BOARD OF DIRECTORS ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT
AGENDA
Regular Meetings of the Board of Directors and the External Affairs and Finance and Audit Committees Special Meeting of the Planning Committee AC Transit General Offices 2nd Floor Board Room 1600 Franklin Street Oakland, CA 94612
Wednesday, May 28, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. Closed Session: 4:00 p.m.
Committee meetings will commence when the Board of Directors recesses to a Committee of the Whole
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS GREG HARPER, PRESIDENT (WARD 2) JOE WALLACE, VICE PRESIDENT (WARD 1) ELSA ORTIZ (WARD 3) MARK WILLIAMS (WARD 4) JEFF DAVIS (WARD 5) JOEL YOUNG (AT-LARGE) H. E. CHRISTIAN PEEPLES (AT-LARGE) Teleconference: Director Joel Young, At-Large 730 E 3rd Street Long Beach, California 90802 BOARD OFFICERS DAVID J. ARMIJO, GENERAL MANAGER DENISE C. STANDRIDGE, INTERIM GENERAL COUNSEL LINDA A. NEMEROFF, DISTRICT SECRETARY 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
May 28, 2014 1
Page 1 of 8
MEETING PROCEDURES Public Comment: Members of the public wishing to present comments should complete a Speaker’s Form and submit it to the District Secretary. For subjects not listed on this agenda, the public will be invited to speak under the "PUBLIC COMMENTS" section of the agenda. For specific agenda item(s), speakers will be invited to address the Board/Standing Committee(s) at the time the item is being considered. All speakers are allowed two (2) minutes to present comments. Individuals wishing to present more detailed information are encouraged to submit comments in writing. Written comments are included in the record for meeting(s), and as such, are available for public inspection and may be posted to the District’s website. Electronic Devices: All electronic devices (cell phones, pagers and similar-sounding devices) shall be placed on mute, vibrate or silent mode during Board and Committee meetings pursuant to District Ordinance No. 12. Time of Meetings: Times included on this agenda for commencement of Standing Committee meetings are estimates only. Committee meetings will commence when the Board of Directors recesses to a Committee of the Whole. Order of Agenda Items: The Board or Standing Committee(s) may discuss any item listed on this agenda and in any order. Agenda Planning: The Agenda Planning portion of the agenda is designed to assist the Board and staff in the preparation of future Board and Committee agendas. Each item requested shall have the concurrence of at least two Directors in order to place a proposed agenda item on a future agenda. LIVE AUDIO STREAMING OF BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS Live audio streaming and an archive of previously recorded meetings is available on the District’s website at www.actransit.org. For technological reasons, recordings of meetings held outside of the Board Room cannot be streamed to the web. AVAILABILITY OF AGENDA RELATED MATERIALS Written agenda related materials for all open session regular meetings are available to the public 72 hours prior to the meeting or at the time the materials are distributed to a majority of the Board. Written materials presented at a meeting by staff or a member of the Board will be available to the public at that time, or after the meeting if supplied by an outside party. Agenda related materials are available on the District’s website or by contacting the District Secretary’s Office. ACCESSIBLE PUBLIC MEETINGS Meetings of the Board of Directors are accessible to individuals in wheelchairs. The Board Room is equipped with Assistive Listening Devices for individuals with a hearing impairment. Written materials in appropriate alternative formats, disability-related modification/accommodation as well as sign language and foreign language interpreters must be made 72 hours in advance of the meeting or hearing to help ensure availability. Please direct requests for disability related modification or accommodation and/or interpreter services to Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary, 1600 Franklin Street, Oakland, California, 94612 or call (510) 891-7201. AC Transit’s General Offices are generally served by bus lines 1, 11, 12, 51A, 72, 72M. The nearest accessible bus 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
May 28, 2014 2
Page 2 of 8
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING – Greg Harper, President Wednesday, May 28, 2014, at 5:00 p.m. 1.
ROLL CALL
2.
GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT
3.
PUBLIC COMMENT
4.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Staff Contact or Presenter
David Armijo
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.
4A. Consider approving Board of Directors and Standing Committee minutes of May 14, 2014.
Linda Nemeroff 891-7284
4B. Consider receiving Accessibility Advisory Committee minutes of April 8, 2014 (Report 14-124).
Dennis Butler 891-4798
4C. Consider receiving Retirement Board Minutes of April 10, 2014 (Report 14-125).
Hugo Wildmann 891-4889
4D. Consider authorizing members of the Board of Directors and the General Manager to attend the American Public Transportation Association Annual Meeting and EXPO on October 12-15, 2014 in Houston, Texas (Report 14-174).
Linda Nemeroff 891-7284
5.
REGULAR CALENDAR
5A. Consider receiving report and adoption of Resolution No. 14-023 approving the FY 2014-15 Operating and Capital Budget (Report 14026e).
Jim Pachan 891-4752
5B. Consider approving the award of on-call contracts to URS Corporation, Acumen Building Enterprise and VSCE Inc. for project management services (Report 12-172a).
Dennis Butler 891-4798
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.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 28, 2014 3
Page 3 of 8
ALL COMMITTEES ARE ADVISORY ONLY. 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 14-127).
Dennis Butler 891-4798
A-2.
Consider recommending receipt of report on the recently enacted Oakland ordinance regarding vulnerable roadway and sidewalk users [Requested by Director Peeples – 3/26/14] (Report 14-115).
Denise Standridge 891-4833
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 Bi-monthly Budget Update for February and March, 2014 (Report 14-128).
Jim Pachan 891-7215
B-2.
Consider recommending receipt of the Monthly Report on Investments for March, 2014 (Report 14-131).
Jim Pachan 891-7215
B-3.
Consider recommending receipt of the FY 2013-14 Third Quarter Employee and Non-Employee Out-of-State Travel Report (Report 14129).
Jim Pachan 891-7215
B-4.
Consider recommending receipt of the FY 2013-14 Third Quarter Travel and Meeting Expense Report for Directors and Board Officers (Report 14-130).
Linda Nemeroff 891-7284
B-5.
Consider recommending receipt of the FY 2013-14 Third Quarter Surplus and Obsolete Materials Report (Report 14-132).
Tom Prescott 891-7221
B-6.
Consider recommending approval to dispose of surplus and obsolete parts and materials through sale, or means most advantageous to the District (Report 14-071).
Tom Prescott 891-7221
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 28, 2014 4
Page 4 of 8
B-7.
Consider recommending receipt of report from the Internal Audit Department regarding the costs associated with legal services provided by outside counsel [Requested by Director Peeples – 12/12/12; Retained in Committee – 10/23/13] (Report 13-268a).
Alan Parello 891-7203
Briefing/Action Items: B-8.
Consider recommending that the General Manager be authorized to enter into contracts with Kaiser Permanente Health Maintenance Organization (HMO), Health Net HMO, and The Standard Insurance Company and approve renewal rates for Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) and MetLife Dental Plan (Report 14-134).
Kurt De Stigter 891-4791
B-9.
Consider the following reports associated with the Hay Group Classification and Compensation Study:
Kurt De Stigter 891-4791
a) Recommend receipt of report on the proposed amendments to Board Policy 201 (Personnel Policies for Unrepresented Employees) concerning the implementation of a merit pay structure for Unrepresented employees (Report 13-159b); and b) Recommend adoption of Resolution No. 14-023 implementing the Unrepresented Employee Pay Structure and the adoption of new classification specifications for Contract Services Manager, Director of Systems & Software Development, Manager of Systems Analysis Operations Data Systems Administrator and Senior Advisor (Report 13-159c) B-10. Consider recommending receipt of the Quarterly Report on the Status of Contracts and Purchase Orders over $50,000 (Report 14-136).
Tom Prescott 891-7221
B-11. Consider recommending receipt of the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Semi-Annual Payment Report for the Period of October 1, 2013 through March 31, 2014 (Report 14-141).
Phillip McCants 891-5443
B-12. Consider recommending receipt of report on contract compliance approval [Requested by Director Ortiz – 6/12/13) (Report 13-216a).
Denise Standridge 891-4833
C.
Staff Contact or Presenter(s)
SPECIAL PLANNING COMMITTEE – Mark Williams, Chairperson Held immediately following the Finance and Audit Committee. Public Comment (for items not on the agenda) Briefing/Action Items:
C-1.
Consider recommending receipt of informational update on the Bus Rapid Transit 65% design milestone and Business/Parking Impact Mitigation Plans (Report 14-155).
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 28, 2014 5
Dennis Butler 891-4798
Page 5 of 8
C-2.
Consider recommending that the General Manager be authorized to execute a funding agreement with the City of Alameda to receive up to $500,000 in pass-through funding for the Line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction and Sustainability (Line 51 CDRS) Project (Report 14-161).
C-3.
Consider recommending that the General Manager be authorized to enter into Line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction and Sustainability Project Cooperative Agreements with the cities of Alameda, Oakland, and Berkeley (Report 14-159).
RECONVENE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING – Greg Harper, President 6.
REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES
The District Secretary will report on the recommendations made by the Committees, including those items referred to the Consent Calendar Addenda. If discussion or comment is desired, any person may request that an item be considered individually.
A. EXTERNAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE: A-1. Consider receiving the Monthly Legislative Report and approval of legislative positions (Report 14-127). A-2. Consider receiving report on the recently enacted Oakland ordinance regarding vulnerable roadway and sidewalk users [Requested by Director Peeples – 3/26/14] (Report 14-115). B. FINANCE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE: B-1. Consider receiving the Bi-monthly Budget Update for February and March, 2014 (Report 14-128). B-2. Consider receiving the Monthly Report on Investments for March, 2014 (Report 14-131). B-3. Consider receiving the FY 2013-14 Third Quarter Employee and NonEmployee Out-of-State Travel Report (Report 14-129). B-4. Consider receiving the FY 2013-14 Third Quarter Travel and Meeting Expense Report for Directors and Board Officers (Report 14-130). B-5. Consider receiving the FY 2013-14 Third Quarter Surplus and Obsolete Materials Report (Report 14-132). B-6. Consider approving the disposal of surplus and obsolete parts and materials through sale, or means most advantageous to the District (Report 14-071). B-7. Consider receiving report from the Internal Audit Department regarding the costs associated with legal services provided by outside counsel [Requested by Director Peeples – 12/12/12; Retained in Committee – 10/23/13] (Report 13-268a).
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 28, 2014 6
Tom Prescott 891-7221
Dennis Butler 891-4798
Staff Contact or Presenter(s) Linda Nemeroff 891-7284
Dennis Butler 891-4798 Denise Standridge 891-4833
Jim Pachan 891-7215 Jim Pachan 891-7215 Jim Pachan 891-7215 Linda Nemeroff 891-7284 Tom Prescott 891-7221 Tom Prescott 891-7221 Alan Parello 891-7203
Page 6 of 8
B-8.
Consider authorizing the General Manager to enter into contracts with Kaiser Permanente Health Maintenance Organization (HMO), Health Net HMO, and The Standard Insurance Company and approve renewal rates for Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) and MetLife Dental Plan (Report 14-134).
Kurt De Stigter 891-4791
B-9.
Consider the following reports associated with the Hay Group Classification and Compensation Study:
Kurt De Stigter 891-4791
a) Receive report on the proposed amendments to Board Policy 201 (Personnel Policies for Unrepresented Employees) concerning the implementation of a merit pay structure for Unrepresented employees (Report 13-159b); and b) Adopt of Resolution No. 14-023 implementing the Unrepresented Employee Pay Structure and the adoption of new classification specifications for Contract Services Manager, Director of Systems & Software Development, Manager of Systems Analysis Operations Data Systems Administrator and Senior Advisor (Report 13-159c) B-10. Consider receiving the Quarterly Report on the Status of Contracts and Purchase Orders over $50,000 (Report 14-136). B-11. Consider receiving the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Semi-Annual Payment Report for the Period of October 1, 2013 through March 31, 2014 (Report 14-141). B-12. Consider receiving report on contract compliance approval [Requested by Director Ortiz – 6/12/13) (Report 13-216a). C. SPECIAL PLANNING COMMITTEE: C-1. Consider receiving informational update on the Bus Rapid Transit 65% design milestone and Business/Parking Impact Mitigation Plans (Report 14-155). C-2. Consider authorizing the General Manager to execute a funding agreement with the City of Alameda to receive up to $500,000 in passthrough funding for the Line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction and Sustainability (Line 51 CDRS) Project (Report 14-161). C-3. Consider authorizing the General Manager to enter into Line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction and Sustainability Project Cooperative Agreements with the cities of Alameda, Oakland, and Berkeley (Report 14-159). 7.
Tom Prescott 891-7221 Phillip McCants 891-5443 Denise Standridge 891-4833
Dennis Butler 891-4798 Tom Prescott 891-7221
Dennis Butler 891-4798
CONSENT CALENDAR ADDENDA
The Board is requested to authorize as recommended from the committee meetings above.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 28, 2014 7
Page 7 of 8
8.
CLOSED SESSION/REPORT OUT
The items for consideration are listed below and will be reported on by the General Counsel as necessary at the end of the meeting.
Denise Standridge 891-4833
8A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9 (a))
Wesley v. AC Transit, et al., ACSC Case No. RG13670505, Claim No. 12-1551. Quarterly Litigation Report Jones v. AC Transit, ACSC No. RG12-620431; Edwin v. AC Transit, ACSC No. RG12-637734; Newton v. AC Transit, ACSC No. RG13-667254; Newton v. AC Transit, ACSC No. RG13-667258; Crawford, et al. v. AC Transit, ACSC No. RG13-699315; Russell v. AC Transit, ACSC No. RG13-699055; Edwards v. AC Transit, ACSC No. RG13-692596; Forest Ambulatory Surgical Associates, L.P., et al. v. United Healthcare Insurance UnitedHealth Group, Inc., et al., U.S. Dist. Ct. (Eastern District), No. C12-02916 PSG-FFM; Freeman v. AC Transit, ACSC No. RG13-683635; and Claims of Haastrup (No. 13-3520) and Paek (No. 13-3824).
8B. Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(b)) (Two Cases)
8C. 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
8D. Public Employee Performance Evaluation
(Government Code Section 54957) Title: General Manager, Interim General Counsel, District Secretary
9.
AGENDA PLANNING
10.
BOARD/STAFF COMMENTS
11.
ADJOURNMENT Next Meeting: June 11, 2014, at 5:00 p.m.
(Government Code Section 54954.2)
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 28, 2014 8
Page 8 of 8
BOARD OF DIRECTORS CONSENT CALENDAR
May 28, 2014 Agenda Items 4A-4D
9
This page intentionally blank
10
BOARD OF DIRECTORS ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT
MINUTES Regular Meetings of the Board of Directors and the Planning and Operations Committees Special Meeting of the Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit General Offices 2nd Floor Board Room 1600 Franklin Street Oakland, CA 94612
Wednesday, May 14,2014 at 5:00p.m. Closed Session: 3:30p.m. (Items 9A-9D) Committee meetings will commence when the Board of Directors recesses to a Committee of the Whole
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS GREG HARPER, PRESIDENT (WARD 2) JOE WALLACE, VICE PRESIDENT (WARD 1) ELSA ORTIZ (WARD 3) MARK WILLIAMS (WARD 4) JEFF DAVIS (WARD 5) JOEL YOUNG (AT-LARGE) H. E. CHRISTIAN PEEPLES (AT-LARGE) BOARD OFFICERS DAVID J. ARMIJO, GENERAL MANAGER DENISE C. STANDRIDGE, INTERIM GENERAL COUNSEL LINDA A. NEMEROFF, DISTRICT SECRETARY
Alamed a-Contra Costa Tra nsit District
May 14,2014 11
Page 1 of 16
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING- Greg Harper, President Wednesday, May 14, 2014, at S:OO p.m.
I The
ACTION SUMMARY
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Board of Directors held a
! Regular meeting on Wednesday, May 14, 2014. !
I
j The meeting was called to order at 3:38 p.m. for the purpose of
Closed Session. All Board members were present with the exception i of Director Williams who arrived at 3:S8 p.m. and Director Davis who I arrived at 4:02 p.m. The District Secretary announced that the Board J would convene in Closed Session to discuss Items 9A-D as listed on j the agenda. Closed Session concluded at S:03 p.m. 1
!
I At S:ll p.m., I to order.
President Harper called the Board of Directors meeting
j
1.
2.
'ROLLCALL Present: Ortiz, Williams, Davis, Peeples, Young, Wallace, Harper
I
I GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
i General Manager David Armijo reported on the following: i• i '•
3.
INFORMATION ONLY
Recent experiences on European transit systems; and Feature article about AC Transit in Mass Transit Magazine.
I
I PUBLIC COMMENT !
I • Jane Kramer commented on transparency and accountability with l
j•
i ;'
I'
!•
I
II • I
regard to agency organizational design and processes, noting that the District should conduct brainstorming sessions and compose the agency's design publicly. She said that the agency has the talent and experience in-house to do this. David Schonbrunn, TRANSDEF, was concerned that ridership has dropped since 2000 and would like to see it rise to 350,000. He and three colleagues were attending the meeting to make suggestions on how to improve the system design to make it easier to understand and ride. Gerald Cauthen commented on Transbay service and bus routes. He said ridership on Transbay was too low and suggested it is because the route structure in the East Bay zig zags through local streets before going to San Francisco. Ken Bukowski commented that the elimination of transfers was a bad idea. He pointed out that some routes only go one direction, such as line F. He asked for more space for bikes on the racks and inside the bus. Bob Feinbaum suggested the NextBus app be marketed more widely. He added that better coordination is required at BART stations where more timed transfers are needed and suggested that BART and AC Transit try to better integrate the two systems.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 14,2014 12
Page 2 of 16
Dwain Crawley, President of AFSCME 3916, commented on contract negotiations. He said that employees are concerned and discouraged about not recovering the concessions made in the last contract and were hoping to conclude negotiations soon so they could get back to the work of the District Oscar Guerra, representing the Training and Education Department, talked about the function and importance of this department to the District. Kenneth Harris, 34 year employee, spoke about the function and importance of the Operations Control Center (OCC). He pointed out that OCC Supervisors workers don't get breaks as they should and shared an incident about the D2 fire at the hydrogen fueling station to illustrate that their jobs put them in harm's way. Nathan Landau, member of the AFSCME Executive Board, commented that the union had made concessions during the recent fiscal crisis and now that the District was rebounding, contract negotiations should be straightforward but they weren't and union members were perplexed. He urged the Board to resolve the contract issues quickly. Maria Campos, AFSCME Representative At-Large, represented the sentiment of the membership. She said members were confused and shocked when presented with the most recent District contract proposal. She observed that when benefits are being threatened, members feel unrewarded and demotivated. She showed a petition signed by over 90% of the membership stating that AFSCME deserves and wants a fair contract. Cheryl Brown, Political and Legislative Director of AFSCME Council 57, commented on shared goals of providing better service, increasing ridership and finding revenue sources. She urged the Board to give AFSCME 3916 a fair contract and quickly conclude negotiations so everyone could move forward. Vicki Riggin, Assistant Transportation Superintendent and AFSCME Vice President, commented that she is excited about being part of the current effort to improve AC Transit. She requested that the District offer AFSCME parity with ATU by giving a 3% raise, not taking away OCC's differential, and not talking about two-tier retirement until ATU does. She said AFSCME does not want to be the stepping stone to ATU's next contract. Jerry Grace commented that there was a shooting at Kennedy High School and some bus routes were diverted in Richmond. He also commented that he was very pleased with the fare changes coming in July. Yvonne Williams, ATU Local 192, commented that many of the problems in service and contract negotiations were caused by inadequate funding. She noted that May is Transit Action Month and called on everyone to call their legislators in Washington and advocate for transit funding on May 20'h. She also stated that the Alameda·Contra Costa Transit District
May 14,2014 13
Page 3 of 16
Alameda Labor Council had not yet endorsed Measure BB due to the outstanding labor issues in the Bay Area.
4.
INFORMATION ONLY
PRESENTATION Update on federal legislative matters. Steve Palmer of Van Scoyoc Associates reported on the following: The Highway Trust Fund, which will run out at the end of July, and how much is needed to sustain current spending levels; President Obama's Transportation Authorization Bill; Senator Boxer's version of the Transportation Authorization Bill; and Potential funding impacts to the Bus Rapid Transit Project as a result of the Annual Appropriations Bill and House Appropriations Bill if passed. Members of the Board inquired about BRT Project funding, the gas tax, reimbursement of 5307 operating funds, what can be done to refocus on bus service and restore bus funding given the popularity of rail projects, and the use of Small Starts funding for rail projects. The item was presented for information only.
5.
CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: PEEPLES/WALLACE to approve the items on the Consent Calendar as presented. The motion carried by the following vote:
APPROVED AS INDICATED
AYES:7: Peeples, Wallace, Ortiz, Williams, Davis, Young, Harper
SA. Consider approving Joint Board of Directors/Accessibility Advisory Committee minutes of March 12, 2014. 58. Consider approving Board of Directors and Standing Committee minutes of April 9, 2014. SC. Consider approving Board of Directors and Standing Committee minutes of April 23, 2014.
I I
50. Consider approving Board of Directors/Board Officers Retreat
i
Min~~~~~~
I
I
SE. Consider authorizing Directors Young and Williams to attend the Conference of Minority Transportation Officials (COMTO) 43'd l National Meeting in Atlanta, Georgia on July 12-15, 2014 (Report 14· 158).
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 14,2014 14
Page 4 of 16
6.
REGULAR CALENDAR
GA. Consider receiving report examining Board Policy 350- Procurement Policy and adoption of proposed amendments [Requested by Director Ortiz- 3/26/14) (Report 14-108).
APPROVED
Chief Performance Officer Tom Prescott provided an overview of the staff report and the recommended policy amendments. He also , explained reporting requirements under the policy.
ii Director Ortiz
asked for further clarification of the following policy
i elements: i!
j
:'
'
•
.
Relationship of the strategic source initiative to the Buy America Goods policy goal; Two-thirds voting requirement for negotiated procurements; Posting of sole-source procurements on the District's website; Authority of the General Manager for budgeted and unbudgeted procurements for services, materials and supplies; Board approval of solicitations; and Cardinal changes to contracts.
! Director Peeples asked what the relationship was between unbudgeted ! procurements and an amendment to the budget. Capital Planning and
I Grants
l
Manager Kiran Bawa advised that unbudgeted items were approved as part of the mid-year budget review.
!
i Public Comment:
I Nathaniel Arnold, ATU local 192, asked if the contracts approved by I the General Manager included the contracting out of ATU jobs.
!i {President Harper explained that the 1
issue was governed by the A TU
contract.]
I
i MOTION:
PEEPLES/WILLIAMS to adopt proposed amendments to Board Policy 350 - Procurement Policy. The motion carried by the i following vote:
I
I AYES:7: Peeples, Williams, Ortiz, Davis, Young, Wallace, Harper RECESS TO STANDING COMMITTEES (as the Committee of the Whole) The Board meeting recessed to the Standing Committees at 6:38p.m. ALL COMMITTEES ARE ADVISORY ONLY.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 14,2014 15
Page 5 of 16
A.
PLANNING COMMITTEE- Mark Williams, Chairperson The Planning Committee convened at 6:38 p.m. All Committee members were present.
ACTION SUMMARY
! Public Comment (for items not on the agenda)
I Jerry Grace invited the
Board and public to participate in the Disability
I Capitol Action Day in Sacramento. !
~~~~~:
II,
Ii MOTION: ORTIZ/PEEPLES to forward !'
I
items A-1 through A-3 to the ! RECOMMEND Consent Calendar Addenda recommending receipt. The motion carried 1' RECEIPT by the following vote: ·
I AYES:7: Ortiz, Peeples, Harper, Wallace, Davis, Young, Williams A-1.1 Consider recommending receipt of the First Quarter Report on the ! Bus Rapid Transit Project (Report 14-109).
i
A-2.
! Consider
A-3.
I Consider
recommending receipt of the Quarterly Report on the I Transbay Transit Center Project (Report 14-110).
recommending receipt of the Quarterly Report on the I District's Involvement in External Planning Processes (Report 14-111).
!
i Briefing/Action Items: i
A-4.
I Consider
recommending that the General Manager be authorized to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Alameda ! County Transportation Commission (CTC) to prepare the District's I Major Corridors Study using Alameda CTC's consultants (Report 14-1 i 119). '
l
RECOMMEND APPROVAL
I
! Transportation Planning Manager Jim Cunradi presented the staff
! report. !
I MOTION: PEEPLES/WALLACE to forward to the Consent Calendar I Addenda recommending approval. The motion carried by the following I' vote: !
I AYES:7: Peeples, Wallace, Harper, Ortiz, Davis, Young, Williams ! A-5. ! Consider recommending receipt of report on Transbay service ! operations and planning, including ridership and fleet assignments ! (Report 14-148).
RECOMMEND RECEIPT
I Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 14,2014 16
Page 6 of 16
[Written comments received prior to the meeting are incorporated into the file by reference.] Director of Service Development Robert del Rosario presented the staff report. Suggestions were discussed to improve the quality of the Transbay service, including stop-skipping, restoring service previously cut, and review the local rider policy to recognize that while there may be a lot of local riders at the beginning of a Transbay line, there will be fewer as the bus gets closer to the bay. In addition, President Harper asked staff to work with Caltrans on the metering policy, noting that buses seem to spend more time waiting in traffic than normal. He also commented on the joint effort between AC Transit and BART to improve Transbay service in areas where BART's capacity is limited as well as ways to better serve BART stations in outlying areas. Mr. del Rosario said staff was looking to initiate an express service for Transbay whereby the bus would stop at every other stop similar to the service in the 1980s. He added that staff was planning on a modest $2.5 million expansion of service and will study geographic areas to determine where to add back service and the type of route that should be put into service. Director Peeples felt some of the facts in the report were contrary to his own observations and the experiences of some Transbay riders who have written to the Board complaining they have been denied boarding and have been left at the temporary Transbay Terminal. Another concern was the notion of providing point-to-point service. Director Peeples reported that that the Board had a formal park and ride resolution and was against it, noting that AC Transit was not a rail system. General Manager David Armijo responded that he was not interested in point-to-point/park-and-ride service, but in ways AC Transit can be more competitive and provide better service. He said that staff is looking to design 3 to 5 lines with a limited number of stops (up to 12) in areas where there are significant problems, and that regional funding is being made available to help alleviate overcrowding at many of the major BART stations in Central and South Alameda County. He further pointed out that the average Transbay line has 29 stops, which , is significant, and the riders pay more money to ride it.
!
i Director Young asked why 25% of the buses carry only 10% of the
I ridership. Mr. del Rosario advised that each Transbay trip requires a i dedicated bus and there are no passengers on the morning or evening I return trips. Mr. Armijo advised that staff is investigating the use of Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 14, 2014 17
Page 7 of 16
short turns, which instead of doing a full 90 minute trip, would allow one bus to do a portion of the trip and another bus to the remainder of it. This approach is. more cost effective and provides betterfrequency. MOTION: Peeples/Yaung to forward to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending receipt. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:7: Peeples, Young, Harper, Wallace, Ortiz, Davis, Williams The Planning Committee adjourned at 7:14p.m. B.
i OPERATIONS COMMITTEE- Joe Wallace, Chairperson i The
Operations Committee convened at 7:14 p.m. All Committee
i' members were present.
ACTION SUMMARY
\
Public Comment (for items not on the agenda) i Jerry Grace commented that it was hard for him to catch the bus in ! Hayward because the station was confusing. 1
l
I Consent Items: l MOTION:
PEEPLES/YOUNG to forward items B-1 through B-7 to the [ Consent Calendar Addenda recommending receipt or approval as i indicated.. The motion carried by the following vote:
i
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR RECEIPT AS INDICATED
AYES:7: Peeples, Young, Harper, Ortiz, Williams, Davis, Wallace B-1.
Consider recommending approval to release solicitations for architecture and engineering, construction management and l construction in support of the project to replace the storm drains at the Emeryville Division (Report 14-142). i
i I
i Director Ortiz asked about Brooks Act compliance, Disadvantaged i' Business Enterprises (DBE) and small business set asides. Chief Planning
l and Development Officer Dennis Butler advised that the Brooks Act is a
! federal
statute that allows qualifications-based procurements for and engineering services relating to the alteration, construction and repair of real property. He added that the solicitation would be sent to the District's list of registered vendors, including DBEs [ and small local business, but because the contract value exceeded $100,000, there would be no set asides for small local businesses.
i architectural
l
I I
i Director Williams asked if the District would be paying prevailing wages
I on the projects.
Director of Procurement Jon Medwin advised that the I prevailing wage element would only apply to construction, not I architectural and engineering services.
Alameda~Contra
Costa Transit District
May 14,2014 18
Page 8 of 16
B-2.
Consider recommending approval to release solicitations for architecture and engineering, construction management and construction in support of the San Leandro Transit Center (Report 14143). Public Comment: Jerry Grace asked when the San Leandro Transit Center would be finished.
B-3.
Consider recommending approval to release solicitations for architecture and engineering, construction management and construction in support of the project to install new bus wash facilities at all operating divisions (Report 14-144). Public Comment: Jerry Grace said that he did not understand what the item was about.
B-4.
Consider recommending approval to release solicitations for architecture and engineering, construction management and construction in support of the maintenance bay upgrade at the Emeryville Division (Report 14-145).
B-5.
Consider recommending approval to release solicitations to complete the detailed design and to refurbish, install, and commission hoist and lift equipment in support of the project to install new bus hoists/lifts at all operating divisions (Report 14-146).
B-6.
Consider recommending receipt of the Quarterly Operations Performance Report for AC Transit fixed route services (Report 14113). Director Peeples commented that several of the reports indicated that there were no Key Performance Indicators (KPI} before August of 2012, and wanted to know if this was because there were different KPis. Chief Operating Officer Jim Pachan advised that the KPis have been enhanced in many ways.
B-7.
Consider recommending receipt of Quarterly Report on Clipper Outreach Activities and Usage (Report 14-151). Briefing/Action Items:
B-8.
Consider recommending approval of contract award to Complete Coach Works for the installation of fifty-one diesel emissions control systems on Van Hool 5000 series buses to comply with the California Air Resources Board transit fleet vehicle requirements (Report 14114).
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 14, 2014 19
RECOMMEND APPROVAL
Page 9 of 16
Manager of Technical Services Stuart Hoffman presented the staff report. MOTION: PEEPLES/WILLIAMS to forward to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending approval. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:7: Peeples, Williams, Harper, Ortiz, Davis, Young, Wallace B-9.
Consider recommending that the General Manager be authorized to: 1) Resume operations at the Richmond Division {03) on a weekday schedule and with the "desired" level of maintenance and improvements outlined in the Facilities Utilization Study presented to the Board on February 12, 2014; and 2) Issue solicitations for architectural and engineering, project management/construction management and construction contracts for the rehabilitation of 03, with options for the remaining operating divisions and central maintenance facility (Report 14-107).
RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH MODIFICATIONS
Chief Planning and Development Officer Dennis Butler presented the staff report. He added that there was no difference in construction costs under the scenarios provided in the report. MOTION: YOUNG/WALLACE to forward to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending that the General Manager be authorized to resume operations at Division 3 under Scenario C provided in the staff report; and approve the issuance of solicitations for architectural and engineering, project management/construction management and construction contracts for the rehabilitation of D3, with options for the remaining operating divisions and central maintenance facility. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:7: Young, Wallace, Harper, Ortiz, Williams, Davis, Peeples B-10. Consider recommending that the General Manager be authorized to execute license agreements to enter and use District property with the United Cerebral Palsy of the Golden Gate for the property at 1531 Webster Street and John and Carole Garcia for the property at 1510 Franklin Street (Report 14-122).
RECOMMEND APPROVAL
Real Estate Manager Hallie Llamas presented the staff report.
i
! MOTION: PEEPLES/YOUNG to forward to the Consent Calendar ! Addenda recommending approval. The motion carried by the following
I vote: ' Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 14, 2014 20
Page 10 of 16
AYES:7: Peeples, Young, Harper, Ortiz, Williams, Davis, Wallace The Operations Committee adjourned at 7:41 p.m.
c. I SPECIAL FINANCE AND AUDIT COMMIITEE- Jeff Davis, Chairperson i The
Finance and Audit Committee convened at 7:41 p.m. All
I Committee members were present.
ACTION SUMMARY
i Public Comment (for items not on the agenda) \ There was no public comment offered. i
i Briefing Items: C-1.
I Consider recommending receipt of report on the proposed FY Z014-1S i Operating and Capital Budgets (Report 14-0Z6d).
RECOMMEND RECEIPT
I [The following documents were incorporated into the file by reference:
I • A presentation on the FY 2014-15 Proposed Budget given at the meeting; A letter from the AC Transit Retirement Board and response by the General Manager concerning the District's annual contribution to the retirement plan; and A handout on the Operating Reserve Fund Balance.]
II Interim Chief Financial Officer Jim Pachan introduced Budget Manager I Hernan Vargas and
Manager of Capital Development and Grants Kiran J Bawa who gave overviews of the operating and Capital budgets for FY 1 2014-15.
I
i Discussion
ensued regarding the level and/or availability of the I District's operating reserves. General Manager David Armijo called l attention to the handout concerning the operating reserve, noting that there was approximately $25 million available as of April 2014. He I added that staff expects to close out the current fiscal year with a [ budget surplus which would be added to the reserve. President Harper ! commented that he would like to see the level of operating reserves increased.
i
I I
I Operating Budget: Questions were addressed. concerning increased [ healthcare costs, District goals and objectives, the billing of staff hours J to the appropriate capital projects, telecommunication expenses, the definition of "other revenues", Measure AA, BB, VV revenues, the role of service employees, and new positions under the Chief Performance Officer. President Harper asked staff not to rule out the possibility of hiring attorneys for the new positions in contract compliance and administration.
I
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 14, 2014 21
Page 11 of 16
Capital Budget: Ms. Bawa addressed questions from the Committee regarding the use of cash operating reserves to fund the District's local match requirement and how multi-year projects are programmed. Follow-up Information Requested: Up-to-date cash reserve figures; Allocation of AB 1107 funds to Special District Two; Clarification in the operating budget with respect to the budget for the Retirement Department and chargebacks for non-labor costs; and Itemization of the expenses for fringe benefits associated with the "Ghost Division" {long-term disability) in the Human Resources budget.
With regard to the letter from the AC Transit Retirement Board concerning the District's annual contribution to the plan, Director Peeples felt that while the changes being made to actuarial longevity tables will result in a higher contribution next year, the extra money available this year should be spent on service improvements, which would help efforts to pass Measure B3. Public Comment: Jerry Grace commented the District needed to have money available for emergencies. l
I
MOTION: YOUNG/WALLACE to forward to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending receipt. The motion carried by the following vote:
I
AYES:7: Peeples, Wallace, Harper, Ortiz, Williams, Young, Davis C-2.
Consider recommending that the General Manager or his designee be authorized to apply for Department of Homeland Security FY2014 Transit Security Grant Program funds for security training for frontline employees (Report 14-149}. ·
RECOMMEND APPROVAL
There was no presentation of the staff report.
\_".
MOTION: PEEPLES/WALLACE to forward to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending approval. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:7: Peeples, Wallace, Harper, Ortiz, Williams, Young, Davis The Finance and Audit Committee adjourned at 8:37p.m.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 14,2014 22
Page 12 of 16
RECONVENE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING- Greg Harper, President The Board of Directors meeting reconvened at 8:37 p.m.
7.
I REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES
ACTION SUMMARY REPORT GIVEN
! District Secretary Linda Nemeroff reported that all of the items from
i the Planning, Operations and Finance and Audit Committee meetings had been referred to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending ! receipt or approval as presented. Item B-9 was forwarded recommending that the General Manager be authorized to resume operations at Division D3 under Scenario C provided in the staff report; and approval to issue solicitations for architectural and engineering, project management/construction management and construction contracts for the rehabilitation of D3, with options for 1 I the remaining operating divisions and central maintenance facility. J
8.
CONSENT CALENDAR ADDENDA MOTION: PEEPLES/DAVIS to receive or approve the items referred to the Consent Calendar Addenda as indicated on the agenda, including ; Item B-9 authorizing the General Manager to resume operations at J Division D3 under Scenario C provided in the staff report; and approval [ to issue solicitations for architectural and engineering, project ! management/construction management and construction contracts for I the rehabilitation of D3, with options for the remaining operating J divisions and central maintenance facility.
RECEIVED OR APPROVED AS INDICATED
Ii AYES:7: Peeples, Davis, Ortiz, Williams, Young, Wallace, Harper '
I The items brought before the Board were as follows: A. A-1. A-2. A-3. A-4.
A-5.
I PLANNING COMMITTEE: Consider receiving the First Quarter Report on the Bus Rapid Transit Project (Report 14-109). Consider receiving the Quarterly Report on the Transbay Transit Center Project (Report 14-110). ! Consider receiving the Quarterly Report on the District's Involvement in External Planning Processes (Report 14-111). Consider authorizing the General Manager to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Alameda County Transportation Commission (CTC) to prepare the District's Major , Corridors Study using Alameda CTC's consultants (Report 14-119). I ' Consider receiving report on Transbay service operations and planning, including ridership and fleet assignments (Report 14-148).
B. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE: B-1. Consider approving the release of solicitations for architecture and i engineering, construction management and construction in support of Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 14, 2014 23
Page 13 of 16
B-2.
B-3.
B-4.
B-5.
B-6. B-7. B-8.
B-9.
B-10.
the project to replace the storm drains at the Emeryville Division (Report 14-142). Consider approving the release of solicitations for architecture and engineering, construction management and construction in support of the San Leandro Transit Center (Report 14-143). Consider approving the release of solicitations for architecture and engineering, construction management and construction in support of the project to install new bus wash facilities at all operating divisions (Report 14-144). Consider approving the release of solicitations for architecture and engineering, construction management and construction in support of the maintenance bay upgrade at the Emeryville Division (Report 14145). Consider approving the release of solicitations to complete the detailed design and to refurbish, install, and commission hoist and lift equipment in support of the project to install new bus hoists/lifts at all operating divisions (Report 14-146). Consider receiving the Quarterly Operations Performance Report for AC Transit fixed route services (Report 14-113). Consider receiving the Quarterly Report on Clipper Outreach Activities and Usage (Report 14-151)'. Consider approving contract award to Complete Coach Works for the installation of fifty-one diesel emissions control systems on Van Hool 5000 series buses to comply with the California Air Resources Board transit fleet vehicle requirements (Report 14-114). Consider authorizing the General Manager to: 1) Resume operations at the Richmond Division (D3) on a weekday schedule and with the "desired" level of maintenance and improvements outlined in the Facilities Utilization Study presented to the Board on February 12, 2014; and 2) Issue solicitations for architectural and engineering, project management/construction management and construction contracts for the rehabilitation of D3, with options for the remaining operating divisions and central maintenance facility (Report 14- 1 107), i Consider authorizing the General Manager to execute license agreements to enter and use District property with the United Cerebral Palsy of the Golden Gate for the property at 1531 Webster Street and John and Carole Garcia for the property at 1510 Franklin Street (Report 14-122).
C. SPECIAL FINANCE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE: C-1. C-2.
Consider receiving report on the proposed FY 2014-15 Operating and Capital Budgets (Report 14-026d). Consider authorizing the General Manager to apply for Department of Homeland Security FY2014 Transit Security Grant Program funds for security training for frontline employees (Report 14-149).
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 14,2014 24
Page 14 of 16
9.
CLOSED SESSION/REPORT OUT Interim General Counsel Denise Standridge reported on the following:
REPORT GIVEN
MOTION: PEEPLES/WALLACE to approve settlement in the amount of $40,000 in the matter of Amour v. AC Transit, WCAB Case Nos. ADJ4384055, ADJ7769611, ADJ7410402. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:4: Peeples, Wallace, Ortiz, Harper ABSENT: Williams, Davis, Young (out of seat) MOTION: PEEPLES/WALLACE to approve settlement in the amount of $35,190 in the matter of 0/oyo v. AC Transit, WCAB Case No. ADJ8196619. The motion carried by the following vote: , AYES:4: Peeples, Wallace, Ortiz, Harper ABSENT: Williams, Davis, Young (out of seat)
I
9A. Conference with Legal Counsel- Existing Litigation 1
! (Government Code Section 54956.9 (a)) i
i Constantino 0/oya v. AC Transit, WCAB Case No. ADJ8196619 j Gregory Amour v. AC Transit, WCAB Case No. ADJ4384055, ADJ7769611, ADJ7410402
i Francisco v. AC Transit, AC5C Case No. RG12617444, Claim No. 11-2676 !
9B. Conference with Legal Counsel- Potential Litigation {Government Code Section 54956.9(b)) (Two Cases)
9C. Conference with Labor Negotiators 1
{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
9D. Public Employee Performance Evaluation 1
(Government Code Section 54957) General Manager, Interim General Counsel, District Secretary
i Title: 10.
I
I AGENDA PLANNING I Director
Williams wanted to know when the Community Outreach ! Center for the Bus Rapid Transit Project would open in Fruitvale.
! Referred to Operations Director Ortiz requested a report on the bankruptcy of ClearEdge and the consequences for AC Transit (to be included in an upcoming report on the Hydrogen Program. {President Harper concurred)
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
May 14, 2014 25
Page 15 of 16
i Director
I
II
I,
Referred to Planning , Director Peeples requested a report and possible letter of support for I car parking protected bike lanes on Telegraph Avenue. (President Harper concurred)
I
Young requested a report on t he impact of t he recent ly j adopted policy on the disposition of lost and unclaimed property on ! the donation of bicycles to area nonprofit organizations.
~
I 11.
I
BOARD/STAFF COMMENTS
i Members of the Board commented i since the last meeting.
on meetings and events attended
'
12.
II
I
ADJOURNMENT 1
There being no further business to come before the Board of Directors,
I the meeting was adjourned at 8:48 p.m. The next meeting of the Board I of Di rectors is scheduled for Wednesday, May 28, 2014. Respectfully submitted,
~~ftf~ District Secretary
Alameda-Cont ra Costa Tra nsit Dist rict
May 14,2014 26
Page 16 of 16
Report No: Meeting Date:
14-124 May 28, 2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) Minutes of AprilS, 2014
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider receiving the Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) minutes of April 8, 2014. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Minutes for April 8, 2014 were approved by the Accessibility Advisory Committee on May 13, 2014. Major topics included: Discussion regarding Joint Meetng with Board of Directors, Election of Chair/Vice Chair, and Fare Change Implementation. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
The Accessibility Advisory Committee was established by the Board of Directors in 1991 to review, comment and advise the Board of Directors and District staff regarding the implementation and enhancement of planning programs and services for seniors and people with disabilities. The AAC consists of 14 members with two members being appointed by each of the seven elected members of the District's Board of Directors. Committee members serve a one year term. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
This report is being provided to inform the Board of the activities of the Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC). ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
This report does not recommend an action.
27
Report No. 14-124 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 April 8, 2014
Department Head Approval:
Dennis W. Butler, Chief Planning and Development Officer
Reviewed by:
Robert del Rosario, Director of Service Development Mallory Nestor-Brush, Accessible Services Manager Kim Ridgeway, Accessible Services Specialist Tammy Kyllo, Administrative Coordinator
Prepared by:
28
Staff Report 14-124 Attachment 1
April 8, 2014
AAC Minutes
MINUTES ATTACHMENT 1 REGULAR MEETING OF THE AC TRANSIT ACCESSIBILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AAC) APRIL 8, 2014 The meeting came to order at I :03 p.m. 1. Roll Call and Introduction of Guests AAC members present: Scott Blanks, Chair Janet Abelson Steve Fort Pam Fadem James Robson Don Queen Deborah Taylor (left at 3:10p.m.) Will Scott Hale Zukas, Vice Chair Marina Villena AAC members absent: Shirley Cressey (excused) Yuli Jacobson
Jim Gonsalves (excused)
Staff:
Mallory Nestor-Brush, Accessible Services Manager Tammy Kyllo, Administrative Coordinator Kim Ridgeway, Accessible Services Specialist Victoria Wake, Marketing and Community Relations Manager
Guests:
Randall Glock Danielle Roundtree
2. Order of Agenda The order of the agenda was approved. 3. Approval of Minutes MOTION: Fort/Taylor approved the March 12, 2014 AAC meeting minutes. The motion carried by the following vote: A YES: 10: Abelson, Blanks, Fadem, Fort, Queen, Robson, Scott, Taylor, Villena, Zukas ABSENT:3: Cressey, Gonsalves, Jacobson 4. Discussion regarding Joint Meeting with the Board of Directors The Committee was pleased with the meeting with the Board of Directors. The Committee agreed with President Harper that a joint meeting between the AAC and the Board of Directors should happen more often and whenever an issue arises. Committee members were happy to meet face to face with the Directors who appointed them. Mallory Nestor-Brush, Accessible Services Manager, announced that Michael Flocchini,
29
Training and Education Manager, will be attending AAC meeting quarterly. The Committee requested staff to forward the Joint Meeting Minutes to the AAC members once they are available. The AAC decided to move forward and ask for Board approval of the AAC Outreach Flyer, which will be used by AAC members to help promote AC Transit accessible bus services. 5. Review of Quarterly ADA Complaints Tammy Kyllo, Administrative Coordinator, reviewed the 3'd Quarter (January I- March 31) FY 12/13 and FY 13/14 Customer Relations ADA Complaints. The ADA-Securement Issues complaints were significantly higher in FY 13114 compared to FY 12/13. 6. Chairs Report Chair Fadem thanked the committee for stepping up, being engaged, and participating by representing all seniors/disabled to make AC Transit more successful. 7. Election of ChairNice Chair Pamela Fadem opened nominations for the AAC Chair for 2014-2015. MOTION: Fadem!Scott nominated Hale Zukas. Zukas withdrew from nominations. MOTION: Taylor/Robson nominated Scott Blanks. MOTION: Abelson/Taylor moved to close nominations. The motion carried unanimously: AYES:10: Abelson, Blanks, Fadem, Fort, Queen, Robson, Scott, Taylor, Villena, Zukas ABSENT:3: Cressey, Gonsalves, Jacobson MOTION: Elect Scott Blanks as AAC Chair for 2014-2015. The motion carried unanimously: AYES:10: Abelson, Blanks, Fadem, Fort, Queen, Robson, Scott, Taylor, Villena, Zukas ABSENT:3: Cressey, Gonsalves, .Jacobson Scott Blanks opened nomination for AAC Vice Chair for 2014-2015. MOTION: Zukas nominated Pamela Fadem. Fadem withdrew from nominations. MOTiON: Scott/Taylor nominated Will Scott. MOTION: Fadem!Blanks nominated Steve Fort. MOTION: Fadem nominated Hale Zukas. MOTION: Abelson/Taylor moved to close nominations. The motion carried unanimously: AYES:10: Abelson, Blanks, Fadem, Fort, Queen, Robson, Scott, Taylor, Villena, Zukas ABSENT:3: Cressey, Gonsalves, Jacobson MOTION: Elect Will Scott as AAC Vice Chair. A YES:4: Abelson, Queen, Scott, Taylor ABSTA1N:6: Blanks, Fadem, Fort, Robson, Villena, Zukas ABSENT:3: Cressey, Gonsalves, Jacobson MOTION: Elect Steve Fort as AAC Vice Chair. A YES:2: Blanks, Robson ABSTAIN:8: Abelson, Fadem, Fort, Queen, Scott, Taylor, Villena, Zukas ABSENT:3: Cressey, Gonsalves, Jacobson MOTION: Elect Hale Zukas as AAC Vice Chair. 30
A YES:4: Fadem, Fort, Villena, Zukas ABSTAIN:6: Abelson, Blanks, Queen, Robson, Scott, Taylor ABSENT:3: Cressey, Gonsalves, Jacobson There was a tie between Will Scott and Hale Zukas for Vice Chair so the members re-voted. MOTION: Elect Will Scott as AAC Vice Chair. A YES:4: Abelson, Queen, Scott, Taylor ABSTAIN:6: Blanks, Fadem, Fort, Robson, Villena, Zukas ABSENT:3: Cressey, Gonsalves, Jacobson MOTION: Elect Hale Zukas as AAC Vice Chair. The motion carried with the following vote: A YES:6: Blanks, Fadem, Fort, Robson, Villena, Zulms ABSTAIN :4: Abelson, Queen, Scott, Taylor ABSENT:3: Cressey, Gonsalves, Jacobson Congratulations to the new AAC Chair, Scott Blanks and Vice Chair, Hale Zukas. 8. Fare Change Implementation Victoria Wake, Marketing and Community Relations Manager, reported that the new fare policy and pricing changes were adopted by the Board of Directors in December 2013 and will start July I, 2014. The changes to local fares include introducing a day pass, eliminating transfers, reducing Clipper cash prices, and reducing the price of the Adult 31-Day Pass. The only change to transbay fares is the elimination of the mag-strip paper version of the free local-to-transbay transfer, which will be available on Clipper. Single-ride cash fares, local and transbay, will not change. Wake also reported that internal training includes bus operator education plans, which stared in March and will continue through June. Public outreach is also planned to adequately inform customers of the specitlcs of the changes. The Committee would like to see a rolling 24-hour day pass and more locations to purchase Clipper cards. 9. Board Liaison Report Director Peeples reported on the following items: • The April 9, 2014 Board of Directors Meeting will be held at El Cerrito City Hall. Agenda items include: o Short-Range Transit Plan (SRTP) o Small Transit Vehicle Procurement - To improve service through the purchase of ten small transit vehicles for a pilot program on low-productivity routes in the Central and South county areas 10. Review of Lift/Ramp Road Call Report The report for the period of January 19, 2014- March 15, 2014, showed 9 lift/ramp road calls. Of these 9 roadcalls, I was chargeable or mechanical. Some Committee members stated that for the 2 items with the "Debris under Ramp" the Operators should have the appropriate tools they need to clear the debris. 11. Review ofMCI 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 was concerned with the two dates, February 13, and February 21, that were down to 81%. 12. Service Review Advisory Committee (SRAC) Report Janet Abelson reported that the next SRAC meeting will be May 6, 2014. 31
13. Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC) PAPCO Report Hale Zukas reported that the 2014 Annual Mobility Workshop is tentatively scheduled for Friday, October 17, 2014 at the Ed Roberts Campus in Berkeley. 14. Public Comments None. 15. Transit Correspondence This is an informational item for the committee. 16. Member Communications and Announcements Hale Zukas reported that the - BART Fleet of the Future New Train Car Model, Invitation for people with disabilities event is at the Nmth Berkeley Station on April29, from 2:00 -7:00pm. Staff will send an email to the Committee. 17. Staff Communications and Announcements Tammy Kyllo, Administrative Coordinator, shared the changed in the Brown Act that was distributed by the District Secretary. Kyllo also reminded the Committee that the next meeting will be held in the 41h Floor conference room. 18. Set Next Agenda & Meeting Date The next AAC Meeting will be held Tuesday, May 13, 2014 at 1600 Franklin Street, 41h Floor, Oakland, CA. Agenda items include Quarterly Training Update and Discussion on Meeting Locations for the AAC Meeting. 19. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 3:41 p.m.
32
Staff Report 14-125
Minutes Meeting of the AC TRANSIT RETIREMENT BOARD April10, 2014
ROLLCALL
Chair Jeffrey Lewis called the meeting to order at 9:14 AM Members Present: Lewis Clinton, Davis Riemer, Joyce Willis, Chair Jeffrey Lewis, and Vice Chair Yvonne Williams, -- 5 Absent at Roll Call: None Members Absent: None Also Present: Hugo Wildmann, Retirement System Manager; Adelle Foley, Retirement System Administrator; Russell Richeda, Legal Counsel; (the following individuals were at part of the meeting) H.E. Christian Peeples, District Board Liaison; David Armijo, AC Transit General Manager; Denise Standridge, AC Transit Interim General Counsel; Carolyn Smith, and Kevin Novak, NEPC; Osvaldo Pereira, Park Square Capital; Mike Keough and Julien Colville, Alcentra, and Graeme Delaney-Smith, Alcentra by phone. PUBLIC COMMENTS
None Hugo told the Board that several agenda items would be taken out of order to enable non-Board members to join in the discussion of selected items. REGULAR CALENDAR
Hugo introduced AC Transit's Interim General Counsel, Denise Standridge to the Board. She described her professional experience, including 13 years as a litigator. The Retirement Board welcomed her and Board members said they look forward to working with her. (AC Transit General Manager joined the Board for Agenda Items Q and R) Q. Letter to the District Board Pertaining to Plan Amendment 13-A-16 R. AB 1222 PEPRA and Plan Amendment 13-A-16 General Manager David Armijo told the Board that he had received an update on the litigation associated with application of PEPRA to transit agencies at a CTA (California Transit Association) meeting. He said that there had been very little
33
AC Transit Retirement Board April10, 2014 progress, and the deadline might have to be extended beyond January 2015. He also raised the question of what other transit agencies are doing. Vice Chair Williams stressed that PEPRA does not apply to members of ATU, so there is no reason to delay clarification of this issue with regard to those employees. Director Peeples said that the problem is that in reality AC Transit and the Retirement Board are following AB 1222 -- excluding transit agencies from PEPRA -- yet the PEPRA amendment is still part of the Retirement Plan. Member Clinton reviewed the background of the current situation. The District Board and staff were working on a Tier II retirement plan when PEPRA became the law in California and created a general "Tier II" plan. Now the District must reinstate the original effort. Chair Lewis replied that the Retirement Board needs an updated Plan to reflect AB 1222, and carmot wait for development of a new Tier II Plan. He suggested that the District Board might rescind the PEPRA amendment. Counsel Richeda added that from the Retirement Board's perspective a suspension of the PEPRA amendment would also be possible. Member Riemer stated that he understood the legal and political complications involved in crafting a new amendment, but he wondered what legal impediment there would be to revoking the PEPRA amendment. General Manager Armijo cited the question of the status of new hires. General Manager Armijo agreed to help to resolve this issue. He said that he would bring it to the District Board, in closed session, in two weeks and return to the Retirement Board in May with a response. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: WILLIAMS/CLINTON to adopt the Consent Calendar. (5-0-0-0)
Ayes: Noes: Abstain: Absent:
Members Clinton, Riemer, and Willis, Vice Chair Williams, and Chair Lewis-- 5 None None None
APPROVED A. Approval of Minutes for March 13,2014
APPROVED
2 34
AC Transit Retirement Board April!O, 2014
B. Approval ofFinancials for February 2014 APPROVED C. Approval oflnvoices in the Amonnt of$112,255.34 APPROVED D. Approval of Retirements for May 2014 I. John Luc Morrill
#39- Term Vested
APPROVED REGULAR CALENDAR (CONTINUED) E.
Approval of Retirements for April/May 2014, With conditions, if any: I. Frank Campbell 2. Charles Cuterry 3. Aubrey Johnson
4. Vicki Toney 5. Alice Williams 6. Leonard Hester
#30989 (May) #32247 (April) #31988 (May) Holding back estimated amount pending completion of Domestic Relations Order #1212 (May) #32371 (April) #31876 (April)-- Term Vested
MOTION: WILLIS/WILLIAMS to approve the six retirements listed above effective April/May 2014. (5-0-0-0) The Board congratulated retiree Vicki Toney for 36 years of service. F.
Rescission of Retirement for Frank Cambra At the March 2014 meeting the Board approved a Service retirement effective April I, 2014 for Frank Cambra Badge 30242. On March 28,2014 staff received a notification that Mr. Cambra withdrew his application.
MOTION: WILLIAMS/WILLIS to rescind approval of Frank Cambra's April!, 2014 Service Retirement. (Carolyn Smith and Kevin Novak, NEPC joined the Board for Agenda Items G through P.) G. Asset Allocation and Rebalancing
3 35
AC Transit Retirement Board April!O, 2014 This Agenda item will be discussed in May as part of the quarterly investment performance report. H. European Focused Direct Lending Hugo recalled that the Board had approved placing half of the Private Debt allocation with Crescent. They agreed to consider European firms for the other half, because of an absence of other US opportunities. NEPC had recommended considering two firms on their Focused Placement List, and the Board had invited Park Square Capital and Alcentra to make presentations in April. Hugo told the Board that Alcentra invested in smaller companies with no leverage, whereas Park Square invested in larger companies and enhanced returns by leveraging up to I to I on senior assets. Park Square has suffered no defaults, while Alcentra has had a 1.5% default rate, with a 51% recovery rate. Both firms have 70 to 75% invested in senior debt. With regard to returns, Carolyn said that it would be necessary to wait until the end of the investment period to be sure of ultimate returns. Chair Lewis called a recess at 10:01 AM The meeting resumed at I 0: II AM The presentations by Park Square and Alcentra each lasted about one hour. (Osvaldo Pereira, of Park Square Capital, joined the Board for Agenda Item I.) I.
Presentation by Park Square Capital on European Direct Lending Carolyn introduced Osvaldo Pereira, a Partner at Park Square Capital. He told the Board that the Park Square team had left Goldman-Sachs 10 years ago, after specializing in subordinated investments. He noted that Park Square had done very well during the credit crises, and had never had a default. They do not invest in small companies, which he characterized as too volatile
Osvaldo reviewed the situation in the "credit-starved" European market after the credit crises of 2007. He pointed out that European banks had purchased large quantities of toxic US loans. European Banks hold 66% of Collateralized Loan Obligations (CLOs) as opposed to 29% in the US. The regulatory changes associated with Basel III were designed to make sure that the banks held capital for theirCLO investments. Turning to a chart, Osvaldo pointed out that the number of investors has dropped by half and the size of the investments has fallen even more, since 2007. As a result
4 36
AC Transit Retirement Board AprillO, 2014 European loans are more attractive investments. When dealing with leverage, he stressed the importance of due diligence. He said that Park Square gets to know the businesses and lends funds to safe companies with modest leverage, at a discount. Their target return is LIBOR + 4.5-5% on senior debt, and 75% of their investments are in senior debt. Their blended target returns are 11-13% Gross IRR Their investments are in well-known firms, mainly in Northern Europe. He told the Board that Park Square had waived the minimum investment cutoff for NEPC clients, enabling the Retirement Fund to invest. Park Square is trying to raise $650 million. They have 19 of the expected 30 investors. In response to a question about foreign exchange risk, Osvaldo said that this risk is hedged. The Board thanked Osvaldo for his presentation. (Osvaldo Pereira of Park Square left the meeting at this point.) Carolyn stressed that waiving the minimum investment for NEPC customers carries no obligation on NEPC's part to realize a total investment amount. Chair Lewis called a recess at II :II AM The meeting resumed at II :22 AM (Mike Keough and Julian Colville, Alcentra, joined the discussion of Agenda Item J, and Graeme Delaney-Smith, Alcentra, joined the discussion by phone.) J. Presentation by Alcentra on European Direct Lending Carolyn introduced Mike Keough, who introduced Julian Colville and Graeme Delaney-Smith. Julian told the Board that the Alcentra team has a long middlemarket track record. Alcentra bought out a Collateralized Loan Obligation manager I 0 years ago. They first invested in senior loans, and expanded their portfolio to include mezzanine investments. Alcentra is owned by the Bank ofNew York (BNY), which provides compliance and legal support, freeing Alcentra to focus on investments. Julian and Graeme summarized the history of European bank loans, their size, their volume, losses in the credit crisis and the constraints placed by the resulting regulatory reaction. Graeme explained that since the credit crisis Alcentra has become a senior sourcing channel and the lead arranger, as banks and accounting firms sold off credits. The government of the United Kingdom chose Alcentra as one of four lenders to step in and provide credit to British companies.
5 37
AC Transit Retirement Board AprillO, 2014 Alcentra avoids certain sectors, companies, and geographic regions, and reviews the business model and management team of companies carefully. The investments are in middle-market businesses in northern Europe and the UK. Graeme told the Board that during 2013 Alcentra had made three investments for their new Alcentra European Direct Lending Fund, which AC Transit is considering - two uni-tranche, and one senior debt - three are in the pipeline, and they expect a total of 20 to 25. Julian said that he expected the final close to new investors to be the third quarter of 2014, and all of the capital to be invested by the end of2015. The Plan's funds would be drawn down over this time period. The target returns are LIBOR plus 5 percent for senior debt, with higher returns for mezzanine debt. He added that the companies in which Alcenta invests generally are not rated. Julian described a situation during which Alcentra had to step in due to a default. They selected new management, added capital, and sold the business after it improved. None of the defaults has resulted in liquidation. Responding to questions, Graeme stressed that Alcentra is not lending to companies that banks do not want to lend to. Park Square lends to larger companies, while Alcentra is a lead arranger. He said that they are in different areas. Finally, the opportunities in direct lending in Europe will continue at favorable rates because the recovery at European banks is some five years behind that in the US. The Board thanked the Alcentra presenters. Chair Lewis called a recess at 12:40 PM The meeting resumed at 12:44 PM K. Next Step(s) on European Direct Lending Chair Lewis told the Board that they could make a decision on investing the $12 million in Direct Lending that day, or wait until a later meeting. Hugo pointed out that the Park Square and Alcentra funds would be open for investments for a few months, so an immediate decision was not necessary. Counsel Richeda mentioned the advantage of making a decision while the presentations were fresh in the minds of Board Members. Chair Lewis mentioned that Park Square lends to larger companies and leverages some of the loans. The difference in fees depends on revenue. Board Members discussed their impressions of the two managers, and the differences between them, including the impact of Alcentra's parent company, BNY. They also considered the alternatives of placing $12 million with one manager, or splitting the investment between the two managers.
6 38
AC Transit Retirement Board April10, 2014
MOTION: RIEMER/CLINTON to invest $12 million in Park Square's European Direct Lending fund. To ask outside counsel Tom Hickey to review the contract for a fee of around $7,500. (5-0-0-0) L. Crescent Direct Lending Investment Update
Hugo reported that the contract with Crescent had been signed. They will inform us when it is time to move the funds. M. Custody Bank Recommendation Hugo recalled that the Board had authorized staff to enter into contract negotiations with Northern Trust to become the Retirement System's custody bank as of July 1, 2014. He reported that he had asked for the favorable terms extended to another retirement system. The Board directed Hugo to sign the contract if these terms are made available, or return to the Board in May if significant differences remain. N. Investment Manager Presentations The Board discussed the scheduling of investment manager presentations. Board Members had preferred annual presentations, but recognized that they should revisit that strategy as the number of managers has increased. Hugo suggested presentations every two years or as the need arose, and noted that discussions with index managers are not necessary. The Board asked Hugo to develop a proposed schedule and a policy recommendation for the May or June meeting.
0. NEPC Work Plan Carolyn referred to the plan for May, which included the quarterly investment performance report and a review of international small cap managers. P. Calendar for 2014 The Board will take a look at the meeting dates for October and November at the May meeting. S. Website Hugo told the Board that the Retirement material is now up and running on the AC Transit website. T. Update on Calculation of Pension Benefit for Former Union Officer James Gardner A meeting on this issue was scheduled for May.
7 39
AC Transit Retirement Board April!O, 2014 U. Disability Determination Process This discussion was postponed until May. V. Retirement System Manager Report 1. Joint Meeting Agenda Items This item will be discussed at the May meeting. (Member Clinton left the meeting at this point.) W. (CLOSED SESSION) I) Matters Relating to Personnel: Disability Applicants' and Disability Retirees' Medical Records (Government Code Section 54957; 65 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 412 (1982) a. Ansar Muhammad -- Occupational Disability b. Desiree Lambert - Occupational Disability c. Gwendolyn Randle- Total and Permanent Disability d. Zakiya Mawusi- Occupational Disability e. Aubrey Johnson- Total and Permanent Disability f. Shauna Chappell - Occupational Disability g. Arsenia Legaspi- Total and Permanent Disability h. Keith Wade- Total and Permanent Disability 1. Ray Dunhams- Total and Permanent Disability Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Government Code Section 54957) Title: Retirement System Manager X. (RESUME OPEN SESSION) I) Report and/or Action on Closed Session Items There were no actions to report. STAFF COMMENTS
None RETIREMENT BOARD COMMENTS
None ATTORNEYS' REPORT
None ADJOURNMENT 8 40
AC Transit Retirement Board April! 0, 2014
MOTION: RIEMER/WILLIAMS to adjourn. The Board adjourned at 1:22PM.
9 41
This page intentionally blank
42
Report No:
T1?9NS/T
Meeting Date:
14-174 May 28,2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
SUBJECT:
Travel Authorization
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider authorizing members of the Board of Directors and the General Manager to attend the 2014 American Public Transportation Association (APTA) Annual Meeting and EXPO on October 12-15, 2014 in Houston, Texas. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In accordance with Board Policy 180A, this report requests approval of out-of-state travel to attend the APTA Annual Meeting and EXPO in Houston, Texas. Attended by policymakers, board members, government agencies, manufacturers, suppliers, and consultants the annual meeting, includes general sessions and forums focused on current issues facing public transportation and features first-rate professional speakers. This year's meeting is held in conjunction with EXPO 2014, the industry's premier trade show. BUDGETARY/FISCALIMPACT:
The estimated cost of the trip is $2,946.50 and includes registration, airfare, lodging, per diem and ground transportation.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
Pursuant to Board Policy 180A, all out-of-state travel for Directors and Officers to attend a conference or a meeting related to District business and at District expense, shall be approved by action of the Board of Directors prior to incurring expenses. This travel authorization has been prepared in accordance with Board Policy 180A. APTA's Annual Meeting is the flagship event for public transportation professionals to engage in educational sessions, forums, tours, and network with peers. This year's annual meeting is held in conjunction with EXPO 2014. Taking place triennially, EXPO is the industry's premier trade show where more than 15,000 professionals from around the world come together to connect, share, and discover the most innovative public transportation solutions. EXPO presents the world's largest collection of manufacturers, suppliers, and consultants all under one roof. 43
Report No. 14-174 Page 2 of 2 Estimated costs:
~ conterence~Fe-;;
-· ............ --===~=~=~~oo.oo[ Airfare __ __ . $~50.(JQ , · $1,050.00 : . lodging {5 nights@ $210/night) ! Pe~ ciiem(Gdays@ $71/day IRS rate) $366:so*!
!
1
l_±~iif·cijr~~spo~ta:o~-{~days @-$30/=a=)_il. ·s!!!~:~~j
*Reduced amount for first and last days af travel; excluding conference provided meals included in the registration fee. Upon return from the trip Directors are required to provide a brief oral or written summary of their activities and/or information learned during the trip not later than the next Board meeting. In accordance with Policy 180A, the Board is asked to authorize out-of-state travel to the 2014 APTA Annual Meeting and EXPO in Houston, Texas for members of the Board of Directors and the General Manager. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
APTA's Annual Meeting serves as a forum to improve knowledge, professional and technical skills, and provides networking opportunities for public transportation officials and professionals at all levels. The impact on the District of sending Directors and the General Manager to the annual meeting would be entirely positive. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
There are no practical alternatives to the course of action recommended in this report. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES:
Board Policy 180a - Travel and Meeting Expense Reimbursements for Directors and Board Officers. ATTACHMENTS: 1: 2014 APTA Annual Meeting Program Overview
Department Head Approval:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
Prepared by:
Kathleen Eichmeier, Assistant District Secretary
44
Staff Report 14-174 Attachment 1
American Public Transportation Association
Program Overview The 2014 APTA Annual Meeting & EXPO is scheduled for October 12-15 in Houston, Texas at the Hilton Americas & George R. Brown Convention Center. Hosted by Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County (Metro), APTA's major policy & management conference attracts public transportation leaders and managers from all sectors. Join the discussions with your colleagues to share best practices. Register early for this opportunity to network with colleagues and learn from one another.
Please note that this schedule is preliminary and subject to change. Last updated Apri/8, 2014
Saturday, October 11 8 a.m. - 6 p.m.
Committee Meetings
9:30a.m . - 5 p.m .
Conference Registration Desk Host Information Desk 12 -4 p.m .
APTA Board of Directors Meeting Sunday, October 12
7-9 a.m.
Mid-Level Managers Welcome and Orientation Breakfast Meeting liiiO UfH
7 a.m . - 6 p .m .
Committee Meetings
8 a.m . - 6 p .m.
Conference Registration Desk Host Information Desk Moderators/Speakers & AV Preview Room 1-2:15 p.m .
This isAPTA How do you get the most out of your membership?
6-7:30 p.m .
Welcome Reception Reception sponsored by Parsons Corporation
PARSONS Monday, October 13 7 a.m. - 4 p.m.
Conference Registration Desk Host Information Desk Moderators/Speakers & AV Preview Room 7-8:15 a .m .
Committee Meetings
8:30- 10 a.m .
OPENING GENERAL SESSION America's Future is Riding on Public Transportation Sponsored by Keolis North America
10:30 a.m. - 5 p.m .
EXPO OPEN 45
1 - 4 p.m. - International Showcases 1 - 4:30 p.m. -Livable & Sustainable Communities Showcases
1:30-3 p.m.
~
1 - 4:45 p.m. - Learning Zone Presentations GENERAL SESSION
I U.S. Department of Transportation Officials I
3:30 - 5:30 p.m.
Concurrent Educational Sessions
1
Complete Streets & Integrated Urban Mobility
I
Congress & The Federal Transportation Agenda AdWheel Awards Ceremony Financing New Projects Sponsored by TranSystems Corporation
Big Transportation Infrastructure Projects Worldwide 5:45- 6:45 p.m.
L
Am~rican Publi~~ansportation Foundation Reception Tuesday, October 14
8 a.m . - 4 p.m.
r
Conference Registration Desk Host Information Desk Moderators/Speakers & AV Preview Room
8-10a.m.
APTA AWARDS BREAKFAST Sponsored by SPX GENFARE
SP>< >Genfare 9 a.m. -4:30p.m.
EXPO OPEN 10 a.m.-2:45p.m. - Learning Zone Showcases 10 a.m.- 4 p.m. -International Showcases 10:15 a.m.-2:45p.m. Livable & Sustainable Communities Showcases
1:30-3:30 p.m.
Concurrent Educational Sessions Good Faith Effort: Live or Memorex? APTA-COMTO Disadvantaged Business Enterprises {DBE} Assembly Leadership APTA 2014 Graduation & 2015 Welcome; American Public Transportation Foundation Scholarship Awards How Agencies are Complying with MAP-21 It's All About Advocacy: How to Engage the Public and Stakeholders Funding for Public Transportation Sponsored by TranSystems Corporation
4-5:30 p.m .
6-7 p.m. '-----------·---
GENERAL SESSION The Increasing Demand for Innovative Suburban Public Transportation Services ·ea~ership APT A Reception
- - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - - -
Wednesday, October 15 ------46
Committee Meetings
7-8 a.m. 7:30-10 a.m.
Conference Registration Desk Host Information Desk Moderators/Speakers & AV Preview Room 7:30- 9:15a.m.
APTAIWTS BREAKFAST Sponsored by Keolis North America
lx
L __ 9 a.m.- 3 p.m.
EXPO OPEN 10-11:30 a.m. Livable & Sustainable Communities Showcases 10 a.m. -1:45 p.m.- Transit Technology Showcases 10 a.m.-2:15p.m. -International Showcases
9:30- 11 a.m.
Concurrent Educational Sessions Management Tools for Integrating Emerging Technologies The Transit Board Member's Role in Procurement Trends in Public Perceptions: New Expectations + What's Ahead for Public Transportation Services & Communications
Workforce Development Sponsored by TranSystems Corporation Local Residential & Commercial Real Estate Values: Public Transportation's Connections & Impact Arts in Transit 11:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m.
CLOSING GENERAL SESSION
12:45-5 p.m.
Committee Meetings
1 -5 p.m.
Federal Transit Administration's Major Capital Investment Grant Workshop
2-4:30 p.m.
I
Houston Metro Technical Tours
Copyright© 2014 American Public Transportation Association • 1666 K Street NW, 11th Floor, Washington, DC 20006 Telephone (202) 496-4800 • Fax (202) 496-4324 • Contact Us • Logo Usage • Staff Intranet
47
This page intentionally blank
48
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR CALENDAR
May 28, 2014 Agenda Item 5A-5B
49
This page intentionally blank
50
Report No: Meeting Date:
14-026e May 28, 2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
REPORT
STAFF TO:
AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Recommended FY 2014-15 Annual Operating and Capital Budget
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider receiving report on the FY 2014-15 Annual Operating and Capital Budget and adoption of Resolution 14-023 approving the FY 2014-15 Annual Operating and Capital Budget. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Recommended Annual Operating and Capital Budget for FY 2014-15 are being provided for Board consideration of adoption. The recommended budget includes total projected operating revenues of $344.4 million and total operating expenses at $342.3 million, which allows for a surplus of $2.1 million. The recommended budget provides adequate funding to support existing operations and planned service expansion initiatives in support of the agency goals and objectives for this next fiscal year. The recommended budget includes adjustments that were reviewed with the Board during the May 14, 2014 presentation of the Proposed Budget. The operating revenues for the Recommended budget are consistent with the projections from the Proposed budget presented at the May 14th Board meeting. Staff finalized the analysis of subsidies and made no further changes to the figures presented in the Proposed Budget. Labor costs were reduced by approximately $1.6 million from the Proposed budget projections due to a reduction in projected pension contribution expenses from the final estimate provided by the pension fund actuarial consultant. In accordance with the May 14th Proposed Budget presentation, the savings from the reduction in pension contribution expenses will be placed in reserves in an effort to achieve the Board's objectives for District stability and to provide for potential opportunities for future service enhancement. The FY 2014-15 Recommended Capital Budget of $84.2 million is funded by an assortment of Federal, State, Local and District capital funds. Federal funding for the FY 2014-15 Recommended Capital Budget is significantly higher than previous years as the District has discontinued the use of FTA formula funds for preventive maintenance. This report also provides a status of projects in the existing FY 2013-14 Capital Budget, where there is a net savings of $174,097 in District capital funds due to projects being completed by the end of the fiscal year with remaining balances that are offset by one project that is requiring additional funding.
51
Report No. 14-026e Page 2 of 6
BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: The recommended operating budget of $344.4 million is consistent with the Proposed operating budget, with a projected operating surplus of $2.1 million. The Recommended operating budget includes only minor adjustments from the Proposed budget. The primary change is the reduction to pension contributions presented to the Board on May 14. The recommended capital budget projected at $84.2 million includes $10.9 million in District capital funds for fleet replacement and expansion, facility improvements, technology and system-wide enhancements.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: FY 2014-15 GENERAL FUND RECOMMENDED OPERATING BUDGET Staff presented highlights in a Proposed Draft of the Operating Budget for FY 2014-15 at Board meeting on May 14, 2014. Staff proposed minor adjustments as part of the presentation and updated the Proposed Budget based upon feedback from the Board. The Recommended Operating Budget maintains a balanced level of revenues and expenses and provides for an operating surplus. Total Operating Revenues are projected at $344.4 million and Total Operating expenses are projected at $342.3 million (See Attachment 1). The Recommended Budget provides for several initiatives previously discussed for service enhancements and investments in workforce training and development. Operating revenues and subsidies are projected to grow at an aggregated rate of 2% over the FY 2013-14 Mid-Year Budget, based on the reported positive economic trends in the East Bay and in the general Bay Area economy. Please refer to Attachment 2 for a detailed overview of all the operating revenues by category. Staff finalized the analysis of the Sales-Tax based subsidies and Property Taxes subsidies for the close of FY 2013-14, and concluded that the projection presented as part of the Recommended Budget is the best forecast available at this time. Farebox revenues are expected to continue the positive growth trend that occurred in FY 201314 due to ridership growth. The projected increase in farebox revenue for the new fiscal year will be accomplished through both ridership growth on existing service and potential ridership growth from service expansion. The Bay Area economy is projected to continue the improvement seen in past years which is anticipated to result in ridership growth at 4.4% over the prior year. The increase in ridership and farebox revenues will also be supported by the service enhancement plan that will go into effect during the new fiscal year. The baseline Operating Expenses are projected to grow at 1.4% over the FY 2013-14 Mid-Year Budget which is primarily due to contractual wage increases, healthcare cost increases, and revised labor cost estimates associated with operations. The most notable change in the Recommended Budget over the Proposed Draft is the reduction in the estimated cost of the 52
Report No. 14-026e Page 3 of 6 Pension Contribution Expense by $1.6 million due to a final projection provided by the pension actuarial consultant resulting in a higher operating surplus. The Service Enhancement Plan is expected to increase overall operating expenses to $342.3 million resulting in an overall growth of 2.0% in operating expenses over the FY 2013-14 Mid-Year Budget. The positive trends for labor costs that resulted in reductions in Pay to Platform cost factors are expected to stabilize during the upcoming fiscal year. The change in the composition of the workforce is expected to continue to reduce or maintain the baseline cost of wages, as more workers in the Operations workforce are now in the less senior ranges of the pay scale. Services expenses are expected to increase due to salary and benefit increases for the contracts with the Alameda and Contra Costa County Sheriff departments, as well as a potential need to continue managing more complicated legal cases. Training services are also an important component of the recommended budget for the year, in order to seek productivity and leverage on the important investments in technology the District has made and is making in recent years. Other Expenses are expected to show a significant increase due to the known costs of elections for Board members, which occur every two years. The following summarizes the main budgetary changes and adjustments in the Recommended FY 2014-15 Operating Budget as compared to the Proposed FY 2014-15 Budget presented May 14: FY 2014-15 Recommended Operating Budget Changes from Proposed: Operating Revenues: •
No changes are recommended at this point.
Operating Expenses: •
Pension Contributions costs are showing the positive effect of a reduction of $1.6 million from the Proposed budget projections due to a reduction in projected pension contribution expenses from the final estimate provided by the pension fund actuarial consultant. In accordance with the May 14th Proposed Budget presentation, the savings from the reduction in pension contribution expenses will be placed in reserves in an effort to achieve the Board's objectives for District stability and to provide for potential opportunities for future service enhancement.
The Recommended Operating Budget is based on a projected 1.70 million revenue service hours, 22.0 million operated miles, and 1,901 full-time equivalent positions. It is anticipated that the Service Enhancement Plan will result in 20 additional operators. FY 2014-15 RECOMMENDED CAPITAL BUDGET Staff presented highlights of the FY 2014-15 Capital Budget at the last Board meeting on May 1 14 h, where there was discussion on the District's capital priorities and funding sources. The discussion did not result in any changes being proposed by the Board to the proposed FY 201415 Capital Budget at $84.2 million, including $10.9 million in District capital funds. However, 53
Report No. 14-026e Page 4 of 6 since the last Board meeting, staff reviewed the list of existing FY 2013-14 Capital Budget and identified some projects that will be completed by end of the fiscal year freeing up $174,097 in District capital funds. The FY 2014-15 Recommended Capital Budget of $84.2 million is funded with a mix of Federal, State, Local and District capital funds as shown in Attachment 3. Federal funding for the Proposed FY 2014-15 Capital Budget is significantly higher than previous years as the District has discontinued the use of FTA formula funds for preventive maintenance. Additionally, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's (MTC) 15-year Core Capacity Challenge Grant Program will allow the District to advance Federal funds for capital projects including vehicle replacement and expansion, and facility rehabilitation and replacement. State 1-Bond funds along with appropriate other local and District funds will be used as matching funds and to fully fund other projects. Funding is proposed for twenty-six new projects in FY 2014-15 (see Attachment 3). The recommended projects fall in four major categories - fleet replacement; facilities & maintenance; technology; and system-wide enhancements. The Recommended FY 2014-15 Capital Budget also includes reprogramming of funds for four projects to free up State 1-Bond funds which are more flexible and can be used as match funds for other large projects. The table below provides a summary of funding by category for Recommended FY 2014-15 Capital Budget. Table· FY 2014-15 Recommended Capital Budget by Fund Source
Category
District
Federal
State
Local
Total
Fleet Replacement & Expansion
$0.3
$35.7
$8.9
$0.0
$44.9
Facilities & Maintenance
$1.4
$16.5
$5.5
$0.0
$23.4
Technology
$1.9
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$1.9
System-wide Enhancements
$7.2
$0.0
$2.1
$3.3
$12.6
Adjustments
$0.1
$16.8
($15.5)
$0.0
$1.4
$10.9
$69.0
$1.0
$3.3
$84.2
Sub-total
Fleet Replacement & Expansion - FY 2014-15 vehicle procurements consist of (80) revenue vehicles along with. $300,000 for non-revenue vehicles. The procurements include a mix of hybrid and diesel fueled vehicles, as per the Fleet Replacement Plan, as well as an additional (15) 40 foot vehicles to support service expansion. Facilities and Maintenance- The major projects recommended for funding include Division 3 refurbishment, Operations Control Center relocation, and other miscellaneous facility upgrades at various divisions. Technology - District funds will be utilized for replacement of the Storage Area Network, PeopleSoft version upgrade, and minor equipment replacement. System-wide Enhancements- The FY 2014-15 proposal includes funding to address a portion of the District's capital commitment for the Transbay Terminal project, Richmond Parkway
54
Report No. 14-026e Page 5 of 6 Transit Center improvements, local matching funds for Contra Costa College Transit Center improvements, and the San Leandro BART Terminus project. Adjustments- The use of FY 2014-15 Federal funds in lieu of previously programmed State 1-
Bond funds will free up this flexible source of funds for potential use as matching funds for other large projects, such as bus procurements and Division 3 refurbishment. The District's projected capital needs over the next five years exceed $300 million. The recommended budget addresses roughly one-third of the existing requests within a five-year window. Additional funding towards these projects needs to be identified as part of future capital budget development. MTC's Core Capacity program is providing assistance in funding the District's capital needs, including vehicle replacements and facility refurbishment and upgrades for the next 15 years. Attachment 4 provides a status of projects in the existing FY 2013-14 Capital Budget of $455.1 million, including a breakdown of all current major projects funded by a mix of federal, state, local and District capital funds as shown in the chart below. This list has been revised to identify projects completing by the end of the fiscal year with a remaining balance of $269,449 in District capital funds and some that require additional funding due to higher costs totaling $95,352 requiring a net adjustment of $174,097 to the existing capital budget.
Existing Capital Program Funding Summary
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
Staff analyzed several alternatives based upon requests presented by operating areas for resource allocations and new proposed activities and programs. Staff was guided by its updated goals and objectives and by the specific strategic priorities and initiatives defined in the Draft report, including enhanced service, support of the Districts' infrastructure, wellness and safety initiatives, and renewed investments in developing the technical and professional
55
Report No. 14-026e Page 6 of 6 capabilities of the workforce. Staff updated the Recommended Budget based upon discussion with the Board at the May 14th Board meeting.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: This report is being provided to inform the Board of the finalization of activities associated with the development of the FY 2014-15 budget, and to recommend adopting the FY 2014-15 Operating and Capital Budget under consideration in this report. Staff proceeded to consider many alternatives suggested and requested by the District's operating managers and has included several alternatives reviewed by the Board.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: SR 13-285 Budget Development Process and Calendar, November 13, 2013 SR 14-033 Discussion regarding the Short Range Transit Plan - SRTP, February 12, 2014 SR 14-048 FY1314 Mid-Year Budget review, February 26, 2014 SR 14-026 FY1415 Proposed Budgeting Framework, March 26, 2014 SR 14-026c FY1415 Draft Budget, April 23, 2014 SR 14-026d FY1415 Proposed Budget, May 14, 2014 Board Policy 312 Budget Policy
ATTACHMENTS: 1: FY1415 Recommended Operating Budget Summary la: FY1415 Recommended Operating Revenues 2: Resolution 14-023 Recommended Operating and Capital Budget ~: FY 2015 Recommended Capital Budget 4: FY 2014 Existing Capital Budget Department Head Approval:
James Pachan, Interim Chief Financial Officer
Prepared by:
Hernan Vargas, Budget Manager Kiran Bawa, Capital Planning and Grants Manager
56
ACTRANSIT FY 2014-15 RECOMMENDED OPERATING BUDGET- GENERAL FUND, BUDGETARY BASIS 5/28/2014
Recommd Recommended
FY1415 Fav I (Unfav)
Operating
Changevs
Budget Draft
Operating Budget
Budget
FY1415
Fav I
Apr 23,2014
May 14,2014
May28, 2014
Proposed
(Unfav)
FY1415 Proposed
FY1415 Operating
FY1415
%change
CONSOLIDATED Revenues Operating
Subsidies
$
$ 68,846,570 $ 68,846,570 $ $ 275,178,950 $ 275,518,950 $ 275,518,950 $
0.0%
344,365,520
0.0%
!Total Revenues
68,846,570
344,025,520
0.0%
344,365,520
Operating Expenses
Total S&W
$ 111,514,473 $ 113,266,355 $ 113,266,315 $
Fringe Benefits
40
0.0%
85,454,738 85,454,738 $ $ 17,451,000 $ 15,831,604 $ $ $
1,619,396
0.0% 9.1%
PEPRA
$ $ $
Baseline Labor Costs
$ 212,179,513 $ 216,172,094 $ 214,552,658 $
1,619,436
UAAL Pension Amortization
$
23,948,000
Contracts and labor agreements $
718,545
Pension Contrib, Normal Cost
ITotal Labor Costs
82,864,040 17,801,000
N/A 0.8%
$ 23,948,000 $ 23,948,000 $
0.0%
$
0.0%
974,881
$
974,881
$
$ 236,846,059 $ 241,094,974 $ 239,475,538 $
1,619,436
0.7%
District's Operating Expenses (2,000,000) $
to be Capitalized
$
(1,000,000) $
Services
Other Expenses
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
23,324,859 18,647,833 15,265,348 6,078,865 14,080,000 1,100,000 26,761,513 2,326,897
Total Operating Expenses
$ 343,431,374 $ 341,759,444
Fuel and Lubricants
Other Materials and Supplies Utilities and Taxes Casualty and Liability Interest Expenses ADA and DB purchased transp
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
23,708,768 18,060,679 14,811,202 6,127,987 10,000,000 1,139,943 26,210,513 2,605,378
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
(2,000,000) $
0.0%
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
23,708,768 18,060,679 14,811,202 6,127,987 10,000,000 1,139,943 26,210,513 2,605,378
$ 340,140,008 $
1,619,436
0.5%
rn
:D ~
....I
0
..
II>
$
Service Enhancement Plan
$
2,101,787
$
504,289 $
2,123,725
$
2,101,787
N/A
> .....
CONSOLIDATED Operating Surplus I (Deficit)
Ol
$
594,146 $
57
1,619,436
272.6%
:-< ~
SR 14-026e ATT.1A
ACTRANSIT FY1415 RECOMMENDED OPERATING REVENUE BUDGET THIS YEAR
LAST YEAR
NEXT YEAR
I
'' Recommended !' Operating '' '' Revenue '' ''' Budget FY 2015
FY 2013 Actuals
I
FY 2014 Mid-Year Budget
''
May28
''
Change Fav I (Unfav) FY2015 over FY 2014 Mid Year
$
%
REVENUES AND SUBSIDIES
Of:!erating 1.a Farebox 1.b Contract Services 2 BART Transfers 3 Interest Income 4 Advertising 5 Other Revenue 6 Rental Income 7 Other Operating Revenues
8 Total Operating Revenues Subsidies 9 Transportation Develop. Act (TDA)
51.434 5.602 2.460 72 1,819 3,729 324 8.404
53,000 5,600 3:6oo. 50 1,919 2,081 350 8,000
55,650 5.600 3,600 70 1,977 1,940 350 I 7,937
2,650
. . 20 58 (141)
. (63)
0.0% 40.0% 3.0% -6.8% 0.0% -0.8%
65.440
66,600
69,187
2,587
3.9%
2,585
4.5% 5.0% 8.3% -14.5% 2.9% 3.6%
53,980
57,543
10AB1107 11 Measure B
34,812 24,657
35,850 24,000
60,128 37,643 26,000
12 State Transit Assistance (STA)
10,071 3,978
11,379 4,347
9,730
(1,649)
4,475
127.498
133,119
137,976
128 4,857
13 Measure J 14 Total Sales-Tax based Subsidies
5.0% 0.0%
1,793 2,000
4.5% 0.0% 3.3%
79,360 29,439
76,500 29,241
79,942
3,442
16 Measure AAJBBIVV 17 Total Property Taxes Subsidies
29,241
.
108,799
105,741
109,183
3.442
18 ADA Paratransit Fund (inc. fares) 19 Federal Assistance (ADA) 20 ADA Paratransit Vehicles
6,043 2.476 1,088
5,922 3,988 1.433
5,812 4,107 1,476
(11 0) 119 43
-1.9% 3.0% 3.0%
21
Total ADA related Subsidies
9,607
11,343
11,395
52
0.5%
22 Fed Assis · Prev Maint. 23 Capital Funds Exchange 24 Total Prev Maint & related Subs
7,657
.
. .
7,657
.
.
. . .
25 Supplemental Service
2,000
2,225
2,225
.
26 Labor Reimbursement
2.469
1,800
(21)
0.0% -1.2%
.
1,821 2,722
12,808
12,660
12,600
.
. . .
15 Property Taxes
26.a BART Escrow Acct 27 RM2 subsidies, DB local assist 29 Federal Assistance Section 5307 Capital Funding
.
.
.
(2,722) (60)
-100.0% -0.5%
. .
31 TPI 32 Lifeline STA JARC, AB664, other
9,686
989
34 Total Other Federal, State Local
26,963
20,417
16,625
(3,792
-18.6%
34 Total Subsidies
280,524
270,620
275,179
4,559
1.7%
35 Total Revenues and Subsidies
345,964
337,220
344,366
7,145
2.1%
58
(989)
-100.0%
5/21/2014 11:54 AM
SR 14-026e A TT.2
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RESOLUTION No. 14-023 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE GENERAL FUND OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 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 KPls Framework, and Strategic and Fiscal Priorities for the Development of the General Fund Operating and Capital Budgets for FY 2014-15 on Budget workshops and meetings held on March 26, 2014, April 23, 2014 and May 14, 2014 according to the approved Budget Development Calendar and Process; and WHEREAS, the General Manager has developed the General Fund Operating and Capital Budgets for FY 2014-15 based on prevailing economic conditions; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has received and reviewed the General Manager's Proposed Operating Budget for FY 2014-15 on the Board session held May 14 2014, NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District does resolve as follows: SECTION 1. Approves the Recommended General Fund Operating and Capital Budget for Fiscal Year 2014-15 in the amount of$ 428.6 Million as identified on the FY 2014-15 Operating and Capital Budget Summary: a. Total Operating Revenues. $ 344.4M b. Total Operating Expenses. 342.3M c. Total Capital Program 84.2M d. Total Capital Program Contributions 84.2M e. Transfer to/(from) Unrestricted Net Assets$ 2.1M
Resolution No. 14-023
Page 1 of2 59
SECTION 2. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption by four affirmative votes of the Board of Directors.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of May, 2014.
Greg Harper, President
ATTEST:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
I, Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary for the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a Regular meeting of the Board of Directors held on the 28th day of May, 2014 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
Approved as to Form and Content:
Denise C. Standridge, Acting General Counsel
Resolution No. 14-023
Page 2of2 60
AC TRANSIT DISTRICT Resolution No 14-023 (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS)
< >
F-Y2~ii't;
t(GCOmMerideet: SJ281~t4<<
OPERATING REVENUES & SUBSIDIES: Farebox
55,650
Other Operating Revenue Total Operating Revenues
13,537 69,187
Sales-Tax based subsidies
137,976
Property-Tax based subsidies
109,183 -
Preventive Maintenance and related Subsidies
ADA Paratransit related operating subsidies
11,395
Other Federal, State and Local grants subs Total Operating Subsidies
16,625 275,179
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES & SUBSIDIES
344,366
OPERATING
Total Revenues FY 2014-15$ 344.4M
EXPENSES:
239,476
Labor Costs District's Operating Expenses to be Capitalized
(2,000)
Services Fuel & Lubricants Other Materials & Supplies Utilities & Taxes Casualty & Liability Interest Expense Other ADA and DB purchased transp
23,709 18,061 14,811 6,128 10,000 1,140 2,605 26,211
/.
340,140 1----------------
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSE
/
OPERATING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT)
4,226
Service Enhancement
2,102 1------------/
ADJUSTED OPERATING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT)
2,124
CAPITAL PROGRAM District Funded Capital Program Grant Funded Capital Program District Contribution to Capital Program Grants Contribution to Capital Program
/
Total Capital Program
(10,900) (73,300) 10,900 73,300
FY 2014-15 $84.2M Total Contributions to Fund Capital Program
FY 2014-15 $ 84.2M
-
Total Capital Program, Net of Funding
/
Total Expenses FY 2014-15 $ 342.3M
.-··-··-··-··-··-··-··- ·---- ..
REVENUE I EXPENSE ADJUSTMENTS: Transfer From I (To) Unrestricted Net Assets
(2,124)
TOTAL ADJUSTMENTS
12,124
-
ADJUSTED SURPLUS I (DEFICIT)
61
.. __________
- .. - .. ----· -
iTransfer From I (To) Unrestricted --~Net Assets '"'(~o1_4,1S._s __ 2.,1.~---··-··-··-··-··-·
SR 14-026e Attach-3
FY 2015 PROPOSED CAPITAL BUDGET Category
Project Description
Federal
State
Fleet Replacement & Expansion
(25) 40ft Urban Hybrid Bus
15,460,000
3,865,000
19,325,000
Fleet Replacement & Expansion
(40) 40ft Urban Diesel Bus
14,720,000
3,680,000
18,400,000
Fleet Replacement & Expansion
(15) 40ft Expansion Buses
5,520,000
. 1,380,000
6,900,000
Fleet Replacement & Expansion
Non Revenue Fleet Replacement
Facilities & Maintenance
D3 Major Rehabilitation
13,360,000
4,640,000
18,000,000
2,200,000
800,000
3,000,000
Facilities & Maintenance
OCC Relocation (D2 to CMF)
Facilities & Maintenance
D6 Roof Replacement
Facilities & Maintenance Facilities & Maintenance
District
Local
300,000
Grand Total
300,000
198,000
462,000
GO- Fire pipe corrosion repair
87,000
203,000
290,000
Training Education Ctr Parking Lot Gate
99,000
23 1,000
330,000
Facilities & Maintenance
Boardroom Enhancements
Facilities & Maintenance
Districtwide Hazardous Waste Awng
Facilities & Maintenance
Districtwide Pigeon Abatement
660,000
250,000
250,000
60,000
60,000
105,000
105,000
Facilities & Maintenance
Maint Equipment> $1 ,000
120,000
120,000
Facilities & Maintenance
Facilities Equipment Replacement
130,000
130,000
Facilities & Maintenance
Automated Extnl Defibrillator
120,000
120,000
Facilities & Maintenance
Emergency Facilities Maintenance
200,000
200,000
Facilities & Maintenance
Finance Equipment> $1,000
10,000
10,000
Technology
Storage Area Network Replacement
750,000
750,000 970,000
Technology
Upgrade PeopleSoft Version 9.2
970,000
Technology
IS Equipment Replacements
185,000
Systemwide Enhancements
Transbay Terminal Capital Contribution
Systemwide Enhancements
Contra Costa Coli Transit Ctr (Match)
Systemwide Enhancements
211 Marketing NF (Match)
Systemwide Enhancements
Richmond Parkway Transit Center
185,000
7,000,000
2,148,000
165,000
165,000
10,000
10,000
Systemwide Enhancements
San Leandro Bart Terminus
Adjustments
(27) 60ft BRT Bus
(1,368,794)
1,534,424
Adjustments
CAD/AVL
(1 ,350,777)
16,160,000
(13,566,249)
1,940,000
(1 ,940,000)
Adjustments
Fareboxes I SGR
Adjustments
Major Corridor Study
Adjustments
D4 Chiller Replacement TOTAL
9,148,000
411,200 2,424,000 $10,874,629
Page 1 of 1
62
3,000,000
3,000,000
321,000
321,000 165,630 1,242,974
(411 ,200) (2,424,000) $68,955,224
$1 ,006,751
$3,321,000
$84,157,604
SR 14-026e Attach-4
EXISTING CAPITAL PROGRAM STATUS OVERVIEW ID
Project
Project Manager
Category
Project Cost
Amount Spent
% Spent
2017
23 x 60' Articulated Buses
Stuart Hoffman
Vehicles
18,811 ,548
18,778,288
2018
65 x 40' Urban Buses
Stuart Hoffman
Vehicles
29,563,727
29,192,670
99%
2019
16 x 40' Transbay Buses
Stuart Hoffman
Vehicles
7,602,920
7,596,520
100%
18,252,191
100%
100%
2021
38 x 40' Transbay Buses
Stuart Hoffman
Vehicles
18,316,477
2030
Automatic Passenger Counters
Howard Der
Vehicles
133,500
130,228 Complete
2034
Replace Non-Revenue Vehicles
Stuart Hoffman
Vehicles
203,723
203,723
Complete
2040
Replace Fareboxes
Sandra Lewis-Williams Vehicles
11,800,000
11 ,287,455
96%
2050
(51) Diesel Paticulate Filters
William Tanis
Vehicles
1,685,802
1,431,392
85%
2060
MCI Exhaust Retrofits
Stuart Hoffman
Vehicles
55,000
2066
68 x 40' Urban Buses
Stuart Hoffman
Vehicles
31,436,761
2068
27 x 60' BRT Hybrid Buses
Stuart Hoffman
Vehicles
25,006,405
2098
10 x Small Vehicles
Stuart Hoffman
Vehicles
1,151,532
1829
Internal Text Messaging Signs
WahidAmiri
Technology
1,700,000
1836
Peoplesoft Server Migration
Sai Krishnan
Technology
1857
Disaster Plan-ITS Systems
Michael Carvalho
Technology
2029
IS-Claims System
Kashyap Sharma
3,272
(95,352)
0% 31,105,287
99% 0% 0%
1,269,999
75%
389,574
249,574
Complete
140,000
458,630
454,870
Complete
3,760
Technology
143,000
44,160
31%
2033
NextBus Replacement
Kashyap Sharma
Technology
120,000
81,014
68%
2047
IS-Unity upgrade to 8.x
Christina Ebojo
Technology
60,000
38,860
65%
1001 9
Hastus Integrated Operations
Patricia Broadbent
Technology
3,515,000
2,284,478
65%
2081
IS-Equipment Replacement
Michael Carvalho
Technology
150,000
129,317
Complete
1366
Richmond Parkway Transit Center
Nathan Landau
Other
650,000
645,107 Complete
2055
Spectrum Ridership Growth
Victoria Wake
Other
2,036,232
2078
Corridor Study
Jim Cunradi
Other
460,000
TBD
211 Marketing Mobility Management
Victoria Wake
Other
290,000
N/A
Other
14,140,012
14,140,012
Various Transbay Terminal Contribution
Dist~i~t
Rema1ntng
652 ,426
20,683
32% 0% 0% 100%
1701
Oakland Hydrogen Fueling Facility
Joe Callaway
Hydrogen
13,908,782
12,386,053
89%
1703
ZEBA Bus Maintenance
Salvador Llamas
Hydrogen
2,202,696
1,189,312
54%
326,924
68%
1704
Marketing and Outreach - ZEBA
Salvador Llamas
Hydrogen
482,495
2027
D2-Hydrogen Maintenance Bay
Joe Callaway
Hydrogen
650,000
2099
Hydrogen Facility O&M
Joe Callaway
Hydrogen
339,591
28,698
8%
1655
66th Avenue
Rick Wrzesinski
Facilities
59,485
55,630
94%
1808
D2-Storm Drains
Joe Callaway
Facilities
1,598,035
936,044
59%
1856
State of Good Repair-Veh.
Sandra Lewis-Williams Facilities
7,403,000
2,026,842
27%
1861
CAD/AVURadio System Replace
Sandra Lewis-Williams Facilities
39,008,751
2,360,412
6%
2010
Rework GO Office Config
Magnus Hienzsch
Facilities
100,000
2011
GO-Fire Code Compliance
Craig Michels
Facilities
211,000
67, 144
32%
2012
Boardroom AV
Magnus Hienzsch
Facilities
200,000
95,770
48%
2023
D6-Reroof Maint & Mack Bldgs
Magnus Hienzsch
Facilities
548,000
2024
D6/D4- Purchase solar PV
Joe Callaway
Facilities
1,500,000
2025
D6-Pavement Rehabilitation
Craig Michels
Facilities
500,000
0%
0%
0% 0% 404,318
81%
2028
Upgrade Hazmat berms
Wahid Amiri
Facilities
474,600
158
0%
2032
Finance Equipment
Lewis Clinton
Facilities
14,000
9,976
Complete
203 7
Photovoltaic Solar Panels Ph2
Joe Callaway
Facilities
3,005,265
2,743,642
91%
2044
D4-Garage Deck Repair, Phase 1
Magnus Hienzsch
Facilities
532,000
48,050
9%
2049
GO-Relocate Guard Desk Phase 1
Magnus Hienzsch
Facilities
134,000
2054
San Leandro BART Terminal
Joe Callaway
Facilities
3,929,026
448
0%
2056
D2-Roof Replacement /Equipment
Craig Michels
Facilities
655,000
76,756
12%
2058
D4-Trans.Bidg./Chiller Replacement
Magnus Hienzsch
Facilities
3,030,000
3,271
0%
2079
Emergency Facilities Repair
Craig Michels
Facilities
215,000
146,038
Complete
68,962
2080
Maintenance Equipment
Salvador Llamas
Facilities
15,000
7,697
Complete
7,303
2082
Conlra Costa College Transit Center
TBD
Facilities
660,000
0%
Joe Callaway
0%
2089
Bus Washer Rehab
Facilities
3,000,000
2090
External Painting of Divisions-D2, D4, D6 Wahid Amiri
Facilities
700,000
2091
D4-Environmental Cleanup
Facilities
200,000
Wahid Amiri
Page 1 of 2
63
4,024
0%
0% 177,572
89%
SR 14-026e Attach-4
EXISTING CAPITAL PROGRAM STATUS OVERVIEW ID
Project
. Project Manager
Category
. Project Cost
2092
Computer to Plate Machine
BoAubrey
Facilities
88,000
2094
Lift & Hoist Replacement
Joe Callaway
Facilities
1,500,000
10009
GO-Replace Fire Alarm Panel
Craig Michels
Facilities
10011
District-wide Elevator Modernization
Craig Michels
10016
D2/D6-Study Parking Structures
Joe Callaway
10033
District-Wide Weatherproofing
10036
GO Weatherization
Amount Spent
% Spent
80,000
91%
880,000
873,504
99%
Facilities
2,661,742
2,366,329
89%
76,000
Magnus Hienzsch
Facilities Facilities
128,555
Magnus Hienzsch
Facilities
5,459,600
0%
74,426 98% 107,110 Complete 1,414,227
26% 32%
Various
Facilities
641,002
205,029
2042
Line 51 Corridor TPI
Wil Buller
Corridors
10,639,445
2,931,055
28%
2001
BRT Right Of Way/TPA
David Wilkins
BRT
3,163,000
1,817,500
57%
Various Facilities SGR Projects
2002
BRT Preliminary Engineering
David Wilkins
BRT
5,421,850
5,288,135
100%
2003
BRT Final Design, Plans & Spec
David Wilkins
BRT
14,642,000
10,610,795
72%
2004
BRT Construction
David Wilkins
BRT
99,945,000
0%
2005
BRT Vehicles
David Wilkins
BRT
2,580,000
0%
2006
BRT Proj MgVConstr Mgt
David Wilkins
BRT
43,511,000
7,806,066
18%
David Wilkins
BRT
8,635,708
8,635,708
100%
$455,128,471
$203,268,211
45%
Various BRT Environmental Totals
Page 2 of2
64
District . . Rema1mng
21,445
$174,097
~I
Report No: Meeting Date:
TI"?9#S/T
12-172a May 28,2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
On-Call Project Management Services
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider awarding on-call contracts to URS Corporation, Acumen Building Enterprise and VSCE, Inc. for project management services. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: These contracts will provide on-call project management services to be used as staff augmentation for projects relating to the construction, alteration or repair of real property. These services will permit the District to use project management specialties, such as cost estimating and scheduling on an as-needed basis. This is a qualifications-based procurement. Staff solicited 742 firms, of which 426 were small/local/disadvantaged business enterprises. Five firms responded to the solicitation and were evaluated by a three-person panel comprising representatives from AC Transit and the San Leandro Principal Engineer. The panel found the recommended awardees to be the most qualified with two of the three recommended awardees being small local businesses. The final contracts are on-call contracts valued at a maximum of $750,000 with a period of performance from contract award for 36 months. Of the total contract value, $1,500,000 is for goods and services from small/local/disadvantaged business enterprises. Any tasks issued under these contracts will be firm fixed price taskings. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: Award of these contracts does not have a direct fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Contract Description. These contracts will provide the District with access to specialized project management skills as well as providing the District with short-term staff augmentation to accommodate work load increases. These needs cover a variety of project management areas, such as cost estimating, budgeting, schedule development, work breakdown structure development, drafting of project scopes, and so forth. Many of these specialties are only needed for a limited time period ranging from days to months, depending on the particular project. 65
Report No. 12-172a Page 2 of 4 Implementation Approach. These contracts are on-call, task order based contracts. When the need for services under these contracts is identified, the District will order the services via the existing requisition/purchase order system, in a similar manner to the way on-call transportation planning contracts are used. Procurement Type and Timeline. The procurement approach used for the subject contracts is a qualifications-based, price not determinative, "Brooks Act", as defined by FTA Circular 4220.1F Rev3.
The procurement proceeded according to the timeline in Table 1; the results of the solicitation are in Table 2. Action Board authorization to issue solicitation
Solicitation issued Pre-bid conference Solicitation closed Evaluations complete Table 1. Procurement T1melme.
Date July 11, 2012. Staff Report 12-172 February 19, 2014
February 27, 2014 March 20, 2014 May 1, 2014
Metric Number of firm solicited Number of local firms solicited Number of disadvantaged business enterprises solicited Number of firms that responded Number of firms determined to be responsive Number of firms evaluated Table 2. Solicitation Results.
Value
742 108 426 5 5 5
As this is a qualifications-based, price-not-determinative, "Brooks Act" procurement for architectural and engineering services, as defined by FTA Circular 4220.1F Rev 3 3.f, staff convened an evaluation panel comprising representatives from AC Transit as well as the City of San Leandro Project Engineer. The panel evaluated proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria listed in the solicitation and shown in Table 3. Evaluation Criteria Relevant past performance
Weighting
Technical Specialized Experience Professional Qualifications and Technical Competence of Team Members and Depth of Firm Capacity of Firm to Accomplish the Work in the Required Time Quality Control Program Total Table 3. Qualifications Evaluation Criteria
66
20 30 25 20 5 100
Report No. 12-172a Page 3 of 4 The panel's rankings are shown in Table 4. The highest scoring companies are the most qualified to undertake the scope of services and are deemed both responsive and responsible. In accordance with Board Policy Firm URS Acumen Building Enterprise VSCE, Inc. Baypac Consulting Lerch Bates Table 4. Evaluation Result.
Score 347 326 284 279 70
The recommended contract is an on-call contract; each task order issued under the contract will be a firm-fixed price task order. The total maximum value of each contract is $750,000 and a period of performance from contract award for 36 months. There are no option periods for these contracts. The RFQ stated that awards would be made to the three (3) most qualified firms that the District was able to negotiate contracts with individually. Award of these contracts to the recommended awardees would result in a maximum of $1,500,000 going to small/local/disadvantaged businesses, as Acumen Building Enterprise and VSCE, Inc. are small local businesses. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
Award of these contracts would permit staff to use specialized skills that are not needed full time. In addition, the use of these contracts permits the District to expand and contract its capacity as needed. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
There are three alternative approaches to providing the District with the kinds of services envisioned for these contracts; however, it is important to note that having these contracts in place would not preclude the District from using any of these alternative methods. 1. Hire employees. Adding staff to handle the wide range of specialties and paying them fulltime wages and benefits when we only need them part of the time is not prudent. 2. Individual Procurements. The District could opt to solicit proposals for project management services as the need arises. This would result in lengthened implementation schedules and increased workload among project managers and contract specialists with no corresponding benefit. 3. Temporary Employees. The District could use temporary employees, perhaps hired through a placement agency, for the duration of a particular project. This approach might be satisfactory when the need can be filled by a full time person, but is not satisfactory when a project requires a specialty for a limited number of hours per month over a several month duration.
67
Report No. 12-172a Page 4 of 4
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Staff Report 12-172, Authorization to issue solicitations for on-call project management services.
ATTACHMENTS: There are no attachments to this staff report.
Department Head Approval: Reviewed
Prepared
by:
by:
Dennis W. Butler, Chief Planning and Development Officer Denise Standridge, Interim General Counsel James Pachan, Chief Operating Officer/Interim Chief Financial Officer Jon Medwin, Director of Purchasing and Materials Dennis W. Butler, Chief Planning and Development Officer
68
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
May 28, 2014 Agenda Items A-1 – A-2
69
This page intentionally blank
70
Report No: Meeting Date:
14-127 May 28, 2014
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
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider recommending receipt of the monthly legislative report and approval of legislative positions. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: President Obama and U.S. Transportation Secretary Foxx released the surface transportation reauthorization bill, valued at $302 billion over four years to be funded through Highway Trust Funds and corporate tax reform. State tax revenues continue to outperform projections and valued at a $2 billion surplus through April. Staff recommends support positions on the following two state bills: Support of President Pro Tern's Cap & Trade Expenditure Plan which would provide a permanent funding source for transit, and SB 1236 (Monning - D) Transit District: Transit offenses and enforcement which would make giving false information while being issued a citation a punishable offense by Santa Cruz Transit District contracted security officers and district employees . BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Federal legislation Update This week, President Obama and U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx released the Adm inistration's four-year, $302 billion surface transportation reauthorization bill. The bill proposes that the bill be funded through Highway Trust Fund revenues, as well as revenues from corporate tax reform.
71
Report No. 14-127 Page 2 of 3 On the spending side, the Grow America Act proposes: • • • • • •
$199 billion for highways/safety (an increase of 22 percent over FY 2014 enacted levels); $72 billion for the Federal Transit Administration (an increase of 69 percent over FY 2014); $5 billion for TIGER grants (up 108 percent from the FY 20141evel); $3 billion for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (up 32 percent); $3.7 billion for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (up 12 percent); and $19 billion for the Federal Railroad Administration (an increase of 243 percent, due to $9.5 billion set aside for a new Rail Service Improvement Program, which received no funding in FY 2014).
State Legislation Update
1) Tax Revenues estimated at $2 billiion surplus through April April tax revenues are expected to end at about $450 million above projections. The budget forecast assumed April tax revenues would generate $10.989 billion, and April receipts have now reached $11.466 billion. Assuming tax refunds will climb a little, the LAO estimates the state will end the month $450 million higher than estimated. Through the end of March all revenues (income, sales and corporate taxes) exceeded projections by $1.3 billion. Adding the growth income tax growth from April and higher April corporate tax receipts, the surplus to date will reach nearly $2 billion.
2) Legislative Matrix Refer to Attachment 3 for the legislative matrix which lists recommended support positions on SB 1236 which would authorize the governing board of any transit operator to adopt an ordinance making it an infraction for persons to knowingly give false information to an enforcement officer when being issued a citation. The bill would also authorize the governing board to designate district employees or contracted security officers to enforce ordinances as well as violations of Penal Code Section 640 and the graffiti infraction in Penal Code Section 640.5 .. The matrix lists Board positions. Additionally, President Pro Temp Steinberg's Cap & Trade proposal includes a formula that will provide between 25 to 30% of the remainder of Cap & Trade revenues to be allocated to support public transit. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
This report is being provided to inform the Board of monthly legislative activities. This provides clear direction to legislators, and other bodies, of AC Transit's positions. ALTERNATIVES 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. 72
Report No. 14-127 Page 3 of 3
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Staff Report 14- 028: 2014 Federal and State Legislative Advocacy Programs
ATTACHMENTS: 1: 2: 3:
4: 5:
Federal Update from VanScoyoc Associates State Legislative Report from Platinum Advisors State Legislative Matrix FY 2014 Federal Advocacy Program FY 2014 State Advocacy Program
Department Head Approval: Prepared by:
Dennis W. Butler, Chief Planning & Development Officer Beverly Greene, Director of Legislative Affairs & Community Relations
73
This page intentionally blank
74
SR 14-127 Attachment 1
VANSCOYOC ASSOCIATES
Transportation Update May 5, 2014
Steven 0. Palmer, Vice President David Haines, Manager
This Week
Subcommittee Markup:
FY 2015 Transportation Appropriations. On Wednesday, May 7, the House Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Subcommittee is scheduled to markup and vote on its version of the FY 2015 Appropriations bill for the Department of Transportation (DOT) and Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Hearing: Highway Trust Fund Financing. On Tuesday, May 6, the Senate Finance Committee is scheduled to hold a hearing on funding options for surface transportation, including a discussion of the -Highway Trust Fund. Witnesses will include the Congressional Budget Office, Virginia Transportation Secretary, and representatives from Standard & Poor's, AECOM Capital, and the Cato Institute.
Hearing: Surface Transportation Authorization. On Wednesday, May 7, the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee is scheduled to hold a hearing on the upcoming surface transportation authorization bill, with a focus on freight, safety, and rail service. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx will be the only witness.
Hearing: Travel and Tourism.
On Thursday, May 8, the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee is scheduled to hold a hearing on "The State of U.S. Travel and Tourism: Industry Efforts to Attract 100 Million Visitors Annually." The hearing is expected to focus on public and private travel-promotion efforts and the benefits of tourism in the context of the 2012 National Travel and Tourism Strategy, which detailed a plan to attract 100 million international visitors annually by 2021. Witnesses have not yet been announced.
Last Week
Hearing: Rural Air Service. On Apri130, the Aviation Subcommittee of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee held a hearing on the state of air service to small and rural communities. In general, the Subcommittee Members all expressed support for programs like the Essential Air Service program and other federal programs designed to attract air service to rural areas. Witnesses included Susan Kurland, DOT Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs;
75
2 Dr. Gerald Dillingham, Director of Civil Aviation Issues, Government Accountability Office; and representatives from the Air Line Pilots Association, Republic Airways Holdings, Columbia Metropolitan Airport, and Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport.
Roundtable Discussion: State Experiences with PJs. On April 30, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee held a roundtable panel discussion on the in several states experience with P3s. Representatives of Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Florida appeared before the panel. The consensus from all speakers was that P3s are just part of the solution in funding transportation infrastructure across the country, and that each state has unique conditions and each project has unique circumstances that must be considered when considering P3s.
Hearing: TSA Oversigllt.
On April 30, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation held a hearing on the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) efforts to confront the evolving security threats to America's transportation systems. TSA Administrator John Pistole testified. Senators expressed concern that TSA's budget had been cut by $500 million and had 3,000 fewer employees than last year. Several Senators asked about exit lane staffing and Administrator Pistole said that the agency is evaluating future options, including the use of technology.
Roundtable Discussion: Freigllt.
On April 30, the Senate Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee (Environment and Public Works) and Surface Transportation Subcommittee (Commerce, Science and Transportation) held a joint roundtable on freight priorities in the next surface transportation bill. Panel participants included the heads of Oregon and Iowa DOTs, as well as representatives from the Coalition of Gateways and Trade Corridors, National Waterways Conference, UPS, Burlington Northern Sante Fe Railway, and Dow Chemical Corporation. Witnesses discussed what steps the federal government can take as part of the reauthorization to help states invest in projects that will enhance freight movement for private sector stakeholders.
Department of Transportation This week, President Obama and U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx released the Administration's four-year, $302 billion surface transportation reauthorization bill. The bill proposes that the bill be funded through Highway Trust Fund revenues, as well as revenues from corporate tax reform. On the spending side, the Grow America Act proposes: • • • • • •
$199 billion for highways/safety (an increase of22 percent over FY 2014 enacted levels); $72 billion for the Federal Transit Administration (an increase of69 percent over FY 2014); $5 billion for TIGER grants (up 108 percent from the FY 2014 level); $3 billion for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (up 32 percent); $3.7 billion for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration {up 12 percent); and $19 billion for the Federal Railroad Administration (an increase of243 percent, due to $9.5 billion set aside for a new Rail Service Improvement Program, which received no funding in FY 2014).
76
3 Government Accountability Office
Report: AfT Acquisition.
Last week, GAO released a study on the next generation Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) full body scanners. GAO concludes that TSA has not collected or analyzed information that might help it improve its passenger screeners and recommends that TSA not acquire additional AIT machines until several technical issues can be addressed.
###
77
This page intentionally blank
78
SR 14-127 Attachment 2
May 1, 2014 TO:
Director Greg Harper, President, and Members of the Board David J. Armijo, General Manager Beverly Greene, Director, Community Relations & Legislative Affairs
FR:
Steve Wallauch Platinum Advisors
RE:
legislative Update
Deadlines: The first major hearing deadline is Friday, May 2nd. This is the deadline for all bills with a fiscal impact to be moved out of policy committees and to the Appropriations Committee. This has resulted in a long week of very long hearings.
The hearing deadlines on the horizon include the policy committee deadline for non-fiscal bills on May gth, and the fiscal committee deadline on May 23rd. Since this is the second year of the two-year session, the House of Origin deadline is May 30th. The House of Origin deadline requires all bills to be moved to their second house in order to remain alive. New Speaker: The passing of the gavel from Speaker John Perez to Speaker-elect Toni Atkins
has been set for May 1ih. Assembly Floor Session is scheduled for 1:00 p.m. on May 1ih to swear-in Assemblywoman Toni Atkins as the 69th Speaker of the Assembly. This will be a day long affair with an Ecumenical Service that morning, the swearing-in ceremony, followed by a reception in the Rotunda. Numbers: April tax revenues are expected to end at about $450 million above projections. The budget forecast assumed April tax revenues would generate $10.989 billion, and April receipts have now reached $11.466 billion. Assuming tax refunds will climb a little, the LAO estimates the state will end the month $450 million higher than estimated. Through the end of March all revenues (income, sales and corporate taxes) exceeded projections by $1.3 billion. Adding the growth income tax growth from April and higher April corporate tax receipts, the surplus to date will reach nearly $2 billion.
1
79
Special Session: The Legislature's return from Spring Recess was greeted with a new special session being called by the Governor. The purpose of this Special Session is to revise and replace ACA 4, the ballot measure pertaining to the Rainy Day Fund scheduled to be voted upon this November. Originally scheduled to be voted upon in 2012, ACA 4 is the product of a budget deal made by the Schwarzenegger administration in 2010.
The Governor's January Budget Proposal contained revisions to the ballot measure. The Governor called a special session in order to speed up the process of moving a new rainy day plan onto the November ballot. The Governor's plan has been introduced by Speaker Perez as ACA 1 XX. While Speaker Perez support a quick resolution, Senate Pro Tern Stienberg has indicated that the legislature should wait to act until after the budget is complete. This measure does require a 2/3 vote, which will require Republican support in the Senate. The main differences in the Governor's proposal compared to ACA 4 is the creation of a Prop 98 reserve utilizing capital gains spikes to smooth out school funding, and allow debt payments to be made in lieu of depositing funds in the Rainy Day Fund. The Governor's proposal would also double the size of the fund from 5% to 10% of revenues, and limits any withdrawal in the first year of a recession to 50% of the balance. While the proposal requires a vote of the legislature to with drawl any funds, Republicans have expressed concern that a simple majority vote to with drawl funds is too low of bar. Assemblyman Jeff Gore II (R), vice chair of the Assembly Budget Committee, has asked the vote threshold be raised to 2/3. However, advocates for the poor and many Democrats are uncomfortable moving forward following the recession without establishing some restorations in services to vulnerable populations. Both parties have pledged to work with the Governor to try to find an acceptable compromise. CaiEnviroScreen 2.0: The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment {OEHHA) has released the Draft California Communities Environmental Health Screening Toll, Version 2.0, known as CaiEnviroScreen 2.0. This is report identifies areas of the state with the greatest health impacts caused by environmental factors, such as air pollution burdens, water quality, and unemployment. This is the report that will likely be used to determine where to invest cap & trade auction revenue to benefit disadvantaged communities.
The initial report based the screening criteria on ZIP codes. This updated report provides greater detail by conducting the screening based on census tracts. The new report also adds to the screening factors the potential burdens caused by contaminants in drinking water and the impacts relating to unemployment. With the mandate to invest at least 20% of cap & trade revenue in projects that benefit disadvantaged areas, it is important for AC Transit to be familiar with the findings of this report. There is also the likelihood that some funding programs, such as the Zero Emission Bus program, will require 100% of the funds be used to benefit disadvantaged communities. Through the OEHAA website (link below) there is an interactive map that color codes each census tract from lowest score, or least impacted areas, to the highest scores, or most impacted areas. In the East Bay the medium to high impacted areas are west of San Pablo Avenue, 1-580 and 1-880 from Richmond south to the Alameda
2 80
County line. The interactive map allows you to click on each census tract to reveal the statistics for each area. Since this is a draft report, OEHAA is accepting comments on the contents and findings of the report. The deadline to submit comments of CaiEnviroScreen 2.0 is Friday, May 23. A copy of the report and the interactive map can be found at: http://oehha .ca.gov/ej/ces2.html
Cap & Trade: Senate President ProTem Steinberg has abandoned his proposal for a " carbon tax" and ha s unveiled his proposal on expend ing cap & trade auction revenue. This is a counter proposal to the Governor's cap & trade expenditure plan outlined in the January budget. This proposal is consistent with several Senate bills currently moving through the process, but it is uncertain if this proposal will remain on the legislative track or be subsumed by the budget process. The Pro Tern' s proposal includes a significant commitment to public transit funding and the direct allocation of Sustainable Communities implementation funding to regional entities. The proposal would dedicate 30% of cap & trade revenue to public transit capital and operations. In addition 40% of the fund s would flow through regional entities, such as MTC, for affordable housing, active transportation projects, transit oriented development and transportation efficiency projects. While the proposal estimates $1.7 billion per year would be allocated to transit projects, this is based on the most optimistic revenue assumption that auction revenue will reach $5 billion per year. Revenue estimates for cap and trade auction proceeds range from $2-$5 billion annually, with the likely result somewhere in the middle. Regardless of the range of estimates, the Pro Tern's proposal would make the most significant investment in public transit that has been seen in decades. While the details are being developed, particularly with respect to the allocation method, the proposal includes the following elements: •
Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (40%)- Half the funds must be used for affordable hou sin g and half for implementing sustainable communities strategies. This includes investments in affordable housing, transit-oriented development, land use planning, active transportation, and high density mixed use development, tran sportation efficiency and demand management projects.
•
Public Transit Funding (30%) - These funds would be distributed to operators based on GHG performance criteria to build and operate transit projects. At least 5% must be used for direct transit assistance to customers, such as transit passes.
•
High Speed Rail Funding (20%) - These fund s would be continuously appropriated and could be securitized.
•
State Highway and Road Rehabilitation and for Complete Streets (10%)- These fund s would be distributed based on GHG performance criteria and could be used for traffic management, roadway maintenance, and bikeways.
•
Natural resource, water, and waste ($200 million annually) - These fund s would be appropriated annually as part of the budget act and could be used to funds water efficiency infrastructure projects, forestry and landscape issues, wetland development, 3
81
waste diversion and recycling, energy efficiency, clean vehicles, and "black carbon" reduction. •
Climate Dividend ($200 million annual/vi- Allocated as part of the annual budget act these funds could be used to provide a rebate check on monthly fuel bills or once per year rebate with motor vehicle registrations.
•
"Charge Ahead" Electric Vehicle Deplovment Program ($200 million annual/vi -These funds would be used to fund demonstration programs and other financial assistance to expand the use of zero emission cars, trucks, buses and freight movement vehicles.
•
Green Bank Funding (not less than $10 mil/ian annual/vi- These funds would be used to assist in financing clean energy and other environmentally sustainable projects.
Legislation:
Bike Racks: As introduced AB 2707 (Chau) simply added the LAMTA to the growing list of transit operators authorized to use the longer three position bicycle racks. The bill has been amended, to apply to all transit operators. As amended AB 2707 would allow transit operators to use the longer three position bicycle racks on any vehicle that is no more than 40 feet in length. AB 2707 was approved by the Assembly Committee on Transportation with a vote of 15-0, and it is currently pending on the Assembly Floor. AB 2707 does not affect Vehicle Code Section 35400.7, which specifically authorizes AC Transit to use these bicycle racks on all buses, including 45 foot buses if specific conditions are met. In addition, AC Transit is still required to submit a report on or before December 31' 2014, that summarizes any accidents where the size ofthe rack was a factor.
Transit Offenses: SB 1236 (Menning) has also been amended to apply statewide. As introduced, the bill applied only to the Santa Cruz Transit District. As amended, SB 1236 would authorize the governing board of any transit operator to adopt an ordinance making it an infraction for persons to knowingly give false information to an enforcement officer when being issued a citation. The bill would also authorize the governing board to designate district employees or contracted security officers to enforce ordinances as well as violations of Penal Code Section 640 and the graffiti infraction in Penal Code Section 640.5.
4
82
SR 14-127 Attachment 3
ADVISORS
May 1, 2014 Table 1 Proposed Board Actions Subject
Bills
Status
AC Transit RECCOMENDED POSITION
~enator ~teinberg's Cap
ft\s outlined in the Legislative Update, Senate Budget Negotiations Recommended President Pro Tempore, Steinberg has unveiled an Position : SUPPORT expenditure plan for cap & trade auction revenue & Trade Expenditure Plan lhat dedicates 30% of the funds for public transit projects. Based on optimistic revenue assumptions, this proposal could allocate up to $1.7 billion per year for public transit capital and operations. This represents a transformational investment in public transit. 1
While the percentage and amount dedicated to public transit is subject to negotiations, AC Transit should consider extending its support for this proposal. In addition, the allocation formula used is also subject to negotiations, and it is critical for AC Transit to communicate to its delegation the best method for allocating these funds. While environmental groups want these funds to be allocated on a competitive basis, it is unclear how hat would provide a stable funding base for longer term operational needs. Another formula under consideration is basing the allocation on he STA formula, but tying the use ofthe funds to meeting greenhouse gas reduction goals. ~B
1236 would authorize the governing board of a SENATE APPR. ransit district to designate district employees, Transit districts: except as specified, or security officers contracted ransit offenses by the district, to enforce state laws relative to and certain prohibited acts on or in public enforcement. ransportation systems or on the property, acilities, or vehicles of a transit district, if the
SB 1236 (Manning D)
Recommended Position : SUPPORT
1
83
Subject
Bills
Status
ACTransit RECCOMENDED POSITION
employees or officers satisfy specified training requirements.
~he bill would also make it an infraction to knowingly give false information to an enforcement officer or otherwise obstruct the issuance of a citation.
Table 2: Board Action Positions Bills AB 1720 (Bloom D) Vehicles: bus gross weight. ~B 2445 (Chau D) Community colleges: ransportation fees.contracts.
~
(Steinberg D) Sustainable Communities Investment Authority.
Subject
Status
This bill would extend the sunset date for the bus ASSEMBLY FLOOR axle weight exemption by one year from January 1, 2015 to January 1, 2016. This bill would also likely be used to implement any agreement reached this year on the axle weight issue. AB 2445 was unanimously approved by the SENATE RULES Assembly on a vote of 73-0.
Client - Position AC Transit - Support
'(K Transit - Support
his bill makes clarifying changes in existing law o allow a community college district to impose a ee approved by the students for transportation services on a campus by campus basis. Some believe existing law limits the approval of the fee o a district wide vote. ~B
1 would create a new form of tax increment inancing that would allow local governments to create a Sustainable Communities Investment ~uthority to finance specified activities within a sustainable communities investment area.
~en ate FloorInactive File
~C Transit -Support
~he Governor's Office asked the authors' of the ~a rio us tax increment measures to hold-off
~
(Pavley D) ~lternative fuel and vehicle
sending these bills to his desk last year. With the Governor's IFD proposal released as part of the budget, negotiations over the structure of a new ax increment financing proposal will heat-up during the budget process. pB 11 originally proposed to extend the deadlines ASSEMBLY TRANSP. AC Transit- Support and make the same changes in AB 8. SB 11 was amended to address chaptering out issues with ~B 8, but analogous amendments were not 2
84
Bills
Subject
Status
echnologies: funding programs.
amended into AB 8. Rather than send both bills o the Governor, it was decided to send only AB 8. ~B 11 is now a two year bill, and will likely be used for another purpose.
SCA4 (Liu D) Local government
~CA 4 is in the Senate Committee on SENATE APPRS 1\ppropriations. Constitutional amendments are exempt for the House of Origin deadline.
Client - Position
AC Transit -Support
SCA 4 has been amended to require a percentage of the sales tax revenue be used for projects that projects: special lreduce GHG emissions from transportation axes: voter ~ources, and require a portion of the funds used approval. on state highway project be given to the state for uture maintenance needs.
~ransportation
This measure would amend the Constitution to lower the voter approval threshold to 55% for the imposition, extension, or renewal of a local tax for ransportation projects. SCA 4 was amended to require a local measure to include the following in order to be approved with a 55% vote:
• • •
Includes a specific list of projects and programs that will be funded and limits the use of the funds for those purposes, Includes a requirement for annual audits, and Requires the creation of a citizens' oversight committee.
~
SENATE APPRS SCA 8 is in the Senate Committee on (Corbett D) Appropriations. Constitutional amendments are ~ransportation exempt from the House of Origin deadline. projects: special axes: voter ~CA 8 is another measure that would amend the approval. Constitution to lower the voter approval hreshold to 55% for the imposition, extension, or renewal of a local tax for transportation projects. sCA 8 was also amended to require a local measure to include the following in order to be approved with a 55% vote: Includes a specific list of projects and programs that will be funded and limits the use of the funds for those purposes, Includes a requirement for annual audits, and • Requires the creation of a citizens'
AC Transit - Support
• •
3
85
Bills
Status
Subject
Client- Position
oversight committee. SCA 11 (Hancock D) Local government: special taxes: ~oter approval.
SCA 11 is in the Senate Committee on SENATE APPRS Appropriations. SCA 11 is an "umbrella measure" on lowering the voter threshold from 2/3 to 55% or local sales taxes and parcel taxes. This measure would lower the vote threshold for any purpose.
AC Transit - Support
SCA 11 was also amended to require the ollowing elements in the local measure in order o be approved by 55%:
• •
•
Includes a specific list of projects and programs that will be funded and limits the use of the funds for those purposes, Includes a requirement for annual audits, and Requires the creation of a citizens' oversight committee.
Table 3: Board Watch Positions Bills
Subject
Status
Client - Position
~B 1684 (Chavez R) r,tehicles: length limitations: buses: bicycle ransportation devices.
AB 1684 was recently amended to authorize the North County Transit District to use the longer hree position bicycle racks.
fAoSSEMBLY TRANS
AC Transit - Watch
AB 2707 (Chau D) Vehicles: length limitations: buses: bicycle ransportation devices.
fA.B 2707 authorizes any transit operators to utilize fAoSSEMBLY FLOOR bicycle racks that can accommodate 3 bicycles.
AC Transit - Watch
58 33
~B 33 is the reintroduction of SB 214 from last
~pecifically, the bill would allow transit buses of no more than 40 feet in length to be equipped ~ith a front-mounted bicycle rack that extends up ~o 40 inches from the front body of the bus when ully deployed rather than the 36 inches allowed under current law, and limits the handlebars of a bicycle that is being transported on such a rack ~rom extending more than 46 inches from the ~ront of the bus rather than the 42 inches allowed under current law. ~SSEMBLY FLOOR-
AC Transit- Watch 4
86
Bills (Wolk D) Infrastructure financing districts: voter approval: repeal.
Subject ~ession.
Status
Client - Position
58 214 along with SB 1156 and AB 2144 Inactive File
~ere all vetoed by the Governor.
Two-Year Bill
~hile SB 1 makes changes based on existing redevelop law, SB 33 would create a new tax increment financing structure based on Infrastructure Financing District (IFD) law. pB 33 would eliminate the vote requirement to create an IFD and expands the type of projects an IFD may fund. The bill also specifies the composition of the IFD governing board.
SB 556 Previously SB 556 would prohibit (Corbett D) nongovernmental person or entity contracting ~ith a public agency from displaying a seal or Agency: ostensible: emblem of that public agency on a uniform or nongovernmental vehicle unless a disclosure statement is also entities. conspicuously displayed identifying the uniform wearer or vehicle operator as not a government employee.
fi\ssembly Floor -Inactive File
fi\c Transit - Watch
~wo-Year Bill
SB 566 was amended on September 4th to limit he application oft he disclosure requirements to contracts dealing with public health or safety services. The bill no longer applies to any transit service contracts.
581122 (Pavley D) Sustainable communities: Strategic Growth Council.
SB 1204 (Lara D) California Clean
SB 1122 was approved by the Senate Committee SENATE APPR on Environmental Quality. SB 1122 creates two funding programs. One for he Strategic Growth Counsel to administer grants o local agencies for implementing sustainable communities and other greenhouse gas reduction plans. The second pot of funds would be allocated to MPOs on a per capita basis to be used for competitive grants for projects within he region. The regional grants would be awarded pursuant to guidelines adopted by the Strategic Growth Council. The bill lists the types of eligible projects for the regional funds, which include funding for public transportation ~perations, maintenance, and capital costs. ~B 1204 was approved with bipartisan support by SENATE APPR ,he Senate Committee on Environmental Quality 1
AC Transit -Watch
AC Transit - Watch
5
87
Bills
Subject
Status
Client - Position
lrruck, Bus, and his bill creates a California Clean Truck, Bus, and Off-Road Vehicle Off-Road Vehicle and Equipment Technology and Equipment Program. The purpose of this bill is to use cap & Technology rade auction revenue to fund the development, Program. demonstration, and commercial deployment of zero- and near-zero-emission truck, bus, and offroad vehicle. In particular this bill would create large scale zero emission bus demonstration program aimed at making zero emission bus ~echnology commercially available.
Chaptered or Dead Bills Bills
Subject
Status
Client - Position
~C Transit - Support
AB 160 (Alejo D)
~lternative fuel and vehicle technologies: funding Signed Into Law programs. Chapter #401 California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act DEAD of 2013: exceptions.
AB179 (Bocanegra D)
Public transit: electronic transit fare collection systems: disclosure of personal information.
Signed Into Law l=hapter #375
AC Transit -Watch
AB206 (Dickinson D)
Bicycle transportation devices.
Signed Into Law Chapter #95
AC Transit - Support
AB210 (Wieckowski D)
~ransactions and use taxes: County of Alameda.
Signed Into Law Chapter #194
AC Transit - Support
AB431 (Mullin D)
County Employees Retirement Law of 1937: ~ederallaw compliance
DEAD
AC Transit - Watch
~B730 (Alejo D)
Monterey-Salinas Transit District.
~igned Into Law Chapter #394
AC Transit -Watch
~B574 (Lowenthal D)
California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006: DEAD Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund: sustainable communities strategies.
AC Transit - Support
~B 1002
~ehicles: registration fee: sustainable communities strategies.
DEAD
~C Transit - Watch
i8B 1051 (Bocanegra D)
Housing
DEAD
fAC Transit- Watch
AB 1222 (Bloom D)
Public employees' retirement: collective bargaining: ransit workers: transportation.
~igned Into Law
fAC Transit: SUPPORT
~B 1290 (John A. Perez D)
Transportation planning.
~etoed
fAC Transit - Watch
SB 13
Public employees' retirement benefits.
Signed Into Law
~C Transit -Watch
Mj (Perea D)
(Bloom D)
~C Transit - Watch
Chapter #527
6
88
Bills
Status
Subject
(Beall D) SB 142 (DeSaulnier D) SB 791 (Wllland R)
Client - Position
Chapter #528 Public transit
Signed Into Law Chapter #655
AC Transit - Support
Motor vehicle fuel tax: rate adjustment
DEAD
AC Transit: Oppose
7
89
This page intentionally blank
90
SR 14-127 Attachment 4
2014 Federal Advocac Pro ram Funding
•
FY 2014 Grant Opportunities- Secure federal funds for key capital projects and support funding for 2014 Project Priorities for: o East Bay BRT Improvements within the Small Starts Program and other programs o AC Transit's Intelligent Transportation and Communication System upgrades o Bus lifting equipment program o Rehabilitation of aging facilities
•
Advocate for supplemental funding through the Federal Transit Administration to offset rising operating costs without jeopardizing total funding available for capital projects.
•
Support funding for the Transbay Terminal.
•
Support/seek additional funding for lifeline services including , but not limited to services for access to work, school or medical facilities .
•
Support efforts to rescind the planned across-the-board cuts to all federal programs, called "Sequestration," as enacted under the Budget Control Act of 2011 . Such cuts would reduce funding for the Small Starts Program, which could impact the East Bay BRT project schedule.
Transportation Authorization Principles
•
Support efforts to increase the gas tax or to increase other revenues to replenish and sustain long-term growth of the Highway Trust Fund/Mass Transit Account.
•
Support transportation authorization reform that emphasizes greater funding levels to urban mass transit systems, and oppose efforts to reduce spending on transit formula programs.
•
Support FTA and Congressional efforts to make State of Good Repair for transit bus systems a strategic priority.
Page ll 91
•
Support broad funding eligibility for BRT projects in federal transit programs, including New Starts and Small Starts programs,
•
Seek revisions to the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) grandfather clause that supports the direct representation of transit properties on local transportation policy boards.
Other Advocacy •
Advocate for transit-supportive legislation that mitigates global warming and/or calls for environmental stewardship and related funding.
•
Support funding and coordination between Health and Human Service (HHS) agencies and other transportation agencies to provide services to HHS clients.
•
Support modal parity in the commute tax benefits.
•
Support legislation that relieves the fiscal burden of mandatory regulations.
Page
12 92
SR 14-127 Attachment 5
2014 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.
•
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.
•
Seek funding to support and promote Bus Rapid Transit projects.
•
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.
Pa ge 11 93
•
Support legislation and programs that would provide funding for employee benefits programs.
•
Support funding initiatives that relieve the fiscal burden of mandatory regulations.
Equipment and Operations •
Support legislation or administrative action that would direct Caltrans to establish and maintain HOV lanes on state highway routes and to improve existing HOV lane management to maximize throughput.
•
Support incentives to provide bus contra flow lanes on the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge to/from the Transbay Terminal.
•
Support legislation to exempt public transit vehicles from state and local truck route ordinances.
•
Support legislation or administrative action that would direct Caltrans to permit permanent use of freeway shoulders by public transit buses.
Transit Incentives •
Support legislation to provide incentives for employees and employers to use public transportation to commute to work, including tax credits for purchasing transit passes.
•
Support Clean Air Initiatives that encourage increased public transit use.
•
Support incentives that would give auto insurance credits to heavy transit users.
•
Support common fare programs between Bay Area systems.
•
Support legislation to provide incentives for local governments and developers to incorporate transit passes into the cost of housing.
Environment and Transit Supportive Land Use
•
Support efforts that provide a new form of tax increment financing that promotes economic investment through transit oriented development, and requires the approval of all affected taxing entities.
•
Advocate for transit-supportive legislation that addresses climate change, healthy communities and environments.
Pagl'l2 94
•
Foster transit supportive land use initiatives that require coordination with transit providers in the initial stages of local planning or project development that impacts transit, including density level decisions or transit oriented developments (TODs); and advocate for the required use of: o Transit streets agreements, and o Complete streets plans in which local transportation plans anticipate use of all modes.
•
Support legislation that requires reporting of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) annually through DMV renewal.
Policy Interests •
Support simple majority vote for local transportation ballot tax initiatives.
•
Support legislation to allow District to ban persons for specified offenses from entering district property.
•
Seek revisions to the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) grandfather clause that supports direct representation of transit properties on local transportation policy boards.
•
Support legislation for STA formula reform that includes federal operating funding as eligible revenue.
•
Support efforts that maintain existing Workers' Compensation regulation.
Pagt'
13 95
This page intentionally blank
96
Report No: Meeting Date:
T/?/INS/T
14-115 May 28, 2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
External Affairs Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
Denise Standridge, Interim General Counsel
SUBJECT:
Vulnerable Roadway and Sidewalk Users Ordinance
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider receiving report regarding the recently enacted Oakland ordinance regarding vulnerable roadway and sidewalk users and what it means to AC Transit. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Chapter 12.61 of Article 12 of the Oakland Municipal Code was passed by the Oakland City Council on April 22, 2014. This chapter created an ordinance for vulnerable roadway and sidewalk user victims to seek civil remedies of up to $1,000 as well as reasonable attorneys' fees and costs for each incident. The ordinance was sponsored by Councilmember Libby Schaaf. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
Unknown at this time . It will depend upon the number of legitimate claims filed.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
Councilmember Libby Schaaf brought the Anti-Endangerment of Vulnerable Roadway Users Ordinance to the Public Safety Committee at its meeting on March 25, 2014. The ordinance was recommended by City staff and forwarded to the Oakland City Council for its meeting on April 1, 2014. On April 1, the matter was approved on introduction and scheduled for final passage to the meeting on April 22, 2014, to be heard on the consent agenda. On April 22, 2014, the matter was approved for final passage on the consent agenda and immediately became effective. This ordinance defines a vulnerable user as a pedestrian or bicyclist using a public sidewalk or roadway that allows use by said person. It prohibits five (5) activities: (1) a person operating a motor vehicle shall not assault a vulnerable user because of said user' s status as a pedestrian or bicyclist; (2) a person operating a motor vehicle shall not intentionally inflict emotional distress upon a vulnerable user because of said user's status as a pedestrian or bicyclist; (3) a person operating a motor vehicle shall not commit a battery upon a vulnerable user because of said 97
Report No. 14-103 Page 2 of 3 user's status as a pedestrian or bicyclist; (4) a person operating a motor vehicle shall not intentionally pass a vulnerable user in an unsafe manner; and (5) a person operating a motor vehicle or bicycle shall not intentionally fail to yield the right of way to a pedestrian because of that vulnerable user's status as a pedestrian. An aggrieved vulnerable user can enforce the provisions of the ordinance by bringing a civil lawsuit. The ordinance provides for civil remedies that include a violator being liable for triple the actual damages with regard to each and every violation or $1,000, whichever is greater; reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of litigation; and punitive damages if awarded by a court or jury. This ordinance could have an impact on AC Transit if a vulnerable user is able to prove that an operator committed one of the 5 prohibited activities.
The greatest risk to the District is an
allegation that an operator engaged in activity 2, because emotional distress is subjective. The operators are going to be made aware of this new ordinance as well as the one that was enacted in Berkeley in 2012. The Berkeley ordinance is specifically directed at preventing the harassment of bicyclists and provides for the same remedies. Fortunately, there have been no allegations that a District operator has violated this ordinance in the course and scope of his or her duties as a bus operator. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: There are no advantages or disadvantages associated with this report. The report has been provided at the request of a Board member. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: There are no alternatives. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: None. ATTACHMENT: 1. Chapter 12.61 of Article 12 of the Oakland Municipal Code
Department Head Approval:
Denise Standridge, Interim General Counsel
Reviewed by:
David J. Armijo, General Manager James D. Pachan, Chief Operating Officer Denise Standridge, Interim General Counsel
Prepared by:
98
SR 14-115 Attachment 1
THE OAKLAND CITY COUNCIL DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 - Chapter 12.61 is added to Article 12 of the Oakland Municipal Code to read as follows: Chapter 12.61 PROTECTION
• VULNERABLE ROAD AND SIDEWALK USER
12.61.010 DEFINITIONS. - The following words and phrases, whenever used in this Chapter, shall be defined as follows: A.
"Bicyclist" is a person riding on a Bicycle or Electric Motorized Bicycle.
B.
"Bicycle" shall have the same meaning as that term is defmed in California Vehicle Code se~tion 231 as it exists or may be 'amended hereafter.
C.
"Electric Motorized Bicycle" shall have the same meaning as the term '"motorized bicycle" or "low-speed electric bicycle" is defmed in California Vehicle Code section 406(b) as it exists or may be amended hereafter.
D.
"Electrically Motorized Quadricycle" and "Electrically Motorized Tricycle" shall have the same· meaning as those terms are defined in California Vehicle Code section 407 as it exists or may be amended hereafter.
E.
"Highway" shall have the same meaning as California Vehicle Code section 360 as it exists or may be amended hereafter.
F.·
"Motor Vehicle" shall have the same meaning as California Vehicle Code section 415 as it exists or may be amended hereafter.
G.
"Pedestrian" is a person who is afoot, or who by reason of physical disability, is otherwise unable to ambulate by foot and is operating a human powered wheel chair, an electrically self-propelled wheelchair, an Electrically Motorized Quadricycle, or an Electrically Motorized Tricycle.
H.
"Roadway" shall have the same meaning tas California Vehicle Code section 530 as it exists or may be amended hereafter.
I.
"Sigewalk" shall have the same meaning as California Vehicle Code section 555 as it exists or uiay be amended hereafter.
J.
"Street" shall have the same meaning as California Vehicle Code section 590 as it exists or may be amended hereafter."
K.
"Vehicle" shall have the same meaning as California Vehicle Code section 670 as it exists or may be amended hereafter. -'
L.
"Vulnerable User" is a Pedestrian or Bicyclist using a public Sidewalk, Roadway, Street and/or Highway that allows use by Bicyclists or
Page2 99
.'
SR 14-115 Attachment 1
Pedestrians. This subsection does not abrogate existing Jaws governing the use of Bicycles, Electrically Motorized· Quadricycles or Electrically Motorized Tricycles on Sidewalks. 12.61.020 PROIDBITED ACTIVITIES- All persons shall.comply with the following restrictions in Oakland, on a public Sidewalk, Roadway, Street and/or Highway that allows use by Bicyclists or Pedestrians, and where Division 11 of the California Vehicle Code is enforceable: A.
A person operating a Motor Vehicle shall not assault a Vulnerable User because of, in whole or in part, a Vulnerable Users status as a Pedestrian or ~icyclist.
B.
A person operating a Motor Vehicle shall not intentionally inflict emotional distress upon a Vulnerable User because of, in whole or in part, a Vulnerable User's status as a Pedestrian or Bicyclist.
C.
A person operating a Motor Vehicle shall not commit a battery upon a Vulnerable User because of, in whole or in'part, a Vulnerable User's status as a Pedestrian or Bicyclist.
D.
A person operating a Motor Vehicle shall not intentionally pass a Vulnerable User in an unsafe manner (as defined in Caltfornia Vehicle Code section 21760).
E.
A person operating a Motor Vehicle or Bicycle shall not intentionally fail to yield the right of way to a Pedestrian because of, in whole or in part, a Vulnerable User's status as a Pedestrian, in a manner which is contrary to California Vehicle Code Chapter 5 of Division 11 (Pedestrians' Rights and Duties).
10.61.030
CIVIL REMEDIES.
A.
Any aggrieved Vulnerable User may enforce the provisions of this Chapter by means of a civil lawsuit.
B.
Any person who violates the provisions of this Chapter shall be liable for treble the actual damages with regard tp each and every such violation, or $1,000, whichever is greater, and shall be liable for reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of litigation. In addition, a jury or a court may award punitive damages .
.C.
Violations of any of the 'provisions of this Chapter shall not be construed to constitute a misdemeanor or infraction under this Code, notwithstanding Chapter 1.28 (General Penalty). But such conduct may constitute a public offence, misdemeanor or infraction independent of this Code.
Page 3 100
SR 14c115 Attachment 1
I
D.
The remedies provided by the provisions of this Chapter are in addition to . all other remedies provided by law, and nothing in this Chapter shall preclude any aggrieved pe'rson from pursuing any .other remedy provided bylaw.
Section 2 - The City Council finds and detem1ines that the adoption of this Ordinance is exempt from the California Envirorunental Quality Act ("CEQA"), including under section 1506l{b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, and authorizes the filing of a Notice of Exemption with the Alameda County Clerk. · Section 3 -If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each section, subsection, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that one or tnore other sections, subsections, clauses, or phrases may be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 4 - This Ordinance shall become effective immediately on final adoption if it . receives six or more affrrmative votes; otherwise it shall become effective upon the seventh day after final adoption. Section S- This Ordinance is enacted pursuant to the City of Oakland's general police powers, Section 106 of the Charter of the City of Oakland, and Article XI of the California Constitution. IN COUNCIL, OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, _ _ _ _ _ _ _, 2014 PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES-
BROOKS, GALLO, GIBSON MCELHANEY, KALB, KAPLAN, REID, SCHAAF and PRESIDENT KERNIGHAN,
NOESABSENTABSTENTION-
ATTEST:-~---,-,.,,-,-~...,..,.~-=---- LATONDA SIMMONS ' City Clerk and Clerk of the Council Of the City of Oakland, C.Yifornia Date of Attestation:
Page4 101
This page intentionally blank
102
FINANCE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE
May 28, 2014 Agenda Items B-1 – B-12
103
This page intentionally blank
104
Report No:
T~NS/T
Meeting Date:
14-128 May 28, 2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Bi-monthly Budget Report Update
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S) :
Consider receipt of the Bi-monthly Budget Update for February and March 2014. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On a Year-To-Date (YTD) basis, the District's operating expenses are under budget by approximately $7.5 million or 3.0 percent as of March 31, 2014. Salaries and Wages were $4.2 million under budget, with Operations wages, the largest component of the District's salaries and wages expense category, continuing the very favorable trend seen throughout the year. The positive YTD variance of $2.0 million in the Adjusted Labor Costs category shows the favorable impact of capitalization of labor and indirect costs incurred in the execution of capital projects. The Materials and Supplies account continued the positive trend with a $1.5 million favorable YTD variance . The Fuel and Lubricants account was also trending under budget with a $0.9 million favorable YTD variance. The Services account expenditures have increased with an acceleration of the end of year invoicing activity, but the account is still showing a $1.3 million favorable YTD variance. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
The March YTD budget variance report continues to show positive trends for the general fund operating expense budget. The positive YTD variance of$ 7.5 million represents 3.0 percent of the entire operating expense budget. Labor costs are trending below the projected budget levels on an YTD basis, with lower than anticipated labor costs in Operations for both Regular Time and Overtime wages. The positive variance in the labor category is primarily due to a workforce composition that includes an increase in lower seniority workers, plus the more efficient use of the workforce that has resulted in a lower pay-to-platform or pay-to-base multiplier for operators and 105
Report No. 14-128 Page 2 of 3 maintenance employees. The net result is a slight increase in pay hours compared to previous years with the cost per hour of labor being slightly lower than the projected budget. The Fringe Benefits account is the only major account with an unfavorable YTD variance of $7.2 Million. The unfavorable variance in the Fringe Benefit account is primarily due to timing of benefit related invoices, accounting accruals for future expenses, inclusion Post Employee Benefit accruals, and increased employee benefit costs from several benefit categories. The positive variance for the Pension Fund account is primarily due to the base pensionable payroll expenses being lower than the projected budget. The Adjusted Labor Costs account provides for the capitalization of labor and indirect costs related to Capital Projects. The focus on properly charging labor to capital projects has resulted in a favorable YTD variance of about $2.0 million in this account category. The lower labor costs and higher than anticipated capitalization of labor costs for capital projects has resulted in an overall favorable YTD variance of about$ 3.0 million for the labor components of the budget. Non-Labor expenses continued to trend under budget with an YTD favorable variance of approximately $5.5 million, which was the largest overall contributor to the positive variance for the general fund. The Services account is showing expenditures slightly below the projected budget resulting in a $ 1.3 million or 7.6 percent YTD favorable variance. Staff anticipates expenditures in this area to increase as invoices are received during the last quarter of the fiscal year. Fuel and lubricants expenditures are trending under the projected budget due to lower average diesel fuel prices, which has resulted in an YTD favorable variance at $ 0.9 million. Bus parts and supplies continued the positive trend resulting in a favorable YTD variance of$ 1.5 million. The savings in these account categories are associated with the improved maintenance of the fleet and operation of a newer fleet of buses and are expected to continue through the remainder of the fiscal year. The Utilities and Taxes expenditures remained constant at levels slightly above the projected budget resulting in an unfavorable YTD variance of$ 0.1 million for this account. Casualty and Liability costs are maintaining a positive trend with a favorable YTD variance of$ 0.4 million. The ADA Consortium and Other Purchased Transportation account expenditures were lower than the projected budget due to lower than anticipated ridership for the ADA Consortium program and stable par transit provider billing rates, which resulted in a favorable YTD variance of$ 1.5 million. Staff is anticipating that the positive trends in budget expenditures will continue for the remainder of the current fiscal year.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: This report does not recommend a course of action with notable advantages or disadvantages.
106
Report No. 14-128 Page 3 of 3
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: This report does not recommend an action.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Board Policy 312- Budget Policy
ATTACHMENTS: 1:
FY 2013-14 Operating Expense Trend Analysis
Department Head Approval:
James Pachan, Interim Chief Financial Officer
Prepared by:
Hernan Vargas, Budget Manager
107
This page intentionally blank
108
FV13/14 Operating Expense Trend Analysis Preliminary March 2014
July Operating Expenses (OOO's}
Salary & Wages Fringe Benefits
Pension Fund Total Labor Costs Adjusted Labor Costs
Services Fuel & Lubricants Other Materials & Supplies Utilities & Taxes Casualty & Liability Interest Expense ADA Consortium and Other Purchased Other Total Operating Expenses
Budget
Var$
Actual
Var%
Budget
August Var$ Actual 444 8,538 (1,583) 8,017 434 3,085 (705) 19,640 19,640 (788)
8,982 6,435 3,519 18,936 18,852
8,558 6,647 3,090 18,295 18,295
424 (212) 429 641 558
4.7% -3.3% 12.2% 3.4% 3.0%
8,982 6,435 3,519 18,936 18,852
1,856
1,912 1,574 1,353 401 820 111 2,392
(55) 21 (39) 94 20 (8) (141) (7)
-3.0%
579 1,523
18.9% 2.4% -7.6% -6.3% -8.4%
1,856 1,596 1,314 494 841 103 2,251 86
443
1.6%
27,392
25,140
1,596 1,314 494 841 103 2,251 86 27,392
93 26,950
1.3% -2.9%
*Note: March 2014 additional accruals and final adjustments could still be performed by the Accounting department. Budget review of actual figures could lead to further adjustments.
109
1,133 379 666 105 1,091 23
Var%
Budget
September Var$ Actual 415 8,567 (465) 6,900 422 3,097 372 18,564 18,564 288
4.9% -24.6% 12.3% -3.7% -4.2%
8,982 6,435 3,519 18,936 18,852 1,856 1,596 1,314 494 841 103 2,251
63
68.8% 4.6% 13.8% 23.2% 20.8% -2.2% 51.5% 73.4%
86
2,217 1,566 1,005 530 897 108 2,232 185
2,253
8.2%
27,392
27,304
1,277 73 181 115 175 (2) 1,160
(361) 29. 309 (35) (57) (5) 19 (99) 88
Var%
4.6% -7.2% 12.0% 2.0% 1.5%
-19.5% 1.8% 23.5% -7.2% -6.7% -4.9% 0.8% -116.0%
0.3%
FY13/14 Operating Expense Trend Analysis Preliminary March 2014 November
October Operating Expenses {OOO's)
Salary & Wages Fringe Benefits Pension Fund Total Labor Costs Adjusted Labor Costs Services Fuel & Lubricants Other Materials & Supplies Utilities & Taxes Casualty & Liability Interest Expense ADA Consortium and Other Purchased Other Total Operating Expenses
Budget 8,982 6,435 3,519 18,936 18,852
Var$
Actual
8,961 6,266 3,076 18,304 18,304
20 169 443 632 549
1,856 1,596
1,850
1,314
1,268 619 774 108
6 (25) 46 (125) 67 (5) (6) 57
494 841 103 2,251 86 27,392
1,621
2,257
28 26,829
563
Var%
Budget
Actual
December
Var$
8,982 6,435 3,519 18,936 18,852
8,687 6,355 4,387 19,430 19,430
294 80 (868) (494) (577)
-4.9%
1,856 1,596 1,314 494 841 103
-0.3%
2,251
67.0%
86
1,436 1,268 1,055 444 884 108 2,313 55
420 328 258 50 (43) (5) (62) 31
2.1%
27,392
26,992
400
0.2%
2.6% 12.6%
3.3% 2.9%
0.3% -1.6% 3.5% -25.4% 8.0%
*Note: March 2014 additional accruals
and final adjustments could still be performed by the Accounting department. Budget review of actual figures could lead to further adjustments.
110
Var%
Budget
Actual
Var$
Var%
8,982 6,435 3,519 18,936 18,852
8,672 6,701 3,257 18,631 18,631
310 (266) 262 305 222
3.4% -4.1% 7.4% 1.6% 1.2%
1,856 1,596
35.9%
(167) (16) 150 (256) 47 (5) (132) 44
-9.0% -1.0%
494 841 103 2,251 86
2,023 1,612 1,164 750 794 108 2,383 42
-51.8% 5.6% -4.9% -5.8% 51.2%
1.5%
27,392
27,505
(113)
.0.4%
3.3% 1.2% -24.7%
-2.6% -3.1% 22.7% 20.6%
19.7% 10.2% -5.1% -4.9% -2.8%
1,314
11.4%
FY13/14 Operating Expense Trend Analysis Preliminary March 2014 January Operating Expenses (OOO's)
Salary & Wages Fringe Benefits Pension Fund Total Labor Costs Adjusted labor Costs Services Fuel & Lubricants Other Materials & Supplies Utilities & Taxes Casualty & Uability Interest Expense ADA Consortium and Other Purchased Other
Total Operating Expenses
Budget
Actual
Var$
9,732 6,517 3,777 20,026 19,942
8,680 9,022 3,293 20,994 20,994
1,052 (2,505) 484 (969) (1,052)
1,890 1,596 1,314 494 841 103 2,251 86
1,875 1,440 1,159 431 793 108 1,979 106
15 156 155 63 48 (5) 272 (21)
28,516
28,885
(369)
Var%
Budget
February Var$
Actual
9,732 6,517 3,777 20,026 19,942
8,241 7,516 3,350 19,107 17,835
1,491 (999) 427
-4.9% 12.1% -24.2%
1,890 1,596 1,314 494 841 103 2,251 86
1,867 1,341 1,106 503 695 100 1,936 38
23 255 207 (9) 146 3 315 48
-1.3%
28,516
25,421
10.8% -38.4%
12.8% -4.8% -5.3% 0.8%
9.8% 11.8%
12.8% 5.7%
*Note: March 2014 additional accruals and final adjustments could still be performed by the Accounting department. Budget review of
actual figures could lead to further adjustments.
111
919 2,107
3,095
Var%
Budget
March {Preliminary}* Actual Var$
9,732 6,517 3,777 20,026 19,942
9,980 7,940 2,324 20,244 19,245
(248) (1,423) 1,453 (218) 697
56.2%
1,890 1,596 1,314 494 841 103 2,251 86
1,772 1,529 1,056 491 799 100 2,159 231
118 67 257 3 42 3 92 (145)
10.9%
28,516
27,381
15.3%
-15.3% 11.3% 4.6%
10.6%
1.2% 16.0% 15.8% -1.9%
17.3%
3.2% 14.0%
1,135
Var% -2.6%
-21.8% 38.5%
-1.1% 3.5% 6.2%
4.2%
19.6% 0.6% 5.0%
3.2% 4.1%
-169.5%
4.0%
FY13/14 Operating Expense Trend Analysis Preliminary March 2014
Operating Expenses {OOO's)
Salary & Wages Fringe Benefits
Pension Fund Total Labor Costs Adjusted Labor Costs
Budget
Total FYTD Actual Var$
Var%
83,085 58,159 32,446 173,691 172,941
78,884 65,364 28,960 173,208 170,937
4,201 (7,205) 3,486 483 2,004
16,806 14,361 11,824 4,447 7,568 926 20,259 770
15,531 13,473 10,298 4,548 7,122 955 18,743 800
1,275 888 1,526 (101) 446 (29) 1,515 (29)
249,901
242,406
7,495
5.1% ~12.4%
10.7% 0.3% 1.2%
Services Fuel & Lubricants Other Materials & Supplies Utilities & Taxes
Casualty & liability
Interest Expense ADA Consortium and Other Purchased
Other
7.6% 6.2% 12.9% -2.3% 5.9% -3.1% 7.5% -3.8%
Total Operating Expenses
3.0%
*Note: March 2014 additional accruals and final adjustments could still be performed by the Accounting department. Budget review of
actual figures could lead to further adjustments.
112
I
Report No: Meeting Date:
T/?9/Y.S/T
14-131 May 28, 2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Monthly Report on Investments
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider Receiving Monthly Report on Investments for March 2014. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: As of March 31, 2014 the District had the following investments: Repurchase Agreement (REPO)
$25 million (Collateralized 102%)
Money Market Account
$ 84.17 million (Collateralized 110%)
Money Market Account
$1.75 million (small banks; all 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 March 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 con se rvative investment approach. Daily roll-over of REPO and collateralized money market accounts is done with preservation of principal foremost in mind.
113
Report No. 14-154 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 March 2014.
Department Head Approval:
James D. Pachan, Interim Chief Financial Officer
by: Prepared by:
Sue Lee, Treasury Manager
Reviewed
Beverly Abad-Fitzgerald, Treasury Administrator
114
ALAMEDA - CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT MONTHLY REPORT ON INVESTMENTS FOR THE GENERAL FUND MARCH 31, 2014
en Jl
> --i
j 115
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
116
INVESTMENT SUMMARY FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS/OTHER FUND MARCH 31,2014
TYPE MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS REPO'S TREASURY BILLS DISCOUNT NOTES AGENCY BONDS
Average Interest Rate% 0.248% 0.023% 0.000% 0.000% 0.000%
TOTAL GENERAL FUND INVESTMENTS
TYPE MONEY MARKET REPO'S DISCOUNT NOTES AGENCY BONDS
Average Interest Rate% 0.070% 0.000% 0.000% 0.000%
TOTAL OTHER (CaiEMA/Bus Proc.) INVESTMENTS
Carrying Value
Par Value
Fair Value
%of Total
$25,171,126.16 $25,000,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$25,171,126.16 $25,000,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$25,171,126.16 $25,000,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
50.17% 49.83% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
$50,171 '126.16
$50,171,126.16
$50,171 '126.16
100.00%
Carrying Value
Par Value
Fair Value
%of Total
$62,905,320.4 7 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$62,905,320.47 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$62,905,320.47 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
$62,905,320.47
$62,905,320.47
$62,905,320.47
100.00%
Page 1
117
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT INVESTMENT OVERVIEW FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS PROCUREMENT/OTHER FUND MARCH 31,2014
2013 DESCRIPTION
YTO
2014
AUG
JUL
SEP
OCT
DEC
NOV
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
AVERAGE
CURRENT MONTH AVERAGE INTEREST RATES Repurchase Agreements (current month) Money Market Accounts (current month) Govt Securities held at month end
0.012% 0.070%
0.020% 0.070%
0.015% 0.070%
0.032% 0.070%
0.033% 0.070%
0.025% 0.070%
0.008% 0.070%
0.070%
0.023% 0.070%
0.020% 0.070%
0.080% 0.070%
0.072% 0.070%
0.061% 0.070%
0.051% 0.070%
0.041% 0.070%
0.034% 0.070%
0.031% 0.070%
0.028% 0.070%
0.024% 0.070%
0.047%
0.060% 0.030% 0,139% 0.083%
0.110% 0.040% 0.136% 0.077%
0.100% 0.010% 0.133% 0.069%
0.090% 0.045% 0.127% 0.062%
0.090% 0.080% 0.120% 0.060%
0.100% 0.065% 0.118% 0.058%
0.130% 0.055% 0.115% 0.057%
0.100% 0.045% 0.110% 0.050%
0.110% 0.045% 0.109% 0.048%
0.099% 0.046% 0.123% 0.063%
DAYS
DAYS 9
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
7
7
7
DAYS 8
DAYS
7
7
7
7
7
$25,000,000 $93,625,417
$25,000,000 $93,631,187
$25,000,000 $93,636,924
$25,000,000 $93,642,075
$25,000,000 $85,907,055
$25,000,000 $85,912,951
$25,000,000 $88,076,447
$25,000,000 $85,922,620
$25,000,000 $88,076,447
$25,000,000 $89,825,680
0.013%
Treasury Bills (purchased in current month) Discount Notes (purchased in current month) Agency Bonds (purchased in current month)
AVERAGE INTEREST RATE Repurchase Agreements (12-month avg)
Money Market Accounts (12-rnonth avg)
0.0700/0
Govt Securities held at month end Treasury Bills (Portfolio) Discount Noles (Portfolio) Agency Bonds (Portfolio) INVESTMENT 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
INVESTMENTS AT CARRYING VALUE RepurChase Agreements Money Market Treasury Bills Discount Notes Agency Bonds
INVESTMENTS AT COST
$118,625,417
$118,631,187 $118,636,924 $118,642,075
$110,907,055 $110,912,951
$113,076,447
$110,922,620 $113,076,447
$0
$0
$0
$114,825,680
$118,625,417
$118,631,187 $118,636,924 $118,642,075
$110,907,055 $110,912,951
$113,076,447
$110,922,620 $113,076,447
$0
$0
$0
$86,119,260
Page2
118
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RETURN ON INVESTMENTS FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS PROCUREMENT/OTHER FUND MARCH 31,2014
RETURN ON INVESTMENTS Repurchase Agreements Money Market Treasury Bills Discount Notes Bonds Total return on investments Interest received Accrued interest Total return on investments
JUL
AUG
$389 5,392
$410 5,446
0 0 $5 781 $389
2013 SEP
2014 OCT
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
$306 5,287
$667 5,464
$687 5,139
$632 5,004
$181 5,052
$222
$458
4,520
5,005
0 0 $5 856
0 0 $5593
0 0 $6.131
0 0 $5826
0 0
0 0 $5 233
0 0 $4 742
0 0 $5.463
5,392
$3Bg 5,467
$292 5,301
$194 5,039
$340 5.123
$5781
$5.856
$5593
$194 4,548 $4742
$632
$632
5,499 $6131
5,194 $5 826
$5636
$757 4,879 $5636
$5233
MAR
$5463
YTD
MAY
APR
JUN
TOTAL
0 0 $0
0 0 $0
0 0 $0
$3,952 $46,309 $0 $0 $0 $50 261
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
$46,442 $50 261
$3,819
PORTFOLIO INVESTED Average daily portfolio available for investment Average daily portfolio invested
$58,689,151
$58,689,151
$28,225,806
$28,225,806
48.09%
48.09%
% of average daily portfolio invested
CARRYING VALUE GENERAL FUND PORTFOLIO
FY 13114
Jul2013 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dee
Jan 2014 Feb Ma' Ap' May
$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
Jul 2012
Jan 2013 Feb M"
May Ju"
Jul2013 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Jan 2014 Feb Ma' Ap' May Ju"
$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
Jul2011 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dee
Jan2012 Feb Ma'
AP'
May
$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
Jul2012 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Jan 2013 Feb Ma' Ap' May J"'
Page3
119
$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 10/11 Jut 2010 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dee
Jan 2011 Feb Ma' Ap' May Ju"
Jul2011 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Jan 2012 Feb M"
""'
May
Ju"
$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
$25,423,957 $15,427,078 $15,429,234 $15,429,332 $45,432,936 $45,437 277 $45,442,015 $45,447,053 $45,451,256 $45,453,059 $45,456,386 $40,459,599 FY 10/11
FY 11/12
FY 12/13
FY 13/14
CARRYING VALUE BUS/OTHER PORTFOLIO
$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
Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
""'
J"'
FY 11/12
FY 12/13
Feb M"
$5,742,841 $5,742,990 $5,743,090 $5,743,140 $5,743,184 $5,743,245 $5.743,291 $5,743,332 $5,743,378
""'
$5,743,468 $5.743,513
Jul2010 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Jan 2011
May
Ju"
$5,743,423
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT DETAIL OF PORTFOLIO FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS PROCUREMENT/OTHER FUND MARCH 31, 2014 Purchased Fn>m
TYPE
Settlement
Maturity
Days to
Date
Date
Maturity
Purchased Rate%
Maturity Rate%
Carrying Value
ParVaJue
Fair Value
MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS Wells Fargo Local Banks
0.070% 0.425% TOTAL MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS
REPO'S
Bank of America
TREASURY BILLS:
TOTAL REPO
03/25114
04/01/14
7
23,415,636.13 1,755,490.03 25,171,126.16
23,415,636.13 1,755,490.03 25,171,126.16
23,415,636.13
0.248%
0.070% 0.425% 0.248%
0.030%
0.030%
25,000,000.00
25,000,000.00
25,000,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,755,490.03 25,171,126.16
TOTAL TREASURY BILLS
AGENCY DISC NOTES:
TOTAL DISCOUNT NOTES AGENCY BONDS:
TOTAL BONDS
IPORTFOLIO - GENERAL FUND
0.00
0.00
0.00
50,171,126.16
50,171,126.16
50,171,126.16
MONEY MARKET: Wells Fargo MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS
CaiEMAICaiOES CaiEMA Grant No. 6461 Bus Procurement
0.070%
0.070%
2,150,596.80
0.070% 0.070%
0.070% 0.070%
1,200.36 60,753,523.31 0.00
2,150,596.80 1,200.36 60,753,523.31 0.00
2,150,596.80 1,200.36 60,753,523.31 0.00
0.070%
0.070%
62,905,320.47
62,905,320.47
62,905,320.47
113,076,446.63
113,076,446.63
113,076,446.63
TREASURY BILLS: AGENCY DISC NOTES:
AGENCY BONDS:
/PORTFOLIO~ OTHER {CaiEma/Bus Procurement)
ITOTAL PORTFOLIO GENERAL FUND 50.17%
COMPOSITION OF PORTFOLIO : Money Market Repurchase Agreements Treasury Bills Discount Notes Bonds
49.83% 0.00%
0.00% 0.00% 100.00%
Page4
120
OTHER (CaiEma/CaiOESJBus Procurement)
100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00%
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS FOR THE MONTH ENDED MARCH 31, 2014
SETTLEMENT DATE
MATURITY DATE
DAILY""REPO"" INVESTMENT$
CURRENT # INTEREST OF DAYS RATE
INTEREST EARNED
INTEREST RECEIVED
CASH RECEIPT
AIR ACTIVITY
NET ACTIVITY
AVERAGE INVESTMENT AMT.INV • #OF DAYS/ DAYS IN MONTH: 31
BANK OF AMERICA
02/25/14 03104114 03/11/14 03/18/14 03/25/14
TOTAL
03/04/14 03/11/14 03/18/14 03/25/14 04/01/14
. $25,000.000.00 $25,000,000.00 $25,000,000.00 $25,000,000.00 $25,000,000.00
7 7 7 7 7
0.0100% 0.0200% 0.0200% 0.0200% 0.03000/o
20.83 97.22 97.22 97.22 145.83
48.61 97.22 97.22 97.22 0.00
25,000.000.00 25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00
-27.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
-25.000.000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25,000,000.00
5,645,161.29 5,645,161.29 5,645,161.29 5,645,161.29 5,645,161.29
$100,000,000.00
7
0.0225%
$458.32
$340.27
$125,000,000.00
-$27.78
$0.00
$28,225,806.45
Page 5
121
ALAMEDA· CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT GENERAL FUND GOVERNMENT SECURITIES SUMMARY
FOR THE MONTH ENDED MARCH 31, 2014 CUSIP
AGENCY
SETTLEMENT
MATURITY
DISCOUNT
PAR
DATE
DATE
RATE(%)
VALUE
NUMBER
Treasu
Bills Matured:
Treasu
Bills Held at Month End:
TOTAL TREASURY BILLS
DAYS
COST
MARKET RATE
HELD
FAIR
VALUE
RATE
CARRYING
MONTH
(%)
VALUE
INT. EARNED
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
DURING MONTH
0.00
DURING
MONTH
CARRYING
VALUE
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
o.oo
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Discount Notes Mahzred:
Discount Notes Held at Month End:
TOTAL DISCOUNT NOTES Agency Bond Matured
Agency Bond Held at Month End:
TOTAL BONDS
TOTAL GOVERNMENT SECURmES
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
Government Securities over 90 days
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total Govemment Securities- Aged
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Variance
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
PageS
122
E
Report No: Meeting Date:
,:w/VS/T
14-129 May28, 2014
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 2013-14 Third Quarter Employee and Non-Employee Out-of-State Travel
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider Receiving the FY 2013-14 Third Quarter Employee and Non-Employee Out-of-State Travel Report. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Employee Out-of-State travel for the Third Quarter of FY 2013-14 totals $13,747.33 which was funded by the District Operating Program. There are no non-employee travel expenses to report. Attachment 1 summarizes the trips that were taken in the Third Quarter, and Attachment 2 provides a detailed description of the justification for the trip and the nature of the expenses. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
Budgeted travel activity is included as part of FY 2013-14 budget.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
The Employee Out-of-State travel for the Third Quarter of FY 2013-14 totals $13,747.33 which was funded by the District Operating Program. There are no non-employee travel expenses to report. Attachment 1 summarizes the trips that were taken in the Third Quarter, and Attachment 2 provides a detailed description of the justification for the trip, as well as the nature of the expenses. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
There are no notable advantages or disadvantages. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
This report does not recommend an action.
123
Report No. 14-129 Page 2 of 2
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Staff Report 14-045 FY 2013-14 Second Quarter Employee and Non-Employee Out-of-State Travel
ATTACHMENTS: 1: Employee Out-of-State Travel Summary, Third Quarter FY 2013-14
2:
Detailed Description of Employee Travel, Third Quarter FY 2013-14
Department Head Approval:
James D. Pachan, Interim Chief Financial Officer
Prepared by:
Sue Lee, Treasury Manager
124
AC Transit
Sorted by start date
OUT OF STATE TRAVEL SUMMARY (EMPLOYEES) 3RD QUARTER (JAN -MARCH) FY 2013/2014 IName
llstart Date
Pachan,James Daniel
II Purpose
IIEnd Date
llcity/State
IIGrant Funded~ITotal Cost
I
2/7/2014
2/11/2014 Transit CEO Seminar 2014
NEW ORLEANS, LA
No
2,475.81
Bui,David
2/10/2014
2114/2014 NTI Contract Administration
PHOENIX,AZ
No
1,169.25
Medwin,Jonathan
2/10/2014
2/14/2014 NTI Contract Admin -Air fare only
PHOENIX,AZ
No
273.70
Goodwin,Cieo
2/23/2014
2/26/2014 2014 APTA Conference
NEW ORLEANS, LA
No
2,358.11
Joseph,Michele
2!23/2014
2/26/2014 2014 APTA Conference
NEW ORLEANS, LA
Laynes, Nichele
2/23/2014
2/26/2014 2014 APTA Conference
NEW ORLEANS, LA
No No
2,023.61 1,889.50
Der,Howard
3/18/2014
3/21/2014 NTD Reporting Training Class
NEWARK, NJ
No
1,239.70
Jung,Campbell Moore,Charlyn
3/18/2014
3/22/2014 NTD Training 3/28/2014 Intra to Transit Procurement
NEWARK, NJ
No
1,284.19
SALT LAKE CITY
No
1,033.46
3/24/2014
13,747.33
Total Recap: Grant-funded travel total
0.00
District-funded travel total
13,747.33
Total
13,747.33
(/)
Jl
125
sA" 14-129 /I.TT.2
Detailed Description of Employee Travel, Third Quarter FY 2013-2014
Employee:
James Pachan
Date:
2/7/2014-2/11/2014
Purpose:
Transit CEO Seminar 2014
Place:
New Orleans, Louisiana
Cost:
$2,475.81
Nature of Expenses: Airfare ($488.10), Lodging (899.19), Conference fees ($745.00), Ground Transportation ($53.00}, Per Diem ($232.25), Parking ($58.27) The APTA Transit CEO Seminar proved a forum for transit leadership to exchange information and enhance leadership skills. The seminar focused on new strategies and best practices related to funding and financing, workforce development, labor relations, disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE) programs, cyber security, media relations, why the Millennia! generation is choosing public transit, succession planning, MAP-21's safety, asset management, and state of good repair mandates, The following are a few specific topics that were included in the conference: •
FTA Workshop on MAP-21
•
Discussion with Millennials on attracting the younger generation to public transportation
•
Strategic planning utilizing the insights of MAP-21
•
Expanding resources and support for transit agencies
•
Building on the relationship with members of the Board
•
Reducing attention related accidents in public transportation
•
Labor relations trends in transit
The APTA Transit CEO Seminar is an extremely valuable conference for executive level staff to gain new insights for improving the stability and performance of transit agencies. The sessions at the conference were very valuable in improving the knowledge of CEO/GM and Deputy CEO/GM's, and the interaction with CEO/GM and Deputy CEO/GM staff was invaluable in identifying methods to further improve the performance and perception of AC Transit.
Employee:
David Bui
Date:
2/10/2014-2/14/2014
Purpose:
NTI Contract Administration
Place:
Phoenix, Arizona
Cost:
$1,169.25
Nature of Expenses: Airfare ($269.80), Lodging ($633.20}, Per Diem ($266.25} Authorization was requested for the Contract Specialist to attend the National Transit Institute (NTI) Procurement and Contract Administration Course.
The National Transit Institute is an organization
which provides training and education in support of public transportation in the United States. This Procurement and Contract Administration course intends educate attendees on good contract administration system should look and how it should function after contract award. This procurement
126
•-
Detailed Description of Employee Travel, Third Quarter FY 2013-2014 course will emphasize good procurement business practices and policies from a broader industry perspective. This training covers the roles and responsibilities of contracting parties. Specific problem areas that may emerge during the procurement process will be identified and addressed. The course will aid AC Transit in its preparation and Administration of Contracts.
Employee:
Jon Medwin
Date:
2/11/2014-2/14/2014
Purpose:
National Transit Institute Contract Administration Seminar
Place:
Phoenix, Arizona
Cost:
$273.70
Nature of Expenses: Airfare ($273.70) Authorization was requested for the Director of Procurement & Materials to attend the National Transit Institute (NTI) Seminar in (Federal) Contract Administration. NTI is the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) contractor for providing transit training to public agencies in the United States. This is one of the four core procurement seminars offered by NTI. With major projects launching, i.e., Line 51 and the BRT program, it is important that key procurement staff are up to date on the most updated and best procurement practices.
Employee:
Charlyn (Kai) Moore
Date:
3/24/2014- 3/28/2013
Purpose:
National Transit Institute Introduction to Transit Procurement
Place:
Salt lake City, Utah
Cost:
$1,033.46
Nature of Expenses: Airfare ($256.00); Lodging {$490.96); Ground Transportation {$12.00); Per Diem {$274.50) Authorization was requested for Charlyn (Kai) to attend the National Transit Institute (NTI) Seminar in {Federal) Contract Administration.
NTI is the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) contractor for
providing transit training to public agencies in the United States. This is one of the four core procurement seminars offered by NTI. With major projects launching, i.e., Line 51 and the BRT program, it is important that key procurement staff is up to date on the most updated and best procurement practices. Kai is a new District employee and this is a foundation course.
127
Detailed Description of Employee Travel, Third Quarter FY 2013-2014
Employee:
Cleo Goodwin
Date:
2/23/2014-2/26/2014
Purpose: Place:
2014 APTA Conference New Orleans, Louisiana
Cost:
$2,358.10
Nature of Expenses: Registration Fees ($525.00), Lodging ($717.00), Per Diem ($248.50), Airfare ($763.50), Ground Transportation ($104.10) Authorization was requested for the Director of Marketing and Communications to attend the American Public Transportation Association Marketing and Communications Workshop. The workshop provides an intensive experience focusing on all aspects of public transportation marketing and communications, including media relations, customer service, ridership initiatives and best practices. By attending and participating in this workshop, marketing/communication personnel are able to take advantage of educational sessions, industry networking opportunities, and information sharing. Exposure to new and creative approaches, exploration of new solutions and discovery of marketing trends allow for staff to develop and implement new ideas for marketing the system's services and enhancing the image of AC Transit.
Employee:
Michele Joseph
Date:
2/23/2014-2/26/2014
Purpose:
2014 APTA Conference
Place:
New Orleans, Louisiana
Cost:
$2,023.61
Nature of Expenses: Lodging ($714.51), Airfare ($476.00), Per Diem ($248.50), Ground Transportation ($59.60), Registration Fees ($525.00) Authorization was requested for the Director of Marketing and Communications to attend the American Public Transportation Association Marketing and Communications Workshop. The workshop provides an intensive experience focusing on all aspects of public transportation marketing and communications, including media relations, customer service, ridership initiatives and best practices. By attending and participating in this workshop, marketing/communication personnel are able to take advantage of educational sessions, industry networking opportunities, and information sharing. Exposure to new and creative approaches, exploration of new solutions and discovery of marketing trends allow for staff to develop and implement new ideas for marketing the system's services and enhancing the image of AC Transit.
128
Detailed Description of Employee Travel, Third Quarter FY 2013-2014
Employee:
Nichele Laynes
Date:
2/23/2014-2/26/2014
Purpose:
2014 APTA Conference
Place:
New Orleans, Louisiana
Cost:
$1,889.50
Nature of Expenses: Registration fee ($525.00), Lodging ($714.51), Per Diem ($248.50), Airfare ($333.25), Ground Transportation ($42.00), Parking ($26.24) Authorization was requested for the Marketing Administrator to attend the American Public Transportation Association Marketing and Communications Workshop in New Orleans. The four-day workshop focused on all aspects of public transportation marketing and communications, including media relations, customer service, ridership initiatives, peer networking and discussion, and exploration of best practices. In attending this workshop, I was able to leverage educational sessions, industry networking opportunities, and information sharing. I was also exposed to new ways of marketing and advertising public transportation, was informed of new industry-wide advertising initiatives, and discovered leading-edge market trends that will afford me the opportunity to develop and implement new ideas for promoting the District's services, and enhancing the image of AC Transit.
Employee:
Howard Der
Date:
3/18/2014-3/21/2014
Purpose:
NTD Reporting Training Class
Place:
Newark, New Jersey
Cost:
$1,239.70
Nature of Expenses: Per Diem ($213.50), Ground Transportation ($23.70), Airfare (318.00), Lodging ($654.90), Parking (24.00), Mileage ($5.60) Authorization was requested for the Planning Data Administrator to attend training on National Transit Database (NTD) reporting conducted by the National Transit Institute (NTI) at Rutgers University. NTD was established by an act of Congress in 1974 and is intended to be a uniform reporting system for public transit agencies in the United States. Collected NTD data is used by the Federal Transit Administration to determine how federal transit funding is apportioned. The overall objective of the training is to help transit professionals learns the necessary skills for reporting data to the NTD Internet reporting website. The training specifically provided an in-depth, detailed orientation to all the reporting sections on the NTD reporting website at www.ntdprogram.gov. In addition, the training gave staff a better understanding of the NTD reporting mechanisms and reporting requirements.
129
Detailed Description of Employee Travel, Third Quarter FY 2013-2014
Employee:
Campbell Jung
Date:
3/18/2014-3/22/2014
Purpose:
NTD Training
Place:
Newark, New Jersey
Cost:
$1,284.19
Nature of Expenses: Airfare ($284.00). Lodging (807.69), Per Diem ($152.50), Ground Transportation ($40.00) Authorization was requested for the Planning Data Administrator to attend training on National Transit Database (NTD) reporting conducted by the National Transit Institute (NTI) at Rutgers University. NTD was established by an act of Congress in 1974 and is intended to be a uniform reporting system for public transit agencies in the United States. Collected NTD data is used by the Federal Transit Administration to determine how federal transit funding is apportioned. The overall objective of the training is to help transit professionals learns the necessary skills for reporting data to the NTD Internet reporting website. The training specifically provided an in-depth, detailed orientation to all the reporting sections on the NTD reporting website at www.ntdprogram.gov. In addition, the training gave staff a better understanding of the NTD reporting mechanisms and reporting requirements.
130
Report No: Meeting Date:
14-130 May28,2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
SUBJECT:
Travel and Meeting Expenses for Directors and Board Officers
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider receiving the FY 2013-14 Third Quarter Travel and Meeting Expense Report for Directors and Board Officers. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Board is provided with an itemized quarterly summary of travel, meeting and miscellaneou s expenses. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
On April 10, 2013, the Board voted to continue the 25% ($2,250) reduction in their travel budgets, leaving $6,750 for travel and meeting expenses during FY 2013-14, with the Board President receiving an extra $2,000 during each half of the fiscal year. Total expenses for the third quarter of the fiscal year amounted to $5,340.32. With regard to Board Officers, each Officer has an annual budget for travel and meeting expense reimbursements which was approved by the Board of Directors with the adoption of the District's budget. Board Officers' expenses totaled $5,666.37 for the third quarter of FY 201314.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
Board Policy No. 180A - Travel, Meeting and Miscellaneou s Expense Reimbursements for Directors and Board Officers, provides that the Board of Directors receive an itemized quarterly summary of all travel, meeting and miscellaneous expenses reimbursed under the policy. A summary of expenses for each Director and Board Officer is provided in Attachment 1. In addition, the year-to-date expense total for each Director is provided in Attachment 2. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
This report is provided to the Board in the interest of transparency with regard to travel and miscellaneous expenses incurred by the Board and Board Officers.
131
Report No. 14-130 Page 2 of 2
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: This report is provided for information only.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Board Policy 180A: Travel, Meeting and Miscellaneous Expense Reimbursements for Directors and Board Officers.
ATTACHMENTS: 1: FY 2013-14 Third Quarter Directors and Officers Travel/Meeting Expense Report
2:
Board Annual Expense Summary
Prepared by:
Kathleen Eichmeier, Assistant District Secretary
132
TRAVEL/MEETING EXPENSE Directors and Officers FY 2013/2014 Third Quarter Report Director
Expense Description
WALLACE
Beginning Balance Less 25% Reduction (Approved by Board on 04/1 0/13) 1st Quarter Travel/Meetings (July/Aug/Sep) 2nd Quarter Travel/Meetings (Oct/Nov/Dec) 3rd Quarter TraveUMeetings (Jan/Feb/Mar) 4th Quarter Travel/Meetings (Apr/May/Jun)
Expense Q3
$2,256.48
l3rd Quarter Report January 11114/2013- Transportation Research Board Affiliate Membership (Renewed at time of registration for Annual Meeting) Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, January 12-16, 2014 Registration Airfare Lodging Per Diem Airport Shuttle Baggage Fees Ground Transportation
Quarter
$120.00 $351.75 $2,256.48 $120.00
Declining Balance $9,000.00 -$2,250.00 $6,630.00 $6,278.25 $4,021.77 $3,901.77
l $173.00
$525.00 $356.70 $455.48 $319.50 $79.00 $50.00 $139.26
01128/2014- Faxline Monthly Charge
$12.55
PDA Service Fee•
$40.00
February
........)> .... OJ
n
$40.00
PDA Service Fee•
March 03/04/2014- USB Adapter and Charging Cord for iPad
$13.49
03/26/2014- Faxline Monthly Charge
$12.50
PDA Service Fee•
$40.00
::::;
3C1)
V> OJ
~
:;IJ C1)
'0
0
::J .... .... ....
..... ..... -1>-
' ..... w 0
Total:
$2,256.48
"Pursuant to Board Policy 180A, Section V.B, expenses related to District provided faxes and cell phones shall be charged against the funds provided to each Director under Section III.C (Travel). 133
TRAVEUMEETING EXPENSE Directors and Officers FY 2013/2014 Third Quarter Report
Q3
'
•~••••• ""'" reoowo '" •••~o"'l ''ooo;
I
$2.000 mll•blo durioo
Less 25% ~t1on $2000. $2000. 1st T I 2nd Quarter T 3rd 4th Quarter 1
DV tsoara on '1st half of fiscal ' 2nd half of fiscal l) I
I " ' """ "' fiOOOI yNI, '""
~
$395.7(
~
i....
••
.. ,
-,
J3rd Quarter Report 1-
i
to Oakland
IPDA
$61.88
=
~
$3.96
'to ~~· ,~,gl Office to take BART to Transbay Joint t'owers ~"" '"' "'
i
n1
~
...!:"
I to attend Board
•v••~v
'"
...
04/10/~)
1
01!no,orl1,1-
"'
$3.96 I - BART Fare to San
i
I-
' to attend Board
I-
'to
>for
1
,_
•_Joint Powers
l_l
A•
,;"
$6~
I
I Office to attend BRT__f'clli9'_
~
~
i
$50.00
'Fee•
10211212014102113/2014-
to attend Board i
I-
$3.96
I to Oakland
'to ~~· ·~· gl Office to take BART to 1 '"''"""I Joint Powers '"
..., $3~
102113/2014- BART Fare to San 14IPDA
i
' to attend Board
>for j-
'Joint
$6.60
I 'to
$3~
$50.00
i 'Fee•
2 *Pursuant to Board Policy 180A, Section V.B, expenses related to District provided faxes and cell phones shall be charged against the funds provided to each Director under Section III.C (Travel). 134
TRAVEUMEETING EXPENSE Directors and Officers FY 2013/2014 Third Quarter Report
President January 2013
HARPER
Expense Description
Expense Q3
Quarter
Declining Balance
(Pun~uant
to Board Polley 18oa, the Board President shall receive an additional $2000 available during 1st half of fiscal year, and $2 000 available during 2nd half of fiscal earl
Beginning Balance Less 25% Reduction (Approved by Board on 04/10/13) Additional $2000 available 1st half of fiscal vear-Board President Additional S2000 available 2nd half of fiscal vear-Board President 1st Quarter TraveVMeeUngs (July/Aug/Sep) 2nd Quarter Travel/Meetings (Oct/Nov/Dec) 3rd Quarter Travel/Meetings (Jan/Feb/Mar) 4th Quarter TraveVMeetings (Apr/May/Jun)
$9,000.00 ~,250.00
_E,OOO.OO
$213.36
March 03/12/2014- Mileage to attend Board Meeting- Emeryville to Oakland
$3.96
03/13/2014- Mileage to General Office to take BART to Transbay Joint Powers Authority Meeting
$3.96
03/13/2014- BART Fare to San Francisco for Transbay Joint Powers Authority Meeting
$6.60
03/24/2014 - Mileage to General Office to attend BRT Policy Steering Committee meeting
$3.96
03/26/2014- Mileage to attend Board Meeting- Emeryville to Oakland
$3.96
PDA Service Fee*
$50.00
Total:
$150.00 $395.70 $213.36 $61.88
:>2,000.00 $10.600.00 $10,204.30 $9,990.94 $9,929.06
$213.36
3 *Pursuant to Board Policy 180A, Section V.B, expenses related to District provided faxes and cell phones shall be charged against the funds provided to each Director under Section III.C (Travel). 135
TRAVEUMEETING EXPENSE
Directors and Officers FY 2013/2014 Third Quarter Report Director
Expense Description
ORTIZ
Beginning Balance Less 25% Reduction (Approved by Board on 04/10/13) 1st Quarter Travei/Mee~ngs (July/Aug/Sep) 2nd Quarter Travel/Meetings (Oct/Nov/Dec) 3rd Quarter Travel/Meetings (Jan/Feb/Mar) 4th Quarter Travel/Meetings (Apr/May/Jun)
Expense Q3
$544.23
l3rd Quarter Report January 01/08/2014- Mileage to General Office for Alameda ILC Meeting
Quarter
$284.58 $261.17 $544.23 $157.52
Declining Balance $9,000.00 -$2,250.00 $6.465.42 $6,204.25 $5,660.02 $5,502.50
I
$7.84
01/13/2014-=-Mileage toDowntown oal
$11.20 -~
01/23/2014- Mileage to Downtown Oakland for Alameda County Transportation
Commission meeting
$11.20
Keglslrallon ror :;,an Leanaro c;namoer or c;ommerce t>oara or Installation Dinner
v uL->,Lv ,. -
u~recmrs
$90.00
01/23/2014- Mileage to San Leandro Senior Center for Chamber of Commerce Dinner
$8.96
PDA Service Fee• February 02/03/2014- Registration for Alameda Labor Council Annual Awards Dinner on April18, 2014
$40.00
$200.00
-·---
-"--
02/03/2014- Mileage to Downtown Oakland for Alameda County Transportation
Commission meeting
$7.84
02/12/2014- Mileage to General Office for BART/AC Transit Liaison Committee Meeting
$7.84
02/12/2014- Mileage to General Office for meeting with Maria Ayerdi of Trans bay Joint Powers Authority
$7.84
02/20/2014- Mileage to Alameda City Hall for Alameda Oversight Board Meeting
$6.16
02/24/2014- Mileage to Downtown Oakland for Oakland Oversight Board Meeting
$7.84
PDA Service Fee•
$40.00 4
*Pursuant to Board Policy 180A, Section V.B, expenses related to District provided faxes and cell phones shall be charged against the funds provided to each Director under Section III.C (Travel). 136
TRAVEUMEETING EXPENSE Directors and Officers FY 2013/2014 Third Quarter Report Director
Expense Description
ORTIZ
Beginning Balance Less 25% Reduction (Approved by Board on 04/1 0/13) 1st Quarter Travei/Mee~ngs (July/Aug/Sep) 2nd Quarter Travei/Mee~ngs (OcVNov/Dec) 3rd Quarter Travel/Meetings (Jan/Feb/Mar) 4th Quarter Travei/Mee~ngs (Apr/May/Jun)
Expense Q3
$544.23
Quarter
Declining Balance $9,000.00 -$2,250.00 $6,465.42 $6,204.25 $5,660.02 $5,502.50
$284.58 $261.17 $544.23 $157.52
March 03/06/2014- Mileage to General Office for meeting regarding Line 51 contract
$7.84
03/11/2014- Mileage to Downtown Oakland for Oakland Oversight Board Meeting
$7.84
03/11/2014- Printer Toner Cartridges
$26.15
-·-.
03/24/2014- Mileage to General Office for BRT Policy Steering Committee meeting
$7.84
03/27/2014- Mileage to Downtown Oakland for Oakland Oversight Board Meeting
$7.84
"UA
<>erv1ce
----
·-
:o<~LI_:llll
~ee
$544.23
Total:
5 *Pursuant to Board Policy 180A, Section V.B, expenses related to District provided faxes and cell phones shall be charged against the funds provided to each Director
under Section III.C (Travel). 137
TRAVEUMEETING EXPENSE Directors and Officers FY 2013/2014 Third Quarter Report Director
Expense Description
WILLIAMS
Beginning Balance Less 25% Reduction (Approved by Board on 04/10/13) 1st Quarter Travel/Meetings (July/Aug/Sep) 2nd Quarter Travel/Meetings (Oct/Nov/Dec) 3rd Quarter Travel/Meetings (Jan/Feb/Mar) 4th Quarter Travel/Meetings (Apr/May/Jun)
Expense Q3
$150.00
Quarter
$5,771.20 $648.55 $150.00 $150.00
Declining Balance
$9,000.00 -$2,250.00 $978.80 $330.25 $180.25 $30.25
I
l3rd Quarter Report January IPDA Service Fee* I February PDA Service Fee* I
I
$50.00
I I
$50.00
March $50.00
PDA Service Fee*
$150.00
Total:
6 *Pursuant to Board Policy 180A, Section V.B, expenses related to District provided faxes and cell phones shall be charged against the funds provided to each Director under Section III.C (Travel). 138
TRAVEUMEETING EXPENSE Directors and Officers FY 2013/2014 Third Quarter Report Director
Expense Description
DAVIS
Beginning Balance Less 25% Reduction (Approved by Board on 04/10/13) 1st Quarter TraveUMeetings (July/Aug/Sep) 2nd Quarter Travel/Meetings (OcVNov/Dec) 3rd Quarter Travel/Meetings (Jan/Feb/Mar) 4th Quarter Travel/Meetings (Apr/May/Jun)
Expense Q3
$244.97
l3rd Quarter Report January 01108/2014- Mileage to attend Board Meeting - Newark to Oakland
I
Quarter
$3,240.06 $1,245.85 $244.97 $104.16
Declining Balance $9,000.00 -$2,250.00 $3,509.94 $2,264.09 $2,019.12 $1,914.96 --~----
····-··-
$28.00
01/2212014- Mileage to attend Board Meeting- Newark to Oakland
$28.00
Voice Service Charge*
$35.00
February 02112/2014- Mileage to attend Board Meeting- Newark to Oakland
$28.00
02/26/2014- Mileage to attend Board Meeting - Newark to Oakland
$28.00
Voice Service Charge*
$35.00
March 03112/2014- Mileage to attend Board Meeting- Newark to Oakland
$28.00 $6.97
03/18/2014- USB 30 pin charging cord 03/26/2014- Mileage to attend Board Meeting- Newark to Oakland
$28.00 $244.97
Total:
7 *Pursuant to Board Policy 180A, Section V.B, expenses related to District provided faxes and cell phones shall be charged against the funds provided to each Director under Section III.C (Travel). 139
TRAVEUMEETING EXPENSE Directors and Officers FY 2013/2014 Third Quarter Report Director
Expense Description
PEEPLES
Beginning Balance Less 25% Reduction (Approved by Board on 04/10/13) 1st Quarter Travel/Meetings (July/Aug/Sep) 2nd Quarter TraveVMeetings (Oct/Nov/Dec) 3rd Quarter Travel/Meetings (Jan/Feb/Mar) 4th Quarter Travel/Meetings (Apr/May/Jun)
Expense Q3
$1,496.55
]3rd Quarter Report January Transportation Research Board 93rd Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C. January 1116,2014 Registration ($525 paid in FY 2012/13) Airfare Lodging ($454.44 paid in FY 2012/13) Per Diem Ground Transportation
$1,985.92 $925.30 $1,496.55 $120.00
$40.00
02/13/2014- Registration for IURD Cities and Transit Conference, March 20-21, 2014, Berkeley, CA
$161.38
.
$10.00 $40.00
$75.00
03/20/2014- Registration for Fremont Chamber of Commerce State of the City event on March 28, 2014
$45.00
03/22/2014- Office Supply- Double sided tape and packing tape
$11.21
PDA Service Fee* Total:
$9,000.00 -$2,250.00 $4.764.08 $3,838.78 $2,342.23 $2,222.23
$0.00 $293.40 $113.36 $461.50 $5.70
$200.00
PDA Service Fee* March 03/14/2014- Registration for AltCar Expo Industry and Fleet Conference, Craneway Pavillion, Richmond, CA
Declining Balance
I
PDA Service Fee* February 02/03/2014- Registration for Alameda Labor Council Annual Awards Dinner on April 18,2014
02/24/2014- Taxi Fare from El Cerrito BART to Albany Oversight Board Meeting due to bus pass by
Quarter
$40.00 $1,496.55
*Pursuant to Board Policy 180A, Section V.B, expenses related to District provided faxes and cell phones shall be charged against the funds provided to each Director under Section III.C (Travel). 140
8
TRAVEUMEETING EXPENSE Directors and Officers FY 2013/2014 Third Quarter Report Director
Expense Description
YOUNG
Beginning Balance Less 25% Reduction {Approved by Board on 04/10/13) 1st Quarter Travel/Meetings (July/Aug/Sep) 2nd Quarter Travel/Meetings (Oct/Nov/Dec) 3rd Quarter Travel/Meetings (Jan/Feb/Mar) 4th Quarter Travel/Meetings (Apr/May/Jun)
Expense Q3
$434.73
Quarter
$3,114.40 $370.00 $434.73 $120.00
Declining Balance $9,000.00 -$2,250.00 $3,635.60 $3,265.60 $2,830.87 $2,710.87
I
l3rd Quarter Report January 01/02/2014- Office Supply- Toner for HP Printer Cartridge - Cyan Cartridge - Magenta Cartridge - Yellow High Capacity Cartridge- Black
$22.87 $22.87 $22.87 $52.63
- -----
PDA Service Fee*
$40.00
February PDA Service Fee*
I
I
March 03/28/2014- Registration for Public Advocates Voices of Conscience Celebration, San Francisco, CA, April 24, 2014
$40.00
L $65.00
03/28/2014- Registration for WTS Annual Awards Dinner, Oakland, CA, May 21, 2014
$128.49
PDA Service Fee* Total:
$40.00 $434.73
9 *Pursuant to Board Policy 180A, Section V.B, expenses related to District provided faxes and cell phones shall be charged against the funds provided to each Director under Section III.C (Travel). 141
TRAVEUMEETING EXPENSE Directors and Officers FY 2013/2014 Third Quarter Report Expense Description
Expense Q3
BOARD OFFICERS DAVID J. ARMIJO- GENERAL MANAGER 1st Quarter Travei/Meetinqs (July/Aug/Sep) 2nd Quarter Travel/Meetings (Oct/Nov/Dec) 3rd Quarter Travel/Meetings (Jan/Feb/Mar) 4th Quarter Travel/Meetings (Apr/May/Jun)
$4,764.13
l3rd Quarter Report January INo reportables.
Quarter
Declining Balance
$359.90 $888.14 $4,764.13 $0.00
I
I
I February APTA 2014 CEO's Seminar, New Orleans, LA, February 7-14, 2014 Registration Airfare Lodging Per Diem Ground Transportation
$745.00 $392.00 $614.20 $204.00 $50.00
March APTA 2014 Legislative Conference, Washington, D.C., March 8-11, 2014 Registration Airfare Lodging Per Diem Ground Transportation
$750.00 $343.00 $1,079.49 $172.50 $36.17
CTA Executive Committee Meeting, San Diego, CA. March 27-28, 2014 Airfare Lodging Per Diem Ground Transportation Total:
$187.00 $140.77 $35.00 $15.00 $4,764.13
10 *Pursuant to Board Policy 180A, Section V.B, expenses related to District provided faxes and cell phones shall be charged against the funds provided to each Director
under Seclion III.C (Travel). 142
TRAVEUMEETING EXPENSE Directors and Officers FY 2013/2014 Third Quarter Report Expense Description
Expense Q3
BOARD OFFICERS DENISE C. STANDRIDGE -INTERIM GENERAL COUNSEL (February 12, 2014) 1st Quarter Travel/Meetings (July/Aug/Sep) 2nd Quarter Travei/Mee~ngs (Oct/Nov/Dec) 3rd Quarter Travel/Meetings (Jan/Feb/Mar) 4th Quarter Travel/Meetings (Apr/May/Jun) [3rd Quarter Report January -DAVID A. WOLF No Reportables.
Declining Balance
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
I -------
I 1
$0.00
Quarter
I
February- DENISE C. STANDRIDGE No Reportables.
I I
March- DENISE C. STANDRIDGE No Reportables. $0.00
Total:
11 *Pursuant to Board Policy 180A, Section V.B, expenses related to District provided faxes and cell phones shall be charged against the funds provided to each Director under Section III.C (Travel). 143
TRAVEUMEETING EXPENSE Directors and Officers FY 2013/2014 Third Quarter Report Expense Description
Expense Q3
BOARD OFFICERS LINDA A. NEMEROFF - DISTRICT SECRETARY 1st Quarter Travel/Meetings (July/Aug/Sep) 2nd Quarter Travel/Meetings (Oct/Nov/Dec) 3rd Quarter Travel/Meetings (Jan/Feb/Mar) 4th Quarter Travel/Meetings (Apr/May/Jun)
$902.24
l3rd Quarter Report January INo Reportables
Quarter
Declining Balance
$0.00 $0.00 $902.24 $0.00
I
I
February California Special Districts Association Board Secretary/Clerk Conference. Napa, CA, February 27-28, 2014
Conference Fee
$750.00 $142.24 $10.00
MileaQe Bridge Toll March No Reportables
$902.24
Total:
12 *Pursuant to Board Policy 180A, Section V.B, expenses related to District provided faxes and cell phones shall be charged against the funds provided to each Director under Section III.C (Travel). 144
TRAVEUMEETING EXPENSE
Directors and Officers FY 2013/2014 Third Quarter Report
'Q1
17::~=~(~~~~~
ocoouc"'
cuc~uvc
t<~n.nn
\Ortiz i IDavis
;,771.20\
\Young
l, 114.4(
!Q
>0<
!04
~.n
$2~
$120.0(
~;~
$213.3€
$61.88 ~157.52
150.0(
120.0(
$ $
;434.7<
$370.0C II' ,198.32
~120.0(
-%
IYTD
$3.90'1.7
~~~~ r19R
~104.16
$ '.245.8e
•TOTALS
$150.0(
TOTAL
$4 52 c:t
~
~n
mn no
$~ $2.710.87 1.64
57.8QOh no oa"
81.52'1< ~
28.37'1<
~
)> V> .... .... ....!lJ !lJ
n
::::::
::r ::>:1
3
ro
ro
"0
0
....::::1 .... ,..., ~
N
-Po
'
f-"
w
0
145
This page intentionally blank
146
Report No: Meeting Date:
T1?9NS/T
14-132 May 28,2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Fiscal year 2013- 14 Third Quarter Surplus and Obsolete Materials Report.
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider Receiving the FY 2013- 14 Third Quarter Surplus and Obsolete Materials Report. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: During the Third Quarter of Fiscal Year 2013 - 2014, the District sold to Mountain View Tours Inc. One 2010 model year 45-foot Van Hoof Suburban coach and related obsolete equipment for one hundred and fifty five thousand dollars ($155,000.00). During th is period the District also sold (23) model year 1998 NABI 3000 series coaches, (18) model year NABI 1999 3100 series coaches, and four model year 1996 New Flyer articulated coaches for scrap value or ($70,375.00} BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: The total for surplus sales for this period in the amount of $225,375.00 is applied to the District' s General Fund.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: The non-revenue vehicles and equipment have served their useful life, have been fully depreciated, and have a zero net book value . These vehicles were approved for disposal by the Board of Directors, and were disposed of by means that are most advantageous to the District. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: The Board of Directors has requested a quarterly report on obsolete and surplus sales. ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS: This report is provided for information only.
147
Report No. 14-132 Page 2 of2 PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Report 14-027: Disposal of retired buses and other equipment through sale, or by means most advantageous to the District. Report 13-214: Dispose of retired buses through sale or by means most advantageous to the District. Board Policy 356: Disposition of surplus equipment, supplies, and other tangible personal property of the District. Board Policy 394: Write- Off Policy
ATTACHMENTS: None
Department Head Approval:
Thomas Prescott, Chief Performance Officer
Reviewed by:
Jon Medwin, Procurement and Materials Director James Pachan, Interim Chief Financial Officer Fred Walls, Materials Supervisor
Prepared by:
148
Report No: Meeting Date:
T/?19/VS/T
14-071 May 28, 2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Obsolete Parts and Material Disposal
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider approving the disposal of surplus and obsolete parts and material through sale, or by means that are most advantageous to the District. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The parts and material identified have surpassed their useful life expectancy for the District's needs. All items identified are for fleets which have been retired, and are no longer on District property. These items are recommended for disposal in accordance with methods outlined in Board Policy 356. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: Depending on what method the District elects to dispose of the parts and material, the anticipated result in reimbursement is 1% to 3% of cost, based on the fair market value at the time of sale.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: When coach and minivan fleets have served their useful life, and are disposed of, there are usually residual parts and materials that were utilized for their maintenance. At such time as these fleets have served their useful life and are retired, consideration should be given to the disposition of the supporting parts and materials to prevent an over stocking condition. In the past, numerous fleets have been retired and disposed with all supporting parts and material retained with no value to the District. Staff has identified surplus and obsolete parts and material currently being held in inventory for equipment that has been retired. The identified parts and materials are for vehicles that are no longer CARB compliant; therefore they have a greatly diminished value.
149
Report No. 14-071 Page 2 of 2 The estimated current market value for the identified items is approximately, twenty-eight thousand dollars {$28,000). ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
The elimination of these surplus parts and material will allow for a greater stocking capacity of inbound parts and material for the new Gillig and New Flyer fleets. By removing these items from stock, the District would minimize the number of line items to be processed during inventory reconciliation and dramatically reduce the District's inventory dollar value. In addition, by eliminating these obsolete parts there will be a greater storage capacity allowing for an increase in stock levels for high use items thereby reducing "Hard Coach Down" for out of stock parts. Furthermore there will be a reduction in man hours utilized in reorganizing the warehouse to accommodate incoming parts and material. Overall this action will provide for a clutter free, safe working environment and increase overall warehouse functionality. Additionally, disposing of these parts brings revenue to the District that it would not otherwise have if the obsolete inventory is left sitting on the shelves. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
No alternatives were considered other than the course of action recommended in this report. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES:
Board Policy 356 ATIACHMENTS:
None
Department Head Approval:
ED Barrow, Materials Superintendent
Reviewed by:
Jon Medwin, Procurement and Materials Director Thomas Prescott, Chief Performance Officer Denise Standridge, Interim General Counsel James Pachan, Chief Operating Officer/Interim Chief Financial Officer Fred Walls, Materials Supervisor
Prepared by:
150
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-268a May 28, 2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Follow-up of Internal Audit Report on District Outside Legal Costs
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider receiving a follow-up report from the Internal Audit Department regarding the costs associated with legal services provided by outside counsel, with comparisons to prior years. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Staff Report 13-268 - District Outside Legal Costs was received by the Board of Directors on October 23, 2013. The report summarized outside legal counsel expenses in fiscal years 2011, 2012 and 2013. After some discussion, the Board requested additional information to be provided in a follow-up report, including a schedule of what outside law firms were used for and what kind of work was being sent out to these firms. To lighten the Legal Department workload and augment the talents and areas of expertise of District in house counsel, the Department must sometimes contract with outside legal firms with experience in special areas of the law. Every three years, the agency issues Requests for Proposals for outside legal counsel in these specialty areas of the law. Attachment 1 shows current professional service contracts in force for outside legal counsel and their specialty areas of the law. Internal Audit has also provided an analysis of outside legal counsel expenses incurred by the District in fiscal years 2011, 2012, 2013 and the first three quarters of fiscal year 2014. Included in this analysis (see Attachment 2) is a summary of all invoices charged to the District in those years, the firm providing the work and a description of the services provided. An analysis of outside legal costs shows that the District was under budget for outside legal counsel costs in fiscal years 2011, 2012, 2013 and the first nine months of fiscal year 2014. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
There was no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
151
Report No. 13-268a Page 2 of 3 BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
The AC Transit Legal Department contracts with several law firms and attorneys to assist the District with various legal matters. In December 2012, a request was made to Internal Audit to review outside legal expenses in fiscal years 2011 and 2012. Later, the request was modified to include fiscal year 2013 and determine if the bills for these years were charged/recorded in the proper period and if outside legal expenses in total were within budget in each of those years. On October 23, 2013, the Board received Staff Report 13-268 - District Outside Legal Costs from Internal Audit, which summarized outside legal counsel expenses in fiscal years 2011, 2012 and 2013 and determined that several invoices for services performed in fiscal year 2012 were not recorded by the District until fiscal year 2013. The reason for this was that even though the work was performed in fiscal year 2012, the invoices were not approved for payment by the then-General Counsel until well after the accounting close of fiscal year 2012. The report also showed that even after adjusting outside legal expenses in fiscal years 2012 and 2013 to correct these errors, outside legal expenses were still under budget. After Staff Report 13-268 was received, a request was made by the Board of Directors to provide additional information in a follow-up report, to show what outside law firms were used for and the kind of work being sent out to these firms. Attachment 1 shows current professional service contracts in force for outside legal counsel and their specialty areas of the law. Internal Audit has provided an analysis of outside legal counsel expenses incurred by the District in fiscal years 2011, 2012, 2013 and the first three quarters of fiscal year 2014 (see Attachment 2). Included in this analysis is a summary of all invoices charged to the District in those years, the firm providing the work and a description of the legal services provided. Also, a comparison of actual outside legal counsel expenses incurred in fiscal years 2011, 2012, 2013 and the first three quarters of fiscal year 2014 with budgeted amounts in those same periods is shown below:
FISCAL YEAR
BUDGET
ACTUAL
AMOUNT UNDER BUDGET
2011 2012 2013 2014 (thru 3/31/14)
$1,775,000 $1,199,896 $ 822,000 $ 693,000
$1,632,742 $ 511,930 $ 615,211 $ 633,374
$142,258 $687,966 $206,789 $ 59,626
Attorney staffing levels for the agency have remained fairly consistent in the years reviewed, between 4 and 5 attorneys from 2011 to 2013 and currently 3 attorneys on staff. The reason for variances in outside legal counsel expenses in the current fiscal year is primarily due to a few cases and/or investigations that required more attention and increased workload from outside counsel. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
This report does not recommend disadvantages.
a course of action with
152
notable advantages or
Report No. 13-268a Page 3 of 3
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: This report does not recommend an action.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Staff Report 13-268, received by the Board on October 23, 2013 and which reported outside legal costs is a prior relevant Board action associated with this report.
ATTACHMENTS:
1: 2:
Summary of Current Professional Service Contracts for Outside Legal Counsel Outside Legal Counsel Invoices for fiscal years 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014
Department Head Approval: Reviewed by: Reviewed by: Prepared by:
Alan Parello, Manager of Internal Audit James Pachan, Acting Chief Financial Officer Denise Standridge, Interim General Counsel Alan Parello, Manager of Internal Audit
153
CURRENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTS FOR OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL
Attachment 1 for STAFF REPORT
13-268a
Contract No.
Firm Name
Specialty Areas
2012-1195C
Burke, Williams & Sorenson, LLP 444 South Flower Street, Suite 2400 Los Angeles, CA 90071
Public Sector Labor/Employment Law, Public Law, Public Entity Procurement and Contracting, Public Works Contracting, Financing, Bankruptcy Law, Environmental Law and Litigation
2012-11950
Foster Employment Law 3000 Lakeshore Avenue Oakland, CA 94610
Public Sector Labor/Employment Law
6/30/17
2012-1195E
Goins & Associates 1330 Broadway, Suite 930 Oakland, CA 94612
Public Sector Labor/Employment Law, Public Works Contracting and Defense of Tort Litigation
6/30/17
2012-1195G
Hanson Bridgett 425 Market Street, 26th Floor San Francisco, CA 94105
Public Sector Labor/Employment Law, Public Entity Law, Public Entity Procurement and Contracting, Public Works Contracting, Defense ofTort Litigation, Financing, Tax Law, Bankruptcy Law, Intellectual Property Law, Environmental Law and Litigation and Pension Law
6/30/17
2012-1195H
Jarvis, Fay, Doporto & Gibson, LLP 492 Ninth Street, Suite 310 Oakland, CA 94607
Public Sector Labor/Employment 6/30/17 Law, Public Entity Law, Public Entity Procurement & Contracting, Public Works Contracting, Defense of Tort Litigation, Financing and Environmental Law & Litigation
2012-1195J
Lafayette & Kumagai 100 Spear Street, Suite 600 San Francisco, CA 94105
Public Sector Labor/Employment Law
6/30/17
2012-1195K
Meyers Nave Riback Silver & Wilson 555 12th Street, Suite 1500 Oakland, CA 94607
Public Sector Labor/Employment Law, Public Entity Law, Public Entity Procurement and Contracting, Public Works Contracting, Defense of Tort Litigation, Financing, Environmental Law and Litigation and Pension Law
6/30/17
Page 1541 of 3
Expiration Date 6/30/17
CURRENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTS FOR OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL
Attachment 1 for STAFF REPORT
13-268a
Contract No. 2012-1195L
Firm Name Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. 1 Market Plaza, Steuart Tower #1300 San Francisco, CA 941 05
Specialty Areas Public Sector Labor/Employment Law
Expiration Date 6/30/17
2012-1195N
Rosales Law Partners LLP 433 California Street, Suite 630 San Francisco, CA 94547
Public Entity Procurement and Contracting, Public Works Contracting and Financing
6/30/17
2012-1195P
Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth 500 Capitol Mall, Suite 1120 Sacramento, CA 95814
Financing
6/30/17
2013-1244B
Apperson Crump PLC 6070 Poplar Avenue, 6th Floor Memphis, TN 38119
Public Sector Labor/Employment Law, Public Entity Procurement and Contracting, Public Works Contracting and Tax Law
6/30/17
2013-1244E
Bertrand, Fox & Elliot 2749 Hyde Street San Francisco, CA 94109
Public Sector Labor/Employment Law and Defense of Tort Litigation
6/30/17
2013-1244F
Best Best & Krieger, LLP 3390 University Avenue, 5th Floor Riverside, CA 92502
Public Sector Labor/Employment Law, Public Entity Law, Public Entity Procurement and Contracting, Public Works Contracting, Financing, Tax Law, Bankruptcy Law, Intellectual Property Law, Environmental Law and Litigation, Real Estate Acquisition and Construction
6/30/17
2013-1244H
Law Offices of Jeremy D. Weinstein 1512 Bonanza Street Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Tax Law and Intellectual Property Law
6/30/17
2013-12441
The Law Office of Julian Gross 455 Market Street, Suite 1270 San Francisco, CA 94105
Public Sector Labor/Employment Law, Public Entity Law, Public Entity Procurement and Contracting and Public Works Contracting
6/30/17
2013-1244L
Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 6033 W. Century Blvd. Suite 500 Los Angeles, CA 90045
Public Sector Labor/Employment Law, Public Entity Procurement and Contracting, Public Works Contracting, Real Estate Acquisition and Construction
6/30/17
Page 1552 of3
CURRENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTS FOR OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL
Attachment 1 for
STAFF REPORT
13-268a
Contract No.
Firm Name
Specialty Areas
2013-1244M
Lofton & Jennings 225 Bush Street, 16th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Renne Sloan Holtzman Sakai LLP 350 Sansome Street, Suite 300 San Francisco, CA 94104
Financing
Public Sector Labor/Employment Law, Public Entity Law and Environmental Law and Litigation
6/30/17
Ryan & Lifter 2010 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 330 San Ramon, CA 94513
Public Sector Labor/Employment Law, Public Entity Procurement and Contracting, Public Works Contracting, Defense of Tort Litigation and Construction
6/30/17
2013-12440
2013-1244P
Page 3 of 3 156
Expiration Date 6/30/17
Account Analysis- DETAIL
ATIACHMENT 2 for STAFF REPORT 13-268a
Outside Legal Expenses FY 2011, 2012, 2013 & 2014
FY2011 APPERSON, CRUMP & MAXWELL, PLC APPERSON, CRUMP & MAXWELL, PLC APPERSON, CRUMP & MAXWELL, PLC APPERSON, CRUMP & MAXWELL, PLC APPERSON, CRUMP & MAXWELL, PLC APPERSON, CRUMP & MAXWELL, PLC BERTRAND FOX, ELLIOTI & COHN BERTRAND FOX, ELLIOTI & COHN BERTRAND FOX, ELLIOTI & COHN BERTRAND FOX, ELUOTI & COHN BERTRAND FOX, ELUOTI & COHN BERTRAND FOX, ELLIOTI & COHN BERTRAND FOX, ELLIOTI & COHN BERTRAND FOX, ELLIOTI & COHN BERTRAND FOX, ELLIOTI & COHN BERTRAND FOX, ELLIOTI & COHN BERTRAND FOX, ELLIOTI & COHN BERTRAND FOX, ELLIOTI & COHN BERTRAND FOX, ELUOTI & COHN BERTRAND FOX, ELLIOTI & COHN DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR FOSTER EMPLOYMENT lAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT lAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT lAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT lAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
08/11/10 $ 10/31/10 $ 01/01/11 $ 02/28/11 $ 03/31/11 $ 05/10/11 $ 07/23/10 $ 08/23/10 $ 10/01/10 $ 10/29/10 $ 10/08/10 $ 12/21/10 $ 01/20/11 $ 02/17/11 $ 02/15/11 $ 03/08/11 $ 03/08/11 $ 05/19/11 $ 04/19/11 $ 06/06/11 $ 07/23/10 $ 08/30/10 $ 08/30/10 $ 08/31/10 $ 07/23/10 $ 07/23/10 $ 09/30/10 $ 09/30/10 $ 11/24/10 $ 11/24/10 $ 10/27/10 $ 12/28/10 $ 10/27/10 $ 01/31/11 $ 01/31/11 $ 02/28/11 $ 02/28/11 $ 02/28/11 $ 03/31/11 $ 03/31/11 $ 04/28/11 $ 04/28/11 $ 04/28/11 $ 05/26/11 $ 05/26/11 $ 05/26/11 $ 06/29/11 $ 06/29/11 $ 08/01/10 $ 08/01/10 $ 08/01/10 $ 09/01/10 $ 09/01/10 $ 09/01/10 $ 09/01/10 $
1,045.00
Guidelines & 2008 UPA DOL final rule
9,691.16
Interest arbitration demand
3,037.08
Interest arbitration demand
209.93
Interest arbitration demand
264.93
Interest arbitration demand
266.52
Translink & 13c (CA-90-Y401)
6,528.00
Langston v. ACT
3,887.22
Langston v. ACT
4,054.78
Langston v. ACT
6,616.86 595.01 10,033.84
Langston v. ACT AC Transit v. Caltrans Langston v. ACT
2,465.36
Langston v. ACT
3,404.22
Langston v. ACT
172.01
AC Transit v. Caltrans
2,657.92
Langston v. ACT
2,695.63
Langston v. ACT
1,589.81
Langston v. ACT
26,688.70
Langston v. ACT
1,038.28
Langston v. ACT
8,247.92
Personnel Matter- Former Employee
4,312.35
General legal
4,694.40
General Tax
3,241.08
Real Estate Transaction
12,255.38
BRT
7,137.71
BRT
4,912.20
General legal
982.10
General legal
1,651.05
General Legal
417.09
General Legal
2,282.93
Real Estate Transaction
3,255.85
General Legal
3,845.70 142.39
BRT- CEQA/NEPA General Legal
912.60
General legal
247.86
General legal
561.60
General Legal
19,584.84
River Watch v. ACT
5,110.35
River Watch v. ACT
8,321.10
Personnel Matter- Former Employee
1,366.50
Richmond Terminal
1,958.89
General Legal
3,432.50
River Watch v. ACT
5,170.50
Personnel Matter- Former Employee
5,517.32 60.16
312.68 656.95 10,775.00
River Watch v. ACT Real Estate Transaction General Legal General Legal Gilmer vs. AC Transit
4,375.00
Personnel Matter- Former Employee
1,125.00
Personnel Matter- Former Employee
4,175.00
Local192 Impasse Litigation
2,050.00
Personnel Matter- Former Employee
1,200.00
35,239.10
Personnel Matter- Former Employee ATU Interest Arbitration
Pagelof9
157
Account Analysis- DETAIL Outside Legal Expenses FY 2011, 2012, 2013 & 2014
ATIACHMENT 2 for STAFF REPORT 13-268a
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
09/01/10 $
29,620.01
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
10/01/10 $
210.00
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
10/01/10 $
250.00
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
10/01/10 $
75,798.00
ATU Interest Arbitration
Gilmer vs. AC Transit Personnel Matter- Former Employee Personnel Matter- Former Employee
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
10/01/10 $
24,398.13
Gilmer vs. AC Transit
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
11/01/10 $
22,744.10
Gilmer vs. AC Transit
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
11/01/10 $
53,819.02
ATU Interest Arbitration
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
11/01/10 $
1,500.00
Personnel Matter- Former Employee
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
11/01110 $
Personnel Matter- Former Employee
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
12101110 $
330.00 1,200.00
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
12/01/10 $
5,130.00
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
12/01/10 $
55,654.88
Gilmer vs. AC Transit ATU Interest Arbitration
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
12/01/10 $
22,390.00
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
01/01/11 $
80,157.63
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
01/01/11 $
1,200.00 900.00 11,263.01
General labor Personnel Matter- Former Employee
ATU Travel Time General labor
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
01/01/11 $
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
01101111 $
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
01/01/11 $
480.00
Personnel Matter- Former Employee
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
02/01/11 $
17,460.00
Personnel Matter- Former Employee
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
02/01/11 $
56,665.80
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
02/01/11 $
4,560.00
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
03/01/11 $
3,473.10
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
04/01/11 $
150.00
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
03/01/11 $
66,612.14
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
04/01111 $
71,704.70
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
04/01/11 $
1,067.73
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
04/01/11 $
30,000.00
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
05/01/11 $
7,770.00
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
05/01/11
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
05/01/11
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
06/01/11
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
06/01/11
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW
06/01/11
HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS
07126110
HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS
06/25/10
HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS
06/25/10
HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS
07/23/10
HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS
07/21/10
HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS
08/19/10
HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
02/26/10
HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
08/18/10
HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
09127110
HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
10/27/10
HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
09/30/10
HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS
09/30/10
HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS
08/31/10
HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS
08/31/10
HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS
08/31/10
HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
10/22/10
HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
10/22/10
HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
11/11/10
HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
11/16/10
HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
10/31/10
HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
09/30/10
HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
10/31/10
HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
12/15/10
HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS
12/16/10
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
Personnel Matter- Former Employee ATU Interest Arbitration
Gilmer vs. AC Transit ATU Interest Arbitration Personnel Matter- Former Employee ATU Interest Arbitration Gilmer vs. AC Transit Gilmer vs. AC Transit Personnel Matter- Former Employee Personnel Matter- Former Employee ATU Interest Arbitration
12,180.00
Personnel Matter- Former Employee
43,893.23
Gilmer vs. AC Transit
84,288.04
Gilmer vs. AC Transit
3,450.00
ATU Interest Arbitration
8,250.00
Gilmer vs. AC Transit
622.40 1,421.05 10,688.70
1,598.00 10,071.90
5,588.60
Payroll Compliance Review EB Matters Payroll Compliance Review General legal ATU Interest Arbitration American Tower
1,165.63
Payroll Compliance Review
134,539.38
Writ re: 2010 ATU contract
3,042.80
General legal
680.00
General legal
80,431.46
Writ re: 2010 ATU contract
39,277.90
Writ re: 2010 ATU contract
8,441.30
674.43
Pension Plan Payroll Compliance Review
1,348.37
Payroll Compliance Review
45,751.26
Writre: 2010 ATU contract
31,357.27
Writ re: 2010 ATU contract
1,292.00
Writ re: 2010 ATU contract
578.00
General legal
700.20
Payroll Compliance Review
1,169.30
EB Matters
1,281.00
EB Matters
2,040.00
Dumbarton Service
2,399.00
Writ re: 2010 ATU contract
Page 2 of 9
158
Account Analysis. DETAIL
ATIACHMENT 2 for STAFF REPORT 13-268a
Outside Legal Expenses
FY 2011, 2012, 2013 & 2014
HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS
11/30/10 $
4,991.20
HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS
12/16110 $
17,492.58
Writ re: 2010 ATU contract
HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS
11/30/10 $
544.60
Payroll Compliance Review
HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS
11111110 $
36,309.43
Writ re: 2010 ATU contract
HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS
01/28/11 $
805.83
Writ re: 2010 ATU contract
HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS
01128111 $ 01/27/11 $ 01114111 $ 02/17/11 $ 02/28/11 $ 03/16/11 $ 03/15/11 $ 03/23/11 $ 04/12/11 $ 03/23/11 $ 03123111 $ 04/30/11 $ 05/23/11 $ 05/27/11 $ 06121111 $ 08131/10 $ 12131/10 $ 01131111 $ 01/31/11 $ 09/07/10 $ 08/31/10 $ 07/31/10 $ 12/31/10 $ 01/31/11 $ 07/31/10 $ 08/31/10 $ 09/30/10 $ 10/31/10 $ 11/30/10 $ 12/31/10 $ 01131111 $ 02/28/11 $ 03/31/11 $ 04/30/11 $ 05131111 $ 09/07/10 $ 10/25/10 $ 07/25/10 $ 10/25/10 $ 12/03/10 $ 01/20/11 $ 01/21/11 $ 03/30/11 $ 05/02/11 $ 05/24/11 $
1,313.47
Writ re: 2010 ATU contract
9,477.70
Pension Plan
HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS LIEBERT, CASSIDY & WHITMORE LIEBERT, CASSIDY & WHITMORE LIEBERT, CASSIDY & WHITMORE LIEBERT, CASSIDY & WHITMORE LOFTON & JENNINGS MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN AND liFTER RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN AND LIFTER
Pension Plan
2,144.00
General legal
272.00
General legal
802.20 2,725.80 102.00
Worker Classification Issues General legal ATU Matter- Labor Litigation
466.80
Payroll Compliance Review
646.00
General legal
1,644.49
Pension Plan
2,017.11
Pension Plan
13,965.70
Pension Plan
1,335.60 942.90 1,738.69
Economic Interest Disclosures Payroll Tax Issues General legal
3,913.05
General Legal
605.00 62.00
General Legal
354.00
General Legal
20,000.00
General Legal Financial Instruments
25.00
General Legal
630.00
General Legal
2,625.00
General Legal
600.00
General Legal
618.41
OSHA Complaint
9,572.04
OSHA Complaint
1,267.50
OSHA Complaint
1,973.75
OSHA Complaint
4,260.57
OSHA Complaint
16,956.51
OSHA Complaint
1,426.25
OSHA Complaint
97.50
OSHA Complaint
863.75
OSHA Complaint
6,065.85
OSHA Complaint
62.14
OSHA Complaint
1,969.50 2,184.00 604.50
Van Hoof Warranty Air Products General Legal
2,650.50
Allen vs. AC Transit
468.00
Van Hoof Warranty
927.50
Richardson vs. AC Transit
1,014.00
Air Products
9,126.00
Van Hoof Warranty
390.00
Van Hool Warranty
488.70
Insurance Review
$ 1,632,741.95
FY 2011 TOTAL
FY 2012 APPERSON, CRUMP & MAXWELL, PLC BERTRAND FOX, ELLIOD & COHN
7/14/2011 7/12/2011
$37.57 $1,253.96
Certificate of Participation Review Langston vs. AC Transit
Page3of9
159
ATIACHMENT 2 for STAFF REPORT 13-268a
Account Analysis- DETAIL Outside Legal Expenses
FY 2011, 2012, 2013 & 2014
Legal Serv1ce Descnpt1on BERTRAND FOX, ELUOTI & COHN BERTRAND FOX, ELLIOTI & COHN BERTRAND FOX, ELLIOTI & COHN BERTRAND FOX, ELLIOTI & COHN DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER FOSTER FOSTER FOSTER
EMPLOYMENT LAW EMPLOYMENT LAW EMPLOYMENT LAW EMPLOYMENT LAW
FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
8/23/2011 10/5/2011 1/31/2012 4/17/2012 7/29/2011 7/29/2011 8/31/2011 9/27/2011 8/31/2011 10/31/2011 11/30/2011 12/29/2011 1/31/2012 1/31/2012 8/1/2011 9/1/2011 9/1/2011 10/1/2011 11/1/2011 12/1/2011 12/1/2011 1/1/2012 7/1/2011 7/1/2011 8/1/2011 9/1/2011 10/1/2011 10/1/2011 11/1/2011 11/1/2011 11/1/2011 12/1/2011
12/1/2011 1/1/2012 1/1/2012 2/1/2012 7/20/2011 8/15/2011 7/29/2011 9/23/2011 10/21/2011 8/24/2011 11/17/2011 12/21/2011 2/27/2012 2/27/2012 9/30/2011 10/31/2011 2/27/2012 2/27/2012 1/27/2012 12/30/2011 11/30/2011 2/27/2012 2/27/2012 2/27/2012 3/21/2012 5/25/2012 3/21/2012
$317.48 $347.48 $115.48 $440.00
$220.50 $1,310.40 $946.64
$568.80 $4,926.22 $257.40
$1,141.65 $3,352.50 $1,302.75
$2,994.90 $1,025.00 $1,200.00 $775.00 $1,800.00
$6,060.00 $2,760.00 $2,700.00
$1,020.00 $9,030.00 $30,304.47
$9,971.71 $4,594.00
$925.00 $1,500.00 $720.00 $825.00
$1,380.00 $3,750.00 $6,421.20 $4,290.00 $2,175.00
$12,203.08 $714.00
$2,402.90 $10,300.80 $272.00
$2,346.00 $9,612.42 $714.00
$2,045.80 $234.40 $408.00
$6,093.34 $5,462.20
$1,682.50 $1,328.80 $116.70
$622.40 $3,912.40
$23,823.50 $1,267.00 $1,828.30
$272.00 $2,335.85 $293.00
Langston vs. AC Transit Langston vs. AC Transit Langston vs. AC Transit Langston vs. AC Transit Personnel Matter- Former Employee Personnel Matter- Former Employee Personnel Matter- Former Employee Labor Issue General legal Labor Issue Legal Issue Service West lease Personnel Matter- Former Employee Personnel Matter- Former Employee Gilmer vs. AC Transit Labor Issue Gilmer vs. AC Transit Labor Issue Labor Issue Labor Issue GM/GC Recruitment GM/GC Recruitment Gilmer vs. AC Transit Gilmer vs. AC Transit Gilmer vs. AC Transit Gilmer vs. AC Transit Gilmer vs. AC Transit Gilmer vs. AC Transit
2011 Petition to Compel Gilmer vs. AC Transit Gilmer vs. AC Transit Gilmer vs. Gilmer vs. Gilmer vs. Gilmer vs.
Gilmer vs. AC Transit Procurement and DBE Policy Review BRT Project Pension Plan Small Local Business Policy BRT Project Pension Plan Bus Contract Certificate of Participation Review Bus Warranty Issues Transbay Transit Center Project Pension Plan Pension Plan Procurement -Intra-Vehicle Text Message Signs Williams/Robbins vs. AC Transit GM Recruitment GM Recr)Jitment ACT vs. HCC life Insurance Co. BRT Project Procurement- Intra-Vehicle Text Message Signs Forest Ambulatory Surgical Associates vs. United Healthcare Transbay Transit Center Project ACT vs. HCC life Insurance Co. BP Bio Gas Project
Page 4 of 9
160
AC Transit AC Transit AC Transit AC Transit
Account Analysis- DETAIL
ATIACHMENT 2 for STAFF REPORT 13-268a
Outside Legal Expenses FY 2011, 2012, 2013 & 2014
HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN AND LIFTER SYLVA, JULIA SYLVA, JULIA FY 2012 TOTAL
4/30/2012 5/25/2012 11/30/2011 1/26/2012 2/27/2012 3/9/2012 3/21/2012 3/21/2012 3/30/2012 3/30/2012 3/30/2012 4/30/2012 3/30/2012 3/30/2012 3/30/2012 5/17/2012 5/25/2012 4/30/2012 8/12/2011 9/22/2011 10/10/2011 11/17/2011
12/20/2011 1/12/2012 3/12/2012 3/12/2012
3/13/2012 4/11/2012 5/7/2012 4/11/2012 5/7/2012 4/16/2012 4/11/2012 5/7/2012 4/11/2012 4/12/2012 5/7/2012 3/12/2012 4/11/2012 5/7/2012 6/21/2012 6/21/2012 6/21/2012 6/25/2012 9/30/2011 7/25/2011 9/22/2011 9/22/2011 10/3/2011 11/15/2011 1/30/2012 5/21/2012 3/7/2012
$13,612.90 $11,222.20 $2,090.60
$4,348.68 $6,834.00
$19,509.28 $4,315.80
$4,248.50 $1,817.60
$10,113.30 $3,478.00
$1,239.30 $2,490.50 $5,046.15
$4,034.20 $155.60 $13,936.65 $22,774.35 $925.00 $200.00
$4,550.00 $1,158.87 $161.42 $101.73
$462.00 $7,164.50 $1,878.03
$1,438.46 $11,404.93 $9,486.39
$9,603.51 $3,739.03 $8,556.74
$16,938.83 $8,347.28 $9,643.72
$13,706.60 $3,561.80
$1,963.50 $577.50 $1,713.46
$5,001.33 $2,846.90 $23,995.02
$125.00 $136.50 $2,850.00
$156.00 $8,550.11 $7,282.00 $4,474.80
$2,314.02 $2,596.00
Solid Oxide Fuel Cell System Solid Oxide Fuel Cell System Legal Issue Legal Issue Process and Organizational Matters ACT vs. HCC Life Insurance Co. Richmond Transit Center BRT Project Emeryville Uninterrupted Power Supply Personnel Matter- Insurance Issue Procurement- Intra-Vehicle Text Message Signs Forest Ambulatory Surgical Associates vs. United Healthcare Solid Oxide Fuel Cell System Process and Organizational Matters State of Good Repair Forest Ambulatory Surgical Associates vs. United Healthcare Williams/Robbins vs. AC Transit Williams/Robbins vs. AC Transit General Service- Consultation General General General General
General Service- Consultation EEOC Complaint Personnel Matter Personnel Matter Undisclosed legal Matter(s) Undisclosed Legal Matter(s) Undisclosed Legal Matter(s) Undisclosed legal Matter(s) Undisclosed Legal Matter(s) Undisclosed Legal Matter(s) Undisclosed legal Matter(s) Undisclosed Legal Matter(s) Undisclosed Legal Matter(s) Undisclosed Legal Matter(s) Undisclosed Legal Matter(s) Undisclosed legal Matter(s) Undisclosed Legal Matter(s) Harbor vs. AC Transit Silveira vs. AC Transit EEOC Complaint Singh vs. AC Transit OSHA issue Bus Warranty issues Bus Warranty issues Bus Warranty issues Bus Warranty issues Bus Warranty issues Bus Warranty issues Gilmer vs. AC Transit Gilmer vs. AC Transit
$511,930.09
FY2013
Page 5 of 9
161
Service- Consultation Service- Consultation Service- Consultation Service- Consultation
Account Analysis- DETAIL
ATTACHMENT 2 for STAFF REPORT 13-268a
Outside Legal Expenses FY 2011, 2012, 2013 & 2014
Legal Serv1ce Descnpt1on BERTRAND FOX, ELLIOTT & COHN BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP DOWNEY, BRAND & SEYMOR FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON HANSON HANSON HANSON
BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
3/27/2013 8/2/2012 9/11/2012 10/3/2012 11/12/2012 12/7/2012 2/14/2013 3/11/2013 4/4/2013 6/10/2013 4/30/2012 12/1/2012
1/1/2013 1/1/2013 3/1/2013 2/1/2013 4/1/2013 2/1/2013 3/1/2013 4/1/2013 2/1/2013 6/1/2013 6/1/2013 7/11/2012 3/9/2012 7/11/2012 7/11/2012 6/12/2012 6/12/2012
6/12/2012 6/12/2012 4/30/2012 9/11/2012 9/11/2012 9/11/2012 9/11/2012
9/11/2012 9/11/2012 12/5/2012 11/30/2012 1/18/2013 10/9/2012 12/21/2012
HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
8/6/2012 2/21/2013 1/22/2013 2/13/2013 1/31/2013 3/20/2013 3/20/2013 2/28/2013 3/20/2013 8/6/2012 4/30/2013 5/20/2013 5/21/2013 5/31/2013 4/8/2013
HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
7/11/2012
HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
$258.30 $4,159.50
$2,389.50 $1,950.17 $678.50
$1,563.50 $590.00
$501.50 $118.00 $118.00 $16,131.20 $300.00 $870.00
$6,738.16 $1,350.00 $18,810.00
$1,520.49 $300.00 $41,877.95 $41,494.28
$6,690.00 $300.00 $47,634.37 $1,961.90 $1,725.25
$347.10 $13.19
$2,197.50 $3,274.40 $790.12
$206.62 $7,408.20 $6,975.00 $225.00
$2,662.50 $1,275.00 $300.00
$5,078.47 $562.50 $1,650.00 $873.00
$176.72 $13,024.50 $5,196.60
$187.50 $1,250.00 $2,375.00 $7,990.50 $2,511.50
$275.00 $12,400.71 $1,787.20
$600.00 $412.50
$2,375.00 $262.50 $1,875.00
$375.00 $2,550.00
langston vs. AC Transit Pension Plan Linde North America, Inc. Linde North America, Inc. Linde North America, Inc. Linde North America, Inc. Linde North America, Inc. Legal Issue Legal Issue Linde North America, Inc. Personnel Matter· Former Employee labor Issue Silveira vs. AC Transit Edwin vs. AC Transit Silveira vs. AC Transit Personnel Matter Silveira vs. AC Transit Labor Issue Edwin vs. AC Transit Edwin vs. AC Transit Edwin vs. AC Transit Labor Issue Edwin vs. AC Transit ACT vs. HCC Life Insurance Co. ACT vs. HCC Life Insurance Co. Forest Ambulatory Surgical Associates vs. United Healthcare Process and Organizational Review State of Good Repair ACT vs. HCC Life Insurance Co. Bus Waranty Issues Forest Ambulatory Surgical Associates vs. United Healthcare ACT vs. HCC Life Insurance Co. Process and Organizational Review Forest Ambulatory Surgical Associates vs. United Healthcare Labor Issue Solid Oxide Fuel Cell ACT vs. HCC Life Insurance Co. Williams/Robbins vs. ACT Review of Gilmer Case Files Pension Plan BRT Project ACT vs. HCC Life Insurance Co. Pension Plan Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Legal Issue BRT Project BRT Project- Real Estate Acquisition Plan Pension Plan BRT Project BRT Project- Real Estate Acquisition Plan Pension Plan Williams/Robbins vs. ACT ACT vs. HCC Life Insurance Co. Pension Plan BRT Project BRT Project- Utility Agreement Pension Plan BRT Project Wllliams/Robbins vs. ACT
Page 6 of 9
162
Account Analysis· DETAIL Outside Legal Expenses
ATIACHMENT 2 for STAFF REPORT 13-268a
FY 2011, 2012, 2013 & 2014
HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETI MARCUS VLAHOS JARVIS, FAY, DOPORTO, & GIBSON, LLP JEREMY D WEINSTEIN JEREMY D WEINSTEIN JEREMY D WEI N5TEI N LAFAYETIE & KUMAGAI, LLP LAFAYETIE & KUMAGAI, LLP MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, OGLETREE, DEAKINS, OGLETREE, DEAKINS, OGLETREE, DEAKINS,
NASH NASH NASH NASH
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, OGLETREE, OGLETREE, OGLETREE,
DEAKINS, DEAKINS, DEAKINS, DEAKINS,
NASH NASH NASH NASH
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH ORRICK, HERRINGTON RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN AND LIFTER RYAN RYAN RYAN RYAN
AND LIFTER AND LIFTER AND liFTER AND LIFTER
3/30/2012 6/12/2012 2/13/2013 4/8/2013 3/31/2013 4/10/2013 5/21/2013 6/14/2013 6/25/2013 11/30/2012 2/28/2013 3/27/2013 6/25/2013 9/30/2012 10/31/2012 4/11/2013 7/12/2012 7/12/2012 7/12/2012 7/12/2012 7/12/2012 7/12/2012 8/10/2012 8/10/2012 8/10/2012 8/10/2012 8/10/2012 9/21/2012 9/21/2012 9/21/2012 10/7/2012
10/7/2012 10/7/2012 10/7/2012 11/8/2012 11/9/2012 11/9/2012 9/21/2012 2/12/2013 11/8/2012
$16,713.30 $9,036.90
$26,327.70 $900.00 $9,674.28
$112.50 $2,412.50
$3.412.50 $2,614.00
$4,000.00 $900.00 $4,445.00
$487.50 $8,017.68
$5,280.00 $2,000.00
$2,263.75 $225.00 $262.50
$262.50 $1,170.42 $975.00
$1,318.87 $3,798.13 $637.50 $4,528.50
$4,752.58 $296.75 $12,383.61 $4,078.99 $18.21 $262.50 $24,449.66
$6.320.88 $5,179.90 $9,554.66
$8,694.50 $2,486.97
$113.81 $4,810.64
Williams/Robbins vs. ACT Williams/Robbins vs. ACT Williams/Robbins vs. ACT BRT Project BRT Project BRT Project Gilmer vs. AC Transit Gilmer vs. AC Transit Legal Issue Legal Advice British Petroleum British Petroleum Shell Energy Biogas Contract Termination Personnel Matter· lnsurnace Issue Pension Plan Retainer Silveira vs. AC Transit Personnel Matters EEOC Complaint EEOC Complaint Singh vs. AC Transit Harbor vs. AC Transit Silveira vs. AC Transit Various Personnel Matters* Personnel Matters Singh vs. AC Transit Harbor vs. AC Transit Singh vs. AC Transit Harbor vs. AC Transit Silveira vs. AC Transit Personnel Matter Singh vs. ACTransit Harbor vs. AC Transit Silveira vs. AC Transit Harbor vs. AC Transit Harbor vs. AC Transit Edwin vs. AC Transit Personnel Matter Edwin vs. AC Transit
12/14/2012 1/7/2013 1/7/2013 2/15/2013 2/17/2012 2/17/2012 2/17/2012
$7,046.96 $24,421.71
Silveira vs. AC Transit Silveira vs. AC Transit Harbor vs. AC Transit
$1,195.68 $4,727.55 $1,128.76
Silveira vs. AC Transit Harbor vs. AC Transit Personnel Matter
$1,661.63 $9,301.75
Personnel Matter Personnel Matter
3/12/2012
$3,475.05 $51,389.18
12/14/2012 6/11/2012 6/7/2012 3/20/2012 6/7/2012 6/7/2012 3/20/2012 3/20/2012 12/28/2011 6/7/2012 6/7/2012
$7,262.37 $2,359.50 $4,836.00
$292.50 $58.50 $702.00 $838.50
$2,919.98 $117.00 $175.50
Personnel Matter Harbor vs. AC Transit LILO's/SILO's Biogas and PG&E Rebate Program ACT vs. HCC Life Insurance Co. Duenas vs. AC Transit Insurance Requirements· Hilltop Bus Waranty Issues Forest Ambulatory Surgical Associates vs. United Healthcare ACT vs. HCC Life Insurance Co. Legal Issue Stern vs. AC Transit
Page 7 of 9
163
Account Analysis- DETAIL
ATIACHMENT 2 for STAFF REPORT 13-268a
Outside Legal Expenses FY 2011, 2012, 2013 & 2014
Legal Serv1ce Descnpt1on SCHEIDIG, KEN SCHEIDIG, KEN
5/31/2013 6/30/2013
FY 2013 TOTAL
$1,375.00
Consultant Services
$5,252.00
Consultant Services
$615,211.21
• A portion of this invoice was incurred by the former General Counsel for services related to his performance evaluation.
FY 2014- through March 31. 2014 APPERSON, CRUMP & MAXWELL, PLC APPERSON, CRUMP & MAXWELL, PLC APPERSON, CRUMP & MAXWELL, PLC BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, llP FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW FOSTER EMPLOYMENT LAW HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS
10/10/2013 11/6/2013 11/30/2013 7/18/2013 7/18/2013 7/18/2013 9/16/2013 2/18/2014 3/11/2014 7/1/2013 7/1/2013 8/1/2013 8/1/2013 8/1/2013 8/1/2013 9/1/2013 9/1/2013 9/1/2013 9/1/2013 10/1/2013 10/1/2013 11/1/2013 12/1/2013 12/1/2013 11/1/2013 12/1/2013 1/1/2014 1/1/2014 1/1/2014 2/1/2014 2/1/2014 2/1/2014 2/1/2014 10/16/2013 11/11/2013 7/8/2013 5/25/2012 3/21/2012 4/30/2012 7/18/2013 3/20/2013 7/18/2013 6/27/2013 7/5/2013 6/21/2012 6/21/2012 10/9/2012 7/31/2013 8/21/2013
$137.50
DOL Matter
$631.68
DOL Matter
$519.18 $2,537.00
Pension Plan Best Contracting and M-Core
$147.50
Best Contracting and M-Core
$560.50 $147.50
Linde North America, Inc. Best Contracting and M-Core
206.50
Linde North America, Inc.
1,445.50
Linde North America, Inc.
$480.00
legal Issue
$3,480.00
legal Issue
$3,330.00
Confidential
$4,620.00
labor Issue
$42,168.17
Mediation Fees, Document Retrival and Other Miscellanous
$24,438.12
Mediation Fees, Document Retrival and Other Miscellanous
$360.00
labor Issue
$510.00
Confidential
$81,691.88
Confidential
$73,299.19
Confidential
$2,250.00
$37,662.27 $5,075.90 $900.00
$19,953.00 $4,800.00 $3,030.00
labor Issue Confidential Miscellanous Services Confidential Confidential Legal Issue Personnel Matter
9,009.40
Confidential
1,500.00
Performance Review Process
26,720.84
Confidential
5,251.51
Confidential
3,900.00
Performance Review Process
930.00
Confidential
3,000.00 $912.50
General labor
$212.50
Gilmer vs. AC Transit
$15,282.59
$986.00
Gilmer vs. AC Transit Consulting and Research Document Review
$5,024.10
Bus Warranty Issues
$5,829.00 $450.00
Analysis and Correspondence
$562.50
Analysis and Correspondence
$900.00
BRT Project
$2,312.50 $637.50
Bus Warranty Issues
BRT Project Forest Ambulatory Surgical Associates vs. United Healthcare
$77.34
Analyze, Research and Review of Policies
$7,189.49
Analyze, Research and Review of Policies
$675.00
Correspondence
$1,987.50
BRT Project
$3,000.00
BRT Project
Page 8 of 9
164
Account Analysis- DETAIL Outside Legal Expenses FY 2011, 2012, 2013 & 2014
ATIACHMENT 2 for STAFF REPORT 13-268a
SCHEJDIG, KEN
8/27/2013 8/20/2013 6/30/2013 8/8/2013 9/9/2013 9/11/2013 9/20/2013 9/20/2013 8/13/2013 10/24/2013 10/24/2013 12/16/2013 11/22/2013 12/20/2013 1/15/2014 1/16/2014 2/16/2014 6/30/2013 8/26/2013 8/26/2013 9/10/2013 9/19/2013 8/27/2013 7/16/2013 6/7/2013 5/22/2013 6/5/2013 8/20/2013 8/1/2013 8/9/2013 8/14/2013 10/11/2013 1/17/2014 2/6/2014 2/17/2012 12/14/2012 12/14/2012 1/7/2013 5/8/2013 12/31/2013 3/17//2014 6/30/2013 8/31/2013 9/30/2013 1/31/2014 2/28/2014 3/31/2014 8/1/2013 9/1/2013 9/30/2013 11/1/2013 11/29/2013
SCHEIDIG, KEN
12/31/2013
HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRlDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGETT MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS HANSON BRIDGED MARCUS VLAHOS LAFAYEDE & KUMAGAI, LLP LAW OFFICE OF JULIAN GROSS LAW OFFICE OF JULIAN GROSS LAW OFFICE OF JULIAN GROSS LAW OFFICE OF JULIAN GROSS LOFTON & JENNINGS MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER MEYERS NAVE RIBACK SILVER OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH ORRICK, HERRINGTON ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP ROBERT D. PETERSON LAW CORP SCHEIDIG, KEN SCHEIDIG, KEN SCHEIDIG, KEN SCHElDIG, KEN
Wolf
FY 2014 {Through March 31, 2014) Total
2/7/2014
$2,353.50 $787.50
Legal Matters
BRT Project
$4,279.50
BRT Project
$2,625.00 $262.50
Gilmer vs. AC Transit
$3,289.10
Gilmer vs. AC Transit
$937.50
Forest Ambulatory Surgical Associates vs. United Healthcare Miscellanous Services
$7,987.50
BRT Project
$300.00 $1,162.50
Forest Ambulatory Surgical Associates vs. United Healthcare
$2,550.00
$187.50 $712.50
$75.00 862.50 175.00 262.50
$3,459.34
Miscellanous Services BRT Project Forest Ambulatory Surgical Associates vs. United Healthcare Workforce Development Program- Review and Analysis Procurement Issue Forest Surgery Center v. UHC Brian Gilmer vs. AC Transit Forest Surgery Center v. UHC Employee Insurance Issues
$406.00
Policy Development for BRT Project
$11,410.00
Policy Development for BRT Project
$7,578.00
$20,000.00 $20,000.00
Policy Development for BRT Project Representation in negotiation of PLA for BRT project Credit Agreement w/ Bank of America
$1,300.00
Legal/Governmental Conflict Advice Opinion
$6,389.21 $14,290.00
Legal/Governmental Conflict Advice Opinion
$10,577.50 $3,163.00
Legal/Governmental Conflict Advice Opinion
Legal/Governmental Conflict Advice Opinion Personnel Matter
$5,861.00
Personnel Matter
$9,197.50 $492.50
Personnel Matter
$3,162.50
General Consultation and Services
703.89 1,043.96 $7,982.39 $1,223.37 $9,054.38 $3,187.17
Consultant Services
$93.00 $20,799.87 4,533.75
$325.00
Legal/Governmental Conflict Advice Opinion
Consultant Services General Consultation and Services Edwin vs. AC Transit Edwin vs. AC Transit Edwin vs. AC Transit Personnel Matter Negotiatied Payment for Various Legal Matters Legal Matters Review Decision, Case File, and Letter to Cleint
$975.00
Review of Documents and Miscellanous Services
$357.50
OSHA Complaint
48.75 3,107.38 471.25 4,125.00 2,447.50
Review Email Review brief and case file Review brief and prepare for hearing Consultant Services Consultant Services
1,677.50 4,345.00 3,025.00
Consultant Services
4,480.00 2,540.00
Consultant Services
Consultant Services Consultant Services Legal Matters
$633,374.47
Page 9 of 9
165
Report No: Meeting Date:
14-134 May 28, 2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Annual Health Care Renewal Rates
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Authorize the General Manager to enter into contracts with Kaiser Permanente Health Maintenance Organization (HMO), Health Net HMO and The Standard Insurance Company and approve renewal rates for Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) and Metlife Dental Plan.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This Staff Report provides the FY2014/2015 premium increases for Kaiser Permanente HMO, and Health Net HMO medical plans. Kaiser initially offered a one year renewal rate of 12.11% for both Union and Management active groups. However, Alii ant, the District's Employee Benefits Broker, was able to negotiate a conditional two (2 year) renewal rate of 8.8% for FY2014/2015 and 6.00% for FY2015/2016. In addition, Alliant negotiated with Health Net to reduce the District's renewal rate for all active groups from 13% to 9%. Alliant requested medical premium quotes from Sutter/United Health Care; however, they declined to quote stating the premiums they could offer would be 5%-6% higher than the Kaiser renewal rate. The Metlife Dental premium will increase by 6.2%. The Standard Life Insurance and Long-Term Disability plans for active employees will remain the same. However, the retiree group life plans will increase by 22%. The Vision Services Plan (VSP} premiums will remain the same.
BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: The execution of the Health Care Plan renewals is anticipated to cost $41,000.000.00. It is included in the proposed FY2014-2015 operating budget.
166
Report No. 14-134 Page 2 of4
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: The District currently contracts with Kaiser Permanente and Health Net for medical services and The Standard for life Insurance, accidental death and dismemberment and long-term disability. These contracts will expire on June 30, 2014. Per Attachment A, total District active healthcare cost for FY2014/2015 are projected to be $41,026,466.04. Healthcare cost for FY 2013/2014 was approximately $37,700.000.00
Consideration of Kaiser Permanente Renewal The District received an initial rate of 12.11%, however Alliant negotiated the rate to 8.8% with a guarantee rate increase of 6% for FY2015/2016. This multi-year rate guarantee is being offered based on the following conditions: 1. The District must continue to offer the Health Net's fully insured plan with no either health plans offered and no changes in carriers through 6/30/16. 2. There can be no change in rate structure, eligibility requirements, and contribution strategy until 7/1/16. 3. The District continues to partner with Kaiser regarding Worksite Well ness. 4. Allow Kaiser to provide a quote on their Kaiser on the Job (KOJ) Occupational Health and Safety Services. Our new 2014/2015 premium rate changes are as follows:
FY2014/2015 8.8% 8.8% 5.40% 5.40%
Union employees Management employees Senior Advantage- Union Senior Advantage- Management
Approximately 2.6% the premium increase is due to the fees associated with Affordable Care Act such as the Insurance Industry tax, the Patient Centered Outcomes Research (PCORI) fee and the Reinsurance Fee.
Consideration of Health Net Renewal Our 2014/2015 premiums were initially 13.00%, however, Alii ant negotiated with Health Net to lower the premium to an overall increase of 9%. Our new 2014/2015 premium rate increases are as follows:
FY2014/2015 9.0% 9.0% 4.99%
Union employees/Early Retirees Management employees/Early Retirees HMO Seniority Plus- Union and Management
167
Report No. 14-134 Page 3 of4
Approximately 3% of the premium increase is due to the fees associated with the Affordable Care Act such as the Insurance Industry Tax, the PCORI Fee, and the Reinsurance Fee.
Consideration of Metlife Dental Plan renewal The District is currently self-funded for the Metlife PPO Dental plan. There are two renewal components for a self-funded dental program, Administrative Costs, which are fixed and premium/funding rates, which are set each year depending on average utilization of dental services. The current administrative monthly fee of $4.68 per employee will remain the same. Alliant has reviewed the most recent dental claims experience and is recommending an increase to current funding of 6.2%. Furthermore, Alliant obtained a quote for the Delta Dental Insurance and based on the analysis, the administrative fee would increase from $4.68 to $11.00. Staff recommends that the District remain with Metlife Insurance.
Consideration of The Standard Life Insurance Plan renewal The Standard is proposing a rate pass for all active life insurance plans and accidental death and dismemberment classes, as well as the long-term and supplemental disability plans. The Standard, however, is proposing a 22% increase for all retiree life insurance classes including the executive life plan. This increase is due to the experience rate of the retiree classes as of July 2009 - October 2013. The incurred claims paid for this period was $1,068,828 which exceeds the earned premiums of $863,180. The rate increase of 22% is needed to ensure that the plan is credible for future years. This rate increase in guaranteed until June 30, 2016.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: Renewal of District's health care contracts will ensure continuity of benefits for District employees and retirees.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: No alternative actions are proposed.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: The Board of Directors approved contract renewals for Kaiser Permanente, Health Net, The Standard, and COBRA and Retiree rates on May 22, 2013 per Staff Report 13-122.
168
Report No. 14-134 Page 4 of4
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Attachment A- Benefit Plan Cost Summary 2. Attachment B- Kaiser Permanente Premiums 3. Attachment C- Health Net Premiums 4. Attachment D- Metlife Dental Premiums 5. Attachment E- VSP Premiums 6. Attachment F- Standard life Insurance Premiums
Department Head Approval: Kurt De Stigter, Chief Human Resources Officer Reviewed by: Denise Standridge, Interim General Counsel James Pachan - Chief Operating Officer/Interim Chief Financial Officer Prepared by: Rachellightburn, Sr. Human Resource Administrator
169
2014-2015
SR 14-134 Attachment A
Benefit Plan Cost Summary for Active Employees Benefit Plans Kaiser ATU AFSCME/Unrepresentative IBEW
$22,891,638.00 $2,550,943.20 $189,348.00
Total
$25,631,929.20
Health Net ATU AFSCME/Unrepresentative IBEW
$7,736,586.48 $2,783,642.76 $121 '167.00
Total
$10,641,396.24
Metropolitan Life Dental Employee premiums Administrative Fee Total
$3,609,999.36 $93,330.00
$3,703,329.36
Vision Service Plan (Vision) Active employees Total
$535,153.20
Life & AD&D Insurance Active employees Total
$362,778.00
Long-term Disability
$67,913.64
Board of Directors
$83,966.40 $41,026,466.04
Benefit Plan Total
170
SR 14-134 Attachment B
FY13/14
%of Increase FY14/15
Single Double Family
$676.62 $1,353.24 $1,914.86
8.80% 8.80% 8.80%
$736.16 $1,472.34 $2,083.34
Single Double Family
$659.82 $1,319.64 $1,867.28
8.80% 8.80% 8.80%
$717.88 $1,435.76 $2,031.60
Single Double
$970.46 $1,940.92
8.80% 8.80%
$1,055.86 $2,111.72
Single Double
$947.48 $1,894.96
8.80% 8.80%
$1,030.86 $2,061.70
Single Double
$358.16 $716.32
5.40% 5.40%
$377.48 $754.96
Senior Advantage (AFSCME, UNREP, IBEW) Single Double
$358.16 $716.32
5.40% 5.40%
$377.48 $754.96
Kaiser Perroanente Monthly PremiUms
ActiveATU
Active (AFSCME, UNREP, IBEW)
Early Retiree ATU
Early Retiree (AFSCME, UN REP, IBEW)
Senior Advantage ATU
171
SR 14-134 Attachment C
HealthNet Monthly Premiums
FY13/14
% of lncfease
FY14/15
Active ATU
Single Double Family
$974.40 $2,019.83 $2,559.75
9.00% 9.00% 9.00%
$1,062.12 $2,201.61 $2,790.13
Active (AFSCME, UN REP, IBEW)
Single Double Family
$940.92 $1,950.30 $2,471.71
9.00% 9.00% 9.00%
$1,025.60 $2,125.83 $2,694.16
Early Retiree ATU
Single Double
$1,169.38 $2,423.84
9.00% 9.00%
$1,274.62 $2,641.99
Single Double
$1,100.99 $2,281.84
9.00% 9.00%
$1,200.08 $2,487.21
Seniority Plus ATU
Single Double
$521.33 $1,042.66
4.99% 4.99%
$547.37 $1,094.74
Seniority Plus (AFSCME, UN REP, IBEW)
Single Double
$521.33 $1,042.66
4.99% 4.99%
$547.37 $1,094.74
Early Retiree (AFSCME. UNREP, IBEW)
172
SR 14-134 Attachment D
Metlife Monthly Dental Premiums
FY13/14
Increase
FY14/15
Single Double Family
$65.65 $133.05 $231.14
6.20% 6.20% 6.20%
$69.72 $141.30 $245.48
Metlife Administration Fees
$4.68
0.00%
$4.68
173
SR 14-134 Attachment E
Vision Service Plan (VSP) Monthly Premiums
FY13/14
No increase
FY14/15
Single Double Family
$13.40 $19.50 $34.90
0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
$13.40 $19.50 $34.90
174
SR 14-134 Attachment F
Standard Basic Life Insurance Monthly Premiums Active Classes
FY13/14
%of Increase
FY14/15
Class 1
(Board of Directors)
$7.01
0.00%
$7.01
Class 2
(AFSCME & Unrepresented)
$64.08
0.00%
$64.08
Class 3
(ATU & IBEW)
$7.01
0.00%
$7.01
$11.62
22.00%
$14.18
$11.62
22.00%
$14.18
Retired Classes
Class 4 (AFSCME, Class 5
Unrepresentated, IBEW)
(ATU & IBEW)
Class 6
(Executives)*
$190.00
22.00%
$231.80
Class 7
(all retirees)
$11.62
22.00%
$14.18
Class 8
(Unrepresented)
$11.62
22.00%
$14.18
Class 9
(all retirees)*
age rated
0.00%
age rated
* retiree paid
175
This page intentionally blank
176
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-159B May 28,2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF
REPORT
TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Unrepresented Employees Merit Pay Plan
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider receiving this report on the proposed amendments to Board Policy 201 concerning the implementation of a Merit Pay Structure for Unrepresented employees. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Board of Directors received Staff Report 13-159A which included a proposed classification and compensation structure for unrepresented employees. The Board authorized the General Manager to begin the implementation of a merit pay system for unrepresented employees. This report outlines the components of the merit pay plan and general administration guidelines for the plan. The proposed merit plan links pay increases to performance evaluations. The overall performance rating is used to calculate the merit increase, taking into consideration where in the salary range the employee is at for his/her classification, months of service in the current review cycle and overall budget impact. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
The General Manager has recommended a 3% merit pool for fiscal year 2014-15. The estimated cost is $235,000 for the upcoming fiscal year.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
Performance Management is about improving organization performance by improving team and individual performance, and ensuring that the organization's strategy is executed and implemented. To that end, a merit pay plan is used to reward successful performance by employees. This Merit Pay Plan was developed for use for unrepresented employees who meet the eligibility requirement. Subject to availability of funds and Board approval, the General Manager will recommend a merit pool as part of the annual budget for each fiscal year. Once the budget is approved by the Board of Directors, merit increases will typically become effective on July 1st, at the beginning of the new fiscal year.
177
Report No. 13-1598 Page 2 of 6
Merit Increase Guide The chart below shows the potential percentage merit increase an employee may receive. The actual merit increase may vary depending on budget availability and individual performance levels. For example if the majority of employees "exceeds" expectations, there would need to be an adjustment within the ranges noted to ensure that the increase remain within overall budget allocation. An employee whose pay is at the maximum of the salary range may not be granted an increase that would cau se the base salary to exceed the maximum of the range for that classification. If a merit increase would result in pushing the employee's base salary above the maximum of the range, the employee may receive a smaller merit increase to bring him/her to the maximum of the range and the remainder may be paid out as lump sum. Eligible employees at the maximum of their ranges may be given a lump sum payment in lieu of a merit increase. The lump sum payment is based on the performance rating and will not exceed 2% of the employee's base pay.
Performance
75.0%84.9%
85.0%94.9%
95%104.9%
105%114.9%
115%119.9%
6%- 8%
5%- 7%
4% - 6%
3%- 5%
2%- 4%
120% or higher
I! Above and Beyond
I•
II
I! 5%- 7%
4% - 6%
3% - 5%
2% -4%
1% -2%
II
Exceeds I•
4% -6%
2%- 4%
3% -5%
Job Well Done
1% - 2%
l
Needs Progress
0
0
0
Increase options in this area : - No increases - Lump sum paym ents - Sm all increases - Sm all increas e and lump sum payments
u
Does Not Meet Standards
1•. !I "
178
Report No. 13-1598 Page 3 of 6 Eligibility and Review Cycles To be eligible for a merit increase, an unrepresented employee (excludes Boa rd Officers and employees with employment contracts) mu st have at least six months of continuous service in an unrepresented classification before the performance evaluation date. Employees with less than 6 months of service as an unrepresented employee at the time of the performance evaluation are not eligible for merit increases in that review cycle . Employees with at lea st six months, but less than a full12 months of service in a review cycle will receive a prorated merit increase. In some instances a newly hired/promoted unrepresented employee will need to wait longer than 12 months before he/she is eligible for a merit increa se. In this situation, if an employee has more than 12 months of continuous service in an unrepresented classification and did not receive a merit increase in the previous review cycle; the employee may be eligible to receive an additional prorated amount. Please see the table below. This proration factor is multiplied by the percentage increase the employee is granted, based on his/her performance.
Number of Full Months
Proration Factor
18
1.5
17
1.4167
16
1.3334
15
1.25
14
1.1667
13
1.0833
12
1
11
0.9167
10
0.833
9
0.75
8
0.667
7
0.5833
6
0.5
Comments Employee who missed merit in crease, would rece ive an increase d using the proration factor. Employee who missed merit increase, would rece ive an increased using the proration factor. Employee who missed merit increase, would receive an increased usin g the proration factor. Employee who missed merit increase, would receive an increased using t he proration factor. Employee who missed merit increase, wou ld receive an increased using the proration factor. Employee who missed merit increase, wou ld receive an increased using the proration factor. This is the typical merit increase Employee with at least 6months of service but less than a full12 months will receive a prorate d increase using th e proration factor Employee w ith at least 6month s of service but less than a full1 2 months will receive a prorated increa se using the proration factor Employee with at least 6months of service but less than a full1 2 months will receive a prorated increase using the proration factor Employee w it h at least 6mo nth s of service but less than a full12 months will receive a prorated increase using the proration fa ctor Employee with at least 6months of service but less than a full1 2 months will receive a prorated increase using the proration factor Employee w ith at least 6months of service but less than a full1 2 months will receive a prorated increase using t he proration factor
Example 1:
A typical employee who has been working at AC Tran sit in an unrepresented classification for 12 months at the time of the evaluation receives a satisfactory performance evaluation, which results in a 3% increa se. The employee has 12 months
179
Report No. 13-159B Page 4 of 6 of service; therefore we would take the 3% and multiply that by a factor of 1.0. This would result in an overall increase of 3.0%. Example 2: An employee is promoted 6 months prior to the evaluation date into an unrepresented classification. The employee has only 6 months of service at the time of the evaluation and receives a satisfactory performance evaluation, which results in a 3% increase. We would take the 3% and multiply that by a factor of 0.5. This would result in an overall increase of 1.5%. Example 3: An unrepresented employee was hired three months prior to the evaluation date. The employee is not eligible for an increase in this current review period. In the next review period, if the employee demonstrates satisfactory performance and receives a 3% merit. The employee has 15 months of service; therefore we would take the 3% and multiply that by a factor of 1.25. This would result in an overall increase of 3.75%. Performance Reviews Employee performance is to be formally reviewed at least once each year. The focus of the review is to discuss the employee's performance for the period and review standards for the position. The final review must be completed by the employee's supervisors. The final review must be reviewed and approved by Human Resources and the department's executive. The performance evaluation will typically take place in the Month of April, prior to the award of merit increases. Determination of Merit Increase Best practices for salary administration of a merit pay plan indicate that the increase should be given in a progression. Typically, employees with a lower compa-ratio receive a higher percentage increase. Conversely employees with a higher compa-ratio will receive a lower percentage increase. The compa-ratio is calculated by taking the employee's current salary divided by the midpoint of the salary range for the position. An employee who is at 100% is at the midpoint, whereas an employee who is at 105% is 5% above the midpoint. The midpoint represents the District's estimate of the market rate for a given job.
Based on the employee's overall performance rating a percentage increase will be calculated. The Human Resources Department will prepare increase recommendations based on the performance ratings. All department executives will be required to review and approve the recommendations before the increase recommendations are presented to the General Manager for final approval. Employees will be notified of their merit increases as soon as possible after all employee merit increases for the years have been approved. Appeals Process Within one week from the date the merit increases have been communicated, employees who wish to appeal their merit increase must do so in writing to the Chief Human Resources Officer. Appeals must state why the employee disagrees with his/her merit increase. The Chief Human Resources Officer will review the appeals, taking into consideration the employee's overall 180
Report No. 13-159B Page 5 of 6 performance rating and any new information. The Chief Human Resources Officer or designee will make a formal recommendation to the General Manager. The General Manager may choose to accept or reject the appeal. The final outcome will be communicated to the employee. Salary Range Administration
To maintain market competiveness, staff recommends that the salary ranges be reviewed on annual basis. In most cases there will be no need for adjustments, but where the market shows noticeable increases compared to the District's current salary range, staff will prepare recommendations on how to adjust the range. This needs to be completed prior to the recommendation of a merit pool.
Next Steps: Staff will prepare amendments to Board Policy 201 for Board Approval.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: Advantages- this plan moves the District towards a pay for performance plan. This approach rewards individuals based on their performance rather than grant automatic step increases. Disadvantages -a merit pay plan is complex and difficult to administer. Additional staff time will be required to administer the plan. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: There are many variations of merit pay systems. All systems have advantages and disadvantages. The plan presented in this report is fair and equitable; staff believes this model is fiscally responsible and sustainable. The plan may require ongoing adjustments as we gain experience using the new merit pay plan.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Board Policy 201 SR 13-159 SR 13-159A
ATTACHMENTS: 1:
Examples of Merit Increases
181
Report No. 13-1598 Page 6 of 6
Department Head Approval: Reviewed
by:
Prepared
by:
Kurt De Stigter, Chief Human Resources Officer Denise C. Standridge, Interim General Counsel James Pachan, Interim Chief Financial Officer Due Le, Human Resources Manager
182
SR 13-1598 Attachment 1
Examples of Merit Increases for Unrepresented Employees
I
II II
Exceeds
Current
Prorated
Salary
Increase%
$139,200.00
102
2.50%
10
$119,200.00
96
4.00%
12
$103,200.00
102
1.00%
12
0.833
2.08%
$2,898.84
1
4.00%
$4,768.00
1
1.00%
$1,032.00
Above and Beyond Job Well Done Job Well
Exceeds
na - 1%
na - 1%
Done $89,600.00
120
lump sum
12
$ 78,400.00
82
6.00%
14
183
1 1.1667
lump sum
$896.00
7.00%
$5,488.16
This page intentionally blank
184
Report No: Meeting Date:
T~IVS/T
13-159C May 28, 2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Operations Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
The Unrepresented Employee Pay Structure and New Classification Specifications
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Consider adoption of Resolution No. 14-023 implementing the Unrepresented Employee Pay Structure, and adopting new classification specifications for Contract Services Manager, Director of Systems & Software Development, Manager of Systems Analysis, Operations Data Systems Administrator, and Senior Advisor. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Classification and Compensation Study of Unrepresented classifications performed by the Hay Group, the General Manager is recommending the implementation of the salary structure proposed in the study, as specified in Staff Report 13-159A, and approved by the Board on April 23, 2014. The new structure will ensure the alignment of the District's classification and compensation structure with best practices, as well as internal equity, and external competitiveness. It will also facilitate the transition of unrepresented employees into a Merit Pay system. In addition, five new classifications are being proposed. These one-incumbent classes will help the District adjust to changing requirements and become more effective. These positions have been reviewed ; and new classifications developed by Human Resources staff. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: There is no budgetary impact; the positions have been included in the budget for Fiscal Year 2014-15. BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Contract Services Manager (Unrepresented, Grade H-170). In order to foster the adoption of new efficiencies in the procurement process, the department is being reorganized into two functional areas under the Procurement Director. The Purchasing Unit will report directly to the Purchasing Manager. The Contracts unit will report to the Contract Services Manager, who will ensure that all contracts and solicitations adhere to District policies and procedures,
185
Report No. 13-159C Page 2 of 3 California law, and Federal Transit Administration regulations; and protect District interests and budget concerns. This position is in the current Fiscal Year 2013-14 budget. The job title and classification will change. Director of Systems & Software Development (Unrepresented, Grade H-190). This classification is being created to help support the Chief Technology Officer in managing the daily operations of the Information Technology (I.T.) Department, with emphasis on managing one or more business units, including application architecture development and integration; the design and development of databases for enterprise wide data exchange and reporting, and complete responsibility for LT.'s application portfolio. This classification is new, and is not budgeted in Fiscal Year 2014-15. Manager of Systems Analysis (Unrepresented, Grade H-180). This proposed classification will support the District in a variety of ways related to methods of data analysis, and standardized reporting within AC Transit; and externally to the public, stakeholders, and funding partners. This includes continued development and reporting of Key Performance Indicators (KPis); providing required data and analysis for National Transit Database (NTD) which impacts funding levels; development and implementation of other standard reports and analyses (capital projects status and control reports, operating statistics and characteristics, service planning statistics, etc.).
This position will serve to support and produce currently adopted District
reporting (KPis), develop additional standardized reporting and analytical methods, and to serve as a "clearing house" for information that is being disseminated; resulting in more consistent and reliable data reporting. This position is currently budgeted, and the job title will change from Principal Financial Analyst. Operations Data Systems Administrator (AFSCME, Grade 8). This proposed classification is a new position, and will support the District with management and oversight of the various data systems used in operations. This includes making necessary fleet, equipment, and data system changes or upgrades to reflect changes in operations during sign-ups, fleet assignments, new fleet, or facilities equipment implementation. Technology continues to advance with maintenance and operations management systems compatible with advanced vehicles and maintenance practices. Having accurate and timely data from operating systems provides District staff with current information and reports needed to effectively and efficiently manage the operation. Senior Advisor (Unrepresented, Grade H-180). This proposed classification will support the strategic objectives of the General Manager and the District, and manage complex administrative projects, as assigned by the GM. As AC Transit's presence in the region as a transit provider continues to expand, with an unprecedented number of capital and other projects currently in progress; the District needs this vital position to foster communication and
186
Report No. 13-159C Page 3 of 3 maintain contact both internally and externally in support of the General Manager. This position is currently in the budget as a Manager of Special Projects. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
If approved, the advantages are enhanced performance, improved coordination and communication, and strengthening of processes that would allow for greater efficiency and accountability in meeting the business needs of the District. ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS:
The alternative is for the Board not to approve the Unrepresented Employee Pay Structure, and one or more of these proposed new classifications. This would inhibit the ability of the District to establish internal equity and external competitiveness in salaries, and the transition of unrepresented employees into the Merit Pay system, and inhibit the affected departments from effectively and efficiently maintaining compliance with laws and requirements, and the timely completion of critical District functions. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES:
None ATTACHMENTS: 1:
Resolution 14-023 and Related Exhibits
Department Head Approval:
Kurt De Stigter, Chief Human Resources Officer
Reviewed by:
Denise Standridge, Acting General Counsel James Pachan, Acting Chief Financial Officer Llew Keller, Sr. Human Resources Administrator
Prepared by:
187
This page intentionally blank
188
Staff Report
13-159C Attachment No.I
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 14-023 A RESOLUTION IMPLEMENTING THE UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEE PAY STRUCTURE; AND ADOPTING THE NEW CLASSIFICATIONS OF CONRACT SERVICES MANAGER, DIRECTOR OF SYSTEMS & SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT, MANAGER OF SYSTEMS ANALYSIS, OPERATIONS DATA SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATOR, AND SENIOR ADVISOR TO THE GENERAL MANAGER. WHEREAS, Public Utilities Code Section 24886 authorizes the Board of Directors of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District to determine and create such number and character of positions in the District as are necessary to carry on the functions of the District; and WHEREAS, Section 24886 also authorizes the Board of Directors to establish the appropriate salary, salary range, or wage for each classification created by the District; and WHEREAS, the General Manager has assessed the current personnel needs of the District and determined amendments to the classification plan are necessary for the proper operation of the District; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the General Manager to adopt the new classifications of Contract Services Manager, Director of Systems & Software Development, Manager of Systems Analysis, Operations Data Systems Administrator, and Senior Advisor as set forth in Exhibits A through E of this resolution; and to implement the Unrepresented Employee Pay Structure, as set forth in Exhibit F of this resolution. NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District does hereby resolve as follows:
Section 1. Adopts the new classifications of Contract Services Manager, Director of Systems & Software Development, Manager of Systems Analysis, Operations Data Systems Administrator, and Senior Advisor as set forth in Exhibits A through E of this resolution.
Section 2. Approves and authorizes the General Manager to implement the Unrepresented Employee Pay Structure, as set forth in Exhibit F of this resolution.
Section 3. 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 May 2014
Greg Harper, President
Page 1 of2
Resolution No. 14-023 189
Staff Report 13-159C
Attachment No.1
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 May, 2014 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
Approved as to Form and Content:
Denise Standridge, Interim General Counsel
Resolution No. 14-023
Page 2of2 190
Alameda Co Cl
Staff Report
ct
13-159C Exhibit A
n
Contracts Services Manager Class Code TBD
FLSA Status Exempt
EEO Category TBD
Re resented Status
Salary Grade
Unrepresented
H-170
Effective Date TBD
1 Resolution # TBD
I
DEFINITION: Under general direction; manages the District's contracts administration functions, ensures compliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations, and provides primary supervision to assigned subordinate procurement staff. REPRESENTATIVE FUNCTIONS include, but are not limited to: •
Oversees the development and administration of contract activities; terms; solicitations, including invitations for bid (IFB), requests for proposal (RFP), and requests for qualification (RFQ); contract awards, and delivery of goods and services.
•
Ensures that all contracts protect the District's interests uphold District policies, procedures, California law, and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) regulations,
•
Manages the development and implementation of goals, objectives, and priorities; monitors and evaluates the efficiency, and effectiveness of contract administration service delivery methods and procedures
•
Evaluates and approves contracts for award, and to be submitted to senior management and the Board of Directors for final approval; negotiates contract terms with vendors, and manages other activities related to the award, issuance, and administration of contracts.
•
Manages contract compliance activities to ensure all departments are in adherence with District contract policies, and Federal, State, local laws, and regulations;
•
Manages, plans, and reviews work plans and activities for assigned staff; assigns projects and programs; and makes recommendations for staffing levels for the assigned area.
•
Selects, trains, motivates, and evaluates assigned staff; provides and coordinates staff training; works with employees to correct deficiencies; and implements discipline procedures when necessary.
•
Provides guidance on procurement functions including contract award and administration, and makes recommendations to management for resolution of contracts and- procurement issues
•
Oversees the preparation and issuance of contract agreements, tracks costs and reviews contract budget to ensure that costs do not exceed authorized limits
•
Reviews and approves contract amendments, revisions, terminations, contract closeouts and contract assignments.
•
Prepares, and/or manages the preparation of periodic and ad-hoc reports related to procurement and contracts; and delivers oral presentations to Board of Directors and other audiences.
•
Develops and implements internal standards, policies, controls and procedures for District procurement, including contracts administration.
•
Monitors legislation and industry changes in public sector contract administration; evaluates the impact on the District and recommends changes and improvements, as needed
•
May act as Procurement Director in his/her absence Page 1 of 2 191
I
Alameda Contr Clas
Staff Report 13-159C
ct n
Exhibit A
Contracts Services Manager •
Performs related duties, as required.
MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Knowledge Of: Principles and procedures of contracts administration related to professional services; scope of work preparation and methods for administering both formal and informal contracts processes and negotiations; applicable State, Federal, local laws including Federal Transit Administration contracting guidelines, DBE, MBE, WBE participation, and regulations governing public agency contract administration principles and practices; principles and practices of budget preparation and administration; professional business report writing and presentation techniques; current software and computer applications related to the tracking and administration of contracts and agreements; program development and administration; principles and practices of management, supervision, evaluation, employee training and motivation; and current software for spreadsheets, word processing, and presentation at the intermediate level of proficiency. Ability To: Direct, supervise; train, and evaluate professional and clerical staff performing procurement and contracts functions; interpret and apply Federal and State laws, District contract policies and procedures; research, analyze and recommend procurement and contract methods and procedures for cost effectiveness and compliance; manage the preparation of contract documents including scopes of work and evaluation criteria; prepare and administer budgets; identify and analyze complex issues and develop various solutions; prepare written reports; quickly learn and effectively use current District software for contracts and procurement; make effective oral presentations to a variety of audiences; and establish and maintain effective relationships with those contacted in the course of work using principles of excellent customer service. Education: Equivalent to a Bachelor's Degree from an accredited four-year college or university in Business Administration, Public Administration, management, or a related field. Experience: Seven (7) years of increasingly responsible experience in procurement, including three (3) years supervising procurement and contract management functions and staff. Experience in a public agency is preferred. Additional years of experience beyond the minimum may be considered in lieu of the required education, on a year for year basis. Special Requirement: Must be willing to: (1) work outside regular business hours; and (2) travel between the various District facilities, as required. · Physical Requirements: Must maintain the physical condition necessary to: (1) perform tasks in an office setting operating a personal computer, keyboards, and other peripheral equipment; (2) possess physical mobility in order to transport oneself expeditiously within and between District facilities. S.\HR\Data 12-01-01\Ciass-Comp\Specs in Process A-0\Contract Services Manager.docx
Page 2 of 2 192
Alameda Co Cl
trict lion
Staff Report
13-159C Exhibit 8
Director of Systems and Software Develop .___ _ _ Class Code TBD
FLSA Status Exem t
EEOCate o
TBD
Represented Status Unre resented
Sala Grade H-190
Effective Date
TBD
__j
Resolution
TBD
DEFINITION: Under administrative direction; establishes the mid- and long-term vision for software and systems development; designs and oversees the development and implementation of software solutions to support the District's overall business strategies and technical requirements; and provides expertise for the preparation of the Information Services technical roadmap .. REPRESENTATIVE FUNCTIONS may include, but are not limited to: •
Develops strategic systems and software plans and objectives; and the AC Transit Development Manual, including the District's technical framework, Enterprise Database architecture, and coding standards.
•
Directs the end-to-end development, launch, implementation, administration, and maintenance of all the Districts systems, applications, software products, websites, technical reports, and Key Performance Indicators.
•
Provides leadership, motivation, and work direction to assigned staff, including Database Administrators and Software Engineers; monitors the progress and timely completion of work activities, ensures the completion of all required systems checks, and provides staff development and individual and group training opportunities.
•
Works closely with staff to develop standards for application access to databases; and oversees the implementation of database interfaces that emphasize security and performance.
•
Meets and confers with staff on a regular basis to review progress, and provide systems updates to help avoid failures.
•
Collaborates with Executives, Department heads, Project Managers, development teams, and other stakeholders to collect project specifications, and ensure that software solutions and other deliverables are successfully integrated, tested, and verified; and meet critical product delivery, and customer satisfaction objectives.
•
Designs systems and software solutions; develops priorities, and establishes timelines and resources required for efficient, accurate, and timely project delivery. Writes periodic progress reports, and presents briefings.
•
Designs and develops specifications for application, web, and database servers and hardware to assist the Network Team in the building of servers.
•
Plans and directs change activities with application developers, telecommunications specialists, vendors, and staff; tracks development issues, directs implementation and deployment; and keeps executive staff informed regarding the progress of assigned projects.
•
Develops standards for database back-up; and oversees the implementation of all production applications.
•
Ensures the optimization of operations performance and efficiency, and the integrity of applications and databases; and analyzes performance data and operating conditions to troubleshoot and correct current problems, and minimize future problems.
•
Develops and oversees the development of performance standards, processes, and procedures to be applied uniformly throughout the department, and the District; and ensures that development systems and database documentation is accurately maintained, and released in a timely manner.
Page 1 of 2 193
Alameda Co Cl
Staff Report 13-159C Exhibit B
trict tion
Director of Systems and Software Develop,n-n,,,..,..-.,rr,,.---_j •
Initiates, reviews, and monitors adherence to written procedures and contingencies for planned software changes, outages, systems integrity, and security policies and procedure; and validates and revises appropriate application access privilege standards.
•
Continuously researches and evaluates new software technologies, industry trends, and best practices to optimize the District's systems design and development process.
•
Develops and maintains collaborative relationships and partnerships with vendors, independent contractors, and external web partners.
•
Performs related duties as required.
MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Knowledge Of: Software and database architecture and security; enterprise applications and their underlying databases; principles of systems and software design; software development frameworks, Object-Oriented Analysis and Design (OOA-OOD); graphical user interface design and usability; principles and practices of software engineering in an n-tier client-server architecture; object-oriented programming; Microsoft SQL Server, TSQL; Microsoft ASP.Net MVC, C#; HTML, CSS, DOM and Javascript; Java and J2EE; Microsoft Team Foundation Server (TFS); Extreme Programming (XP) or Agile software development; principles, methodology, and applications of relational database theory; database performance tuning and reporting; fundamentals of project management; formal change management procedures; basic mathematics and algebra; current office methods and procedures; and current software for word processing, spreadsheets, databases, and presentation at the advanced level of proficiency. Abilitv To: Provide experience and technical knowledge to form a bridge between management vision/direction and software solutions; design and develop n-tier client-server applications using a variety of languages and frameworks, both native Windows and web-based; design and implement testing routines to reduce downtime; troubleshoot and resolve problems with applications; supervise, mentor, assign work, assess individual and group training needs, and provide training to a large staff; provide motivation and work direction aimed at maximizing enterprise application efficiency and up-time; review and analyze user requirements; write documentation and user information and training materials; research and make recommendations regarding implementation of new software technologies; prepare estimates of time and resources needed; use discretion and independent judgment; keep abreast of current developments in the field; communicate effectively both orally and in writing; and establish and maintain effective working relations with those encountered in the course of work using principles of excellent customer service. Education/Certification: Equivalent to either a Bachelor's degree in Computer Science, Software Engineering, or a related field; OR at least five (5) years in a Senior Software Engineer capacity. Certification as a Microsoft Certified Solution Developer (MCSD) or Microsoft Certified Professional Developer (MCPD) is highly desirable. Experience: Ten (1 0) years of recent and verifiable experience designing and developing client-server software, five (5) years of which must include a senior role in the design and development of applications in a Windows Server environment. License Requirement: (1) Must possess or obtain, and maintain a valid Class C California Driver License, and meet the District's safe driving standards. Special Requirement: Must be willing to: (1) work outside regular business hours as required by implementation of special projects, and emergencies; and (2) travel between the various District facilities as required. Physical Requirements: Must maintain the physical condition necessary to: (1) perform tasks in an office setting operating a personal computer, keyboards, and other peripheral equipment; (2) possess physical mobility in order to transport oneself expeditiously within and between District facilities. 5:\HR\Data 12-01-01\Ciass-Comp\Ciass Specs\Diredor of Systems & Software Devetopment.doc
Page 2 of 2 194
Alameda
Contr.-----~-----,,ct
Clas
Staff Report 13-159C
Exhibit C
Manager of Systems Analysis Class Code TBO
FLSA Status Exem t
Sala Grade H-180
EEOCate o TBO
Effective Date TBO
Resolution TBO
DEFINITION: Under administrative direction, conducts complex analyses and studies using advanced statistical methodologies; verifies the integrity of data, and ensures consistency between and among capital projects to minimize the expenditure of District funding, and for the timely and efficient completion of capital projects. REPRESENTATIVE FUNCTIONS may include, but are not limited to: •
Develops and implements processes and reporting methods for tracking organizational performance, and the progress of capital projects.
•
Recommends and assists in the development and implementation of the District's goals, as well as departmental goals, objectives, policies and procedures.
•
Performs the District's most complex analyses and studies using established statistical methods, and makes conclusions and recommendations derived from analyses.
•
Reviews and analyses a wide variety of data, including historical, financial, budgetary, and organizational performance information to develop projections, and to track District and department goals and objectives.
•
Coordinates activities closely with senior level staff in all departments for the development and preparation of standard District reporting; including a wide variety of analyses and reports on operations, service planning and development, and financial planning.
•
Supervises staff on an ad-hoc and/or regular basis, as assigned by the department Director, or the General Manager.
•
Develops short- and long-term projections and plans for the District, and participates in the forecasting of District data and processes.
•
Develops, prepares and monitors department, unit and capital budgets; analyzes budgetary data and prepares cost estimates for budget recommendations.
•
Develops, writes, prepares, and presents narrative and statistical reports with analysis, and assists in preparing written summaries of technical analyses that include statistical summaries, tables, and other graphic representations of data.
•
Compiles, verifies validity, and submits National Transit Database (NTD) data for the District.
•
Reviews and develops reports using District operational statistics, and maintains Key Performance Indicators (KPis).
•
Reviews District data and standard reporting regarding planning, operational, financial, and other sources for dissemination to the public and outside agencies.
Page 1 of 2 195
n
Alameda Cor Cl
Staff Report 13-159C
trict lion
Exhibit C
Manager of Systems Analysis •
Collects, maintains, analyses, and assists in the interpretation of service and performance data from a wide variety of internal District databases and software systems, as well as external sources.
•
Maintains, tests, and verifies the integrity of data by identifying and resolving problems with data files and software interfaces.
•
Conducts research, and designs and develops technical studies involving operational, performance, or financial data and information, in cooperation with various District departments.
•
Performs related duties, as required.
MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Knowledge Of: Advanced statistical methods, the principles, methods, and practices of project control and systems analysis; principles and practices of quality assurance and quality control; applicable governmental regulations, laws, and legislation; budget preparation and adherence; principles and practices of management and administration, as well as supervision, leadership, motivation, and team building; and current office software for project management and control, word processing, spreadsheets, databases, and presentation, at the advanced level of proficiency. Ability To: Effectively manage capital projects and assigned staff; develop and monitor department goals for assigned programs; supervise assigned staff; swiftly and accurately analyze projects in order to collect and analyze data, and to develop controls and procedures; coordinate with other departments; communicate articulately and extemporaneously in English, both verbally and in writing to communicate ideas and concepts accurately, concisely, and in a compelling manner; respond rapidly and strategically to the Board of Directors and Executive management under time pressure, and in unanticipated events and emergencies; quickly learn and proficiently use current and newly developed software and databases as required by the demands of the job; stay abreast of current issues and evolving technologies in project management and public transit; and establish and maintain effective working relationships with those encountered in the course of work using principles of excellent customer service. Experience: Six (6) years of increasingly responsible professional-level experience in data analysis, accounting, finance, budgeting including a minimum of one (1) year of lead or supervisory responsibility. License Requirement: (1) Must possess or obtain, and maintain a valid Class C California Driver License, and meet the District's safe driving standards. Special Requirement: Must be willing to: (1) work outside regular business hours as required by implementation of special projects, and emergencies; and (2) travel between the various District facilities as required. Physical Requirements: Must maintain the physical condition necessary to: (1) perform tasks in an office setting operating a personal computer, keyboards, and other peripheral equipment; (2) possess physical mobility in order to transport oneself expeditiously within and between District facilities. S:IHR\Data 12-01-01\Ciass-Comp\Specs in Process A-0\Manager of Systems AnalySIS DRAFT.doc
Page 2 of 2 196
Alameda Contra Classifi
Staff Report 13-159C Exhibit D
Operations Data Systems Administrator Class Code TBO
FLSA Status Exem t
EEO Cate o TBO
Re resented Status
Sala
AFSCME
Grade 8
Effective Date TBO
Resolution TBO
DEFINITION: Under general direction; monitors and maintains equipment and operations performance data systems for compliance with directives, and established procedures; monitors, collects, assembles, and audits data for various operations reports; analyzes system performance and works with internal departments to resolve issues; and designs and writes queries and programs. REPRESENTATIVE FUNCTIONS may include, but are not limited to the following: •
Monitors, collects, assembles, and audits data for use in fleet and equipment maintenance planning, reports with analysis, studies, and problem identification.
•
Periodically audits source data for accuracy, timeliness, and compliance with directives and established procedures.
•
Administers systems security, and assigns appropriate access privileges to end-users.
•
Identifies and reports database problems and recommends and applies corrective actions.
•
Coordinates with internal departments and appropriate vendors to ensure automated systems capability and compatibility with customer requirements are met.
•
Designs and implements testing routines to identify and resolve (de-bug) conflicts and potential operating malfunctions.
•
Analyzes database architecture and monitors disk-usage to maintain integrity of database(s) and/or servers, and reconfigures or relocates data for optimal performance.
•
Documents procedures, and provides user information and training materials.
•
Creates and maintains special operations queries and reports, manages and maintains transfers of fleet and equipment within systems, and sets up new equipment disposal within systems, as directed.
•
Confers with end-users to identify user needs, and with vendors regarding programming and/or systems upgrades.
•
Estimates time and resources needed for projects, develops project schedules, and assist end users to prepare service request forms.
•
Keeps accurate electronic and paper records of all work performed
•
Prepares oral and written presentations for Operations management, and the Board of Directors.
•
Performs related duties as required.
Page 1 of 2 197
~I
Alameda Contra Classifi
Staff Report
13-159C
Exhibit D
Operations Data Systems Administrator MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Knowledge of: Principles and practices of software applications in client-server environments; operating systems and programming "languages" applicable to position responsibility; principles, methodology and applications of relational database theory; set-up and troubleshooting procedures; database recovery techniques; data dictionary tables and tools; preventive maintenance programs; project management; documentation procedures; systems design, configuration, testing and troubleshooting; basic mathematics and algebra; business English usage; modern office methods and procedures; and current software for materials inventory, spreadsheets, word processing, databases, and presentation at the intermediate level of proficiency. Ability To: Quickly learn and effectively use current software programs, and new programs adopted by the District; manage, monitor, analyze, and interpret data from multiple sources and write clear and concise reports on data in support of operations department activities; understand and interpret the provisions of multiple manufacturers' warranties and preventive maintenance program; develop and administer system security; write documentation. and user information and training materials; review and analyze user requirements; research and make recommendations regarding implementation of new programs and/or technologies including time and cost estimates; design and implement testing routines; set-up and install software and upgrades, keep abreast of current and imminent developments in computer technology; communicate effectively in English, both orally and in writing, and establish and maintain effective working relations with those encountered in the course of work using principles of excellent customer service. Education/Training: Equivalent to an Associate's degree in Computer Science, Mathematics, or a related field, and/or certification of completion of a recognized program in Computer Science. Experience: Four (4) years of recent and verifiable experience in a data processing related field in a client-server environment, two (2) years of which must have included performing a variety of tasks in support of administering a database. Additional education may be substituted for up to one year of the general experience on a year-for-year basis. Desired: Experience with Ellipse, Fleetwatch (S&A Systems), HASTUS, PeopleSoft, Warranty Tracking systems, and/or Operator and Maintenance Staff Training Database. License Requirement: Must possess or obtain, and maintain a valid California Class C Driver License, and meet the District's safe driving standards. Special Requirement: Must be willing to: (1) work outside regular business hours as required by the demands of the job, and emergencies; and (2) travel between the various District facilities as required. Physical Requirements: Must maintain the physical condition necessary to: (1) perform tasks in an office setting operating a personal computer, keyboards, and other peripheral equipment; (2) possess physical mobility in order to transport oneself expeditiously within and between District facilities.
S:\HR\Data 12-01-01\Ciass-Comp\Specs in Process A-0\0perations Data Systems Administrator 5-14 docx
Page 2 of 2 198
Alameda Contra C Classifi
Staff Report
13-159C Exhibit E
Senior Advisor Class Code TBD
FLSA Status Exem t
1
EEO Cate o Officials/Administrators
Sala
Grade
H-180
Effective Date
Resolution
TBD
TBD
DEFINITION: Under administrative direction of the General Manager, maintains responsibility for organizing, facilitating, planning, and implementing policies and programs developed by the General Manager's office; and coordinates with executive staff, the District Secretary, on items critical to the District, including strategic planning and analysis, and policy development. REPRESENTATIVE FUNCTIONS may include, but are not limited to the following: •
Provides highly responsible assistance in the development of the General Manager's programs and initiatives; develops and maintains positive interactions and collaboration with all District departments.
•
Ensures delivery of consistent communications from the General Manager to the Executive Team and key internal stakeholders about business strategies, timelines, expectations and priorities.
•
Reviews a wide variety of documentation; including agendas, reports, and technical, financial, and statistical information, and provides briefing, analysis, and alternatives to the General Manager; reviews correspondence and drafts responses on the General Manager's behalf with minimal supervision.
•
Assists the General Manager's Office in the review of staff reports for Board of Directors meetings to ensure that reports align with directives given by the General Manager, as well as appropriate content, proper English use and grammar.
•
Serves as liaison between the General Manager's office and District Executives, as well as department Directors, and Managers, as needed; for the coordination of inter-departmental functions and interactions with internal staff;
•
Coordinates and implements special projects requiring the participation of multiple District departments.
•
Assists the General Manager in efforts to ensure that key strategic initiatives are executed and assists in identifying areas of concern and critical business issues.
•
Coordinates and monitors the preparation of responses to directives from the Board of Directors, in conjunction with the District Secretary and General Counsel offices.
•
Identifies and informs the General Manager of opportunities for the District, as well as potential problem areas that could impact District operations.
•
Provides technical and administrative direction and supervision to assigned staff; assigns and monitors the progress and completion of work assignments and reports progress or issues to the General Manager.
•
Develops and delivers presentations to both internal and external audiences in support of District business.
•
Assists in the development of the budget for the General Manager's Office, and supervises the development of the budget and monitors monthly budget reports.
•
Prioritizes, analyzes, and coordinates the flow of information to and from the General Manager's office in Page 1 of 2 199
~I
Alameda Contra Costa Transit District Classi Staff Report 13-159C
Exhibit E
Senior Advisor order to promote operational efficiency and expedite operational decisions. •
Supports the General Manager's Office in resolving complex issues that may arise as a result of conflicting business processes and/or procedural matters; presents recommendations for the General Manager's consideration and follow-up with department(s) as required.
•
Assist the General Manager in the development and preparation of Administrative Regulations in coordination with Executive Team and Board Officers.
•
Performs other related duties, as defined and directed by the General Manager.
MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Knowledge of: Principles, policies and practices of management and administration; policy development and implementation; budget administration; principles, practices, and trends in public and business administration; supervision, training, employee and organizational development; principles of leadership, team building, motivation and conflict resolution; business report writing; pertinent local, state and federal laws, rules, regulations, and collective bargaining agreements; current office systems and current business software for word processing, spreadsheets, and presentation at the advanced level of proficiency. Ability To: Exercise discretion and maintain strict confidentiality; plan and direct the work of managerial and professional staff; quickly learn and expertly apply knowledge of District operations, programs, policies, and collective bargaining agreements; effectively train, motivate, and evaluate staff; prepare and administer complex budgets; apply collaborative work strategies and gain the cooperation of employees at all levels of the organization; analyze issues and develop alternative solutions; negotiate and resolve issues and disagreements between various District departments and stakeholders; work effectively on multiple issues and projects under stressful circumstances, with multiple tight deadlines; prepare and/or analyze and evaluate comprehensive written reports with recommendations; make effective oral presentations to a variety of audiences; and establish and maintain positive working relationships with those encountered in the course of work using principles of excellent customer service. Education/Training: Equivalent to a Bachelor's Degree from an accredited four-year college or university in business administration, public administration, transportation planning, governmental affairs, or a related field. Experience: A minimum of six (6) years of recent, verifiable, and increasingly responsible management-level experience that included at least three (3) years supervising or directing staff and activities of multiple departments and functions in a public or private agency comparable in size to the AC Transit District. License Requirement: Must possess or obtain, and maintain a valid California Class C Driver License, and meet the District's safe driving standards. Special Requirement: Must be willing to: (1) work outside regular business hours as required by the demands of the job, and emergencies; and (2) travel between the various District facilities as required. Physical Requirements: Must maintain the physical condition necessary to: (1) perform tasks in an office setting operating a personal computer, keyboards, and other peripheral equipment; and (2) possess physical mobility in order to direct or conduct special projects, and attend external meetings and events. S:\HR\Data 12-01-01\Ciass-Comp\SR 13-159C, Reso 14-023\Senior Adllisor_docx.docx
Page 2 of 2 200
Staff Report 13-159C Exhibit F
Existing and New Salary Grades for Unrepresented Employees AC
Job Code Classification
•• 346
I I I I I I I I I I
I
116
-
.
Unrepresented !Assistant District Secretary
ACT
ACT
Transit
Minimum
Maximum
Grade
(First Step)
(Top Step)
Hay
Hay
Grade Minimum
-- • $63,888
''
...
Hay Maximum
•• •
••
$127,416
I $61,200 H170 I $89,600
$134,400
$148,277
H180
$103,200
$154,800
6
$72,696
$86,808
$106,728
H140
$93,700
228
!Attorney II
11
251
!Attorney Ill
13
$124,186
253
!Attorney IV
14
$134,089
1
$160,096
H190
$119,200
$178,800
206
lsudget Manager
12
$114,962
1
$137,290
H170
$89,600
$134,400
12
$114,962
I $137,290 I I I $134,089 I $160,096
H170
$89,600
$134,400
E2
$151,600
$227,400
E1
$142,300
$213,500
E3
$166,400
$249,600
E1
$142,300
$213,500
313 014 081 015 31 32 7 238 038
Icapital Planning & Grants Manager Ichief Financial Officer Ich ief Human Resources Officer Ichief Operating Officer Ichief Performance Officer
IChief Planning & Development
696 34
024
Exec Exec 14 13
$124,1861
$148,277
E1
$142,300
$213,500
!chief Technology Officer
13
$124,186
1
$148,277
E1
$142,300
$213,500
Icontroller IDirector of Bus Rapid Transit
13
$124,186
1
$148,277
H180
$103,200
$154,800
15
$144,799
1
$172,872
H200
$139,200
$208,800
14
$134,0891
$160,096
H190
$119,200
$178,800
14
$134,089
$160,096
H200
$139,200
$208,800
14
$134,089
$160,096
H190
$119,200
$178,800
13
$124,186
$148,277
H200
$139,200
$208,800
Officer
IDirector of Legislative Affairs &
33
Exec
Community Relations
IDirector of Maintenance IDirector of Project Controls &
I
Systems Analysis Director of Service Development and Planning
I
1
$160,096
IH200 I$139,200 I $208,800
9
I $91,440 I
$109,128
I H160 I $78,400 I $117,700
4
354
IExecutive Administrative Assistant IExecutive Coordinator
85
!General Services Manager
10
I $62, 280 I $78,456 I $98,784 I $84, 672
I $74,328 I $93,648 I $117,984 I $101,136
IH130 I $54,400 I $81,600 IH140 I $61,200 I $93,700 IH160 I $78,400 I $117,700 IH150 I $68,900 I $103,400 IH180 I$103, 200 I $154,800
009
IDirector of Transportation IEqual Employment Opportunity
35 348
188 082
14
1
$134,089
Program Administrator
IHuman Resources Administrator IHuman Resources Manager
7
8 11
1
$106,728
201
1
$127,416
I I I I I I I I I I
I
Staff Report 13-159C Exhibit F AC
ACT
ACT
Transit
Minimum
Maximum
Grade
(First Step)
(Top Step)
10
$98,784
$117,984
7
$78,456
$93,648
7
$78,456
$93,648
10
$98,784
$117,984
6
$72,696
$86,808
11
$106,728
$127,416
10
$98,784
$117,984
10
$98,784
$117,984
10
$98,784
$117,984
8
$84,672
$101,136
IProcurement and Materials Director I IProtective Services Manager I IReal Estate Manager I
13
$124,186 1 $148,277
11
$106,728 1 $127,416
10
$98,784 1 $117,984
I $78,400 $117,700 $134,400 H170 I $89,600 $134,400 H170 I $89,600 H160 I $78,400 I $117,700 H190 I $119,200 I $178,800 H170 I $89,600 I $134,400 H160 I $78,400 I $117,700
'Senior Administrative Assistant Unrepresented
3
$57,720
H120
Job Code Classification
1
087
1
088
1
280
IInternal Audit Manager IInternal Auditor ILabor Relations Representative
1
156
IMaintenan ce Superintendent
1
67
I I I I
I I I I
I
I I I I I
IManagement Analyst
Manager of Safety & Environmental 040 63 106 240 632 086 109 65 347 064 190 281 072 164
Hay
Hay
Hay
Grade Minimum
IH170 I $89,600 IH150 I $68,900 IH140 I $61,200 IH160 I $78,400 IH140 I $61,200 H170
Maximum
I $134,400 1 I s1o3,4oo 1 I $93,700 1 I $117,700 I I $93,700 I
$89,600
$134,400
Engineering
IManager of Special Projects IMedia Affairs Manager IPayroll Manager
IPrincipal Financial AnalystUnrepresented
I
I
I lsr. Human Resources Administrator I lsr. Labor Relations Administrator I !Training and Education Manager I !Transportation Superintendent I !senior Project Manager
Treasury Manager
11 9 9 11 10
I
$68,904
H160
I
$73,400 $49,0001
I $127,416 $91,440 I $109,128 $91,440 I $109,128 $106,728 I $127,416 $98,784 I $117,984
H180 $103,200
I H160 I $78,400 H160 I $78,400 H170 I $89,600 H160 I $78,400
I $154,800 I $117,700 I $117,700 I $134,400 I $117,700
$114,962
H180 $103,200
$154,800
$106,728
202
$137,290
Report No: Meeting Date:
14-136 May 28,2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Report on the Status of Contracts and Purchase Orders over $50,000
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider receiving the quarterly report on the status of contracts and purchase orders over $50,000. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This report provides information on the status of contracts and purchase orders over $50,000 awarded by the District for the period of January 1, 2014 through March 31, 2014. Attachments 1 and 2 provide the contracts between and resulting purchase orders valued at $50,000$100,000 which are procured through an informal competitive process, as prescribed by Board Policy 350. In addition, attachments 3 and 4 provide the contracts and purchase orders that equal or exceed $100,000 in value that are procured through a formal procurement process. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no budgetary/fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
Board Policy 350 requires that the Board of Directors review on a quarterly basis the status of all contracts and purchase orders over $50,000 awarded by the District. The attachments to this report represent procurement actions in the $50,000-$100,000 range . as well as those that require a formal procurement process as the award value is at least $100,000. Typically, purchase orders are valid for the fiscal year that they were issued in. Exceptions to this practice occur most commonly in cap ital projects where funds may roll over to the next fiscal year. Additionally, procedures have been established to track expiring contracts, and an eight month rolling report is sent to project managers monthly to remind them of the expiring contract. This report enables the Purchasing department to work proactively and closely with requesting departments to renew, rebid, or let contracts expire.
203
Report No. 14-136 Page 2 of 2 ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: There are no advantages or disadvantages. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: There is no alternate analysis. This report fulfills the reporting requirements established under Board Policy 350. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Board Policy 350-Procurement Policy ATTACHMENTS:
1. Contracts valued at $50,000-$100,000 awarded between January 1, 2014-March 31, 2014 2. Purchase orders valued at $50,000-$100,000 from January 1, 2014-March 31, 2014 3. Contracts valued at $100,000 or more awarded between January 1, 2014-March 31, 2014 4. Purchase orders valued at $100,000 or more opened from January 1, 2014-March 31, 2014
Department Head Approval:
Tom Prescott, Chief Performance Officer
Reviewed by: Prepared by:
Denise C. Standridge, Interim General Counsel Jon Medwin, Director of Procurement and Materials
204
Contract No.
Contract Specialist
2012-1189
Brian Jackson
2014-10284
Kai Moore
2014-10278
Ross Aguas
Expiratio n Date
Description
6/3012014 lntraVehicte Text Message Signs Phase 1 6/18/2014 NTD Methodology Review, Development, and Validation 413012015 Magnetic Media Passes
Project Manager
Award Date
Board Award
Dollar Amount
WahidAmiri
2/5/2014
N/A
572,003.70
Dennis Buller
4/25/2014
NA
$68,441.00
Sue Lee
4/29/2014
N/A
$49.455.00
Opt Prds Opt Prds remain tota l
No
four (4) 1year options
Vendor
Comments
Hanover Displays, Amendment was developed to add Inc. additional signs Period of Perform 45 days TransTrack Systems
four Magna Data USA Commence May 1, 2014 thru April30, 2015 with four (4) one (1) year option years to continue till April 30, 2019 if unilaterally excercised at the sole discretion of the District.
V>
:::0
z ..... f> ..... w
?
0'1 )> ..... ..... QJ
n
::r
3
t1)
:::J
..... .....
205
SR. No. 14-136 Attachment 2
PO No. 0000025119
... ·. VBhdor Buyer: ·.. VendorN~me $50,000.00 2/11/2014 14922 bkjackso DESIGNECENTRAL, INC
SumAnlount
PO Oatli
0000025358
$61,680.00
0000025168
$66,163.00 2/13/2014 10633
25034J
3/7/2014 9161
0000024999
$68,327.67 2/14/2014 10668 $72,003.70 2/5/2014 11885
00000246S8
$72,313.22
00000254391
$78,200.00 3/14/2014 115021
0000024762
$83,276.00 1/14/2014 11289
1/7/201414856
0000025051
$85,281.60
2/7/2014 10622
0000024664
$86,220.00
1/7/2014 14111
jwoodard jbonds
CHOW ENGINEERING, INC
jbonds kmoorel dbonds .sdennis eburks jbonds jwoodard
METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
CUMMINS PACIFIC, LLC HANOVER DISPLAYS INC VEHICLE MAINTENANCE PROGAM INC SERENITY INFOTECH, INC COM CAST SPOTLIGHT GILLIG CORPORATION INTERACTIVE RESOURCES, INC
206
.
Contract No.
Contract Specialist
20j3-1275
David Bui
2013-1265
Brian Jackson
2013-1267
Brian Jackson
2014-1285
KaiMoore
2013-1268
Jamell Woodard
Expiration Date
Description
Project Manager
Award Date
5/1512014 04Seminary JoecaJiaway Hydrogen Fueling Station Upgrade Proiect 11/30/2016 FASTENERS AND Stuart Hoffman FREE STOCK
1/1612014
Denise 2/9/2015 INSURANCE BROKER Standridge SERVICES 2/28/2017 Microsoft Enterprise Mike Carvalho Agreement
4130/2019 Armored Car Services
Sue Lee
Board Award
Dollar Amount
Opt Prds
Opt Prds
total
remain
Vendor
Comments P0#24956
1,513.400.00 0
0
Roebbelen Contracting, Inc.
1/27/2014
225,000.00 0
0
KIMBALL MIDWEST
2/1312014
400,000.00 n/a
WELLS FARGO
296,702.57 none
Compucom
Three-year contract through 212017.
Brink's Inc.
Period of Performance: May 1, 2014-April30, 2019
1/812014
3/512014
4/212014
2,088,348.00 No
207
No
SR. No. 14-136 Attachment 4
PO No. 0000025402 0000025403 0000024712 0000024714 0000025509 0000025637 0000025028 0000024798 0000024799 0000024800 24362J 0000024583 0000024584 0000024585 0000024861 0000024862 0000024959 i 0000025298 0000025299 0000025169 0000025170 0000025171 0000025249 0000025448 0000025404 0000025510 0000025512 0000025638 0000025639 0000025027 0000025029 0000025342 0000025343 0000025344 0000024864 0000024960 0000024961' 0000025300 0000025250 0000025251 0000024970 0000024663 0000024983 0000024713 0000024837 0000025043 0000025528 0000025034 0000024620 0000025335 0000025033 0000025445 0000024772 0000024956 0000025286 0000025527
s·umAmOunt $100,116.06 $100,116.06 $100,740.42 $100,740.42 $101,368.26 $101,546.14 $102,871.58 $102,941.34 $102,941.34 $102,941.34' $103,865.661 $103,904.03 1 $103,904.03 $103,904.03 $104,127.26 $104,127.26 $104,681.86 $104,716.74 $104,716.74 $104,751.621 $104,751.62 $104,751.62 $107,102.53 $122,270.57 $125,145.08 $126,710.32 $126,710.32 $126,932.68 $126,932.68 $128,589.48 $128,589.48 $129,731.80• $129,731.801 $129,731.80 $130,159.08 $130,852.32 $130,852.32 $130,895.92 $133,878.16 $133,878.16 $140,000.00 $142,367.46 $150,000.00; $151,110.62! $152,000.00; $153,000.00 $196,200.00 $198,155.94 $261,044.14 $296,702.57 $310,428.41 $450,871.00 $1,402,675.00 $1,513,400.00 $17,845,834.36 $30,507,322.1 .
PO Date.
VBndo.r·'
3/13/2014 11905 3/13/2014 11905 1/9/2014 10468 1/9/2014 10468 3/20/2014 15314 3/27/2014 10468 2/6/2014:11905 1/16/2014' 11905 1/16/2014 11905 1/16/2014 11905 1/7/2014 10451 1/2/2014 10451 1/2/2014 10451 1/2/2014 10451 1/23/2014 10451 1/23/2014 10451 1/30/2014 10451 2/27/2014 10451 2/27/2014 10451 2/13/2014 10451 2/13/2014 10451 2/13/2014 10451 2/20/2014 10451 3/17/2014 10668 3/13/2014 11905 3/20/2014 15314 3/20/2014 15314 3/27/2014 10468 3/27/2014 10468 2/6/2014 11905 2/6/2014 11905 3/6/2014 10468 3/6/2014 10468 3/6/2014 10468 1/23/2014 10451 1/30/2014 10451 1/30/2014 10451 2/27/2014 10451 2/20/2014 10451 2/20/2014 10451 1/30/2014 14376 1/7/2014 10194 1/31/2014 12805 1/9/2014 10468 1/22/2014 15251 2/6/2014 15046 3/21/2014 11568 2/6/2014 15070 1/3/2014 11317 3/5/2014 8738 2/6/2014 10622 3/17/2014 10622 1/15/2014 14392 1/30/2014 12125 2/24/2014 10622 3/21/2014 10622
~uyer
Vendor Name
.·
raguas IPC raguas IPC jbonds GOLDEN GATE PETROLEUM CO. jbonds GOLDEN GATE PETROLEUM CO. FLYERS ENERGY LLC raguas raguas GOLDEN GATE PETROLEUM CO. raguas IPC raguas IPC raguas IPC raguas IPC jbonds SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY jbonds SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY jbonds SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY .jbonds raguas SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY raguas SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY raguas SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY raguas SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY raguas SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY raguas SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY raguas SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY raguas SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY raguas SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION jbonds raguas IPC I FLYERS ENERGY LLC raguas raguas FLYERS ENERGY LLC raguas GOLDEN GATE PETROLEUM CO. raguas GOLDEN GATE PETROLEUM CO. raguas IPC raguas IPC GOLDEN GATE PETROLEUM CO. 1raguas iraguas GOLDEN GATE PETROLEUM CO. raguas GOLDEN GATE PETROLEUM CO. raguas SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY raguas SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY raguas raguas SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY raguas SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY raguas SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY jwoodard FIRM US CONSULTING INC raguas VENTYX INC. nhenry 21ST CENTURYEMI jbonds GOLDEN GATE PETROLEUM CO. pdavis SOFIAN QUTOB bkjackso BP ENERGY COMPANY bkjackso FLEET TIRE, INC. jbonds METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION bkjackso I BEST CONTRACTING SERVICES kmoorel COMPUCOM jbonds !GILLIG CORPORATION jbonds GILLIG CORPORATION nhenry GANNETI FLEMING PROJECT DEVLPT CORP dbui ROEBBELEN CONTRACTING, INC jbonds GILLIG CORPORATION jbonds GILLIG CORPORATION
208
Report No: Meeting Date:
14-141 May 28,2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO: FROM:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise {DBE) Semi-Annual Payment Report
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider receiving the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Semi-Annual Payment Report for the Period of October 1, 2013 through March 31, 2014. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: DBE participation for the above reporting period was 11%, 3 percentage points higher than the District's FTA-approved overall goal of 8%. A significant change from prior DBE Reports is that this report showcases a DBE firm being awarded a prime contract, whereas past DBE participation was relegated to subcontractor participation only. The table below illustrates DBE participation relative to all contract expenditures, then further breakouts DBE participation by ethnicity and gender. BUDGETARY /FISCAL IMPACT: There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: This report covers the period of October 1, 2013 through March 31, 2014. During this period, staff has worked diligently to sustain a high level of DBE participation through inter-agency outreach and networking efforts; monitoring of Prime Contractors DBE utilization relative to their proposed commitments, and coordinating meetings between prospective contractors and potential user departments. Furthermore, the District has begun incorporating Small Business Enterprise (SBE) goals into its contracts where practicable, a strategy aimed at not only ensuring SBE participation but increasing the likelihood of DBE participation as well. DBE Payments
Total Payments to Prime Contractors
DBE%
$751,409
$6,979,928
11%
Woman*
Asian
AfricanAmerican
38% 34% 6% *Includes all ethnicities
209
Hispanic
Caucasian
56%
4%
Report No. 14-141 Page 2 of 3 During this report period, the District contracted with a number of Prime Contractors that utilized a significant number of DBE, SLBE and Women-Owned businesses. Examples of those contracts include: Prime Contractors (Subcontractors are in non-bold font) Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. - $3,035,912
Community Design & Architecture- $151,768 (SLBE} AGS, Inc. - $67,673 (DBE & SLBE) CHS Consulting Group- $71,802 (DBE & SLBE) FMG Architects- $257,907 (DBE & SLBE) KC Pierce & Associates- $31,710 (DBE & SLBE) , Wreco- $73,633 (DBE & SLBE) f.
6~~~-~t'i..F'ieni·i~i~·si;7os-:7 89 ..................................... ...
-...........................................
...............
'
I Acumen Building Enterprise- $731
(DBE & SLBE)
i I :i
i
I
! Bender Rosenthal, Inc.- $30,378 (DBE)
~--- ------ ---------------------------- - --- -- --------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------1
! Cordoba Corporation - $161, 311 (DBE} ! Kimley-Horn- $534,621
' I Wreco- $40,520 (DBE & SLBE) PLS Surveys- $72,850 (SLBE)
! Parsons Brinckerhoff- $286,027 I Acumen I
Building Enterprise- $15,735 (DBE & SLBE)
During the reporting period, staff continued building upon District-wide efforts to increase exposure and improve community relations that included the following activities: •
Participated in inter-agency contractor outreach event hosted by VTA
•
Participated in two Bay Area Business Roundtable (BABRT) events, interacting with potential contractors and working with other local agencies to exchange DBE and SLBErelated best business practices
210
Report No. 14-141 Page 3 of 3 •
Participated in the Port of Oakland's Workforce Development Workshop to highlight upcoming AC Transit procurement opportunities as well as seek out opportunities to partner with workforce development organizations with the objective of ensuring upcoming BRT workforce goals are achieved
Advantages/Disadvantages
This report does not recommend a course of action with notable advantages or disadvantages. Alternative Analysis
The staff found no practical alternatives to the course of action recommended in this report. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES:
Board Policy 351- Small and Small Local Business Procurement Policy Board Policy 326- Disadvantages Business Enterprise Policy ATTACHMENTS:
None.
Approved by:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
Reviewed by:
Denise C. Standridge, Acting General Counsel
Prepared by:
PhillipS. McCants, Contracts Compliance Administrator
211
This page intentionally blank
212
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-216a May 28, 2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
Denise Standridge, Interim General Counsel
SUBJECT:
Contract Compliance Approval
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider receiving report regarding contract compliance approval. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On June 12, 2013, Director Ortiz requested a report on compliance with Board Policy 350 with respect to contracts. On September 26, 2013, the General Counse l's office provided a report detailing a list of current contracts greater than $100,000 and whether the appropriate approval policy was followed under Board Policy 350. The item was pulled of the agenda and subsequently modified to focus on the VanHool and Linde contracts. On December 13, 2001, the Board of Directors authorized the District's General Manager to execute a contract for buses with Van Hool. The authorization was for up to 135 40' 3 door, low floor buses with an option to purchase up to an additional 135; and up to 60 60' 4 door, low floor buses with an option to purchase up to an additional 60. The unit prices were not to exceed $328,820 for the 40 foot bus and $444,900 for the 60' bus. On December 16, 2009, the Board of Directors authorized the GM and GC to execute a contract and Notice to Proceed to Linde, L.L.C. for a hydrogen fueling system at D2, Emeryville. The Board also authorized execution of a contract and Notice to Proceed to Linde for a hydrogen fueling system at D4, East Oakland, upon the future award of additional grant funds. The Board has expressed concern over compliance with Board Policy 350 as well as the negotiation of terms and conditions of contracts. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
Van Hool : The Board has previously received reports pertaining to the history of the Van Hool procurements and contracts . This report focuses on the contracts, the amendments and compliance with Board Policy 350. 213
Report No. 13-216a Page 2 of 4 On May 10, 2001, Memo 01-159 was presented to the Board requesting authorization for the General Manager to negotiate a sole source procurement with Van Hool for three and four door buses and to explore alternative funding options and third-party financing strategies, allowing the District to utilize state and/or local funds for this procurement in exchange for 5307 federal funds. The Board minutes reflect that the GM be allowed to undertake a negotiated procurement. Thereafter, on June 20, 2001, the District issued Request for Proposal No. 2001-763 for 40' and 60' low floor transit buses. The only proposal received was from Van Hool N.V. /ABC Bus. A contract was entered into on January 17, 2002. Both the solicitation and the contract were presented to the Board for approval and authority was given to the GM and to the GC to negotiate contracts. There were 28 amendments to this contract, all of which are detailed on the chart attached as Exhibit 1. However, not all amendments were brought to the Board for approval. On May 2, 2007, GM Memo 07-115 was presented to the Board requesting the GM be authorized to enter into an agreement with ABC Bus Companies for a one year exchange of one of the District's 40' Van Hool buses in exchange for a Van Hool cruiser to be constructed for ABC for demonstration purposes. The report stated that the use of the cruiser for one year would assist the District in determining the specifications required for the next procurement of cruiser coaches to replace the MCI buses. The report also stated that, while short term bus loans were not usually brought to the Board, this was because of the length of the loan. The Board authorized the loan. Thereafter, staff returned to the Board on May 14, 2008 requesting authority to issue a Request for Proposals for a 45' coach. The Board approved the solicitation and Request for Proposal 2008-1061 was issued. Van Hool was the only company that submitted a proposal, which was for a firm fixed price of $468,030, not including manuals, training, spare parts, test equipment, special tools and freight. However, GM Memo 08-281 presented to the Board on November 12, 2008 states this was adjusted to $511,119 to allow for freight and these items to be delivered directly to Van Hool by the District. The Board authorized the GM to negotiate a contract, which was executed on December 10, 2008. As you may recall, this contract was later cancelled and the parties entered into a settlement agreement over the cancellation. In looking at the amendments in the attached exhibit, there did not appear to be any changes in excess of 15% or material changes that were not presented to the Board. However, the GM and GC were given latitude in negotiating the contract and there were some items the Board may not have approved of had the negotiated terms been brought to its attention. For example, the "termination for convenience" clause was deleted; after contract award the District was not allowed to cancel or decrease the order; Van Hool was given 60 "Van Hool working days" to cure a default while the District usually provides 10 days in a standard contract; reimbursement for warranty work was subject to the acceptance of the claim by Van Hool with prior authorization being required in certain circumstances; the District had to pay the final 90% payment within 5 days of delivery of the coaches and no retention was allowed; the performance bond was valid through the end of the contractual delivery time of the buses and at the latest, December 31, 2003. 1 However, because of the latitude given to staff in 1
The attached exhibit has various references that the performance bond was to be increased. However, it was recently made known that the performance bond was canceled on March 13, 2004. Note that this is before many of the amendments required an increase in the bond that apparently was no longer in existence. 214
Report No. 13-216a Page 3 of4 negotiating the contract, it does not appear that Board Policy 350 was violated with the amendments. Linde: On July 28, 2009, GM Memo 09-129a was presented to the Board requesting authorization to issue a solicitation for the acquisition of hydrogen generation, compression, storage and dispensing systems for installation at D2, the Emeryville division. Authorization was given and the District released a Request for Proposal. Five proposals were received, although two of the proposers each submitted two proposals, so only a total of 3 firms participated. On December 16, 2009, GM Memo 09-297 was presented to the Board requesting two actions. The first was requesting authorization for the IGM and the GC to execute a contract with Linde for the Emeryville division. The second was requesting authorization for the IGM and GC to execute a contract, with Linde for the Oakland division upon the future award of grant funds. The contract was signed on March 2, 2010 and included the priced option of the Oakland facility, which was exercised in amendment 1 on September 29, 2010. Additionally, the contract included seven 1 year options to extend the maintenance services. To date, the options have not been exercised. However, the contract is still in effect because of delays in completing construction so no option has been necessary up to this point. As with the Van Hool contracts and amendments, the Linde contract was in compliance with Board Policy 350. The amendment was previously brought to the Board's attention and approved on December 16, 2009. There have been no further amendments. However, there were terms in the contract that were negotiated that were not Board approved. While the Board may find the terms disadvantageous, no policies were violated in the negotiations. Current Process: Currently, the process for solicitations and contracts is as follows: the contract specialist prepares the solicitation for staff review. The solicitation is routed for signatures and the following people must sign off before it is issued: the contract specialist; Sharon Dennis; Phillip McCants; Jon Medwin; the project manager; the project manager's director; possibly Lewis Clinton (depending upon whether there is a special requisition already in the system); the Interim General Counsel and then the General Manager. Because the solicitation is incorporated into the contract, the current Interim General Counsel is careful to review the terms stated. The solicitation is then returned to the contract specialist with counsel's questions, comments and/or changes before it is routed to the General Manager for signature. After the solicitation is issued, many vendors will ask for exceptions. These are presented to the project manager and usually the Interim General Counsel for approval. The practice of the current Interim General Counsel is to consider the request and, if it is reasonable, approve it. If the request is harmless or very low risk, it is likely to be approved. However, when the request pertains to insurance or indemnity language, legal counsel has to weigh the potential ramifications to the District against the request. In some instances, the project manager must be consulted with to ensure the possible risks are fully understood before the final decision is made. If the Interim General Counsel is unable to approve the request, options are offered to the vendor that would be acceptable to both sides. Once requests are considered and a vendor chosen, the contract is routed for signature. The same review and sign off process occurs. There appear to be two areas that seem to cause concern for the Board. The first area involves compliance with Board Policy 350 in notifying the Board. The second area involves how actual
215
Report No. 13-216a Page 4 of4 contracts are negotiated. The prior procedure was to obtain Board approval and then prepare either the solicitation or the contract. Based on Board comments, it is apparent that the process staff uses to negotiate a contract and reach an agreement needs refinement. The Interim General Counsel recommends that staff bring an item to the Board to authorize the award of the contract subject to negotiation with the proposed contract brought back to the Board for final approval to ensure full transparency of what the Board is approving. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: There are no advantages or disadvantages associated with this report. The report has been provided at the request of a Board member. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: There are no alternatives. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Board Policy 350 ATTACHMENT: Exhibit 1
Department Head Approval:
Denise Standridge, Interim General Counsel
Reviewed by:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
Prepared by:
Denise Standridge, Interim General Counsel
216
Exhibit 1 to SR 13-216a
Van Hool Documents Document Contract
Date
Comments
01/18/02
This was the initial contract for 40' and 60' buses. The initial listed prices were $299,600 for the 40' buses and $429,000 for the 60' buses.
Amendment 1
04/19/02
1. Technical changes to specifications increasing 40' price to $299,920 & the 60' price to $430,940; 2. Purchase 3 40' buses for conversion to fuel cell operation $367,320; 3. Purchase 17 60' buses {AG300} $438,240 with the performance bond to be increased by 10%
leopold Van Hool; Denis Van Hool; Herman Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
Amendment 2
06/05/02
Amendment 3
08/20/02
Purchase an additional12 40' buses {A330} $307,567 with the performance bond to be increased by 10% Change technical specifications increasing 40' price to $300,420 & 60' price to $431,254
Amendment4
02/06/03
leopold Van Hool; Denis Van Hool; Herman Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Carol Babington for Kenneth Scheidig leopold Van Hool; Denis Van Hool; Herman Van Hool; unknown for Rick Fernandez; Carol Babington for Kenneth Scheidig leopold Van Hool; Denis Van Hool; Herman Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Carol Babington
Change technical specifications decreasing 40' price to $299,869 & 60' price increased to $431,328
Signed By
1
217
Board Notified?
GM Memo 01-364, 12/13/01, authorized award & execution of contract up to 135 40' Van Hool buses with option up to 135 more & up to 60 60' buses with an option for an additional 60 GM Memo 02-115, 04/04/02, requesting authorization for GM or designee to negotiate the purchase of up to 18 articulated buses under the option included in the "Initial lot 1" ofthe Van Hool contract. GM Memo 02093, 03/19/02, authorizing the GM to enter into agreement with ISE Research-Thundervolt, Inc. for the purchase of 4 fuel cell buses, with an option for 6 more.
Exhibit 1 Document
Date
Comments
Amendment 5
04/29/03
Change technical specifications increasing 40' price to $300,147 & 60' price to $431,617
Amendment 6
04/30/03
Amendment 7
07/14/04
Amendment 8
07/14/04
1. Change technical specifications to the 3 fuel cell buses increasing the price to $399,000; 2. Add 1 additional bus (A330) for fuel cell conversion, $399,000 (to be assigned to Sun line Transit) 3. Option within next 3 years to purchase up to 10 additional buses. 1. Changes to 3 fuel cell buses increasing the price for VINs 61726 & 61727 to $415,181 and for VIN 61728 to $414,681. 2. Changes to 1 (A330) fuel cell bus for Sun line increasing the price to $438,261. 1. Exercise option to purchase 10 additional60' coaches with technical specification changes increasing the price to $470,456; 2. Increase performance bond by 10% of the order extension price.
Signed By
for Kenneth Scheidig Leopold Van Hool; Dennis Van Hool; Herman Van Hool; Charles Kalb for Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig Leopold Van Hool; Denis Van Hool; Herman Van Hool; Charles Kalb for Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
Board Notified?
GM Memo 02-326, 12/06/02, approved GM & GC to travel to Belgium to finalize the fuel cell configuration & negotiate changes
Leopold Van Hool; Denis Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
Leopold Van Hool; Denis Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
2
218
GM Memo 04-226, 06/16/04, authorized GM to purchase 10 additional 60' buses, 3 from the 1'' option & 7 from the 2"d option to be "commuter type".
Exhibit 1 Document Amendment9
Date
07/14/04
Amendment 10
06/07/04
Amendment 11
10/08/04
Amendment 12
10/08/04
Amendment
10/05/05
13
Comments 1. Exercise option to purchase 61 additional 30' buses (A300K} for $294,000 or € 240,500; 2 will be prototypes and paid for in US dollars; 2. Increase performance bond by 10% of the total order price.
Signed By Leopold Van Hool; Denis Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
Because AC Transit resold 29 40' buses to WMATA, this amendment transferred certain provisions of the contract to WMATA at a cost of $2,815 per bus to be paid by AC Transit Change in technical specifications to the 5 buses VanHool had not yet shipped to WMATA, increasing the price to $350,497 1. Purchase an additional15 60' buses with technical changes increasing the price to $472,801; 2. Increase the performance bond by 10% of the order price. Technical changes to 24 of the 30' (A300k} buses ordered pursuant to Amendment 9 increasing the price to $304,734.
Leopold Van Hool; Denis Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
Board Notified? GM Memo 04-226, 06/16/04, authorized GM to purchase 2 prototype 30' buses: 1 diesel & 1 an ISE gasoline hybrid. GM Memo 04-282, 08/04/04, authorized the GM to finalize & execute the contract for 59 2 door low floor buses. GM Memo 04-097, 03/03/04, approved sale of up to 25 Van Hools to WMATA; GM Memo 04208, 06/16/04, approved sale of up to 4 more Van Hools to WMATA
Leopold Van Hool; Denis Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig Leopold Van Hool; Denis Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
Leopold Van Hool; Denis Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
3
219
GM Memo 05-133, 06/09/05, authorized the GM to travel to Belgium to inspect & authorize shipment of the 30' buses.
Exhibit 1 Document Amendment 14
Date 10/05/05
Amendment 15
06/19/06
Amendment 16
06/19/06
Amendment 17
07/17/06
Amendment 18
06/19/06
Amendment 19
06/19/06
Comments 1. Technical changes to 36 of the 30' (A300K) buses ordered pursuant to Amendment 9 increasing the price to $313,571; 2. Increase the performance bond by 10% of the order price. Technical changes to the 10 additional 60' buses (AG300) ordered pursuant to Amendment 8 increasing the price to $472,472, Technical changes to the additional15 60' buses (AG300) ordered pursuant to Amendment 12 increasing the price to $475,249 1. Purchase an additional40' bus (A330) for conversion to hydrogen fuel cell & change technical specifications increasing price to $458,445; 2. Said bus is assigned to HartfordConnecticut (VIN 61950) Technical changes to the 24 30' buses previously modified pursuant to Amendment 13, decreasing the price to $297,114 (one of these buses was to be prototype hybrid driveVIN63648) Technical changes to the 36 30' buses previously modified pursuant to Amendment 14, decreasing the price
to $305,951; (9 of these were to be
Signed By leopold Van Hool; Denis Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
leopold Van Hool; someone unknown on behalf of Denis Van Hool; no signatures on behalf of the District leopold Van Hool; someone unknown on behalf of Denis Van Hool; no signatures on behalf of the District leopold Van Hool; someone unknown on behalf of Denis Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
leopold Van Hool; someone unknown on behalf of Denis Van Hool; no signatures on behalf of the District
leopold Van Hool; someone unknown on behalf of Denis Van Hool; no signatures on behalf of the District 4
220
Board Notified? GM Memo 05-133, 06/09/05, authorized the GM to travel to Belgium to inspect & authorize shipment of the 30' buses.
GM Memo 05-260, 11/09/05, authorized the GM to exercise an option under the contracts with Van Hool & ISE & negotiate a contract with UTC Power for 1 fuel cell bus for sale to a public entity.
Exhibit 1 Document
Date
Comments equipped with the hybrid drive)
Signed By
Board Notified?
Amendment 20
01/10/07
Extend term of contract 5 years with revised expiration date of 01/16/12; additional options for 40' buses at 500; additional options for 60' buses at 500; options for 30' buses at 500.
Leopold Van Hool; Denis Van Hool, Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
Amendment 21
01/10/07
Leopold Van Hool; Denis VanHool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
Amendment 22
01/08/07
Amendment 23 Amendment 24
02/06/08
Amendment 25
02/06/08
{1}Purchase 25 additional 30' A300K buses with technical changes increasing the price to $319,522 or €255,618. (2) No extended warranty coverage on drive line components. (3) Increase performance bond by 10% of order extension price. {1) Purchase 25 A300L buses with technical changes increasing the price to $340,512 or €272,410. {2) No extended warranty coverage on drive line components. {3) Increase performance bond by 10% ofthe order extension price. Technical changes to the 25 30' A300K buses increasing price to $333,272. Technical changes to the 25 40' A300L buses increasing the price to $354,852. Purchase an additional 2 40' A300L buses at $367,272 each.
GM Memo 06-222, 10/04/06, authorizing the GM to negotiate a 5 year extension to expire 01/17/12 & negotiate additional option quantities up to 500 30' buses, 500 40' buses & 500 60' buses GM Memo 07-029, 01/31/07, summarized the GM's recent trip to Belgium & informed the Board of the purchase of the additional 25 30' buses.
02/06/08
Leopold Van Hool, Denis Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
Leopold Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig Leopold Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig Leopold Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
5
221
GM Memo 07-029, 01/31/07, summarized the GM's recent trip to Belgium & informed the Board ofthe purchase of the additional 25 40' buses.
Exhibit 1 Document Amendment 27 Amendment 28
Date 02/06/08
Amendment 31
02/06/08
Revised Amendment 31
02/06/08
12/10/08
Comments Purchase an additional14 30' A300K buses at $344,937 each. Technical changes to 1 30' A300K bus, diesel-hybrid, VIN 63648 increasing price to $586,200. (!)Technical changes to the 8 fuel cell buses with pricing at $1,250,000 each. (2) Option to purchase an additional 4 fuel cell buses. (3) Van Hool shall issue a performance bond of 10% of the Contract. (4) Van Hool shall increase the
amount of the performance bond, which is presently securing its obligation under the contract for the 8 buses by $1.5 million upon completion of Phase 1 of the contract and an additional $1.5 million upon completion of Phase 2. (1) Technical changes to the 8 fuel cell buses resulting in pricing at $1,260,260 each. (2) Option to purchase an additional 4 fuel cell buses. (3) Van Hool shall issue a performance bond of 10% of the Contract. (4) Van Hool shall increase the amount of the performance bond, which is presently securing its obligation under the contract for the 8 buses by $1.5 million upon
Signed By
Board Notified?
leopold Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig leopold Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig Leopold Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
Jan Van Hool; Filip Van Hool; Leopold Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
6
222
GM Memo 07-284, 12/12/07, authorized the GM to negotiate and execute contracts for the sole source procurement of 8 next generation fuel cell buses with an option to purchase an additional 12 buses.
Exhibit 1 Document
Date
Amendment 32
02/06/08
Amendment 33
12/10/08
Comments completion of Phase 1 of the contract and an additional $1.5 million upon completion of Phase 2. Technical changes to the 19 additional 60' AG300 buses increasing price to $547,739 (1) District plans on entering into contract with VTA for funding of 4 fuel cell buses. (2) District is exercising option to purchase the 4 additional fuel cell buses at a price of $1,285,470 each. (3) Van Hool shall increase its performance bond equal to 10% of
Signed By
Leopold Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig Jan Van Hool; Filip Van Hool; Leopold Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
7
223
Board Notified?
Exhibit 1 Document
Date
Comments the order price.
Signed By
Board Notified?
Contract 20081061
12/10/08
Award of contract to Van Hool for low entry 45' suburban buses. 1
Jan Van Hool; Filip Van Hool; Leopold Van Hool; Rick Fernandez; Kenneth Scheidig
Contract 20091104
03/02/10
Award of contract to Linde for design parts, labor, service and maintenance of the Hydrogen System for Emeryville with a priced option for the District's Oakland facility.
Michael Beckman, Mary King, Carol Babington for Kenneth Scheidig
Linde Amendment 1
09/29/10
Exercise of option for 04, Oakland hydrogen facility
Michael Beckman, Mary King, Carol Babington for Kenneth Scheidig
GM Memo 07-115, 05/02/07, authorized the GM to loan ABC Bus a 40' bus in exchange for a Van Hool cruiser for demonstration purposes; GM Memo 08-081 authorized the acquisition of low-entry suburban style 45' coaches by competitive negotiation of 30, up to 100, buses; GM Memo 08-281, 11/12/08, authorized the GM to negotiate a contract for the purchase of up to 40 45' low entry suburban style commuter buses. GM Memo 09-129a, 07/08/09, authorized the negotiated procurement for the hydrogen system; GM Memo 09-297, 12/16/09, authorized award of contract to Linde for both Emeryville and Oakland GM Memo 09-297, 12/16/09, authorized award of contract to Linde for Oakland option
1
This contract was cancelled and the parties reached a settlement agreement.
8
224
PLANNING COMMITTEE
May 28, 2014 Agenda Items C-1 – C-3
225
This page intentionally blank
226
Report No: Meeting Date:
14-155 May 28,2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Planning Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
BRT Information Update on 65% Design Milestone and Business/Parking Impact Mitigation Plans
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider receiving Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) information update on 65% design milestone and Business/Parking Impact Mitigation Plans.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Draft Business Impact Mitigation Plan is being developed in a collaborative effort between AC Transit, City Partners and Community Stakeholders reflecting the District's desire to promote stronger communities and sustained economic activities. Aligning with Federal Transportation Agency (FTA) regulations for grants governing federal funds, the District has established a budget of $5,131,000 for site specific mitigations and an additional $2,165,000 to cover the cost of implementing business support initiatives in the Oakland sector and $255,000 in the San Leandro sector. District staff, in collaboration with City staff and the Community Working Group (CWG), has assessed the potential parking displacement and has provided an inventory of existing, displaced and newly created spaces in the parking impact mitigation report. City staffs are examining the proposed plan in an effort to optimize parking and/or controls along the BRT corridor. This joint effort will maximize the remaining parking inventory to best serve the needs of the community. District staff is engaged with agency partners and the CWG in continuous outreach efforts, project updates, and merchant interviews aimed at identifying and resolving typical and unique impacts for all corridor stakeholders, especially auto dependent merchants.
BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: The $10,051,000 of project funding allocated to the proposed business and parking impact mitigations is in compliance with FTA guidelines. It is comprised of four major elements: $5,131,000 for site specific mitigations; $2,165,000 for business support initiatives in the Oakland sector; $255,000 for business support initiatives in the San Leandro sector; and proposed up to $2,500,000 for a Technical Assistance program. The City of Oakland has proposed funding business
227
Report No. 14-155 Page 2 of 6 sustainability programs using economic redevelopment services and initiatives. Funding amounts are in development, but could include up to $2,000,000 total for the combined programs and if approved, will be borne entirely by the City of Oakland and not require the use of project funds. BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
65% Design Plans The BRT project will be implemented in three bid packages. 1. Bid Package 1 (Advanced Utility Relocations) 65% submittal was distributed to Agency
Partners on January 26, 2014 and is currently in 100% design phase. Design is scheduled to be complete late August 2014, followed by procurement and construction start in late November 2014. 2. Bid Package 2 (Fruitvale Bypass Improvements and Parking Mitigation lots) 65% submittal was distributed to Agency Partners on February 19, 2014 and is currently in 100% design phase. The package consists of 3 sub-projects; Fruitvale Bypass Project, Elmhurst Parking Mitigation Lot project and Fruitvale Parking Mitigation lot project. Design is scheduled to be complete in late August 2014, followed by procurement and construction start in late November 2014. 3. Bid Package 3 (Major Infrastructure Construction) 65% submittal was not delivered to Agency Partners as scheduled on April 18, 2014. District's Design and Program Management consultants have developed a recovery plan to submit the required complete package on May 30, 2014. Additionally, the recovery schedule reflects how the production of design plans will maintain the 100% design submittal milestone in January 2015, thereby not impacting the Nov 2017 Revenue Service date. Business Impact Mitigation Plan District Staff has been collaboratively working with Oakland and San Leandro staff in developing the Business Impact Mitigation Plan (BIM-P) and the road map to finalize the plan for the Board of Directors and the two City Councils' review and consideration in July 2014. The proposed funding and strategy concept plans shown below were presented to the Policy Steering Committee (PSC) on April 30, 2014. The construction impact mitigations fund the utility relocations due to station platform construction and the required environmental mitigations of the Fruitvale Bypass reconfiguration and the development of two parking mitigation lots in Elmhurst and Fruitvale. The Business Support Initiatives have proportionate amounts of funding allocated for mitigations in each agency sector. Specific mitigations and the dollar amount to fund them will be developed in collaboration between the District and City staffs. The Cities are also using the BIMP as a foundation to explore options for funding business sustainability programs using economic redevelopment services and initiatives. The District has agreed, in 228
Report No. 14-155 Page 3 of6 principle, to allocate a portion of Value Engineering savings of up to $2,500,000 toward a Technical Assistance (TA) fund in Oakland, a proportionate amount of which is open to the City of San Leandro. The portions that are not open to San Leandro are the portions funded exclusively by the City of Oakland. The types of programs, such as a Business Interruption Fund, Business Re-establishment Fund or a Thrive Fund and the associated funding amounts are in development, but could include up to $2,000,000 total for the combined programs in Oakland.
Business Impact Mitigation Funding Category Construction Impact (Site Specific) Mitigations Allocations Business Support Initiatives- San Leandro Business Support Initiatives- Oakland Oakland Sector Business Sustainability ProgramsAC Transit (Technical Assistance) City of Oakland (Interruption, Re-establishment and Thrive Funds) GRAND TOTAL
Allocation $5,131,000 $255,000 $2,165,000 $2,500,000 (proposed) $2,000,000 (proposed) $12,051,000
The development and implementation of proposed business impact mitigations is organized in two major categories; permanent impacts resulting from the final infrastructure footprint and temporary impacts occurring during construction. Permanent Impacts are an outcome of the new infrastructure and operational requirements to make the BRT service work and are prioritized as follows: 1.
4- Driveway Closures/Relocations
2.
12- Curbside Stations- (24 Platforms)
3.
21- Center Median Stations
4.
Area Between Stations
In each priority group above, mitigations will be developed for auto-dependent and other type businesses, and to address new left turn rules. Parking Impacts will be mitigated per the Parking Impact Mitigation Plan. Temporary Impacts are primarily associated with construction activities and are prioritized as follows: 1. Utility Relocations at the 12 - Curbside Station locations (24 Platforms) and at the 21 -
Center Median Station Locations. 2. Parking Mitigations Lots a.
Elmhurst: 86th Ave. & International Blvd.
b. Fruitvale: TBD 3. Fruitvale Bypass 229
Report No. 14-155 Page 4 of 6 a. Along Derby Ave from International Blvd., across 12th St to lOth St. and from there along 10'h St. across Fruitvale Ave. to San Leandro St to 33rd Ave. 4. Driveway Closures/Relocations 5. At or near Curbside Stations 6. At or near Center Median Stations 7. Area between Stations (Paving, striping, lighting, signals, ramps/bulbouts. In each priority group above, mitigations will be developed for impacted businesses, residents and property owners based on the nature and extent of the construction activity. Parking Impacts will be mitigated per the approved construction permit. Site specific mitigations for both permanent and temporary impacts will be developed in collaboration between the District and City staffs, the Community Working Group comprised of selected community-based organizations in Oakland and San Leandro, property owners and business owners. In addition and to supplement the extensive project funded mitigations, four new Business Sustainability Programs are being developed by and for the City of Oakland to connect, integrate and support these aforementioned mitigation strategies before, during and after construction. District Staff has been collaboratively working with Oakland and San Leandro staff to develop a schedule for revising the BIM plan 3 times during the next 3 months. Although this plan is a living document and is subject to modification to address any eligible impact that may not have been anticipated, the proposed mitigations are intended to address the temporary and permanent impacts raised by community and agency stakeholders. The draft plan should be made available to the general public in early August 2014. •
May 16, 2014, Interagency Team to release a second draft BIM-P
•
June 13, 2014, Interagency Team to release a third draft BIM-P
•
July 31, 2014, Interagency Team to release a fourth revised draft BIM-P.
Parking Impact Mitigation Plan District Staff has been collaboratively working with Oakland and San Leandro staff in developing the Parking Impact Mitigation Plan (PIM-P) and the roadmap to finalize the plan for the Board of Directors and the two City Councils' review and consideration in July 2014. The Draft Parking Impact Mitigation Plan provides the parking mitigation strategies developed in response to parking impacts presented in Final Environmental Impacts Study (FEIS), Federal Record of Decision (ROD), and City of Oakland and San Leandro Conditions of Approval (COA). The existing and post-construction parking space inventory is summarized in the table below:
230
Report No. 14-155 Page 5 of 6 Existing Spaces
Proposed Spaces
Created or
Retained
converted
Eliminated Spaces
Spaces Oakland
2108
1468
421
222
San Leandro
168
127
26
15
Total
2276
1592
447
237
The City of Oakland is preparing an independent inventory and policy assessment of the parking along the BRT corridor. This assessment will complement the draft PIM-Pian by first checking the accuracy of the PIM Plan. The City will also have additional and current parking information available that will assist transportation planners with the task of optimizing parking and/or controls along the BRT corridor. This joint effort will maximize the relocation of parking spaces that will best serve the needs of the community. District Staff has been collaboratively working with Oakland and San Leandro staff to develop a schedule for revising the PIM plan 3 times during the next 3 months. This plan will continue to be refined throughout the design development process and is subject to modification to address any parking impacts that may not have been anticipated. The proposed mitigations are intended to address the temporary and permanent impacts raised by community and agency stakeholders. The final plan should be made available to the general public in early August 2014. •
May 16, 2014, Interagency Team to release a second draft PIM-P
•
June 13, 2014, Interagency Team to release a third draft PIM-P
•
July 31, 2014, Interagency Team to release a fourth revised draft PIM-P.
By July 31, 2014 The City will complete an independent Parking Operations Study to validate use of AC Transit's draft PIM-P and to establish new complementary parking rules for the BRT corridor.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
The BIM-P and PIM-P have been prepared in collaboration with our agency partners to provide guidelines and clarity on the District's commitment to mitigate business and parking impacts. They are also informative and instructive plans for various community stakeholder groups, business owners, and the residents along the corridor to know what to expect during the lifespan of the project. Without these plans, it will not be possible to gain the support of the community on this project. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
231
Report No. 14-155 Page 6 of 6 This report provides an update to Board; therefore, there are no alternatives associated with this report.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: There are no prior relevant Board actions or policies associated with this report.
ATTACHMENTS: None
Department Head Approval:
Dennis W. Butler, Chief Planning and Development Officer
Reviewed by:
David Wilkins, Director, Bus Rapid Transit Beverly Greene, Director, Legislative Affairs & Community Relations
Prepared by:
Rama Pochiraju, Sr. Project Manager, Bus Rapid Transit Mitra Moheb, Sr. Project Manager, Bus Rapid Transit
232
~I
Report No:
TI'?9NS/T
Meeting Date:
14-161 May 28, 2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Planning Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
City of Alameda Funding for line 51 Project
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Authorize the General Manager to execute a funding agreement with the City of Alameda to receive up to $500,000 in pass-through funding for the line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction and Sustainability (Line 51 CDRS) Project in substantially similar form as the attached. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The City of Alameda has agreed to pass-through up to $500,000 in Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding to the District for use on the line 51 CDRS Project. The funding will allow the District to award the construction contract and contribute to construction contingency. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
As part of the agreement, the City of Alameda will cover the 20% matching requirement ($125,000) of the funding, so there is no direct impact on the District budget.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
As part of the Line 51 CDR$ Project, the District has worked closely with the three city partners (Alameda, Oakland, and Berkeley) to align the project with the plans that the cities have for the affected corridors. Particularly for the City of Alameda, the District worked to harmonize the line 51 CDRS improvements with the improvements the City has made and is making for the Webster Street Smart Corridor project. These improvements include upgraded bus shelters in accordance with Webster Street architectural theme approved by business associations and the City Council and the widening of Webster Street to accommodate a dedicated transit lane. As part of this process, the City of Alameda has agreed to make up to $500,000 in pass-through FTA funds available to the District to pay for design costs to incorporate their requests and construction funds for the project in general. The Alameda Transportation Commission approved the funding on April 23rd, and the Alameda City Council is schedule to approve the funding on May 20th. The $500,000 is from earmarked FTA Section 5309 Bus & Bus Facility funding that is being passed-through to Alameda by BART. The scope of the funding is for planning, design, and construction of bus transit access improvements from Alameda to BART. 233
Report No. 14-161 Page 2 of 2 Alameda and BART completed a study of access improvement alternatives, and the line 51 CDRS project aligns with the study results. BART has agreed with Alameda's request to pass the funding through to AC Transit to in an effort to accomplish the recommendations of the study. The FTA Section 5309 funding requires a 20% local funds match, which will be handled by the City of Alameda from eligible funds. The Staff Report for the award of the construction contract is also before the Board on May 28, 2014. Approval of this item or programming of other funds is necessary to award that contract.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: There are no disadvantages staff can identify to entering into the agreement for the funding. The line 51 Project is already substantially funded with other FTA funds, and so there are no additional oversight requirements.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: The only viable alternative is for the District to use District capital funds to cover the construction contract award and full contingency amounts.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: 14-159 Master Cooperative Agreement with the City of Alameda for the line 51 Project
ATTACHMENTS: 1: Funding Agreement
Department Head Approval: Reviewed
by:
Prepared by:
Tom Prescott, Chief Performance Officer James Pachan, Chief Operating Officer/Interim Chief Financial Officer Dennis Butler, Chief Planning and Development Officer Denise C. Standridge, Interim General Counsel Kiran Bawa, Manager, Capital Planning and Grants Wil Buller, Traffic Engineer Chris Andrichak, Senior Analyst, Capital Planning and Grants
234
SR 14-161 AU. 1
FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT AND CITY OF ALAMEDA
This Agreement is entered into this day of May 2014, by and between the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District ("DISTRICT"), a public transit operator, and the City of Alameda ("CITY"), a municipality located in the State of California. RECITALS WHEREAS, the CITY is a partner with the DISTRICT in the Line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction and Stabilization Project (the "PROJECT"); and WHEREAS, the CITY and the DISTRICT have entered into a Cooperative Agreement regarding the PROJECT shown in Attachment 1; and WHEREAS, the CITY has an approved pass-through funding agreement with the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) for Federal Transit Administration ("FTA") Section 5309 funds shown in Attachment 2. These funds are eligible to pay for planning, design, and construction of improvements of transit access from Alameda to a BART station; and WHEREAS, the CITY is eligible to make payment to the DISTRICT for implementation of the PROJECT under its agreement with BART; and WHEREAS, the PROJECT is an eligible use of the CITY funding under its agreement with BART and the underlying FTA grant; and WHEREAS, it is advantageous for the CITY to provide funding to the DISTRICT, which will incorporate the CITY's requested improvements as part of the PROJECT; and WHEREAS, the DISTRICT agrees to incorporate the improvements requested by the CITY within the PROJECT as they will support and enhance DISTRICT bus service. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the faithful performance of the terms and conditions set forth below, the DISTRICT and the CITY agree that the undertaking described in this Agreement shall be implemented in accordance with the following:
I.
CITY OF ALAMEDA RESPONSIBILITIES:
A.
For PROJECT related costs, the CITY will process invoices submitted by the DISTRICT for cost reimbursement within 60 days of receipt of invoice if submitted in the proper format and accompanied by acceptable
235
supporting documentation of expenditures. The total payment will not exceed $500,000.
2.
B.
The CITY will be responsible for the local match requirement of the FTA funds of up to $125,000, and will follow all FTA requirements for the source and expenditure of matching funds.
C.
The CITY shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the DISTRICT, its officers, directors, employees, agents, and volunteers from and against any and all liability, loss, expense (including attorneys' fees), or claims for injury or damages arising out of its performance under this Agreement, or the implementation of the PROJECT, or its failure to comply with any of its obligations contained herein, except such loss or damage which was caused by the negligence or willful misconduct of the DISTRICT.
AC TRANSIT RESPONSIBILITIES: A.
The DISTRICT shall comply with all FTA program requirements, stipulations, and terms and conditions in order to receive the PROJECT funds.
B.
The DISTRICT acknowledges and understands that reimbursement of expenditures under this Agreement shall be contingent upon the DISTRICT and its partners, consultants, employees and agents complying with FTA third party contracting requirements (see FTA Circular 4220.1 F, Revised 4/14/2009) in any procurement or contracting activities undertaken as part of this Agreement.
C.
The DISTRICT will provide copies of all procurement solicitations, procurement documents, including documentation of procurement procedures undertaken in connection with any contract award for review by the CITY prior to issuing solicitations or entering into any contracts.
D.
The DISTRICT will submit quarterly activity reports to the CITY detailing PROJECT activities and costs for the preceding three-month period on January 20, April 20, July 20, and October 20, for the duration of the project. These quarterly reports will be the basis of the quarterly reports submitted to BART by the CITY for the duration of the PROJECT.
E.
The DISTRICT may submit invoices to the CITY as frequently as monthly for reimbursement of eligible project costs in a form acceptable to the CITY, along with a description of project activities. Invoices should include time period for the invoice; itemized staff charges to the PROJECT; itemized payments to vendors, consultants or contractors, and total funds being requested for the invoice period. Each invoice will also include
236
documentation of reimbursement. F.
claimed
expenditures
as
a
condition
of
cost
The DISTRICT shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the CITY, its officers, directors, employees, agents, and volunteers from and against any and all liability, loss, expense (including attorneys' fees), or claims for injury or damages arising out of its performance under this Agreement, or the implementation of the PROJECT, or its failure to comply with any of its obligations contained herein, except such loss or damage which was caused by the negligence or willful misconduct of CITY.
3.
The parties may extend, terminate or otherwise modify this Agreement by mutual consent. Any extension or modification shall be confirmed in writing. Either party may terminate this Agreement upon sixty (60) days prior written notice. In the event of any early termination, questions regarding refund of any monies received by the DISTRICT will be negotiated with FTA.
4.
Any notices which may be required under this Agreement shall be in writing, effective when received and given by personal service or by certified or registered mail to the following: AC Transit: Kiran Bawa, Manager of Capital Planning and Grants 1600 Franklin Street, Oakland, CA 94612 City of Alameda: Bob Haun, Public Works Director 950 West Mall Square, Alameda, CA 94501
5. Any disputes arising under this Agreement between the parties shall be resolved by Public Works Director for the CITY, and the Manager of Capital Planning and Grants for the DISTRICT, or their designees. In the event that the CITY and the DISTRICT are unsuccessful in informally resolving any dispute, the parties shall attempt to mediate the dispute by a mediator jointly selected by the parties before initiating any litigation. Such mediation may be requested by either party and shall be performed within 60 days of the request, unless extended by mutual agreement. The obligation to mediate shall be terminated in the event that the parties are unable to mutually agree upon a mediator. The parties shall equally bear the costs of any third party alternative dispute resolution process. 6. The terms and conditions of this Agreement represent the entire understanding of the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement. No other agreement, statement or promise relating to the subject matter of this Agreement shall be valid or binding except by a written amendment to this Agreement. 7. This Agreement shall be governed by California law.
237
8. This Agreement shall not be assigned to any third party.
9. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement is invalid, void, or unenforceable, the provisions of this Agreement not so adjudged shall remain in full force and effect. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement. 10. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the dates set forth below. City of Alameda
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
John A. Russo City Manager
David J. Armijo General Manager
x______________________
X._____________________
Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___
Date_____________
Approved as to content and form:
Michael Roush Interim Assistant City Attorney
Denise C. Standridge Interim General Counsel
x.___________________
x.______________________
Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___
Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
238
Funding Agreement Attachment 1
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR CITY OF ALAMEDA SUPPORT OF THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE OF THE ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT LINE 51 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE INITIATIVE PROJECT IN ALAMEDA, CALIFORNIA
THIS COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into as of May 6, 2014, by and between the CITY OF ALAMEDA ("CITY"), a municipal corporation in the State of California, and the ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT ("AC TRANSIT") a special transit district established pursuant to California Public Utilities Code, Section 2450 I et seq. RECITALS A. CITY and AC TRANSIT, in cooperation with other local, state and federal agencies, desire to construct a transit friendly roadway improvements, and traffic signalization improvements (including all items shown on attached Exhibits A and B) along Broadway, Santa Clara Avenue, and Webster Street in the City of Alameda ("PROJECT'). The primary purpose of the PROJECT is to improve transit operations, and pedestrian access to transit for the Line 51 bus line. B. AC TRANSIT represents that it has $10,500,000 in federal funds committed and available for the implementation of the PROJECT. C. CITY represents that it is ready and able to provide the staff time required to support the PROJECT. D. AC TRANSIT represents that it has federal funds committed to reimburse the CITY for its staff time during construction phase of the project. Mechanism to reimburse the city is through the encroachment permit issued by the City. E. AC TRANSIT represents that it will complete the design of the PROJECT and administers the construction of the PROJECT with the approval of CITY staff. F. The PROJECT will be implemented by AC TRANSIT. The PROJECT will install sidewalk extensions at select bus stops to facilitate pedestrian boarding of buses, and upgrade ADA ramps along the project length. The PROJECT will also upgrade traffic signals with Transit Signal Priority technology so that signals can provide transit vehicles an early green phase, or a green phase extension when needed. Other improvements to signals may include, but are not limited to, exclusive bus phases, pedestrian countdown signal heads, audio and tactile push buttons for the visually impaired, and fiber interconnect between signals. SECTION I PROJECT DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND ADMINISTRATION A. CITY AGREES: I. To review AC TRANSIT's design documents and, if consistent with standard City details, incorporate them into encroachment permits issued for the PROJECT, and to
239
review resident engineering during construction, in return for reimbursement by AC TRANSIT of eligible costs as stated in the encroachment permits. All costs and invoices shall be consistent with federal audit grant reimbursement documentation. 2. To operate and maintain as installed and pay one hundred percent (100%) of the operation and maintenance costs of the signal equipment, sidewalk, curb and gutter, and drainage elements installed as part of the PROJECT. 3. To create and/or designate and permanently maintain all bus stops installed as part of the PROJECT except where maintenance is provided by another maintenance provider. These bus stops shall be designated for use solely by AC TRANSIT vehicles through the use of regulatory signs, pavement markings, and red-painted curb. 4. To grant an encroachment permit authorizing AC TRANSIT or its contractor to perform all construction activities required by the PROJECT within the CITY right of way. B. AC TRANSIT AGREES: I. To pay for CITY fees stated in the encroachment permit by way of a construction contract paid by contractor for actual expenses and costs incurred in the support, review, and approval of AC TRANSIT's design, engineering and construction of the PROJECT. 2. To make progress payments upon the CITY's submittal of progress invoices with appropriate documentation detailing costs incurred. The submittal of progress invoices and payments are not to be more frequent than one (I) per month. AC TRANSIT shall not be liable for making payments for any expenses deemed by the Federal Transit Administration or any other federal agency with appropriate jurisdiction over the PROJECT to be ineligible for federal reimbursement. 3. To cooperate with CITY and its staff, agents, in planning, designing, engineering, constructing, testing, and implementing the PROJECT. 4. To develop and implement, at its own expense, a public awareness program to inform the public regarding the PROJECT prior to its implementation. 5. To designate at its own expense, an AC TRANSIT representative to work with the CITY in coordinating all aspects of the PROJECT including planning, engineering, construction and installation work.
240
SECTION II MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS THE PARTIES MUTUALLY AGREE: I. All obligations of CITY, under the terms of this Agreement, are subject to the CITY receiving appropriate funds, through the encroachment permit to be issued by the City and paid for by AC TRANSIT or the Contractor for CITY support, review, and approval of the design, construction and implementation of the PROJECT. 2. Upon completing and accepting all work on the PROJECT under this Agreement, ownership and title to materials, equipment and appurtenances in relation to this PROJECT will automatically vest in the CITY. No further agreement will be necessary to transfer ownership as hereinbefore stated. The CITY will be the sole owner and will be responsible for operation and maintenance of all signal and communication equipment installed as a part of the PROJECT. 3. Nothing in the provisions of this Agreement is intended to create duties or obligations to or rights in third parties, or affect the legal liability of either party to the Agreement by imposing any standard of care with respect to the development, design, construction, operation, improvement or maintenance of State highways and public facilities different or greater than the standard of care imposed by law. 4. Neither AC TRANSIT, nor its directors, officers and employees, shall be responsible for any damage, loss, expense, costs or liability occurring by any act or omission by CITY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to CITY under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, CITY shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless AC TRANSIT. and its directors, officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Government Code Section 81 0.8) occurring by reason of any act or omission by CITY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to CITY under this Agreement. 5. Neither CITY, nor its officers and employees, shall be responsible for any damage, loss, expense, costs or liability occurring by reason of any act or omission by AC TRANSIT under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to AC TRANSIT under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, AC TRANSIT shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless the CITY, and its officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of act or omission by AC TRANSIT under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to AC TRANSIT under this Agreement. 6. The parties shall work together in the spirit of good faith and cooperation to successfully implement this Agreement. To the extent there are disagreements between the CITY and AC TRANSIT, those disagreements shall immediately be raised between the parties. Prior to initiating any legal action, the parties hereto agree to meet in good faith to attempt to resolve any dispute. In the event the parties cannot resolve the dispute, they will make a thorough good faith effort to resolve such issues through a mediation process conducted by an impartial third party. The parties shall jointly select and engage the
241
efforts of a mediator to help resolve the dispute. The parties shall share the costs of the mediator equally. If the issue still remains unsolved, either party may bring a legal action seeking resolution of the disagreement. However, any and all legal actions may only be brought if the preceding dispute resolution process has been satisfied. 7. If any term or provision of this Agreement, or the application of any term or provision of this Agreement to a particular situation, shall be finally found to be void, invalid, illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, then notwithstanding such determination, such term or provision shall remain in force and effect to the extent allowed by such ruling and all other terms and provisions of this Agreement or the application of this Agreement to other situations shall remain in full force and effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any term or provision of this Agreement or the application of such material term or condition to a particular situation is finally found to be void, invalid, illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, then the parties hereto agree to work in good faith and fully cooperate with each other to amend this Agreement to carry out its intent. 8. In the event a dispute cannot be resolved as described in Section 11.6 of this Agreement, either the CITY or AC TRANSIT may terminate this Agreement upon 60 days prior written notice to the other party. If CITY desires to terminate this Agreement, such written notice shall be sent by U.S. Postal Service certified mail to: General Manager, AC Transit, 1600 Franklin Street, Oakland, CA 94612. If AC TRANSIT desires to terminate this Agreement, such written notice shall be sent by U.S. Postal Service certified mail to City of Alameda, Office of the City Manager, 2263 Santa Clara Ave, Alameda, CA 94501. 9. In the event that this Agreement is terminated by either party before the PROJECT has been completed, AC TRANSIT shall pay only those reasonable costs incurred by the CITY for work that could not have been suspended at the time of the notice of termination. AC TRANSIT will reimburse the CITY for eligible costs incurred following termination that reasonably were incurred at the time of termination and such additional eligible costs necessary to bring any portion of the outstanding work to a reasonable point of completion following the notice of termination. If there is any question regarding the work to be completed, the parties will discuss the outstanding work and concur on the stage at which the incomplete work will end following the receipt of the notice of termination. I 0. This Agreement and all work performed thereunder shall be interpreted under and pursuant to the laws of the State of California. The parties agree that the jurisdiction and venue of any dispute arising under this Agreement shall be the Superior Court of Alameda County. II. Neither party may assign or delegate any of its rights or obligations hereunder without first obtaining the written consent of the other. 12. Each party agrees to keep and maintain (and to require all contractors and subcontractors connected with performance of this Agreement) to keep and maintain records showing actual time devoted and all costs incurred in the performance of all work subject to this Agreement until three (3) years after the accepted completion of the PROJECT, or until such later date as is required under applicable law; provided, however, that if any actions brought under the dispute resolution provisions of this Agreement or lawsuits arising from this Agreement have not been finally resolved by the foregoing deadline, then any
242
records which pertain to any such action shall be maintained until such actions have been finally resolved. 13. This Agreement shall commence as of the date entered and shall continue in effect until the parties reach a mutually agreeable date for termination of the Agreement after all work required by this Agreement has been completed. 14. All of the terms, provisions and conditions of the Agreement hereunder, shall be binding upon and inure the parties hereto and their respective successors, assigns and legal representatives. 15. By signing this Agreement, CITY covenants that it presently has no interest, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the services called for under this Agreement. CITY further covenants that in the performance of this Agreement no person having any such interest shall be employed by the CITY, and that the CITY receives no commissions or other payments from parties other than the DISTRICT as a result of work performed hereunder. 16. This Agreement represents the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and all such agreements entered into prior hereto are revoked and superseded by this agreement, and no representations, warranties, inducements or oral agreements have been made by any of the parties except as expressly set forth herein, or in other contemporaneous written agreements. This Agreement may not be changed, modified or rescinded except in writing, signed by all parties hereto, and any attempt at oral modification of this Agreement shall be void and of no effect. ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT
CITY OF ALAMEDA A Municipal Corporation
John A. Russo City Manager RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL
Robert G. Haun Public Works Director APPROVED AS TO FORM
APPROVED AS TO FORM City Attorney
Denis Standridge Interim General Counsel
Michael Roush Interim Assistant City Attorney
Dated:_ _ _ _ _ _ __
243
Funding Agreement Attachment 2
I
I
"
" 'i··
FUND PASS:THROUGH AGREEMENT between THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPII) TRANSIT DISTRICT
and CITY OF ALAMEDA
for the
TRANSIT AND ACCESS STUDY
and SHUTTLE SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS to BART STATIONS
244
This F1md Pass-Through Agreement for the Transit and Access Study and Shuttle Service · Improvements to BART Stations ("Agreement") is entered into as of the 4th day of March, 2010, by and between the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District ("BART") and the City of Alameda ("City") (collectively, the "Parties") in connection with the ftmding of the planning, . . design, construction and project management of shuttle service improvements between the City '
.
· of Alameda to the Fruitvale and/or lib Street BART Stations (the "Project'~ described in the Scope of Work, attached hereto as Exhibit 2 •
l
RECITALS A.
For fiscal year 2008/2009, the City has been allocated an Initial $1,216,714 in Federal Transit Administration ("FTA") fimding for planning, desi811, construction and project management of shuttle service improvements between Alameda and BART Stations. The Grant is included in El[hibit I, which will be amended from timti"to i11clude additional grants, if any. ·
B.
The City has established aphased Scope of Work for the use of the funds,·which includes a planning and cost estim~ting phase C'Phase I Work") and a construction phase C'Phase ·II Work."). Exhibit2 includes the Scope of Work for Phase I and Phase II; the Scope of. Work for Phase II will be expanded based on Phase I study findings and incorporated by amendment into this Agreement.
c.
For fiscal year 20()9/2010, th.e BART has received an FTA fullding amount of$451,440, intended to b.e allocated to Phase II Work (FTA grant reference: E2009-BUSP-071).
D.
The City -is iiot tlit ellgible direct recipie~t of FTA gr.a.ilt tlmd11_and .has ·requested tha:t BART act as the primary .grantee pass-through agent for FTA funds for the City; which will be a subgrantee for such funds.
B.
To expedite the planning .and design work, which must occur prior to construction, the Phase I work is to be completed by BART and its consultants and funded with the .$380,714of tlie FTA funds. The Phase II improvements are to be constructed by the City and will be located in the City of Alameda.
F.
The purpose of this Agwement is to provide a procedure and set forth the conditions under which BART will pass through to the City the grant funds provided for in each !~);Bill agreement between BART and FTA, to the FTA/BART Grant Agreement executed O!'lil7/2Q_08jy Thot~s _E._Margro an~ the ~A/BART Grant Agreement Executed 09128(2009-Gy Dorot y Dugger·tncluded tn-Exhtbit I. __ ____ _______ __ ... ~..
245
I
.. .. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, BART and the City, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, agree as follows: SECTION 1: CITY OF ALAMRJ?A AGREEMENTS A.
CITY agrees that all Phase II Work that CITY perfotms, or causes to be perfomted, shall be done in accordance with the tenns set forth in this Agreement and the BART/FTA Agreemant, including all references in and attachments to .those Agreements. CITY ftuiher agrees that, as the subrecipient in the BART/FTA Agreement, it will perform, or cause to be perfonned, all the Phase II Work to nieet each and every requirement that is imposed on BART in such BART/FI'A Agreement. CITY further agrees that it will cooperate with BART's Subgrantee Monitoring Program, attached hereto as Exhibit 3 and incorporated herein by this reference; as may be amended from time to time. BART · agrees to notify CITY of Agreement prior . any proposed amendments to the BART/fl'A .
I Ii
to the.amendment B
CITY agrees that no Pha_se II improvements will be constl'Ucted on BART property.
C.
CITY agrees that no actions by CITY's partner organiz11tions, contractors or SIJb_cl)ntraQtQ!'ll, and.no_action.by any .other. patty--or• Agency shall-relieve· CITY· of its ·
I
obligation to comply fully with this Agreement. D.
I
CITY agrees that, while it may request and receive advice from BART fl·om time to time in order to understand CITY's obligations as a subrecipient in the BARTIFTA
I' I
Agreement, CITY remains responsible for its full compliance with the BART/FTA Agreement and With this Agreement. CITY acknowledges that it will hire a consultant ot
2
246
consultants with ·experience in federal conl(acting requirements to assist CITY in the Project and the Phase II Work. E.
CITY acknowledges that all Phase II Work under this Agreement must be performed in · accordance with the work descriptions and· ·schedules established in the BARTIFTA Agreement, and that CITY should not assume that any requested time extension or chailge in work scope wlll be allowed.
F.
CITY shall appoint a Project Manager who shall seC? that project accounts are maintained subjeet to PTA regulations and BART approval, prepare Phase li Work progress reports, as required by the PTA and/or BART, and administer the Phase II Work. Milestone/progress repot1s are due to PTA within 30 days after the end of each calendar quarter (i.e., by January 30, Apdl 30, July 30, and October 30). CITY reports are due to BART 15 days after the end of the quarter to allow BART sufficient processing time. · CITY agrees to comply with the project management prin~iples in the BART/PTA Grant Agreement, amendments thereto, and any other regulations and circulars that may be applicable.
G.
CITY may enierinto contraets with third parties for the completion of the Phase II Wo;k.
·-- ..... --Stiia coritriicl!rshall·be subject to· all oftheterms; conditions and-limitations. set fotthin
the BART/FTA Agreement as if CITY were the grantee named therein. BART reserves · 'the l'ight to review said contracts and change orders or amendments thereto for c!)mpliance with the grant requirements, prior to executioll. CITY shall provide notice to BART of its intent to award these contracts and change orders. BART shall not be subject to any obligations _______ ___party
or liabiljties by contractors ofCITY or any other person not a
to_t~isAgt'eetllent_in
connection with Phase II Work, notwithstanding BART's
3
247
.· ,.
!o)Oncurrence of the award of any contracts. Also, BART concurrence of the award of any contract shall not relieve CITY of liability to BART for any charges to t~e grant that are subsequently disallowed by FTA or determined by any audit to be unallowable. H.
CITY acknowledges that if any portion of any grant under the BARTIFTA Agreement is not funded by FTA, BART is not obligated to provide such ftmds to CITY and is not liable to CITY in any way for such funding. CITY acknowledges that BART wlll seek l'eimbursement ti·oln FTA after making psyments to CITY under this Agreement. CITY further agrees to fully refund to BART any payments ·under this Agreement that are subsequently disallowed by FTA or determined by any audit to be unallowable.
I.
CITY's lnyoices to BART pursuant to this Agreement shall be made in accordance with the then-cmrent schedule for the Phase II Scope of Work and shall segregate costs by activity pursuant to the Scope of Work. In addition, each invoice shall have sufficient documentation to show grant, local match, and in·kind ammmts, as ppplicabie. Invoices shall be submitted to BART not more often than monthly but at least quarterly and shall be made in writing and delivered or mailed to BART as follows: San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District 300 Lakeside Drive, 161h Floor ···-- P.O.Boxl2688-0akland, CA 94604·2688 Attention: Kevin Hagerty Department Manager, C11stomer Access
J.
CITY agrees that only actual, allowable, necessary and reasonable costs are reimbmsable and that all Phase II Work costs invoiced to BART shall comply with the BARTIFTA Agreement scope, terms and conditions. CITY agrees to comply with Title. 2 Code of Federal Regulations Part 225 (formerly Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
_________ ·-Circular A-87),- Cost-Principles-for-State-and-t-o-craHWvernment;an:a-49-CFR Part 18,
4
248
Uniform Administrative Requirements for
Gra~tts
and Cooperative Agreements to State
and Local Govornments, arid to require all of its comme1:cial third party contractors to
.. ,,
i
·I
comply with the cost principles of Title 48 Code of Federal Regulations Pftlt 31.
l
CITY agrees to include this Phase II Work in the schedule of projects to be examined
j
under Its single audit prepa~-ed in accordance with OMB Circular A-133. CITY fwther
I'
agrees to have a single audit, meeting the requirements of bMB Circular A-133 performed by a Certified Public Accountant (CPA) each of its fiscal years for which it receives FTA funding. pursuant to the BART/FTA Agreement. CITY shall provide four copies of the Single Audit Report report to Kevin Hagerty immediately upon receipt of the report from Its CPA. L.
CITY shall allow representatives of the FTA, the State, and BART auditors access to all records, books, and documents, related to costs or performance under this Agt·eement, beginning with execution of this Agreement and extending to three years from final payment by FTA to BART under the BART/FTA Agi·eement. In addition, CITY shall .provide copies of all source documents required to verify compliance with the requirements of this Agreement, including but not limited to, approved cost allocation plans;writteil-piogiessicports,-job cost ledgers;lllld timeTecords. CITY shall-maintain all records related to the Work and its costs for three years from the date of finai payment by the FTA to BART under the BART/FTA Agreement. Furthermore, CITY· shall 1-equire each of its contracto1'S and subcontractors to allow representatives of the FTA, the State, and BART to have access to all books, records, and documents relative to all costs and performance under the. Agreement for the purpose of auditing, inspecting, and
s
249
I
or subcontract and extending for three years after final payment under the Agreement. The contractors and subcontractors shall be required to maintain all records related to co~tract
or subcontract costs and performance for three years following final payment
under the contract or subcontract. M.
It is understood and agreed that neither BART not· any director, officer, agent or
employee of BART is responsible for any d81Ilages or liability occuning by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by CITY, its officers, agents and empll)yees, under Qr in connectiQn with this Agreement. It is also understood that CITY will fully indemnity, hold harmless and defend in any claim or litigation BART, its directors, officers, agents and employees from any damage or llabllity occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by CITY, its officers,11gents and employees under or in connection with this Agreement, and to pay and satisfy any resulting judgments. N.
CITY agt-ees that BART may terminate this Agreement for cause If CITY is In default of any provision. Termination shall be effected by serving a thirty (30)" day written notice of termination on CITY seltll)g forth the maoner in which CITY Is in default and the maoner -in which the alleged default may be cured, if any. If CITY does not cure a curable .. default within thirty (30) days of the receipt of the notice; or commelil:e to cure ·within-tile thirty (30) day period and diligently prosecute the cure to completion to the satisfaction of BART, BART may in its discretion tenninate this Agreement. If the Agreement is terminated, CITY will be t•eimbw·sed for Work performed in accordance with the Agreement prior to tet·mlnation.
0.
CITY agrees to provide the local match fot• the Phase I work completed by BART and its consultants.
-----------------------------
6
250
·r
.I
SECTION 2: BARTAGREBMENTS
A. \
BART agrees to perform and/or hire consultants for completion of the Phase I work described In- the Scope ofW01·k. BART acknowledges that as the direct· grantee for the BART/PTA Agreement(s) funds for Phase I work, it will be responsible to the PTA for complying with the BART/PTA Agreement(s) in the performance of such Phase I work.
B.
BART 11grees to reimburse CITY for propedy documented and invoiced costs incurred in performing Phase ·u Work in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, subject to funding by PTA.
SECTION 3: MUTUAL AGREEMENTS A.
Neither party shall assign this Agreement, or any part thereof, without prior express written consent of the other, and any attempt thereof shall be void and unenforceable.
B.
All notices required hereunder may be given by personal delivery, U.S. mail, courier service (e.g. Federal Express) or facsimile. Notjces shall be effective upon receipt at the following addresses: To BART:
With a copy to:
San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District 300 Lakeside Drive, 16111 Floor P.O. Box 12688 Oakland, CA 94604-2688 · Attention:-· ·Kevin-Hagerty ---- -------- ----Depattment Manager, Customer Access 510-464-6169 (phone) 510-464-6143 (fax) San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District 300 Lakeside Drive, 16th Floor P.O. Box 12688 Oakland, CA 94604-268 8 Attention: Michael Tanner Acting Manager, Grant Compliance 510-464-6433 (phone) 510-287-4751 (fax) ·
7
251
I
I'
I I I
To CITY:
C.
City of Alameda 9SO West Mall Square Alameda CA 94SOJ Attention: Obald Khan Department of Public Works Sl0-749-5926 (phone) 510-749-5867 (fax)
Nothing in this Agreement is intended to nor does establish the Parties as partners, coventurers or principal and agent with one another. Neither party may contract or enter into any other agreement in the name of the other.
D.
This Agreement shall be interpreted under and pursuant to the laws of the State .of California applicable to contracts to be performed within the State, without reference to conflicts of law principles.
E.
This Agreement shall be binding upon and Inure to the benefit of approved transferees, successors and assigns of each of the Parties to it, except that there shall be no transfer of any .interest by any·of the Parties to this Agreement except pursuant to the terms of the Agreement.
F.
This Agreement represents the full, complete and entire agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes any and all other communications, _representations, proposals, .. understandings- or -agreements,- whether -written- or oral, between the Parties hereto with respect to such subject matter. This Agreement may not be modified or amended, in whole or in part, except in writing signed by an authorized officer or representative of each ofthe Pm1ies hereto.
8
'· 252
·,-'
' .i i
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the patties executed this Agreement as of the date first written above.
Recommended for approval:
CITY:
./f~~..P~ Matthew T. Naclerio Public Worlcs Director Approved as to fonn:
Title:
Interim City Manager
CITY Attorney BART: SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT, a rapid transit disttict established pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 28500 et seq.
Approved as to fotm:
·-~~ jh¥-ltCdl u7
BART Attorney
Name:
__________
---------------
..
--------
- -
ol.f.lt,
Titl~-CD~~d, ~uou_~~-~n~n;~~
- - - - - - - - - -----------------------------
9
253
. ---------
This page intentionally blank
254
Report No: Meeting Date:
14-159 May 28,2014
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Planning Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Line 51 CDRS Project, Third Party Cooperative Agreements.
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider authorizing the General Manager to enter into Line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction & Sustainability (CDRS) Project Cooperative Agreements with the cities of Alameda, Oakland, and Berkeley. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Cooperative Agreements with each respective city agency specify design/construction support and operating and maintenance (O&M) responsibilities for Line 51 CDRS Project improvements in the public right-of-way. These Agreements outline the functions to be performed and funded by the District and each city. The terms and conditions under which such work will be performed are also clearly delineated in each agreement. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
The Cooperative Agreements with the 3 cities clearly outline the costs/responsibility associated with design and construction support and ongoing operation/yearly maintenance. The following table summarizes these costs/responsibilities: Operation and Permit Fees City Agency Maintenance (estimated) Responsibility * City- All Equip. $50,000 max Alameda $0** District- None City- All non TSP Equip. Included in Support Oakland $300,000 max District- All TSP Equip. • Fees City- All non TSP Equip. $10,000 Berkeley $131,220 District- All TSP Equip. * Note: Includes Transit Signal Priority (TSP) field equipment only not TSP emitters on buses. **Obligation to Alameda for staff time covered in permit fees. Design/Construction Support outside of Permit Fees (per Agreement)
District fiscal responsibilities for TSP field equipment maintenance is approximately $28,350 per year. The TSP emitters on the buses carry a $20,000 per year District fiscal responsibility for
255
Report No. 14-159 Page 2 of 4 O&M. The total annual maintenance cost to the District for Line 51 TSP equipment (field & bus) is estimated to be $48,350. BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: MTC awarded the District a $10.5 million Transit Performance Initiative (TPI) Grant to fund improvements along the Line 51 Corridor to reduce bus delay and improve reliability. line 51 A/B operates from the Fruitvale BART Station, through Alameda, through Oakland to the Rockridge BART Station, then continues through to the Amtrak Station in Berkeley. The project will install transportation infrastructure operational improvements for buses along the length of the corridor. The purpose of the line 51 Cooperative Agreements with Alameda, Oakland, and Berkeley is to distribute O&M responsibilities between the District and cities for the project improvements. The agreements clarify that the District is responsible for the O&M of TSP equipment installed by the project. The agreements delegate the responsibility for O&M of all other improvements such as (but not limited to) new signal equipment, interconnect cable, concrete hardscape (sidewalk and bus bulbs), and roadway resurfacing, to the respective city agencies along the corridor. The agreements also provide a mechanism for AC Transit to reimburse the cities for agency design/construction support services such as (but not limited to) staff review of design plans and specifications, value engineering, construction inspection and some resident engineering oversight support during construction. The Agreements stipulate that the cities will operate and maintain all non-TSP roadway elements at their own expense. In addition, the Agreements would transfer title of all new equipment and materials installed by this project from the District to the respective city agencies. However, this requires FTA approval, which staff is seeking and is routinely granted on similar type projects. The City of Alameda is including all agency design/construction support services into the encroachment permit fee estimated to be $34,697, not to exceed $50,000 total. This fee includes all permit costs to construct the project within the public right-of -way in Alameda. The fee will be paid for by the contractor at the time of construction. The agreement was authorized /approved by City Council on 5/6/14. The City of Oakland Agreement outlines all agency design/construction support service costs and permit fees to not exceed $300,000. On 11/1/13 Oakland City Council authorized staff to enter into the Agreement with AC Transit. The Oakland Agreement has been reviewed by City staff. The City of Berkeley Agreement outlines all agency design/construction support service costs for City staff, estimated to be $45,000, and for 3rd party consultant services, costing $86,220, totaling a not-to-exceed amount of $131,220 to be paid for separately from the encroachment permit. The City of Berkeley permit fees are estimated to cost an additional $10,000 to be paid for by the contractor at the time of construction. On 4/1/14 Berkeley City Council authorized staff to enter into the Agreement with AC Transit. The Berkeley Agreement has been reviewed by City staff.
256
Report No. 14-159 Page 3 of 4 These Agreements hold the District responsible for the maintenance costs associated with Transit Signal Priority (TSP) equipment in Berkeley and Oakland. There are approx. 63 signalized intersections with new TSP equipment along the corridor that the District will be responsible to operate and maintain. Staff estimates annual maintenance to cost $450 per signalized intersection per year. This results in approximately $28,350 per year for TSP field equipment maintenance. This project will install approximately 40 TSP Global Positioning System emitters on District buses. Staff estimates annual maintenance costs for the emitters to be $20,000 per year for the 40 additional units. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: The advantage of entering into Cooperative Agreements with the cities for the Line 51 CDRS Project is that responsibilities for all agencies are clearly defined to avoid any future misunderstandings over O&M of new equipment and project improvements. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: The District and Cities have negotiated the attached Cooperative agreements. The alternative to have the Cities assume responsibility for all new equipment including TSP would result in higher costs to the District to reimburse agencies for the responsibility. This alternative also relies on the Cities to maintain the equipment in good running order at all times. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: GM Memo 10-178- Speed Protection and Enhancement Program GM Memo 10-233a- Line 51 Service and Reliability Report GM Memo 11-015- Service Sustainability Program to Improve Travel Time Efficiency GM Memo 12-087- Transit Sustainability Study (TSP)/Comprehensive Operations Analysis SR 12-146- Line 51A/B Corridor Delay Reduction and Sustainability Project SR 12-297- Line 51A/B Corridor Delay Reduction and Sustainability Project PA/PC Procurement SR 12-297a - Contract Award for Line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction & Sustainability Project Administration I Project Control Consultant SR 12-297b - Contract Award for Line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction & Sustainability Project Design Consultant SR 14-064 - Adoption of Notice of Exemption for Line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction & Sustainability Project SR 12-297c - Construction Management & Program Management Services for Construction for Line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction & Sustainability (CDRS) Project
ATTACHMENTS: 1:
Draft Cooperative Agreement with the City of Alameda
257
Report No. 14-159 Page 4 of 4
2: 3:
Draft Cooperative Agreement with the City of Oakland Draft Cooperative Agreement with the City of Berkeley
Department Head Approval:
Dennis W. Butler, Chief Planning and Development Officer
Reviewed by:
James Pachan, Interim Chief Financial Officer Robert del Rosario, Director of Service Planning Chris Andrichak, Senior Analyst, Capital Planning and Grants Denise Standridge, Interim General Counsel John Haenftling, Director of Project Controls Jon Medwin, Director of Procurement & Materials
Prepared by:
Wil Buller, Traffic Engineer
258
Staff Report 14-159 Attachment 1
.
UKIGINAL
~'\
~~
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT n~R CITY OF ALAMEDA SUPPORT OF THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS V AND MAINTENANCE OF THE ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT LINE 51 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE INITIATIVE PROJECT IN ALAMEDA, CALIFORNIA
TI-llS COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into as of May 6, 2014, by and between the CITY OF ALAMEDA ("CITY"), a municipal corporation in the State of California, and the ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT ("AC TRANSIT") a special transit district established pursuant to California Public Utilities Code, Section 24501 et seq. RECITALS A. CITY and AC TRANSIT, in cooperation with other local, state and federal agencies, desire to construct a transit friendly roadway improvements, and traffic signalization improvements (including all items shown bn attached Exhibits A und B) along Broadway, Santa Clara Aven11e, and Webster Street in the City of Alameda ("PROJECT;). The primary purpose of the PROJECT is to improve transit operatians, and pedestrian access to transit for the Line 51 bus line. B. AC TRANSIT represents that it has $10,500;000 in federal funds committed and available for the im)Jlementation of the PROJECT. C. CITY represents that it is rendy and able to provide the staff time required to support the PROJECT. D. AC TRANSIT represl)nts that it h11s federal funds committed to reimburse the CITY for its staff time during construction phase of the J)roject. Mechanism to reimburse the city is through the cncroaclunent permit issued by the City. E. AC TRANSIT represents th~t it will complete the design of the PROJECT and administers the construction ofthe PROJECT with the IIJlpi'oval of CITY staff. F. Th.e PROJECT will be implemented by AC TRANSIT. The PROJECT will install sidewalk extensions at select btls st<;ps to facilitate pedestrian boarding of b11ses, and upgmde ADA ramps along the project length. The I'ROJECT will also upgrade traffic signals with Transit Sign11l Priority technology so that signals can provide trnnsit vehicles an eal'ly green phase, or a green phase extension when needed. Other improvements to signals may include, but are, not limit!ld to, exclusive bus phases, pedestrian countdown signal heads, audio and tactile push buttons for the visually impaired, and fiber interconnect between signals. SECTION I PROJECT DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND ADMINISTRATION A. CITY AGREES:
I. To review AC TRANSIT's design documents und, if consistent with stnndard City details, incorporate them into encroachment permits issued for the PROJECT, and to
259
~*\
~w resident engineering during construction, in return for reimbursement by AC TRANSIT of eligible costs as stated in the encroaclunent permits. All costs and invoices shall be consistent with federal audit grant reimbursement documentation. 2. To operate and maintain as installed and pay one hundred percent (I 00%) of the operation and maintenance costs of the signal equipment, sidewalk, curb and gutter, and drainage elements installed as part of the PROJECT. 3. To create and/or designate and permanently maintain all bus stops installed as part of the PROJECT except where maintenance is provided by another maintenance provider. These bus stops shall be designated for use solely by AC TRANSIT vehicles through the use of regulatory signs, pavement markings, and red-painted curb. 4. To grant an encroaclunent permit authorizing AC TRANSIT or its contractor to perform all construction activities required by the PROJECT within the CITY right of way. B. AC TRANSIT AGREES: I. To pay for CITY fees stated in the encroaclunent permit by way of a construction contract paid by contractor for actual expenses and costs incurred in the support, review, and approval of AC TRANSIT's design, engineering and construction of the PROJECT. 2. To ma.lce progress payments upon the CITY's submittal of progress invoices witll appropriate documentation detailing costs incurred. The submittal of progress invoices and payments are not to be more frequent than one (I) per month. AC TRANSIT shall not be liable for making payments for any expenses deemed by the Federal Transit Administration or any other federal agency with appropriate jurisdiction over the PROJECT to be ineligible for federal reimbursement. 3. To cooperate with CITY and its staff, agents, in planning, designing, engineering, constructing, testing, and implementing the PROJECT. 4. To develop and implement, at its own expense, a public awareness program to inform the public regarding the PROJECT prior to its implementation. 5. To designate at its own expense, an AC TRANSIT representative to work with the CITY in coordinating all aspects of the PROJECT including planning, engineering, construction and installation work.
260
tl(
~~ \
SECTION II MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
~ARTIES MUTUALLY AGREE: I. All obligations of CITY, under the tenns of this Agreement, are subject to the CITY 2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
receiving appropriate funds, through the encroachment penni! to be issued by the City and paid for by AC TRANSIT or the Contractor for CITY support, review, and approval of the design, construction and implementation of the PROJECT. Upon completing and accepting all work on the PROJECT under this Agreement, ownership and title to materials, equipment and appurtenances in relation to this PROJECT will automatically vest in the CITY. No further agreement will be necessary to transfer ownership as hereinbefore stated. The CITY will be the sole owner and will be responsible for operation and maintenance of all signal and communication equipment installed as a part of the PROJECT. Nothing in the provisions of this Agreement is intended to create duties or obligations to or rights in third parties, or affect the legal liability of either party to the Agreement by imposing any standard of care with respect to the development, de.sign, construction, operation, improvement or maintenance of State highways and public facilities different or greater than the standard of care imposed by law. Neither AC TRANSIT, nor its directors, officers and employees, shall be responsible for any damage, loss, expense, costs or liability occurring by any act or omission by CITY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to CITY under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section · 895.4, CITY shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless AC TRANSIT. and its directors, officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injury (ss defined in Government Code Section 81 0.8) occurring by resson of any act or omission by CITY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to CITY under this Agreement. Neither CITY, nor its officers and employees, shall be responsible for any damage, loss, expense, costs or liability occurring by reason of any act or omission by AC TRANSIT under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to AC TRANSIT under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, AC TRANSIT shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless the CITY, and its officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of act or omission by AC TRANSIT under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to AC TRANSIT under this Agreement. The p&rties shall work together in the spirit of good faith and cooperation to successfully implement this Agreement. To the extent there are disagreements between the CITY and AC TRANSIT, those disagreements shall immediately be raised between the parties. Prior to initiating any legal action, the parties hereto agree to meet in good faith to attempt to resolve any dispute. In the event the parties cannot resolve the dispute, they will make a thorough good faith effort to resolve such issues through a mediation process conducted by an impartial third party. The parties shall jointly select and engage the
261
~' <:;>~ efforts of a mediator to help resolve the dispute. The parties shall share the costs of the mediator equally. If the issue still remains unsolved, either party may bring a legal action seeking resolution of the disagreement. However, any and all legal actions may only be brought if the preceding dispute resolution process has been satisfied. 7. If any term or provision of this Agreement, or the application of any term or provision of this Agreement to a particular situation, shall be finally found to be void, invalid, illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, then · notwithstanding such determination, such term or provision shall remain in force and effect to the extent allowed by such ruling and all other terms and provisions of this Agreement or the application of this Agreement to other situations shall remain in full force and effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any term or provision of this Agreement or the application of such material term or condition to a particular situation is finally found to be void, invalid, illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, then the parties hereto agree to work in good faith and fully cooperate with each other to lllllend this Agreement to carry out its intent. 8. In the event a dispute cannot be resolved as described in Section 11.6 of this Agreement, either the CITY or AC TRANSIT may terminate this Agreement upon 60 days prior written notice to the other party. If CITY desires to terminate this Agreement, such written notice shall be sent by U.S. Postal Service certified mail to: General Manager, AC Transit, 1600 Franklin Street, Oakland, CA 94612. If AC TRANSIT desires to terminate this Agreement, such written notice shall be sent by U.S. Postal Service certified mail to City of Alameda, Office of the City Manager, 2263 Santa Clara Ave, Alameda, CA 94501. 9. In the event that this Agreement is terminated by either party before the PROJECT has been completed, AC TRANSIT shall pay only those reasonable costs incurred by the CITY for work that could not have been suspended at the time of the notice of termination. AC TRANSIT will reimburse the CITY for eligible costs incurred following termination that reasonably were incurred at the time of termination and such additional eligible costs necessary to bring any portion of the outstanding work to a reasonable point of completion following the notice of tennination. If t.ltere is any question regarding the work to be completed, the parties will discuss the outstanding work and concur on the stage at which the incomplete work will end following the receipt of the notice of termination. I 0. This Agreement and all work performed thereunder shall be interpreted under and pursuant to the laws of the State of California. The parties agree that the jurisdiction and venue of any dispute arising under this Agreement shall be the Superior Court of Alameda County. 11. Neither party may assign or delegate any of its rights or obligations hereunder without first obtaining the written consent of the other. 12. Each party agrees to keep and maintain (and to require all contractors and subcontractors connected with performance of this Agreement) to keep and maintain records showing actual time devoted and all costs incurred in the performance of all work subject to this Agreement until three (3) years after the accepted completion of the PROJECT, or until such later date as is required under applicable law; provided, however, that if any actions brought under the dispute resolution provisions of this Agreement or lawsuits arising from this Agreement have not been finally resolved by the foregoing deadline, then any
262
~~
Q~ords which pertain to any such action shall be maintained until such actions have been
finally resolved. 13. This Agreement shall commence as of the date entered and shall continue in effect until the parties reach a mutually !l!,'l'eeable date for termination of the Agreement after all work required by this Agreement has been completed. 14. All of the te1ms, provisions and conditions of the Agreement hereunder, shall be binding upon and inure the parties hereto and their respective successors, assigns and legal representnti ves. 15. By signing this Agreement, CITY covenants that it presently has no interest, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the services called for under this Agreement. CITY fmther covenants that in the performance of this Agreement no person having any such interest shall be employed by the CITY, and that the CITY receives no commissions or other payments ti·om parties other than the DISTRICT r.s a result of work performed hereunder. 16. This Agreement represents the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and all such agreenients entered into prior hereto are revoked and superseded by this agreement, and no representations, wmTanties, inducements or oral agreements have been made by any of the parties except as expressly set lorth herein, or in other contemporaneous written agreements. This Agreem~nt may not be changed, modified or rescinded except in writing, signed by all parties hereto, and any attempt at oral modification of this Agreement shall be void and of no effect.
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT
CITY OF ALAMEDA A Municipal C01poration
John A. Russo City Manager RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL
•D FOR APPROVAL
Public Works Director APPROVED AS TO FORM
APPROVED AS TO FORM City Attomey
Denise Standridge Intelim .General Counsel
Michael Roush Interim Assistant City Attomcy
Dated: _ _ _ _ _ __
263
This page intentionally blank
264
Staff Report 14-159 Attachment 2
DRAFT
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR CITY OF OAKLAND SUPPORT OF TH E DES IGN, CONSTRUCTION, OPERAT IONS AND MAINTENANCE OF TH E ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRAN SIT DISTRICT LINE 51 TRANS IT PERFORMANCE INITIATIV E PROJECT IN OAKLAND, CALI FORNIA THIS COOPERATIV E AG REEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into as of May XX 2014, by and between the CITY OF OAKLAND ("CITY"), a municipal corporation in the State of California. and the ALAM EDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT Dl STRICT ("AC TRAN SIT") a special transit district established pursuant to Ca lifornia Public Utilities Code, Section 24501 et seq. RECITALS A. CITY and AC TRANSIT, in cooperation with other local, state and federal agencies, desire to construct transit friend ly roadway improvements, and traffic signalization improvements (including all items shown on attached Exhibits A and B) along 8'11 Street, 7'11 Street, Broadway, and College Avenues in the City of Oakland ("PROJECT'). The primary purpose of the PROJECT is to improve transit operations, and pedestrian access to transit for the Line 51 bus line. B. AC TRANSIT represents that it has $10,500,000 in federal fund s committed and avail able for the implementation ofthe PROJECT. C. CITY represents that it is ready and able to provide the staff time required to support the PROJECT. D. AC TRANSIT represents that it has $300,000 in federal funds committed to reimburse the CITY for its staff time. E. AC TRANSIT represents that it will complete the design of the PROJ ECT and administers the construction of the PROJECT with the:: approval of CITY staff. F. The PROJECT will be implemented by AC TRAN SIT. The PROJECT wi ll install sidewalk extensions at select bus stops to fac ilitate pedestrian boarding of buses, and upgrade ADA ramps along the project length. The PROJ ECT will also upgrade traffic signals with Transit Signal Priority technology so that signals can provide transit vehicles an early green phase. or a green phase extension when needed. Other improvements to signals may include, but are not limited to, exc lusive bus phases, pedestrian countdown signal heads, audio and tactile push buttons for the visua lly impaired, Emergency Vehicle Preemption, video detection and fiber interconnect between signals. SECTION I PROJ ECT DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND ADMINISTRATION A. CITY AGREES: I. To conduct the review, approval, and support of AC TRANSIT's design documents, contract administration, procurement, res ident engineering during construction, and administration services for the PROJECT, in return for reimbursement by AC Transit of eligible costs not to exceed $300,000. All costs and invoices shall be consistent with federal audit grant reim bursement documentation. 2. To operate and maintain as installed and pay one hundred percent ( I00 %) of the operation and maintenance costs of the signal equipment, sidewalk, curb and gutter, and drainage elements installed as part of the PROJECT.
265
3. To create and/or designate and permanently maintain all proposed existing and new bus stops installed as part of the PROJECT. This space shall be designated for use solely by AC Transit vehicl es through the use of regulatory signs, pavement markings, and red-painted curb. 4. To create and/or designate and permanently maintain all bus stops installed as part of the PROJ ECT except where mai ntenance is provided by other maintenance provider. This space shall be designated for use solely by AC TRAN SIT vehicles through the use of regulatory signs, pavement marki ngs, and red-painted curb. To grant an encroachment permit authorizing AC TRANSIT or its contractor to perform all construction activities required by the Project within the CITY right of way. 5. To grant AC TRANSIT or its contractor an encroachment permit to perform all operation and maintenance activities to AC TRANSIT equipment deployed by the Project with the CITY 's right of way. B. AC TRANSIT AGREES: I. To reimburse the CITY up to $300,000 for actual expenses and costs incurred in the support, review, and approval of AC Transit' s planning, design, engineering, contract administration, construction procurement and administration of the PROJECT. 2. To make progress payments upon the CITY's submittal of progress invoices with appropriate documentation detailing costs incurred. The submittal of progress invoices and payments are not to be more frequent than one ( I) per month. AC Transit shall not be liable for making payments for any expenses deemed by the Federal Transit Administration or any other federal agency with appropriate jurisdiction over the PROJECT to be ineligible for fed eral reimbursement. 3. To cooperate with CITY and its staff, agents, in planning, desi gning, engineering, constructing, testing, and implementing the PROJ ECT. 4. To develop and implement, at its own expense, a public awareness program to inform the public regard ing the PROJ ECT prior to its implementation. 5. To designate at its own expense, an AC TRANS IT representative to work with the CITY in coordinating all aspects of the PROJECT including planning, engineering, construction and installation work. 6. To operate and maintain all Transit Signal Priority (TSP) equipment deployed by the Project within the City right-of-way.
266
SECTION II MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS THE PARTIES MUTUALLY AGREE: I. All obligations of CITY, under the terms of this Agreement, are subject to the City receiving appropriate funds, not to exceed $300,000, from AC Transit for the CITY support, review, and approval of the design, procurement, construction and implementation of the PROJECT. 2. Upon completing and accepting all work on the PROJECT under this Agreement, ownership and title to materials, equipment and appurtenances in relation to this PROJECT will automatically vest in the CITY. No further agreement will be necessary to transfer ownership as hereinbefore stated. The CITY will be the sole owner and will be responsible for operation and maintenance of all traffic signal and communications equipment installed as a part of the PROJECT. 3. Nothing in the provisions of this Agreement is intended to create duties or obligations to or rights in third parties, or affect the legal liability of either party to the Agreement by imposing any standard of care with respect to the development, design, construction, operation, improvement or maintenance of State highways and public facilities different or greater than the standard of care imposed by law. 4. Neither AC TRANSIT, nor its directors, officers and employees, shall be responsible for any damage, loss, expense, costs or liability occurring by any act or omission by CITY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to CITY under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, CITY shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless AC TRANSIT. and its directors, officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Government Code Section 81 0.8) occurring by reason of any act or omission by CITY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to CITY under this Agreement. 5. Neither CITY, nor its officers and employees, sha!l be responsible for any damage, loss, expense, costs or liability occurring by reason of any act or omission by AC TRANSIT under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to AC TRANSIT under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, AC TRANSIT shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless the CITY, and its officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Government Code Section 81 0.8) occurring by reason of act or omission by AC TRANSIT under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to AC TRANSIT under this Agreement. 6. The parties shall work together in the spirit of good faith and cooperation to successfully implement this Agreement. To the extent there are disagreements between the CITY and AC TRANSIT, those disagreements shall immediately be raised between the parties. Prior to initiating any legal action, the parties hereto agree to meet in good faith to attempt to resolve any dispute. In the event the parties cannot resolve the dispute, they will make a thorough good faith effort to resolve such issues through a mediation process conducted by an impartial third party. The parties shall jointly select and engage the efforts of a mediator to help resolve the dispute. The parties shall share the costs of the mediator equaliy. If the issue still remains unsolved, either party may bring a legal action seeking resolution of the disagreement. However, any and all legal actions may only be brought if the preceding dispute resolution process has been satisfied. 7. If any term or provision of this Agreement, or the application of any term or provision of this Agreement to a particular situation, shall be finally found to be void, invalid, illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, then notwithstanding such determination, such term or provision shall remain in force and effect to the extent allowed by such ruling and all other terms and provisions of this Agreement or the application of this Agreement to other situations shall remain in full force and effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any term or
267
8.
9.
I 0.
II. 12.
13.
14. 15.
16.
provision of this Agreement or the application of such material term or condition to a particular situation is finally found to be void, invalid, illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, then the parties hereto agree to work in good faith and fully cooperate with each other to amend this Agreement to carry out its intent. In the event a dispute cannot be revolved as described in Section 11.6 of this Agreement, either the CITY or AC TRANSIT may terminate this Agreement upon 60 days prior written notice to the other party. If CITY desires to terminate this Agreement, such written notice shall be sent by U.S. Postal Service certified mail to: General Manager, AC Transit, 1600 Franklin Street, Oakland, CA 94612. If AC TRANSIT desires to terminate this Agreement, such written notice shall be sent by U.S. Postal Service certified mail to City of Oakland, Office of the City Manager, One City Hall Plaza, 3rtd Floor, Oakland, California 94612 In the event that this Agreement is terminated by either party before the PROJECT has been completed, AC TRANSIT shall pay only those reasonable costs incurred by the CITY for work that could not have been suspended at the time of the notice of termination. AC TRANSIT will reimburse the CITY for eligible costs incurred following termination that reasonably were incurred at the time of termination and such additional eligible costs necessary to bring any portion of the outstanding work to a reasonable point of completion following the notice of termination. If there is any question regarding the work to be completed, the parties will discuss the outstanding work and concur on the stage at which the incomplete work will end following the receipt of the notice of termination. This agreement and all work performed thereunder shall be interpreted under and pursuant to the laws of the State of California. The parties agree that the jurisdiction and venue of any dispute arising under this agreement shall be the Superior Court of Alameda County. Neither party may assign or delegate any of its rights or obligations hereunder without first obtaining the written consent of the other. Each party agrees to keep and maintain (and to require all contractors and subcontractors connected with performance of this agreement) to keep and maintain records showing actual time devoted and all costs incurred in the performance of all work subject to this agreement until three (3) years after the accepted completion of the project, or until such later date as is required under applicable law; provided, however, that if any actions brought under the dispute resolution provisions of this agreement or lawsuits arising from this agreement have not been finally resolved by the foregoing deadline. then any records which pertain to any such action shall be maintained until such actions have been finally resolved. This agreement shall commence as of the date entered and shall continue in effect until the parties reach a mutually agreeable date for termination of the agreement after all work required by this agreement has been completed. All of the terms, provisions and conditions of the agreement hereunder, shall be binding upon and inure the parties hereto and their respective successors, assigns and legal representatives. By signing this agreement, CITY covenants that it presently has no interest, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the services called for under this agreement. CITY further covenants that in the performance of this agreement no person having any such interest shall be employed by the CITY, and that the CITY receives no commissions or other payments from parties other than the DISTRICT as a result of work performed hereunder. This agreement represents the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and all such agreements entered into prior hereto are revoked and superseded by this agreement, and no representations, warranties, inducements or oral agreements have been made by any of the parties except as expressly set forth herein, or in other contemporaneous written agreements. This agreements may not be changed, modified or rescinded except in writing, signed by all parties hereto, and any attempt at oral modification of this agreement shall be void and of no effect.
268
Staff Report 14-159 Attachment 3
DRAFT
COO PERATIV E AGREEMENT FOR CITY OF BERKELEY SUPPORT OF THE DES IGN, CONST RUCTION, OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE OF THE ALAM EDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT LINE 51 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE INITIATIVE PROJECT IN BERKELEY, CA LIFORNIA THIS COOPERATIV E AGR EEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into as of May XX, 2014, by and between the CITY OF BERKELEY ("CITY"), a municipal corporation in the State of California. and the ALAM EDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT ("AC TRANSIT") a special transit district establi shed pursuant to California Public Utilities Code, Section 2450 I el seq. RECITALS A. CITY and AC TRANSIT, in cooperation with other local, state and federal agencies, desire to construct a transit fri endly roadway improvements, and traffic signalization improvements (including all items shown on attached Exhibits A and B) along University Avenue, Shattuck Avenue, Bancroft Avenue, Durant Avenue, and College Avenue in the City of Berkeley, 8th Street, 7th Street, Broadway, and College Avenues in the City of Oakland, and Broadway, Santa Clara, and Webster, Avenues in City of Alameda ("PROJECT'). The primary purpose of the PROJ ECT is to improve transit operations, and pedestrian access to transit for the Line 51 bus line. B. AC TRANSIT represents that it has $10,500,000 in federal funds committed and avai lable for the implementation of the PROJ ECT in the cities of Alameda, Berkeley, and Oakland. C. CITY represents that it is ready and able to provicte the staff time required to support the PROJECT. D. CITY has already committed $40,000 of its local fund s to support the preliminary engineering and environmental document phase ofthe project. Funds are to cover city staff commitment to review the traffic study, prelimi nary engineering plans, environmental document, and public outreach efforts. E. An independent 3rd party consultant was hired by AC TRANSIT to review and approve (on behalf of the CITY) the documents generated by AC TRANSIT design consultant, to meet AC TRANSIT schedule. F. AC TRANSIT represents that it has $45,000 in federal funds committed to reimburse the CITY for its staff time and $86,220 in federal fund s committed to pay for outside consultant time. G. AC TRANSIT represents that it will complete the design of the PROJECT and administer the construction of the PROJ ECT with the approva l of CITY staff. H. The PROJECT wi ll be implemented by AC TRANS IT. The PROJECT will install sidewalk extens ions at select bus stops to facilitate pedestrian boarding of buses, and upgrade ADA ramps along the project length. The PROJECT will also upgrade traffic signal s with Transit Signal Priority technology so that signals can prov ide transit vehicles an early green phase, or a green phase extension when needed. Other improvements to signals may include, but are not limited to, exclusive bus phases, pedestrian countdown signal heads, aud io and tactile push buttons for the visually impaired, Emergency Vehicle Preemption, video detection and fiber interconnect between signals. SECTION I PROJECT DES IGN, CONSTRUCTION AND ADMINI STRATION A. CITY AGREES:
269
I.
To conduct the review, approval, and support of AC TRANSIT's design documents, via the independent consultant hired by AC TRANSIT. 2. To provide contract administration, procurement, resident engineering support during construction, and administration services for the PROJECT, in return for reimbursement by AC TRANSIT of eligible costs not to exceed $45,000. All costs and invoices shall be consistent with federal audit grant reimbursement documentation. 3. To operate and maintain as installed and pay one hundred percent (100 %) of the operation and maintenance costs of the signal equipment, sidewalk, curb and gutter, and drainage elements installed as part of the PROJECT excluding TSP equipment. 4. To create and/or designate and permanently maintain all bus stops installed as part of the PROJECT except where maintenance is provided by other maintenance provider. This space shall be designated for use solely by AC TRANSIT vehicles through the use of regulatory signs, pavement markings, and red-painted curb. 5. To grant an encroachment permit authorizing AC TRANSIT or its contractor to perform all construction activities required by the Project within the CITY right of way. 6. Upon review and approval ofthe necessary operational reports and other technical information To grant AC TRANSIT or its contractor an encroachment permit to perform all operation and maintenance activities to AC TRANSIT equipment deployed by the Project within the CITY's right of way. 7. To establish a process for review and evaluation of AC TRANSIT's signal timing plan and the Transit Signal Priority operational parameters. B. AC TRANSIT AGREES: I. 2.
3.
4. 5. 6.
7. 8.
To reimburse the CITY up to $45,000 for actual expenses and costs incurred, for contract administration, construction procurement and administration of the PROJECT. To procure engineering consultant on behalf of the CITY to support the CITY in reviewing AC TRANSITS's design and engineering of the PROJECT and pay for engineering consultant's eligible costs not to exceed $86,220 To make progress payments upon the CITY's submittal of progress invoices with appropriate documentation detailing costs incurred. The submittal of progress invoices and payments are not to be more frequent than one (I) per month. AC TRANSIT shall not be liable for making payments for any expenses deemed by the Federal Transit Administration or any other federal agency with appropriate jurisdiction over the PROJECT to be ineligible for federal reimbursement. To cooperate with CITY and its staff, agents, in planning, designing, engineering, constructing, testing, and implementing the PROJECT. To develop and implement, at its own expense, a public awareness program to inform the public regarding the PROJECT prior to its implementation. To designate at its own expense, an AC TRANSIT representative to work with the CITY in coordinating all aspects of the PROJECT including planning, engineering, construction and installation work. To operate and maintain all Transit Signal Priority (TSP) equipment deployed by the Project within the City right-of-way. To provide to the CITY for approval traffic operational analyses for each intersection within the project limit, as well as combined signal operational analysis for the project corridors.
270
SECTION II MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS THE PARTIES MUTUALLY AGREE: I. All obligations of CITY, under the terms of this Agreement, are subject to the City receiving appropriate funds, not to exceed $ 132,000, from AC TRANSIT for the CITY support, review, and approval of the design, procurement, construction and implementation of the PROJECT. 2. Upon completing and accepting all work on the PROJECT under this Agreement, ownership and title to materials, equipment and appurtenances in relation to this PROJECT will automatically vest in the CITY. No further agreement will be necessary to transfer ownership as hereinbefore stated. The CITY will be the sole owner and will be responsible for operation and maintenance of all traffic signal and communications equipment installed as a part of the PROJECT, excluding TSP equipment. 3. Nothing in the provisions of this Agreement is intended to create duties or obligations to or rights in third parties, or affect the legal liability of either party to the Agreement by imposing any standard of care with respect to the development, design, construction, operation, improvement or maintenance of State highways and public facilities different or greater than the standard of care imposed by law. 4. Neither AC TRANSIT, nor its directors, officers and employees, shall be responsible for any damage, loss, expense, costs or liability occurring by any act or omission by CITY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to CITY under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, CITY shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless AC TRANSIT. and its directors, officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Govemment Code Section 81 0.8) occurring by reason of any act or omission by CITY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to CITY under this Agreement. 5. Neither CITY, nor its officers and employees, shall be responsible for any damage, loss, expense, costs or liability occurring by reason of any act or omission by AC TRANSIT under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to AC TRANSIT under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, AC TRANSIT shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless the CITY, and its officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Government Code Section 81 0.8) occurring by reason of act or omission by AC TRANSIT under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to AC TRANSIT under this Agreement. 6. The parties shall work together in the spirit of good faith and cooperation to successfully implement this Agreement. To the extent there are disagreements between the CITY and AC TRANSIT, those disagreements shall immediately be raised between the parties. Prior to initiating any legal action, the parties hereto agree to meet in good faith to attempt to resolve any dispute. In the event the parties cannot resolve the dispute, they will make a thorough good faith effort to resolve such issues through a mediation process conducted by an impartial third party. The parties shall jointly select and engage the efforts of a mediator to help resolve the dispute. The parties shall share the costs of the mediator equally. If the issue still remains unsolved, either party may bring a legal action seeking resolution of the disagreement. However, any and all legal actions may only be brought if the preceding dispute resolution process has been satisfied. 7. If any term or provision of this Agreement, or the application of any term or provision of this Agreement to a particular situation, shall be finally found to be void, invalid, illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, then notwithstanding such determination, such term or provision shall remain in force and effect to the extent allowed by such ruling and all other terms and provisions of this Agreement or the application of this Agreement to other
271
8.
9.
I 0.
II. 12.
13.
14. 15.
16.
situations shall remain in full force and effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any term or provision of this Agreement or the application of such material term or condition to a particular situation is finally found to be void, invalid, illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, then the parties hereto agree to work in good faith and fully cooperate with each other to amend this Agreement to carry out its intent. In the event a dispute cannot be revolved as described in Section I1.6 of this Agreement, either the CITY or AC TRANSIT may terminate this Agreement upon 60 days prior written notice to the other party. If CITY desires to terminate this Agreement, such written notice shall be sent by U.S. Postal Service certified mail to: General Manager, AC Transit, 1600 Franklin Street, Oakland, CA 94612. If AC TRANSIT desires to terminate this Agreement, such written notice shall be sent by U.S. Postal Service certified mail to City of Berkeley, Office of the City Manager, 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704. In the event that this Agreement is terminated by either party before the PROJECT has been completed, AC TRANSIT shall pay only those reasonable costs incurred by the CITY for work that could not have been suspended at the time of the notice of termination. AC TRANSIT will reimburse the CITY for eligible costs incurred following termination that reasonably were incurred at the time of termination and such additional eligible costs necessary to bring any portion of the outstanding work to a reasonable point of completion following the notice of termination. If there is any question regarding the work to be completed, the parties will discuss the outstanding work and concur on the stage at which the incomplete work will end following the receipt of the notice of termination. This agreement and all work performed thereunder shall be interpreted under and pursuant to the laws of the State of California. The parties agree that the jurisdiction and venue of any dispute arising under this agreement shall be the Superior Court of Alameda County. Neither party may assign or delegate any of its rights or obligations hereunder without first obtaining the written consent of the other. Each party agrees to keep and maintain (and to require all contractors and subcontractors connected with performance of this agreement) to keep and maintain records showing actual time devoted and all costs incurred in the performance of all work subject to this agreement until three (3) years after the accepted completion of the project, or until such later date as is required under applicable law; provided, however, that if any actions brought under the dispute resolution provisions of this agreement or lawsuits arising from this agreement have not been finally resolved by the foregoing deadline, then any records which pertain to any such action shall be maintained until such actions have been finally resolved. This agreement shall commence as of the date entered and shall continue in effect until the parties reach a mutually agreeable date for termination of the agreement after all work required by this agreement has been completed. All of the terms, provisions and conditions of the agreement hereunder, shall be binding upon and inure the parties hereto and their respective successors, assigns and legal representatives. By signing this agreement, CITY covenants that it presently has no interest, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the services called for under this agreement. CITY further covenants that in the performance of this agreement no person having any such interest shall be employed by the CITY, and that the CITY receives no commissions or other payments from parties other than the DISTRICT as a result of work performed hereunder. This agreement represents the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and all such agreements entered into prior hereto are revoked and superseded by this agreement, and no representations, warranties, inducements or oral agreements have been made by any of the parties except as expressly set forth herein, or in other contemporaneous written agreements. This agreements may not be changed, modified or rescinded except in writing,
272
signed by all parties hereto, and any attempt at oral modification of this agreement shall be void and of no effect.
273
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
274
AGENDA PlANNING/ STANDING COMMITIEE PENDING liSTS
AC TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
,:.,'
June • Follow-up report on the benefits the District receives by having a lobbyist, how the lobbyist has helped the District over past year, and what staff expects the lobbyist to do in the future. [Requested by Director Young- 3/26/14] 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 Director Peeples to retain on long-term pending. Staff to continue efforts to locate funds, hire personnel utilizing grant funds, and contact local museums to determine if there is interest in taking on the project]. • Planning staff to provide comments and recommendations pertaining to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Reform. [Requested by Director Peeples -10/24/12] Submission of request to hold a future California Tra·nsit Association conference in Oakland. [Requested by Director Williams -11/14/12] long-range strategy to obtain better information as to why people choose not to ride the bus. [Requested by President Harper- 5/22/13]
FINAN~EAI\ID ~UI:)ITCON!II/iiTTEE
I
June • Report on the programs being crafted by CARB, California Energy Commission, etc. to fund the District's fuel cell program as a result of recent legislation signed into law and what the District's plan is to apply for the funding. [Requested by Director Peeples- 11/13/13] Report on the implications of the Affordable Care Act on AC Transit. [Requested by President Harper1/22/14] September Development of a policy concerning ex parte communications and disclosures by Directors during the entire procurement process from issuance of an RFP, IFB, or RFQ through protest. It was suggested
that staff review the policies of the California Public Utilities Commission pertaining to ex parte situations. (Requested by Director Peeples- 9/5/12] Report on why the District's unfunded liability associated with the retirement plan has not improved over the past three years. [Requested by President Harper - 11/15/13] Referred to Joint Board/Retirement Board Meeting. October A review of post-retirement medical benefits provided to all employee groups for the purpose of identifying any disparities that may exist and whether other government entities offer similar benefits [Requested by President Harper- 3/26/14] Referred to a Board Retreat. Agenda Planning May 28,2014
Page 1 of4 275
AGENDA PLANNING/ STANDING COMMITIEE PENDING LISTS
AC TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Finance and Audit Committee, Cont. 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 Update on DBE Goal Contracts/Purchasing Activity Report Semi Annual Reports • DBE/FTA Report and 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)
June • Review the use of bus shelters, which are being occupied by the homeless in Oakland, and what can be done about it. [Requested by Vice President Wallace- 3/26/14] • Re~art aR '1/RetRer tRere is a !3Faeleffi witR wifi aR tAe Re'•'<' Gillig e\lses aAel Raw it will ee filEeel. [ReElllestea ey r;lireetar Pee~les 4/9/14] Issue addressed in Staff Report 14-184 on 5/14/14. August Report on the new fareboxes and how they are working. [Requested by Director Young - 3/26/14] Issue to be addressed in next Quarterly Operations Performance Report. Quarterly Reports (Nov, Feb, May, Aug) • Operations Performance Report Clipper Outreach efforts [Next report to include the number of Clipper tags for UC Berkeley and the cost to the District and the status of regional transfer agreements.] Semi Annual Reports (Feb/Aug) Customer Service Call Center Agenda Planning May 28,2014
Page 2 of 4 276
AGENDA PlANNING/ STANDING COMMITTEE PENDING LISTS
AC TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Operations Committee, cont. Pending Not Scheduled Request for staff investigate reports that bus stops are being painted over with grey paint and provide a report on whether there is a cost effective way to determine if these incidents were isolated or more frequent occurrences and what could be done. [Requested by Director Peeples -7/9/11] • Report on the savings associated with the October service cuts. [Requested by Director Harper 2/23/11] • Report on the closure of the print shop. Retained in Committee pending further study of the placement of Print Shop employees into other positions, the anticipated cost savings, capital investments and useful life of capital equipment, and to explore whether the Print Shop can in-source work from outside of AC Transit {Retained in Committee 8/15/12}. • Implementation of a District-wide calendaring system to track contracts, license renewals, etc. [Requested by Director Peeples- 4/25/12] 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 Director Peeples -11/14/12] 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] Report on strategies to improve access to Clipper, i.e. increasing locations, marketing, and a shortterm discount ride program. [Requested by Director Davis -11/13/13] • Creation of a video privacy policy specifically for all of the video associated with the BRT stations once operational. [Requested by Director Peeples - 2/12/14. Director Peeples to provide additional information to be included in the draft policy.] PLANNI~G
I
COMMinEE ·
October Report on AC Transit's attitude toward shuttles. [Requested by Director Harper - 5/9/12] To be
Discussed at October Board Retreat Board Policy 550- Service Standards and Design. [Requested by the Board- 12/17/08; 2/12/14] To
be Discussed at October Board Retreat Development of a policy to officially require regular ridership surveys every four or five years. [Requested by Director Peeples- 6/24/09] Referred to October Board Retreat
Quarterly Reports (Nov, Feb, May, Aug) Bus Rapid Transit Project MTC Sustainability Process Transbay Transit Center Project Update on District Involvement in External Planning Processes. ·:· Lake Merritt Area Plan [Requested by Director Peeples- 3/9/11] ·:· Oak to gth Street project and details of the commitments made by and to Signature Properties [Requested by Director Peeples- 3/25/06]
Agenda Planning May 28,2014
Page 3 of 4 277
AGENDA PLANNING/ STANDING COMMITIEE PENDING LISTS
AC TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Planning Committee, Cont. Annual Reports Update on CARB (Jun) Update on Service and Operations Special District 2 (Oct)
Pending Not Scheduled
•
•
•
Update of the Designing with Transit document which is to include the development of bus shelter design standards. [Requested by Director Peeples -10/27/10] Review Board Policy 163 with respect to environmental issues. (Board Policy 512) [Requested by Director Peeples] Report on the implications of a study by the California Transportation Commission on anticipated transportation needs in California and the implications to AC Transit. [Requested by Director Peeples11/16/11] Repert bh:le blf39R CeAel~::~sieR af tf:le Tri Valley TraRsit St~;~efy: ReJ:Jert eR Raw te Better seF\·e lewer eteAsity SiU1::1se eemm~:;~Rities aAS iRerease tRe ~;~se ef J31:1Biie/private sR1::1ttles, iAei~::~SiRg: + GeReral Pt:trpese DemaRS Rapiet TraRsit [ReE1~;~esteS By Direeter Qavis 1/28}Q9] -+ TreRets regaretiAg tAe ~ctse ef private sR1::1ttles, earJ3e8ls, ·;a A peels aRet taJEis te seF\'€ tRe pt:tBiie aRei Rev.' it Aas eRaAgeet e·1er time [Re£tl:lesteeJ By Direeter Qavis 2fQ/11] Update on the status of the customer satisfaction survey. Matter was retained in committee on July 9, 2008 pending receipt of proposed survey. On 9/30/09 Director Peeples requested the report include staff's analysis of surveys conducted in Europe, specifically surveys conducted in Helsinki Finland, to determine how surveys can be done cheaper, better and more often. [Requested by Director Peeples - 5/28/08] Report on the feasibility of cancelling the Bus Rapid Transit Project. [Requested by Director Peeples7/31/13] Outcome of staff's investigation to see if it is possible to be more nimble in restoring service in areas where the Oakland Running Festival has concluded. [Requested by Director Peeples- 3/26/14] Report on whether bus stops on the new eastern span of the Bay Bridge can be utilized to let people from San Francisco and parts of the East Bay off so they can access the Bay Bridge Trail Pathway. [Requested by President Harper- 3/26/14] Report on staff's investigation of the possible use of double-decker buses to address transbay capacity issues. [Requested by Director Peeples- 4/9/14]
Agenda Planning May 28,2014
Page 4 of4 278
