%
55.b Grant Funded Capital
73,300
(21 ,903)
51,397
-29.9%
(896)
(11,796)
8.2%
(51 ,397)
-29.9%
44 Utilities & Taxes
6,129
45 Casualty & Liability
10,000
46 Interest Expense 47 ADA Consortium and Other Purchased Transportation
-
1,140 26,211
48 Other
2,613
L50 Total Operating Expenses I 52 Operating Surplus I (Deficit) CAPITAL PROGRAM
56 District Contribution to Capital
(10,900)
56.b Grants Contribution to Capital
(73,300)
I 58
-
Total Capital Expenses, Net
I 59 Total
Expenses
I 60 Surplus I (Deficit)
128
21,903
-
-
N/A
342,242
1,265
343,507
0.4%
2,124
4,593
6,717
216.2%
1/6/2015 1:36PM
SR 15-029 Attachment 3
FY 2015 MID-Y EAR PROPOSED CAPITAL BUDGET CHANGES Federal
Local
Grand Total
Project Description CAD/AVL
3,985,230
Adjustments
OCC Relocation
2,200,000
(2,200,000)
Adjustments
D3 Rehabilitation
822,780
(12,860,000)
Adjustments
D6 Roof Replacement
462,000
462,000
Adjustments
GO Fire Pipe Corrosion Repair
203,000
203,000
Adjustments
TEC Parking Lot Gate
Adjustments
TJPA Capital Contribution
Adjustments
Bus Purchases (remaining funds) TOTAL
District
State
Category Adjustments
(6,843,233)
2,374,828
483,175 (12,037,220)
231,000
231,000
(7,000,000)
(7,000,000)
(8,010) 896,000
129
(21,903,233)
(2,374,828)
(483,175)
(2,866,013)
(0)
0
(21 ,007,233)
FY 2015 MID-YEAR EXISTING CAPITAL BUDGET STATUS Category
tO
Project Name
Approved
Project Manager
Budget
Current Budget
Expended+
%Expended+
Accrued
Accrued
Corridor
2042
Line 51 Corridor TPI
Buller, Wilmer
11 ,125,445
11,125 ,445
10,146,849
91%
Corridor
2054
San Leandro BART Terminal
Callaway, Joe
4,250,026
4,250,026
629,657
15%
Environmental
2028
Hazmat Berms & Awnings
Amiri, Wahid
554,600
554,600
275
0%
Environmental
2091
04-Environmental Cleanup
Amiri, Wahid
200,000
200,000
118,792
59%
Facilities
1655
66th Avenue
Wrzesinski, Richard
59,485
452,502
59,485
Facilities
1808
02 Storm Drains
Callaway, Joe
1,389,035
1,389,035
99,750
7%
Facilities
1856
State of Good Repair Asset Mgm
Broadbent, Patricia
6,166,225
6,166,225
1,045,007
17%
100% Complete
Facilities
2010
Re-Work GO Office Config
Hienzsch , Magnus
100,000
100,000
21,161
21%
Facilities
2011
GO-Fire Code Compliance
Michels, Craig
211,000
234,020
73,423
35%
Facilities
2012
Boardroom Audiovisual Refresh
Hienzsch, Magnus
450,000
450,000
159,615
35%
Facilities
2023
06-Reroof Mack Bldg
Hienzsch, Magnus
1,208,000
548,000
Facilities
2024
06104- Purchase solar PV yr.6
Callaway, Joe
1,509,100
1,509,100
1,509,100
Facilities
2025
06-Pavement Rehabilitation
Michels, Craig
500,000
500,000
76,415
15%
Facilities
2026
02- Replace concrete at Fl
Callaway, Joe
209,000
209,000
559
0%
Facilities
2032
Finance Equip > $1,000
Clinton, Lewis
10,000
10,000
Facilities
2037
Photovoltalc Solar Panels Ph2
Callaway, Joe
3,425,266
3,425,266
3,270,420
Facilities
2044
04 Garage Deck Repair,Phase I
Hienzsch , Magnus
532,000
532,000
50,055
9%
Facilities
2056
02-Trans Bldg Roof RepVEquip
Michels, Craig
655,000
655,000
83,441
13%
Facilities
2058
04-Trans.Bidg./Chiller Replace
Hienzsch, Magnus
3,030,000
1,974,794
29,273
1%
Facilities
2063
SGR GO Projects
Hienzsch, Magnus
169,000
169,000
11 6,135
69%
Facilities
2064
Richmond Parkway TC Rehab
Hass, Michael
3,000,000
766,000
37,258
1%
Facilities
2065
Dist.Wide Pigeon Abatement
Wrzesinski, Richard
140,000
140 ,000
11,106
8%
Facilities
2075
GO-Repi .SmokeDamperEnd Switch
Michels, Craig
40,000
40,000
39,337
98%
Facilities
2077
04,06-New Guard Shack
TBD
Facilities
2079
Emergency Facility Repairs
Michels, Craig
0% 100% Complete
0%
-
95%
55,000
55,000
200,000
200,000
61,200
31%
0%
Facilities
2080
Maintenance Equip Replacement
Llamas, Salvador
120,000
120,000
48,426
40%
Facilities
2082
Contra Costa College TC Rehab
Hass, Michael
825,000
825,000
35,494
4%
Facilities
2089
Bus Washer Rehabs
Callaway, Joe
3,000,000
3,000,000
2,583
0%
Facilities
2090
External Painting of Divisions
Wrzesinski, Richard
700,000
700,000
-
0%
Facilities
2094
Lift & Hoist Replacement
Callaway, Joe
1,500,000
1,500,000
30,813
2%
Facilities
2095
03 Rehabilitation
Hass, Michael
18,000,000
4,640,000
546,274
3%
Facilities
2096
OCC Relocation
Michels, Craig
3,000,000
810,000
412,234
14%
Facilities
10011 District-wide Elevator Modem.
Michels, Craig
2,865,050
2,865,050
2,787,550
97%
Facilities
10016 D21D6-Study Parking Structures
Callaway, Joe
Facilities
10033 District-Wide Weatherproofing
Hienzsch, Magnus
Facilities
10036 GO Weatherization
IS/IT
1829
Internal Text Messaging Signs
IS/IT
1836
PeopleSoft Server Migration
Callaway, Joe
Status
76,000
76,000
74,828
98%
128,555
128,555
128,555
100%
Hienzsch, Magnus
5,155,567
5,155,567
543, 165
11%
Amiri, Wahid
1,700,000
1,501,246
1,288,817
76%
389,574
249,574
249,574
64% Complete 99% Complete
IS/IT
1857
Disaster Plan-ITS Systems
Carvalho, Michael
IS/IT
1861
Real Time Bus/Communications
Lewis-Williams, Sandra
IS/IT
2029
IS-Claims System
Krishnan, Sal
458,630
454,871
454,871
39,008,751
22,851,292
2,124,232
5%
143,000
143,000
44,540
31 %
IS/IT
2030
Automatic Passenger Counters
Der, Howard
133,500
125,164
125,164
IS/IT
2033
NextBus Replacement
Newhouse, Stephen
120,000
120,000
83,874
70%
IS/IT
2047
IS-Unity upgrade to 8.x
Lair, Sharon
60.000
30,850
30 ,850
51% Complete
IS/IT
2081
IS-Equipme nt Replacement
Carvalho, Michael
185,000
185,000
106,524
130
94% Complete
58%
FY 2015 MID-YEAR EXISTING CAPITAL BUDGET STATUS Category
ID
Project Name
Approved
Project Manager
Budget
Current Budget
Expended+
%Expended+
Accrued
Accrued
-
Status
IS/IT
2105
IS-EMC SAN Replacement
Carvalho, Michael
750,000
750,000
IS/IT
2106
IS-Upgrade PSoft Version 9.2
Krishnan, Sal
970,000
970,000
IS/IT
10019 Hastus Integrated Operations
Broadbent, Patricia
3,515,000
3,515,000
2,590,678
74%
Marketing
2055
Wake, Victoria
2,036,232
2,036,232
962,640
47%
Marketing
2109
Mobility Marketing through 211
Wake, Victoria
300,000
300,000
Other
1366
Richmond Parkway Transit Ctr
Landau, Nathan
650,000
607,393
607,393
93% Complete
2078
Major Corridor Study
Cunradi, James
Other Other
Spectrum Ridership Growth
Various T JPA Capital Contribution
Andrichak, Chris
0% 0%
0%
460,000
460,000
443,951
97%
21,143,687
21,143,687
9,846,911
47%
134,000
134,000
211
0%
31,250
31,250
-
0%
Safety
2049
Relocate Guard Desk Phase 1
Hienzsch, Magnus
Safety
2059
D2/0CC Fire Suppression System
Amiri, Wahid
Safety
2061
GO-Elevator card access Camera
Michels, Craig
100,000
100,000
Safety
2072
GO Rpl Garage/Parking Gates
Michels, Craig
64,750
64,750
21,621
Safety
2073
GO, Replace 'Total Doors'
Hienzsch, Magnus
68,644
68,644
2,392
3%
Safety
2104
A utomated Extnl Defibrillator
Amiri, Wahid
120,000
120,000
-
0%
0% 33%
100% Complete
Safety
10009 GO-Replace Fire Alarm Panel
Michels, Craig
Vehicles
2016
Llamas, Salvador
Vehicles
2017
23 x 60' Artie Buses
Hoffman, Stuart
18,811,548
18,81 1,549
18,778,285
Vehicles
2018
65 x 40' Urban Buses
Hoffman, Stuart
29,563,727
29,563,728
29,192,670
99% Complete
Vehicles
2019
16 x 40' Transbay Buses
Hoffman, Stuart
7,602,920
7,602,921
7,595,569
100% Complete 100% Complete
SGR Bus Campaign Repairs
880,000
880,000
878,947
1,037,500
1,037,500
395
0% 100% Complete
Vehicles
2021
38 x 40' Transbay Buses
Hoffman, Stuart
18,316,477
18,316,477
18,240,993
Vehicles
2034
Replace Non-Revenue Vehicles
Hoffman, Stuart
300,000
300,000
283,585
11,800,000
11 ,959,684
11,751 ,874
100%
1,68 5,802
1,685,803
1,685,803
100%
Vehicles
2040
Replace Fareboxes
Lewis-Williams, Sandra
Vehicles
2050
30' VH Exhaust System Install
Hoffman, Stuart
Vehicles
2060
MCI Exhaust System Install
Hoffman, Stuart
55,000
55,000
Vehicles
2066
(68) 40-ft Urban Buses
Hoffman, Stuart
3 1,436,761
31,914,655
31,164,865
-
95%
0% 99%
Vehicles
2068
(27) 60-ft Hybrid Arti e (BRT)
Hoffman, Stuart
25,006,405
25,006,405
Vehicles
2098
Cut-Away 24' Buses
Hoffman, Stuart
1,192,632
1,192,632
Vehicles
2108
15 x 40' Expansion Buses
Hoffman, Stuart
6,900,000
1,623,000
Vehicles
21 12
65 x 40' Urban Buses
Hoffman, Stuart
37,071,720
7,958,000
Vehicles
2113
16 X 40' Dumbarton Buses
Hoffman, Stuart
10,041,581
10,041,581
7,838,939
78%
ZEBA
1701
Oakland Hydrogen Fueling Facil
Callaway, Joe
13,685,467
13,756,099
10,832,434
79%
ZEBA
1703
Fuel Cell Bus O&M
Callaway, Joe
2,202,696
1,993,486
1,190,000
54%
ZEBA
1704
Marketing and Outreach - ZEBA
Llamas, Salvador
482,495
447,262
361,165
75%
ZEBA
2027
D2-Hydrogen Maintenance Bay
Callaway, Joe Subtotal
Corridor
1,190,325
-
-
0% 0%
732,402
858,477
108,533
15%
365,905,504
296,441,398
182,326,858
50%
8,635,708
8,635,708
8,635,708
Corridor
2001
BRT Right Of Way/TPA
3,19g,485
3,199,485
3,135,400
Corridor
2002
BRT Preliminary Engineering
5,275,052
5,275,052
5,275,052
Various BRT Project Development
0% 100%
100% Complete 98% 100% Complete
Corridor
2003
BRT Final Design, Plans & Spec
15,938,326
15,938,326
15,979,233
100%
Corridor
2004
BRT Construction
98,846,601
30,213,297
11,510,682
12%
Corridor
2005
BRT Vehicles & Equipment
2,580,000
2,580,000
Corridor
2006
BRT Proj MgVConstr Mgt
43,511,000
19,156,321
11 ,035,259
25%
BRT Subtotal
177,986,1 72
84,998,189
55,571,335
31%
Total
543,891,677
381,439,587
237,898,192
44%
131
-
0%
This page intentionally blank
132
ACTRANSIT Mid-Year Budget Review FY 2014-15 FY14/15 Mid-Year Position Requests
Total Labor Cost, half
# of positions
year FY1415 Jan-Jun
Union
2015
Journey Mechanic
Capital Projects I Planning External Affairs
ATU
335,353.20 167,676.60 184,260.00 59,262.00 149,850.00
Parts Clerks
Senior Project Manager
1
UN REP
$
87,269.56
Senior Administrative Assistant
1
AFSCME
$
50,070.13
External Affairs Representative
1
AFSCME
$
70,474.88
Marketing Adminis.trator
1
AFSCME
$
71,351.45
Senior Peoplesoft Engineers(*)
3
AFSCME
Computer Operations Administrator
1
AFSCME
Total District
26
Service Employee Finance
$ $ $ $ $
6 3 5 1 3
Operations Senior Body Mechanic
Contract Specialist
ATU ATU ATU AFSCME
Information
Services
Note(''):
-
$ $ $
89,891.99 1,265,459.80
No budgetary impact in FY1415 due to end of contract of 3 contractors budgeted in professional services ~
"' I 0
1\)
> -1 -1
:..
Page 1
SR 15-029 Att.4
133
1/8/2015 10:40 AM
Report No: Meeting Date:
15-033 January 28, 2015
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Proposed FY 2015-16 Budgeting Framework
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider receiving an overview on Staff's proposed FY 2015-16 budgeting framework EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Board adopted a budget development calendar on November 12, 2014. Staff is now proposing the next steps in the development process. The FY 2015-16 Operating and Capital Budgets will be guided by prioritized goals and objectives, key performance indicators, and major program targets. These strategies are derived from the development of the Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP), which is the District's long-term vision for service, equipment, and facility priorities. Over the next weeks and months, staff will work with all department managers and employees to generate systemic commitment and engagement in the definition of departmental goals, key performance indicators, and specific targets to be achieved during the budget period. These elements will be presented to the Board as the budget cycle progresses. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT There is no budgetary/fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: This staff report provides the Board with an update on the process for development of the FY 2015-16 Operating and Capital Budgets. The Board adopted a budget development calendar on November 12, 2014. As presented in the calendar, the Board is receiving for consideration of adoption a Mid-Year budget for both Operating and Capital activity for the current FY 2014-15 on January 28, 2015. The mid-year budget discussion represents a baseline for the current state
134
Report No. 15-033 Page 2 of 2 of operating performance versus operating costs, and the evolution of revenue trends. Staff is now proposing the next steps in the development process.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: This report does not recommend a course of action with notable advantages or disadvantages.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: This report is being provided to inform the Board of the activities associated with the development of the FY 2015-16 Operating and Capital Budgets.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: SR 14-283 Budget Development Process and Calendar, November 2014
ATTACHMENTS: 1: Overview of Proposed Budgeting Framework Department Head Approval:
James D. Pachan, Interim Chief Financial Officer
Reviewed by: Prepared by:
Denise C. Standridge, Interim General Counsel Hernan Vargas, Budget Manager
135
FY 2015-16 Budget Development Process – An Overview of the Proposed Budgeting Framework Staff Report 15-033 Attachment 1
Presented by Jim Pachan, Interim Chief Financial Officer, and Hernan Vargas, Budget Manager AC Transit Finance Department January 28, 2015
136
Agenda Introduction Overview of the Proposed Budgeting Framework Refresher: the Framework for the SRTP Process The Proposed FY 2015-16 Budgeting Framework: Steps One Example Conclusions and Q & A 137
Introduction •
Budget Board Policy 312 mandates District Staff to produce a budget based on long-term and short-term Goals, Objectives, KPIs and targets linking the SRTP’s strategies with the current year operating and capital budgets
•
The budget developed plan accomplishes this mandate in compliance with GFOA recommendations
•
The following is an overview of the proposed budgeting, planning and budgetary control processes for FY2016
138
Overview: the proposed performance-based budget development process framework
SRTP Review
-Verify Key Long term assumptions and status of long-term critical programs
Set Strategic Priorities For new FY
-Define focus area at the Districtlevel
Review Set specific Goals, Department Objectives Objectives KPIs KPIs Targets Targets For new FY -Specify focus Goal(s) according to strategic priority
-Roll down to department level with a focus on interdepartm ental collaboration and common purpose
139 evaluation Note: Process assumes implementation of individual performance
Develop Proposed Budget
-Work on planning activities and resources (details in next slide)
Finalize Recommend Budget
-Define a final Recommended Budget repeating previous steps
Refresher: The Framework for the SRTP Process
Board Policies MTC
Performance Management – SMART Goals
FY 2015-16 / FY 2025-26 AC Transit SRTP
COA, BRT, CBTP, RTCI, TSP FY 2014-15 Operating Budget FY 2014-15 Capital Plan
140
FTA AC Transit FY 2015-16 Operating and Capital Budget
The FY 2015-16 Proposed Budgeting Framework: Steps
1.- Define the strategic priorities for the FY 2015-16 year
2.- Pick the Goals that will guide us based on the strategic priorities for the FY 2015-16 year
3.- Pick the Objectives for each of those Goals selected for the FY 2015-16 year, and define one KPI and one Target for the year for each
4.- Create programs, projects or initiatives that cross departmental boundaries to achieve set targets for the FY 2015-16, and assign a budget for those
Performance Budgeting
141
One example A totally made up example First Step – Define Strategic Priorities Increase ridership by a level enough to increase Farebox Recovery Ratio by 1 percentage point, at least, by the end of FY 2015-16, OR Increase total service available by new Enhanced Service strategy, improving OTP by 3 percentage points and reducing total service costs per hour by 1 percent by the end of FY 2015-16 Second Step – Pick Goals Goal 1: Provide quality and reliable service, OR Goal 2: Implement and maintain a strong safety culture, OR Goal 3: Utilize financial resources effectively and efficiently
142
Conclusions The suggested Process, based on Best Practices, can assist the District to: Design cross-departmental programs or initiatives that contribute to achieving results with limited resources Fosters collaboration and systemic unified planning and implementation – so everyone can win Picking priorities for action is based on hard data Helps discover positive feedback loops or interactions between many Objectives and Goals
143
Q&A Thanks for your attention! Open for all Questions
144
Report No: Meeting Date:
15-020 January 28, 2015
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Amendments to Board Policy 312- Budget Policy
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider approving proposed amendments to Board Policy 312 related to budget development and control. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The District initiated the implementation of a business model based on performance management in 2012, and staff initiated changes to a series of related financial policies to facilitate adherence to the business model. Staff has also been implementing the recommendations suggested by the consultants from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) from a report on the District's financial processes and procedures dated April2014. Board Policy 312 is the backbone of the budgeting and control process at the District. The proposed changes to this policy will guide the synchronization of all related internal control policies and procedures for strategic planning, financial planning, budgetary control and reporting under the scope of an integrated performance management business model. The proposed changes will also assure adherence to GFOA Best Practices for budget development and control processes, and will cause an improvement in the effectiveness and efficiency in conducting and executing such processes. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT
There is no budgetary/fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
The District initiated the implementation of a business model based on performance management in 2012. As a consequence of that change, Staff started the change of a series of related financial policies to facilitate adherence to the business model. In parallel, Staff has continued the implementation of the modernization of the financial control infrastructure used to record and report financial activities, including budgetary processes. As part of that continuous improvement process, Staff has initiated the project plan established to implement the recommendation s suggested by the con sultants from the Government Finance Officers 145
Report No. 15-020 Page 2 of 2 Association (GFOA) in a report on the District's financial processes and procedures, in particular the processes associated with budget development and control, dated April 2014. The recommendations from the GFOA report included the need to foster synchronization and integration of modern and best practices in budget development and financial control between all the District's financial policies. Board Policy 312 sets the basic underlying preparation and control foundation for all other related policies. The main objectives behind the policy revision include: • • • •
Assure consistency in the reference to periodic reviews subject to reporting (particularly for approval) to the Board. Provide controls to resolve, in a fiduciary and fiscally responsible manner, adjustments to the operating and capital budget. Standardize the assignment of responsibilities associated with tasks regarding budgetary approval and control. Clarify and fine tune recording, reporting, and approval procedures for the efficient processing of budgetary considerations for capital projects.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: The proposed changes to the policy will guide the synchronization of all internal control policies and procedures for strategic planning, financial planning, budgetary control and reporting under the scope of an integrated performance management business model. The proposed changes will also assure adherence to GFOA Best Practices for budget development and control processes, and will cause an improvement in the effectiveness and efficiency in conducting and executing such processes. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: Staff found no practical alternatives to the course of action recommended in this report. While the District can continue operating with the existing policies and administrative regulations, doing so will be out of conformance with recommended best practice and will hinder the effectiveness and efficiency of financial operations. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: SR 12-227 Budget Policy 312 Board adoption of amendments, October 2012 SR 13-057 Capital Projects Policy 316 Board adoption of amendments, March 2013 ATTACHMENTS: 1: Board Policy 312 Department Head Approval: Reviewed by: Prepared by:
James D. Pachan, Interim Chief Financial Officer Denise C. Standridge, General Counsel Hernan Vargas, Budget Manager
146
SA 15-020 ATT.l
AC Transit
Policy No. 312
BOARD POLICY Category: FINANCIAL MATTERS
BUDGET POLICY
1.
The District's fiscal year is July 1 to June 30.
2.
The General Manager shall prepare and submit to the Board of Directors a proposed District Budget for the following fiscal year(s) by May 15, of each year. The District Budget shall be prepared concurrently to the pursuit of the District's Annual Fiscal Year(s) Goals, Objectives and Performance Metric targets to be achieved during the period, in alignment with the District's Long Term Strategic Planning Goals and Objectives, included in the Short Range Transit Plan, which are subject to revision and approval by the Board. The District Budget reflects all activities reported under the Enterprise Fund, including not only activities funded by unrestricted general funds, but also activities funded by restricted funds. The activities include all operating as well as capital programs reported under the Enterprise Fund structure. It is desirable that the proposed budget documents include charts illustrating five-year trends for revenue versus expenditures, ridership, cost per passenger, number and character of employees, wages and salaries, and benefit costs.
3.
The Board of Directors shall adopt a resolution by June 30 of each fiscal year approving a balanced District Budget for the following fiscal year, and including the revision and approval of the corresponding Fiscal Year(s) Goals, Objectives and Performance Metric targets. A balanced budget exists when Total Revenue is greater than or equal to Total Expenditures. Total Revenue shall include all revenues and subsidies reported in the Enterprise Fund, consisting of revenues and subsidies allocated to fund operating and/or capital programs. Total Expenditures shall include all operating expenses and investments in fixed assets as reported in the Enterprise Fund that are required to perform operating and/or capital programs. Total Expenditures would also include the Net Transfer from Reserves or Unrestricted Net Assets amount necessary to bring Total Expenditures at the level of Total Revenues. Any increase in expenditures or decrease in revenues that would cause a budget to become imbalanced and would require a budget revision is subject to Board approval. Any year-end surplus will be used to maintain reserve levels with the balance available for capital projects and/or one-timeonly expenditures.
4.
The Board of Directors will adopt a one year balanced budget by June 30 for the next fiscal year.
5.
In the event that the Board of Directors does not adopt the District Budget by June 30, the Board of Directors may adopt a continuing appropriations resolution until such time Adopted: Amended:
Page 1 of 3
147
04/92 06/94:05/99·09/00:08/04:06/05:09/06: 10/10: 10/12
as the District Budget is adopted. A continuing appropriations resolution would provide that payments for services performed on behalf of the District and authorization to award contracts would continue until such time as a District Budget is adopted. 6.
The District Budget shall control disbursements of the agency in accordance with adopted policies, Transit District Law, Mission Statement, and Goals, Objectives, Performance Metric targets and other relevant measures and methods that assure the Financial, Environmental and Social Sustainability of the District's operations .
7.
The District Budget shall include all operating, capital and the interest expense component of debt service requirements of the District for the following fiscal year. The District Budget shall also include the District's contribution to the AC Transit Retirement Plan as provided in Board Policy No. 310.
8.
The District Budget shall include an analysis of the assumptions underlying revenue and expense projections, the number and job classification of authorized positions by department and the platform and revenue hours and miles upon which the District Budget is based. Any change in authorized FTE or platform and revenue_hours or miles during the fiscal year shall require prior approval by the General Manager.
9.
The General Manager shall submit revised revenue and expenditure projections to the Board of Directors , on a bimonthly basis quarterly unless there are changes in those projections that significantly impact the financial status of the District in which case, the Board of Directors will be informed at the next Regular or Special Meeting of the Board. The report The report shall include a quarterly comparison of year-to-date actual expenditure and revenue generations to the adopted budget and quarterly revisions, as well as a report on the progress towards achievement of the District's Goal, Objectives and Performance Metric targets for the period. The Board of Directors shall approve an amended appropriations resolution at the Mid-Year review period, or Quarterly if necessary, quarterly when necessary to authorize the receipt and expenditure of funds unanticipated in the District Budget approved as of June 30- , and the reallocation of funds necessary for the operation of the District.
10.
The Board of Directors shall approve a Budget calendar no later than November 30, which will include tentative dates for Board Workshop(s), public review and Board approval. In addition, the Budget calendar shall include tentative dates for review and approval by the Board of Directors of the Short Range Transit Plan , in the periods when the Short Range Transit Plan is subject to revision. and for submission of applications for inter governmental grants and subsidies.
11 .
The final printed budget document including the contents and resolution for the Adopted Budget for public distribution will be issued within 120 days from the beginning of the fiscal year.no later than by December 1 after the completion of the District's annual financial audit.
12.
The final budgetary quarterly review of any given fiscal year resulting in a budget amendment will occur as part of the Mid-Year Budget Review process after the accounting close of December. The Mid-Year budgetary review will be executed at Third Quarter. Budgetary transfers that result in no net change in the total Enterprise Budget, which includes Operating and capital Budgets, are allowed, as long as they are
Page 2 of 3
Adopted: Amended: 148
04/92 06/94;05/99;09/00:08/04:06/05:09/06; 10/10: 10/1 2
approved by the General Manager and the CFOoccurs at third quarter, usually before mid June. All encumbrances requested and other adjustments that transfer or commit budgets from one fiscal year to the next have to be approved by the Board oo-as part of the final Mid-Year Reviewthis quarterly review. All capital projects and programs started need to be assessed for their stage of development and progress, and necessary All encumbrances into the following fiscal year have to be approved by the Board. operating and capital unexpended and unencumbered appropriations lapse at the end of the fiscal year. 13.
Budgetary control is maintained at the departmental level for each operating department and at the project level for each capital project. Any expenditure in excess of the approved Department Budget or approved Capital Project Budget shall require prior approval by the General Manager. Any expenditure in excess of the authorized total District budget shall require prior approval by the Board of Directors and reported to the Board in the Bimonthly Quarterly Review reports. Budgetary transfers that result in no net change in the total Enterprise Budget, which includes Operating and Capital Budgets, require approval when approved by the General Manager and the Chief Financial Officer. The General Manager shall establish procedures to ensure that proper controls are implemented for all District expenditures.
14.
The General Manager is authorized to exceed the budgetary control limitations noted in Paragraph 1 2~ by $500,000 for expenditures, which, due to an unforeseen combination of circumstances calls for immediate action with inadequate time for prior Board approval. Immediate action is taken to avert or alleviate damage to property, to protect the health, safety and welfare of the community and District's employees, to acquire additional equipment and resources needed to implement service changes that are part of a larger service plan expa n siaA-previo~:~sly-approved by the Board, or to repair or restore damaged or destroyed property of the District. Such action is deemed to ensure that the facilities of the District are available to serve the transportation needs of the general public. - The General Manager shall submit to the Board of Directors for confirmation, within 30 days of the emergency, a report explaining the necessity for the action, a listing of expenditures made under these emergency powers and any recommended future actions.
Page 3 of 3
Adopted: Amended: 149
04/92 06/94;05/99; 09/00;08/04:06/05: 09/06: 10/10: 10/12
This page intentionally blank
150
Report No: Meeting Date:
15-021 January 28, 2015
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Fare Utilization Trends and Fare Policy Implementation Results
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider receiving a report on fare utilization trends and financial results associated with the implementation of the new fare policy on July 1, 2014. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The District implemented a new fare policy and pricing changes on July 1, 2014, which included an introduction of a day pass, elimination of transfers, provisi on of a five percent discount for Clipper cash prices, and a reduction in the price of the Adult 31-Day Pass from $80 to $75. The single-ride cash fares (both local and Transbay), and Senior/Disabled/Youth passes did not change. Further, with this action, the Board deferred a scheduled fare increase. The last fare increase was August 2011. During the five month period since the fare change took effect, a significa nt portion of revenues has shifted from the purchase of Single Ride ticket s to Day Passes. The riders who had form erly purchased transfers began to transition to the purchase of day passes rather th an paying the full single ride fares for each boarding. Following the fare policy changes, total revenue has continued to grow from $53.0 million in FY2013-14 to a projected $54.7 million in FY2014-15, which provides evidence that passengers have become familiar with and successfully transitioned to the new day passes.
BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: This briefing item does not have an associated fi scal impact. However, the new fare policy has had a positive impact on the budget. The District accomplished a reduction in the price of the Adult 31-Day Pass, introduction of a day pass, and elimination of transfers whil e increasing revenues from $53.0 million in FY2013-14 to a projected $54.7 million in FY2014-15. BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: The District implemented a new fare policy and pricing changes on July 1, 2014. The changes to loca l f ares included introducing a day pass, eliminating tran sfers, providing a five percent discount for Clipper cash prices, and reducing the price of the Adult 31-Day Pass from $80 to 151
Report No. 15-021 Page 2 of 6 $75. The single-ride cash fares (both local and Transbay), and Senior/Disabled/Youth passes did not change. The District deferred the fare increase scheduled on July 1, 2013, and has not had a fare increase since August 2011. The fare utilization trends and financial results provided in this report only reflect the revenues received during the District's regularly scheduled service, excluding ParaTransit fares, Easy Pass, and contract services.
Elimination of Transfers During the five month period since the fare change took effect, a significant portion of revenues has shifted from the purchase of Single Ride tickets to Day Passes. The revenue from Single Rides decreased from $41.7 million to $32.6 million during this period, which is a decrease of $9.1 million or close to 22 percent. The riders who had formerly purchased transfers began to transition to the purchase of day passes rather than paying the full single ride fares for each boarding. Total revenue has continued to grow following the elimination of transfers from $53.0 million in FY2013-14 to a projected $54.7 million in FY2014-15, which provides evidence that passengers have become familiar with the new day passes and have made the transition from transfers to the day pass. In the table below, FY2014-15 revenue is annualized and the Day Pass revenues are listed as a separate category rather than being included in the Multi-Ride category to allow for comparison with prior fiscal years. FY15 Fare box Revenue (annualized) Comoarison with FY14 Fare
Category
I
Fare Type
FY15 July-Nov
Current Fares On Clipper
FY15
FY14
Annualized
Revenue
Change
Cash
§i[!gle Ride:
Adult - Local Adult- Transbay Youth/Senior/Disabled- Local Youth/Senior/Disabled - Transbay
2.00 4.20 1.00 2.10
2.10 4.20 1.05 2.10
9,287,903 1,866,349 2,350,868 57,722
75.00 151.20 20.00 20.00 Eliminated Eliminated 5.00 5.00 2.50 2.50
1,851,913 884,420 1,061,758 855,288 0 3,208.180 1,386,608
22,290,967 28,312,933 4.479,238 4,517,433 5,642,082 8,736,851 138,533 139,714
-6,021,966 -38,195 -3,094,769 -1 '182
Multi-Ride:
Adult Local 31-Day Pass Adult- Transbay 31-Day Pass Senior/Disabled Monthly Pass
Youth 31-Day Pass Transfers: Transfers- Local* Day Pass: Local Adult Day Pass Youth/Senior/Disabled- Local
75.00 151.20 20.00 20.00
Total from all fare categories % change owr FY14 Revenue
22,811,008
4,444,591 2,122,608 2,548,219 2,052,691 0 7,699,632 3,327,858
4,023,360 2,058,979 2,335,528 2,362,653 497,038 0 0
421,231 63,629 212,691 -309,962 -497,038 7,699,632 3,327,858
54,746,419 52,984,489
1,761,930 3.33%
Note: *Transfers for FY14 are estimated based on various statlscal reports.
Day Pass Implementation The District attempted to improve the efficiency and convenience of AC Transit's fare payment system by eliminating transfers and implementing a Day Pass. The Day Pass was also intended to improve mobility of transit-reliant passengers by allowing an unlimited number of rides (transfers) for a single price and eliminating the uncertainty associated with the transfers' two152
Report No. 15-021 Page 3 of 6 hour wi ndow. The Adu lt Day Pass is priced at $5.00 and Youth/Sen ior/Disabled discount Day Pass is $2.50. The majority of the District's day pa sses are sold on the farebox (cash fares) on the bus, and about 15 percent of the day passes are sold utilizing the Clipper Card. With the Clipper Card, the passengers are able to use their e-cash purse for each ride until the e-cash transaction s reach the $5.00 threshold within the calendar day; thereafter, the Day Pass Accumulator (DPA) threshold is reached and fares for subsequent rides are not deducted from t hee-cash purse (f ree rides) . The District also sell s a small quantity of magnetic strip day pa sses to social service agencies and non-profit organizations. For the five months since the fare policy change the District sold 510,734 Adult Day Passes and 505,369 Youth/Senior/Disabled discount day pa sses on the bus. Clipper Day Passes sold (DPAs Reached on the table below) totaled 110,672 adult passen gers, and 44,832 Youth/Senior/ Disabled discount passengers. When calcu lated at $5.00 per adult day pass and $2.50 per Discount day pass, the day pass cash and e-cash revenue tota led $4,482,533, representing 21 percent of total cash and e-cash revenue. Clipper DPAs Reached ~
Adult
Youth -
-Sr.
Disabled
Y/S/D subtotal
-
Total DPA Reached
July
22,685
3,663
3,940
1,363
8,966
Aug
22,124
3 ,970
3,912
1,340
9,222
3 1,346
Sept
23,052
3,634
3,998
1,380
9,012
32,064
Oct
23,520
3 ,870
4,228
1,529
9,627
33, 147
Nov
19 ,291
3,341
3,610
1,054
8,005
27,296
11 0,672
18,478
19,688
6,666
44,832
155,504
$553,360
$46, 195
$49,220
$16,665
$11 2,080
$665,440
Total count Total $
3 1,651
GFI Farebox-lssued Day Passes
,Adult -
Youth -
-Sr.
Disabled
Y/S/D subtotal
Total DPA Reached
July
93,1 81
49,619
22,032
9,619
81,270
174,451
Aug
109,199
64,975
28,496
13,506
106,977
216, 176
105,675
60,569
29,771
15,114
105,454
211 '1 29
Oct
110,680
63,607
32,712
19, 134
11 5,453
226,133
Nov
91,999
50,624
28,602
16,989
96,2 15
188,214
510,734
289,394
141 ,613
74,362
505,369
1,0 16,103
$2,553,670
$723,485
$354,033
$185,905
$1,263,423
$3,817,093
Sept
Total count Total $
I•
153
Report No. 15-021 Page 4 of 6 Mag Strip Day Passes Sold : Adult
-Youth -
Sr.
Disabled
-
-
Y/S/D subtotal
Total
July
4,660
1,400
4 ,660
Aug
9,480
1,220
9,480
Sept
2,060
322
2,060
Oct
2,970
1,100
2,970
Nov
1,060
400
1,060
20,230
4,442
20,230
$101,150
$11,105
$112,255
Total count Total$
.,
The farebox Day Pass and Clipper DPAs sales showed a positive trend during the five months since implementation, with the exception of November (holiday month with the fewest number of working days during the year). As the center piece of the fare policy changes, the Day Pass utilization and sales appear to have achieved the objectives of the Di strict's fare change implementation goals. Discount on Clipper Card Clipper use on AC Transit has been trending up over the past few years. Clipp er revenue began to exceed cash revenue in January 2014 and co ntinued to increase to a record high of $2,386,946 in October 2014. While it is still too early to determine the impact on revenue from the five percent Clipper discounts implemented in July, st aff is anticipating that th e incentive to use the Clipper e-cash rather than regular cash will result in a continued transition to the use of Clipper for payment of fares at the District.
Monthly Fare Reve nue by Payment Method (in OOO'sl f or previous 12 Consecut ive months ~
Method Cash Mag-Strip C lipper
~
Jan-14
Feb-14
Mar-14
Aor-14
~
Jun-14
Jul-14
Auq-14
Sep-14
~
Nov-14
1,899
2,075
1,756
2,032
1,905
1,989
1,973
2,013
2,049
2,153
2,1 62
1,884
291
379 1,992
331 2,000
406 2,156
459 2, 142
659 2,072
243 2,050
489 2,076
431 2,126
351 2,201
316 2,387
200 1,97 1
1,778
12 months (Dec '13 - Nov '14) Fare Payment Method Trend 3,000
i
.§. 2,000
..
~~~o;::::-~:;;::::::::;;;;;;;====:;:;;;:;;;:~:::::==:--
:>
~
1,500
f -- -- - - - - -- -- - -- -- -- - -- - - - -
~
J!
!
1,000
c: 0
~
Dec-13
Jan-14
Feb-14
Mar -14
Apr-14
May-14
Jun-14
154
Jul-14
Aug-14
Sep-14
Oct-14
Nov-14
cash
-
Mag-Strip
-
Cli pper
Report No. 15-021 Page 5 of 6
Prev. 12 months total fare revenue lin OOO's) Payment method
Total Fares
%of Total
Cash Mag-Strip
23,891 4,555
44.74% 8.53%
Clipper Total
24,952 53,397
46.73%
12 months (Dec '13 - Nov '14) fare revenue by payment method
Long Term Trend By eliminating transfers and successfu lly transitioning customers to Day Pass usage, the District was able to achieve the goals set in the fare change initiatives and provided for a major improvement in the efficiency and convenience for passengers. The District is anticipating that the positive effects of the fare policy change will continue to increase revenue and further transition from cash to Clipper. The Clipper usage has increased steadily over the years, and the current fiscal year is no exception. The promotion of Clipper has been and will continue to be one of the District's long term goals.
AC Transit Fare Revenue (in OOO's) by Fare Payment Method - 5 Year Trend Fiscal Year FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15*
Cash 26,863 26,263 25,475 24,391 24,184 24,627
Cli~~er
9,101 13,225 18,115 20,366 24,108 25,828
155
Mag Stri~[Passes 13,025 5,973 5,575 5,476 4,692 4,291
Total 48,990 45,461 49,165 50,233 52,984 54,746
Report No. 15-021 Page 6 of 6
Fare Payment Method Trend 30 ,000 - 25,000 Ill 0 0 0 20,000
~ Ql :I
c Ql >
15,000
~ 10,000 ~
-
cash
-
Clipper
-
Mag Strip/Passes
l1l
LL.
5,000 0 FY10
FYll
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15*
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
The new fare policy implemented on July 1, 2014 has significant benefits for both passengers and the District. The new f are policy reduced the cost of the Adult 31-Day Pass and allowed passengers to have unlimited transfers with the purchase of a day pass. The new fare policy is also expected to assist in the continued transition from cash to Clipper fare payments. There does not appear to be any disadvantage to the new fare policy, since the passengers and bus operators have easily transitioned to the new fare structure . ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS :
The alternative analysis was conducted prior to the implementation of the new fare policy and no further alternative analysis is required for this report. This report is being provided to inform the Board of the financi al results associated with the implementation of the new fare policy. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES:
Board Resolution #13-046 Passed and Adopted on 12/11/2013 Board Policy #328 (Fare Policy) ATIACHMENTS:
There are no attachments for thi s report. Executive Staff Approval:
James D. Pachan, Interim Chief Financial Officer
Prepared by:
Sue Lee, Trea sury Manager
156
Report No: Meeting Date:
15-023 January 28, 2015
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Amendments to Board Policy 354- Procurement Protest Procedures
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider adoption of Resolution No. 15-001 amending the protest procedures for all contracting activities contained in Board Policy 354 - Procurement Protest Procedures, and repeal Resolution No. 07-049. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Per Board Policy 302, Introduction to Fiscal Policies, the Board is required to review each fiscal policy every two years for necessary updates. Board Policy 354 was last amended in November, 2007 and upon review by interdepartmental staff, it is recommended that the Procurement Protest Procedures' Policy be amended as indicated herein. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: Negligible inclusion into District's general fund . BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Board Policy 354 has been established as a transparent means in which potential contractors can seek redress for District non-compliance with its own procurement procedures and/or other governing provisions that have the potential to, or have actually resulted in an unwarranted contract award, and for the District to systematically respond. Major Policy Amendments •
Further clarification of "Standing" definition (i.e. the requirement that a valid protester, be in direct position for contract award, unless the protest is based on the content of the solicitation). The current policy is somewhat ambiguous relative to whom can and cannot file a valid protest.
•
Establish a protest filing fee as a means of staving off frivolous protests; compensating for additional staff time required to respond to a protest filing, and staying consistent with current state and federal government protest provisions.
•
De-segregate protest procedures for rolling stock and other technology, resulting in a more uniform process. 157
Report No. 15-023 Page 2 of 2 •
Clarify District staff responsibilities for receiving and processing protests and protest appeals.
•
Further align protests appeals with Federal Transit Administration regulations.
•
Synchronize protest filing lead times on non-federally funded procurements with the relevant California Public Contract Code.
In addition to the above, minor non-substantive amendments include syntax revisions, punctuation, etc. Staff recommends the adoption of Resolution No. 15-001 amending the protest procedures for all procurements and contracting activities contained in Board Policy 354 - Procurement Protest Procedures, and repeal Resolution No. 07-049.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: Advantages: The proposed changes would discourage the filing of frivolous protests, better align District policy with state and federal procedures, and streamline and provide clarification of the steps in the protest process for staff and potential protest filers. Disadvantages: There are no obvious disadvantages to implementing these amendments.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: There are no practical alternatives to the course of action recommended in this report.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Board Policy 354- Procurement Protest Procedures, last amended 11/07
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Resolution 15-001 with Exhibit A: Proposed changes to Board Policy 354 California Public Contract Code Section 20216-20217 Excerpt- State of California Office of Administrative Hearings' Chapter 5, Article 2-1408 Excerpt- Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2014 Excerpt- FTA C 4220.1F Rev. 3, Chapter VII, Section 1 Protests
Approved by:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
Reviewed by:
Denise C. Standridge, General Counsel James D. Pachan, Chief Operating Officer/Interim Chief Financial Officer PhillipS. McCants, Contracts Compliance Administrator
Prepared by:
158
Staff Report 15-023 Attachment 1 ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 15-001 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE PROTEST PROCEDURES FOR ALL PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING ACTIVITIES CONTAINED IN BOARD POLICY 354- PROCUREMENT PROTEST PROCEDURES, AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 07-049 WHEREAS, on November 14, 2007, the Board of Directors adopted Resolution No. 07049 in accordance with the Federal Transit Administration's Circular 4220.1D which requires grantees to establish written protest procedures to handle and resolve disputes relating to District procurement and contacting activities; and WHEREAS, District policy requires the District to comply with all applicable federal, state, local laws and regulations; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors requires staff to periodically review the fiscal policies in order to keep them current and in compliance with federal requirements; and WHEREAS, the protest procedures adopted by Resolution 07-049 require amending for purposes of updating. NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District does resolve as follows: Section 1. The amended protest procedures provided in Exhibit A are hereby approved and shall be implemented by the General Manager effective this date. Section 2.
Resolution No. 07-049 is hereby repealed in its entirety.
Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage by four affirmative votes ofthe Board of Directors. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of January, 2015.
H. E. Christian Peeples, President Attest:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
Resolution No. 15-001
159
Page 1 of2
Staff Report 15-023 Attachment 1 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 28th day of January, 2015 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
Approved as to Form and Content:
Denise C. Standridge, General Counsel
Resolution No. 15-001
160
Page2of2
Exhibit A Resolution No. 15-001
POLICY NO. 354
AC Transit BOARD POLICY
Category: Financial Matters PROCUREMENT PROTEST PROCEDURES
I
I.
PURPOSE AND APPLICABILITY In accordance with Resolution No. 2039 adopted by the AC Transit Board of Directors on February 7, 2002, Board policy requires that the District establish formal procedures for the filing of protests in connection with District procurement activities. All protests shall be processed in accordance with the procedures established herein. These protest procedures shall apply to all types of procurement activities conducted by the District., including formal competitive bidding and requests for proposal. Potential bidders/proposers will be advised of the District's protest procedures in its solicitations for bids and requests for proposals. Failure to follow the District's protest procedures may result in the rejection of a protest. The District shall notify and keep the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) informed of the status of all protests involving FTA fundingfunded third-party contracts and potential third-party contracts thaL-
II.
A
Have a value exceeding $100.000 or
B
Involve a controversial matter. irrespective of amount. or
C
Involve a highly publicized matter. irrespective of amount.
DEFINITION OF PROTEST A protest under these procedures is defined as an allegation , made with respect to a particular procurement action, that asserts that the District, in performing that action: A.
Failed to follow or comply with applicable federal or state law or regulation, District policy or procedure relative to developing, soliciting, evaluating, negotiating and/or awarding a procurement contract.
B.
Failed to comply with the relevant requirements and procedures contained in the solicitation.
C.
Failed to follow District protest procedures.
Page 1 of 7
Adopted : 161Amended :
11/89 02/02, 11/07
·-------{ Forme
Ill.
TYPES OF PROTESTS There are two basic types of protests: A.
Protests Based Upon the Content of the Solicitation : Protests based upon restrictive specifications or alleged improprieties in the bidding procedure or contract specifications, which are apparent or reasonably should be discovered prior to bid opening.
B.
Protests Based Upon Grounds Other Than the Content of the Solicitation: Protests based upon alleged improprieties that are not apparent or which could not reasonably have been discovered prior to bid opening , such as disputes over the staff recommendation for contract award .
IV.
STANDING TO PROTEST In order to file a valid protest of a contract award. a protester n individual, association , corporation, company or other legal entity mlolst must be an actual bidder or offeror that is directly in line for a contract award. e.g .. the second-low bidder protesting award to the apparent low bidder. Subcontractors do not have standing to protest a contract award because they are not directly in line to receive a contract from the District. be an actlolal or prospective slolpplier of goods or services, whose direct economic interest would be affected by the a•Nard or faillolre to award a contract.
V.
TIMELINESS OF PROTESTS In order to be considered timely, a protest of a procurement action must be filed after a solicitation is issued and meet the following time constraints: A.
Protests Based Upon the Content of the Solicitation must be submitted prior+-·----... to bid opening or receipt of proposals. in procurements other than Negotiated Proclolrements lolnder California Public Contract Code §20217: Any protest concerning any of the contents of the solicitation must be filed prior to the bid opening or proposal slolbmission date and time.
B.
Protests Based Upon Grounds other than the Content of the Solicitation-ffi proclolrements other than Negotiated Procurements lolnder California Public Contract Code §20217: Protests must be filed no later thanwithin teA-fifteen (4015) calendar days after the District's notice of intent to award, or notice of award , or notice of non-award, whichever occurs first is made public.
C.
Protests in Negotiated Proclolrements for Rolling Stock and other Technology lolnder California Plolblic Contract §20217: 1.
Page 2 of 7
Protests in Negotiated Procurements based upon the Content of the Solicitation (Request for Proposals or RFPs) mlolst be filed •.vith the
Adopted:
162 Amended:
11/89 02/02.11/07
District within ten (1 0) calendar days after the RFP is first ad'.'ertised . Such protests may be renewed by refiling the protest with the District within fifteen (15) calendar days after the staff recommendation for award has been made available to the public. 2.
Protests based upon grounds other than the Content of the Solicitation (Request for Proposals or RFPs) must be filed within fifteen (15) calendar days after the staff recommendation for award has been made available to the public.
+--.
r::==
------ ~
VI.
CONTENT OF PROTESTS Protests must be submitted in writing. The Protest Form available from the District should be submitted with the protest whether or not additional information is provided by the protester. All relevant referenced material supporting the protest should be attached . Protests should include the following:
I
VII.
A.
The IFB (Invitation for Bids) or Request for Proposals (RFP) number. If any addendum or addenda issued by the District in connection with a solicitation is the basis for a protest, the protest must also identify that addendum. If any other District communication is the basis for a protest, it should also be identified.
B.
The name and address of the protester. If the name or address is different than that shown on any bid or proposal of the protestor, the protest should include a reference to the original name and/or address. Because standing to protest may be an issue, protests filed under a name other than the name stated on the bid or proposal submitted should indicate the basis supporting standing to protest.
C.
A full and complete statement specifying in detail the grounds for the protest, including identification of any laws, regulations, or procedures violated , and providing all pertinent facts in support of the protest.
D.
The specific remedy requested by the protester.
E.
Identification of person(s) and address(es) of those to whom District communications on the matter of the protest should be directed.
PROTEST SUBMISSION
A.
Protests not based on the content of the solicitation and filed by other- than a certified small business must be accompanied by a protest filing fee in the form of a $500 check or money order made out to AC Transit. and be directed to: AC Transit Procurement and Materials Director 10626 International Blvd.1600 Franklin Street. 81h Floor Oakland, CA 9460394612 Protests based upon grounds other than the content of the solicitation as well as all protest appeals should be addressed to:
Page 3 of 7
Adopted:
163 Amended:
11/89 02/02.11/07
+---------{Forme
l\C Transit Manager, Capital Development, Legislation, and Grants Contracts Compliance Officer 1600 Franklin Street Oakland , Cl\ 94612 A.
B.
8-:C .
VIII.
In all cases, tHe-The exterior of the envelope should must be marked: "Attention: Protest Material" and reflect the pertinent IFB or RFP number. Protest filings by certified small businesses must include a $100 check or money order and made out to the address and District contact person above. The District shall refund filing fees of successful protests within 60 days of final determination. Filings fees of unsuccessful protests will not be refunded.
PROCESSING OF PROTESTS Protests will be processed as follows : A.
Protests based upon the Content of the Solicitation in procurements other than Negotiated Procurements under California Public Contract Code §20217:
The Procurement and Materials Director will issue a written decision prior to the opening date for bids or closing date for the submission of proposals. If the decision cannot be made within these time periods, the bid opening or proposal submission date for the procurement may be extended by the District. B.
Protests based on grounds other than the Content of the Solicitation-in Procurements other than Negotiated Procurements under California Public Contract Code §20217: The General ManagerProcurement and Materials Director will issue a written decision response within ten (1 0) working business days after the receipt of the protest by the District. If the General Manager's2 decision cannot be rendered within this time period, the District Procurement and Materials Director will notify the protester of the new~ date when a decision on the protest will be issued. If the General ManagerProcurement and Materials Director upholds the protest, the General Manager'sa decision will include remedial action to be taken. If the General ManagerProcurement and Materials Director denies the protest, the written notice of the decision will include notice of the protester's appeal rights .
C.
Protests in Negotiated Procurements for Rolling Stock and other Technology under California Public Contract Code section §20217:
Page 4 of 7 164
Adopted: Amended :
11/89 02/02,11/07
IX.
1.
In protests based upon the Content of the Solicitation, the Procurement and Materials Director will issue a 'A'ritten decision prior to the opening of proposals.
2.
In protests based upon grounds other than the Content of the Solicitation, the General Manager will issue a written decision within ten (1 0) working days after the receipt of the protest by the District. If the General Manager's decision cannot be issued within this time period, the District will notify the protester of the new date when a decision on the protest 'A'ill be issued.
3.
Protesters shall have an opportunity to appear and be heard before the District prior to the opening of proposals in the case of protests based on the content of the request for proposals, or prior to final award in the case of protests based on other grounds or the renewal of protests based on the content of the request for proposals.
APPEAL OF PROTEST DECISIONS A.
Appeal of Decision ManagerDirector:
of
Purchasing
Procurement
and
Materials+---------{ Forma
Protesters may appeal an adverse decision by the Procurement and Materials Director to the District's General Manager by submitting an appeal, in writing, within five (~) working business days after the date of issuance of the Procurement and Materials Director's decision. The appeal must state the basis for disputing the decision wh ile not introducing new information that was not provided in the initial protest. . The decision of the General Manager to grant or deny the appeal will be final. An appeal of the Purchasing and Materials Director's decision must include a copy of the adverse decision and be sent to: AC Transit Executive Coordinator 1600 Franklin Street. 1om Floor Oakland. CA 94612 Ref: Protest Appeal (Insert Project/Procurement Number Here) The District's General Manager shall respond in writing to the appeal within ten (10) business days with a decision or notice of an extended period of up to five (5) add itional business days in wh ich to render a decision. B.
Appeal of Decision of General Manager: Protesters may appeal an adverse decision by the General Manager to the District Board of Directors by submitting an appeal, in writing , within five (~) working business days after the date of issuance of the General Manager's decision. The appeal must state the grounds for disputing the decision of the General Manager. An appeal of the General Manager's decision must include copies of the two preceding adverse decisions (Procurement and Materials Director response and General Manager's response) and be sent to:
Page 5 of 7
Adopted: Amended :
165
11/89 02/02 ,11/07
AC Transit District Secretary 1600 Franklin Street. 1om Floor Oakland . CA 94612 Ref: Protest Appeal (Insert Project/Procurement Number Here) Board of Director Appeal Process:
C.
1.
As soon as practicable as the matter may be heard but within 45 business days following the receipt of a notice of appeal of the General Manager's decision. At the next regularly scheduled Board meeting following receipt of notice of appeal from the decision of the General Manager, the Board of Directors will consider whether it wishes to entertain the appeal and schedule an appeal hearing to be heard by the Board of Directors at a future Board meeting. The decision whether to hear the appeal will be based on the Board 's review of the following documents: the protest submitted by the protester, the decision of the General Manager denying the protest, the appeal submitted by the protester, and any additional documentation submitted by staff to the Board. If a majority of the Board of Directors votes against entertaining the appeal, the decision of the General Manager will become final.
2.
If there are four affirmative votes of the Board to consider the appeal, the Board will notify the protester of the date and time of the hearing . The Board shall set the parameters of the hearing process. including the following : a) Length of documents submitted: b) Due dates of any documents to be submitted: c) The length of oral presentations for each side (District and protester): d) Any additional parameters the Board feels are necessary.
2.
If there are not four affirmative votes of the Board to consider the appeal. the decision of the General Manager shall become final. If a majority of the Board votes to consider the appeal, the Board will notify the protester of the date of the hearing before the Board of Directors.
3.
At the hearing on the appeal, the protesting party will be afforded a reasonable opportunity to present its case . Unless otherwise permitted by the Board, presentations will be limited to oral argument and documentary evidence. The Board may allow for a question and answer period following presentation of the appeal.
4.
Upon conclusion of the hearing, the Board will either render a decision or continue the matter for decision at the next regularly scheduled Board of Directors meeting or at its discretion. the Board may call a special session to exclusively address and/or render a decision.,.
Page 6 of 7
Adopted: Amended: 166
11/89 02/02.11/07
X.
PROTESTS TO THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION (FTA)
A.
In accordance with the provisions of FTA Circular 4220.W1£, the Procurement and Materials Director, or designee, will be responsible for providing information regarding protests of federally funded procurements to the Manager of Capital Planning/Grants Administration on a quarterly basis for inclusion in the FTA quarterly Progress.
B.
The F'TA will only re•Jiew protests regarding the failure of the District to have written protest procedures or its failure to follow such proceduresReviews of protests by the FTA are limited to: (1) The District's failure to have or follow its protest procedures. or the District's failure to review a complaint or protest: or (2) vio lations of federal law or regulation . The FTA will exercise discretion and will not consider every appeal that it receives.
A protester must exhaust all administrative remedies available through the District. i.e .. the Director of Procurement and Materials. the District's General Manager. and the District's Board of Directors before pursuing a protest with the FTA. F'ollowing an adverse final decision by the District, the protestor may file a protest ¥lith the F'TA. Protests appeals to the FTA should must be filed with the San Francisco Region IX Office no later thanwithin five (5) working days of the date the protester learned or should have learned of an adverse decision by the District. The FTA Region IX contact information for filing an appeal shall be provided in writing to the protester upon notice of the District's final adverse decision to the protester. after a final decision is rendered under the District's protest procedures. In instances where the protester alleges that the District failed to make a final determination on the protest, protesters shall file a protest with the FTA no later than five (5) working days after the protester knows or should have known of the District's failure to render a final determination on the protest. A copy of the protest should also be sent to the District.
Page 7 of 7
Adopted: Amended: 167
11/89 02/02, 11/07
This page intentionally blank
168
CA Codes (pcc:20216-20217)
Page 1 of3 Staff Report 15-023 Attachment 2
PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 20216-20217 20216. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any contract by the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, the Southern California Rapid Transit District, the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District, the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District, the San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board, the North San Diego County Transit Development Board, a county transportation commission that is subject to the competitive negotiation provisions of Section 20229.1, 20231.5, or 20916.3 of this code, or Section 120224.4, 125228, or 130238 of the Public Utilities Code, a transit district, city, county, city and county, or transportation agency, that is subject to the competitive negotiation provisions of Section 20217, and any other transportation agency that is authorized to use comparable competitive negotiation provisions after July 1, 1992, shall comply with the requirements of this section. (b) Other than proprietary information, the content of any request for proposal, any proposal received, and any other communications between a transportation agency and a potential bidder on a contract that is subject to subdivision (a) shall be made available to the public no later than the same time that a recommendation for awarding a contract is made to the governing board or persons responsible for approving the award of a contract to a bidder, except that the price proposed in any bidder's initial proposal shall be available upon the opening of the bid by the agency requesting the proposal. (c) No person may participate in the evaluation of any proposal for the award of a contract that is subject to subdivision (a) if any of the following conditions apply: (1) The person has a financial interest in the outcome of the evaluation or the contract. (2) The person has received a gift of over two hundred fifty dollars ($250) during the previous 12 months from a bidder directly, or indirectly through an intermediary, if it is known to the person that the gift was in whole or in part funded by the bidder. (d) The agency board or any person responsible for awarding a contract under this article shall not have any ex parte communication with a bidder or any representative of the bidder except in writing and if the communication is made public. (e) A contract may not be awarded until 15 days after the staff recommendation has been made available to the public. (f) An agency using the competitive negotiation process shall maintain in writing, and make available upon request, a complete description of the process and the policies and procedures used by the agency in doing so, including all standards, criteria, public protest procedures, and method of contract award. The agency shall also keep a complete record of its actions on each procurement. (g) For purposes of this section and Sections 20217, 20229.1, 20231.5, and 20916.3 of this code and Sections 120224.4 and 130238 of the Public Utilities Code, "competitive negotiation" means a procurement process used by an agency in lieu of a competitive sealed bid process when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids, and that permits the consideration of price, technical experience, past performance, management, or other factors in selecting the most cost-effective proposal for the manufacture and
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pcc&group=2000 1-21 OOO&file=2... 169
8/2 8/20 14
CA Codes (pcc:20216-20217)
Page 2 of3
delivery of specified goods, transit vehicles, or equipment. The process includes negotiations with manufacturers or providers after the receipt of initial proposals during which performance or technical standards and other criteria may be revised in order to secure proposals most advantageous to the purchasing agency or to cure any deficiencies contained in the original proposals.
20217. (a) The Legislature finds and declares .that the award of purchase contracts by transit agencies under competitive bid procedures may not be feasible for products and materials that are undergoing rapid technological changes or for the introduction of new technologies into agency operations, and that in these circumstances it is in the public interest to consider the broadest possible range of competing products and materials available, fitness of purpose, manufacturer's warranty, vendor financing, performance reliability, standardization, life cycle costs, delivery timetables, support logistics, and other similar factors in addition to price in the award of these contracts. (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the governing board of a transit district, city, county, city and county, or transportation agency may direct the purchase of (1) computers, telecommunications equipment, fare collection equipment, radio and microwave equipment, and other related electronic equipment and apparatus used in transit operations ; (2) specialized rail transit equipment, including, but not limited to, railcars; (3) buses; and (4) passenger ferries, by competitive negotiation upon a finding by two-thirds vote of all members of the board that the purchase of those products or materials in compliance with provisions of this code generally applicable to the purchase does not constitute a method of procurement adequate for the agency's needs. This section does not apply to contracts for construction or for the procurement of any product available in substantial quantities to the general public. (c) Competitive negotiation, for the purposes of this section includes, but is not limited to, all of the following requirements: (1) A request for proposals shall be prepared and submitted to an adequate number of qualified sources, as determined by the agency in its discretion, to permit reasonable competition consistent with the nature and requirements of the procurement. In addition, a notice of the request for proposals shall be published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation, which shall be made at least 10 days before the date for receipt of the proposals. The agency shall make reasonable efforts to generate the maximum feasible number of proposals from qualified sources, and shall make a finding to that effect before proceeding to negotiate if only a single response to the request for proposal is received. (2) The request for proposals shall identify all significant evaluation factors, including price, and their relative importance. (3} The agency shall provide reasonable procedures for technical evaluation of the proposals received, identification of qualified sources, and selection for contract award. (4} Prior to making an award, the agency shall prepare a price analysis and shall find that the final negotiated price is fair and reasonable based upon comparable procurement in the marketplace. (5) The award shall be made to the qualified proposer whose proposal will be most advantageous to the agency with price and other factors considered. If the award is not made to the proposer whose proposal contains the lowest price, the agency shall make a finding
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/disp1aycode?section=pcc&group=2000 1-21 OOO&file=2... 170
8/28/2014
CA Codes (pcc:20216-20217)
Page 3 of 3
setting forth the basis for the award. (d) The agency may reject any and all proposals and issue a new request for proposals at its discretion . (e) Upon making an award to a qualified proposer , the agency , upon request , shall make available to all other proposers and to the public , an analysis of the award that provides the basis for the selection of that particular qualified proposal. (f) A person who submits, or who plans to submit , a proposal, may protest any acquisition conducted in accordance with this section pursuant to protest procedures establish ed by the board as follows : (1) Protests based on the cont e nt of the request for proposals shall be filed with the agency within 10 ca lendar days after the request for proposals is first advertised in accordance wi th subdivision (c). The agency shall issue a written decision on the protest prior to opening of proposals. A protest may be renewed by refi ling the protest with the agency within 15 ca lendar days after the staff recommendation for award has been made available to the public as required by subdivision (e) of Section 202 16 . (2) ?X.ny bidder rnay proLe::;L the recommended award on any ground not based upon the conte nt o f the req uest for p roposals by f iling a p r otest with the agency within 1 5 cale ndar days af t e r t h e s t aff recommendation for award h as been made avai labl e t o th e pub lic as requ i r ed b y subdivision (e) of Section 20216 . (3) Any protest shall contain a full and comple te written statemen t specifying in detail the grounds of the protest and the facts supporting the protest. Protesters shall have an opportunity to appear a nd be heard before the agenc y prior to the opening of p r opos al s in the case of protests based on the con tent of t h e request for proposals , or p rior to final award in the case of protests based on other grounds or the renewal of protests based o n th e content of the request for proposals . (g) Provisions in any contract concerning women and minority business enterprises , which are in accordance with the request for proposals , shall not be subject to negotiation wi th the successful bidder . (h) As used i n this section , "agency " includes a tra n sit district , city , county, city and county , or tra n sportation agenc y when engaged in transit operations .
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pcc&group=2000 1-2 1OOO&fi le=2... 171
8/28/20 14
This page intentionally blank
172
Staff Report 15-023 Attachment 3
http 1/www. dgs. ca. govIoa h/gene ra lju nsd iction/bid pro testregs. aspx 1408. Filing a Protest
a. A protest is filed by the submission of: the Detailed Written Statement of Protest and any exhibits specified in section 1412; a check or money order made payable to the Office of Administrative Hearings for the OAH filing fee of $50; and the arbitration deposit as specified in subsection (c) or (d) to the Coordinator by the Close of Business on the 7th working day after the time specified in the Solicitation for written Notice of Intent to Protest under section 1406. A copy of the Detailed Written Statement of Protest and exhibits must also be served on all Parties named in the service list as specified in section 1406. A Protestant who fails to comply with this subsection waives Protestant's right to protest. b. Protestant(s) must provide a FAX (facsimile) number. Notification by facsimile is sufficient for service. If the Detailed Written Statement of Protest is sent to the Coordinator by facsimile, Protestant must: Verify that the pages sent were all received by the Coordinator; and Remit the required deposit and filing fee to Coordinator by any reasonable means. If sending via carrier, the postmark date or equivalent shall be used to determine timeliness. c. Each Protestant not certified as a Small Business shall make a deposit of the estimated arbitration costs, by check or money order made payable to the Office of Administrative Hearings, as determined by the Estimated Contract Value. 1. For contracts up to $100,000.00, the deposit shall be $1500.00. 2. For contracts of $100,000.00 up to $250,000.00, the deposit shall be $3,000.00. 3. For contracts of $250,000.00 up to $500,000.00, the deposit shall be $5,000.00. 4. For contracts of $500,000.00 and above, the deposit shall be $7,000.00. 5 .. Failure to remit a timely required deposit waives the right of protest. 6. Any refund to Protestant(s) shall be made per section 1436. d. Each Protestant certified as a Small Business shall submit a copy of the Small Business Certification in lieu of the deposit specified in subsection (c). If Protestant is a Small Business and the protest is denied by the arbitrator, the Contracting Department shall collect the costs of the arbitration from Protestant. If Protestant does not remit the costs due, the Contracting Department may offset any unpaid arbitration costs from other contracts with Protestant and/or may declare Protestant to be a non-responsible bidder on subsequent solicitations. Note: Authority: Section 12126, Public Contract Code. Reference: Sections 12125-12130, Public Contract Code.
173
This page intentionally blank
174
Staff Report 15-023 Attachment 4
H. R. 3547-429 5, United States Code, but at rates for individuals not more than the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay for level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of such title: Provided further, That activities financed through the revolving fund may provide information in any format: Provided further, That the revolving fund and the funds provided under the headings "Office of Superintendent of Documents" and "Salaries and Expenses" may not be used for contracted security services at GPO's passport facility in the District of Columbia. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE SALARIES AND EXPENSES For necessary expenses of the Government Accountability Office, including not more than $12,500 to be expended on the certification of the Comptroller General of the United States in connection with official representation and reception expenses; temporary or intermittent services under section 3109(b) of title 5, United States Code, but at rates for individuals not more than the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay for level IV of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of such title; hire of one passenger motor vehicle; advance payments in foreign countries in accordance with section 3324 of title 31, United States Code; benefits comparable to those payable under sections 901(5), (6), and (8) of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 4081(5), (6), and (8ll; and under regulations rrescribed by the Comptroller General of the United States, renta of Jiving quarters in foreign countries, $505,383,000: Provided, That in addition, $32,368,000 of payments received under sections 782, 3521, and 9105 of title 31, United States Code, shall be available without fiscal year limitation: Provided further, That this appropriation and appropriations for administrative expenses of any other department or agency which is a member of the National Intergovernmental Audit Forum or a Regional Intergovernmental Audit Forum shall be available to finance an appropriate share of either Forum's costs as determined by the respective Forum, including necessary travel expenses ·of non-Federal participants: Provided further, That payments hereunder to the Forum may be credited as reimbursements to any appropriation from which costs involved are initially financed. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION U'i F: OF 1·; 1.1-:CT HON IC f lLIN U fOH PHOCUH EMCNT
I'I!OT I ~ ST
SYSTI·:fl;l
SEC . 1501. Section 3555(c) of title 31, United States Code, is amended to read as follows: "(c) ELECTRONIC FILING AND DOCUMENT DISSEMINATION SYSTEM."(1) ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION OF SYSTEM.-The Comptroller General shall establish and operate an electronic filing and document dissemination system under which, in accordance with procedures prescribed by the Comptroller General"(A) a person filing a protest under this subchapter may file the protest through electronic means; and
175
H. R. 3547-430 "(B) all documents and information required with respect to the protest may be disseminated and made available to the parties to the protest through electronic means. "(2) IMPOSITION OF FEES."( A) I N CEN EHAL - The Comp f.t oll fo t G ~ n er :1 l nwy r t:'qune eac h person who Illes n p rol<~sL unde t l hts s ub chapte1 to pay d lee Lo su ppo r t t.l te l't;Labltshnw nt :1 nd o pera t10n of the elect1on1 c :>ystem u nder Lh1s s ubsert10n w1th oul r egarrl to whethe t or no t. Lhe pe rson lt.~ <·s the syst.em wtth n:·sped l o Uw prolest. "(B) AMOUNT.-The Comptroller General shall establish (and from time to time shall update) a schedule setting forth the amount of the fee to be paid under subparagraph (A).
"(3) TREATMENT OF AMOUNTS COLLECTED ."(A) ESTABLISHMENT OF ACCOUNT.-The Comptroller General shall maintain a separate account among the accounts of the Government Accountability Office for the electronic system under this subsection, and shall depo,s it all amounts received as fees under paragraph (2) into the account. "(B) USE OF AMOUNTS.-Amounts in the account maintained under this paragraph shall be .available to the Comptroller General, without fiscal year limitation, solely to establish and operate the electronic system under this subsection.". OPEN WORLD LEADERSHIP CENTER TRUST FUND For a payment to the Open World Leadership Center Trust Fund for financing activities of the Open World Leadership Center under section 313 of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2001 (2 U.S.C. 1151), $6,000,000. JOHN C. STENNIS CENTER FOR PUBLIC SERVICE TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT For payment to the John C. Stennis Center for Public Service Development Trust Fund established under section 116 of the John C. Stennis Center for Public Service Training and Development Act (2 U .S.C. 1105), $430,000. TITLE II GENERAL PROVISIONS MAINTENANCE AND CARE OF PRIVATE VEHICLES SEC. 201. No part of the funds appropriated in this Act shall be used for the maintenance or care of private vehicles, except for emergency assistance and cleaning as may be provided under regulations relating to parking facilities for the House of Representatives issued by the Committee on House Administration and for the Senate issued by the Committee on Rules and Administration.
176
Staff Report 15-023 Attachment s Page VII-2
FTA C 4220.1 F 11/01/2008 Rev. I, 04114/2009 Rev. 2, 07/01/2010 Rev. 3, 02/15/2011 informed about the status of the protest. A non-governmental recipient involved in a protest is similarly expected to notify FTA when it receives a third party contract protest to which the circular applies, and to similarly keep FTA informed about the status of the protest. The recipient is expected to provide the following information:
l
Subjects. A list of protests involving third party contracts and potential third party contracts that: 1!
Have a value exceeding $100,000, or
!:1
Involve a controversial matter, irrespective of amount, or
£
Involve a highly publicized matter, irrespective of amount.
2. Details. The following information about each protest: 1!
A brief description of the protest,
!:1 The basis of disagreement, and £
If open, how far the protest has proceeded, or
Q If resolved, the agreement or decision reached, and f
}
Whether an appeal has been taken or is likely to be taken.
When and Where. The recipient should provide this information: 1!
In its next quarterly Milestone Progress Report, and
!:1 At its next Project Management Oversight review, if any. Small recipients may report less frequently if no protests are outstanding .
.'!
FTA Officials to Notify. When a recipient denies a bid protest, and especially if an appeal to FTA is likely to occur, FTA expects the recipient to inform the FTA Regional Administrator for the region administering a regional project, or the FTA Associate Administrator for the program office administering a headquarters project directly. FTA also encourages the recipient to keep its FTA project manager informed about protests with which it is involved. In particular, the recipient should contact its project manager about any unusual activity.
177
This page intentionally blank
178
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 AGENDA PACKAGE FOR STAFF REPORTS
179
This page intentionally blank
180
AC TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
AGENDA PLANNING/ STANDING COMMITTEE PENDING LISTS
Monthly • Legislative Report [Updates on State, Federal, Regional and Local Legislation, including Measure Band the APTA Reauthorization process for T-4]. Annual • State/Federal Advocacy Program Pending Not Scheduled • Status report on the Oral History Project. [Request from President 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]. Report on how the District reaches out to non-riders for their opinions about AC Transit's service. [Requested by Director Harper- 1/14/15]
•.· •·····FIJ\i~J\ICE AI\ID.AUDI"i"C9MMlTTlE April Review and discussion of Director Harper's suggested formula for evaluating whether funds generated by Measure V V have been expended in Special District Two. [Requested by Director Davis - 12/10/14] May be referred to Board Retreat August 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 California Public Utilities Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure pertaining to ex parte situations. [Requested by President Peeples- 9/5/12] September • Report on the advisability of having the Internal Audit Department report directly to the Board. [Requested by President Peeples- 5/28/14] Referred to September Board Retreat Monthly Report on Investments • Fiscal Policies (Review one per month) • Budget Update Bi-Monthly Budget Update Quarterly Reports (Nov, Feb. May. Aug) Board/Officer Travel/Meeting Expense Employee Out-of-State Travel • Surplus/Obsolete Materials • Contracts/Purchasing Activity Report Agenda Planning January 28, 2015
Page 1 of 4
181
AGENDA PLANNING/ STANDING COMMITTEE PENDING LISTS
AC TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Finance and Audit Committee, Cont. Semi Annual Reports DBE/FTA Report and DBE Goal Update (May/Nov) Annual Reports • Appropriations Limit (June); Adoption (July) Audit Engagement Letter (June) Budget Calendar (Nov) Externally Funded Welfare to Work (Nov) Parcel Tax Oversight Committee (Dec to Board) Year-End Audited Financial Statements (Nov) Pending Not Scheduled • Report on Other Post-Employment Benefits other than pensions (OPEB) and associated liability issues. [Requested by Director Davis -10/22/14]
. O~E~TiONS COMMrtrl:J: .•· February Report on set asides for small business (SBE) participation as directed by Board Policy 326, section V, paragraph 2 and how many contracts have been set aside for small businesses in the last two years. [Requested by Director Ortiz- 10/22/14] • Report from staff on the modifications/improvements that were made to the Gillig 1400 series buses to address complaints and issues raised by the Accessibility Advisory Committee and others about the 1300 series buses. [Requested by President Peeples - 9/10/14] Referred to joint meeting with the Accessibility Advisory Committee Review Board Policy 163 with respect to environmental issues. (Board Policy 512) [Requested by President Peeples] Note: General amendments will be proposed to Policy 163. April • Report on the Heavy Duty Coach Mechanic Apprenticeship program [Requested by President Peeples -9/24/14] Resolution supporting continuation and expansion of the District's Fuel Cell Program, subject to funding availability. The resolution will be drafted by President Peeples [Requested by President Peeples- 6/11/14] June Implementation of a District-wide calendaring system to track contracts, license renewals, etc. [Requested by President Peeples- 4/25/12] September Discussion regarding suggestions for a Board Policy on exit interviews and to what extent those interviews, and the reporting thereof, should be different if the person who exited reports directly to a Board Officer. [Requested by President Peeples -11/14/12] Referred to Board Retreat
Agenda Planning January 28, 2015
Page 2 of 4 182
AGENDA PLANNING/ STANDING COMMITTEE PENDING LISTS
AC TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Operations Committee, cont. Quarterly Reports (Nov, Feb, May, Aug)
• •
Operations Performance Report (includes report on the Call Center) Clipper Outreach efforts
Pending Not Scheduled
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). Investigate the creation of a District store which would have hats, clothing and other items available or sale. [Requested by Director Williams -8/28/13] Creation of a video privacy policy specifically for all of the video associated with the BRT stations once operational. [Requested by President Peeples - 2/12/14. President Peeples to provide additional information to be included in the draft policy.] Investigate and report what other public agencies are doing as part of the ongoing conversation of the merit pay issue. [Requested by Director Ortiz- 7/9/14] Report on management training provided to AC Transit managers, including what is currently offered and what can be made available. [Requested by Director Williams- 9/24/14]
PLANNING COMMITTEE February
•
Report on coordination efforts and routing of buses associated with the Oakland Running Festival. [Requested by President Peeples- 3/26/14] Report on the performance of Clear Channel in dealing with bus shelter maintenance including repair, cleaning and responding to customer complaints [Requested by President Peeples -10/22/14].
April
Report on AC Transit's attitude toward shuttles. [Requested by President Harper- 5/9/12] Referred to
Board Retreat
June
•
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 President Peeples -11/16/11]
!!!!v •
Report on the Brooklyn Basin Project (Oak to 9'h Street in Oakland) and details of the negotiations with Signature Properties, including commitments made between the District and Signature Properties [Requested by President Peeples- 3/25/06] Update on the impacts of the Lake Merritt Park Master Plan on AC Transit service [Requested by President Peeples- 3/9/11; updated 12/31/14]
Agenda Planning January 28, 2015
Page 3 of 4
183
AGENDA PLANNING/ STANDING COMMITIEE PENDING LISTS
AC TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Planning Committee, Cont. Quarterly Reports (Nov, Feb, May, Aug)
• •
Bus Rapid Transit Project Trans bay Transit Center Project Update on District Involvement in External Planning Processes
Annual Reports
•
Update on CARB (June) Update on Service and Operations in Special District 2
Pending Not Scheduled
Update of the Designing with Transit document, which is to include the development of bus shelter design standards. [Requested by President Peeples -10/27/10] 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 President 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 President Peeples- 5/28/08]
FUiOREBOARD MEETING Follow-up presentation by MUNI staff on the data collected and conclusions drawn from MUNI's proof-of-payment study. [Requested by President Peeples -1/14/15] Presentation on fare consolidation in the Bay Area. [Requested by President Peeples -1/14/15]
Agenda Planning January 28, 2015
Page4of4
184
