BOARD OF DIRECTORS ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT
AGENDA
Regular Meetings of the Board of Directors and the Planning, Operations, External Affairs and Finance and Audit Committees AC Transit General Offices 2nd Floor Board Room 1600 Franklin Street Oakland, CA 94612
Wednesday, December 11, 2013 at 5:00 p.m. Closed Session: 3:30 p.m. (Items 9A-D)
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 DAVID A. WOLF, GENERAL COUNSEL LINDA A. NEMEROFF, DISTRICT SECRETARY STANDING COMMITTEES MEETING DAYS* nd Planning Committee 2 Wednesday nd Operations Committee 2 Wednesday th External Affairs Committee 4 Wednesday th Finance and Audit Committee 4 Wednesday * All Standing Committees are held in conjunction with the regular Board of Directors meeting, To access live and archived audio of Board of Directors and Standing Committee meetings as well as agendas, staff reports, and the schedule of future meetings please visit www.actransit.org and click on “Board Meetings”. Dial (510) 891-7200 to access agendas by telephone. For questions, contact the District Secretary’s Office at (510) 891-7201. Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
December 11, 2013 1
Page 1 of 8
MEETING PROCEDURES Public Comment: Members of the public wishing to present comments should complete a Speaker’s Form and submit it to the District Secretary. For subjects not listed on this agenda, the public will be invited to speak under the "PUBLIC COMMENTS" section of the agenda. For specific agenda item(s), speakers will be invited to address the Board/Standing Committee(s) at the time the item is being considered. All speakers are allowed two (2) minutes to present comments. Individuals wishing to present more detailed information are encouraged to submit comments in writing. Written comments are included in the record for meeting(s), and as such, are available for public inspection and may be posted to the District’s website. Electronic Devices: All electronic devices (cell phones, pagers and similar-sounding devices) shall be placed on mute, vibrate or silent mode during Board and Committee meetings pursuant to District Ordinance No. 12. Time of Meetings: Times included on this agenda for commencement of Standing Committee meetings are estimates only. Committee meetings will commence when the Board of Directors recesses to a Committee of the Whole. Order of Agenda Items: The Board or Standing Committee(s) may discuss any item listed on this agenda and in any order. Agenda Planning: The Agenda Planning portion of the agenda is designed to assist the Board and staff in the preparation of future Board and Committee agendas. Each item requested shall have the concurrence of at least two Directors in order to place a proposed agenda item on a future agenda. LIVE AUDIO STREAMING OF BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS Live audio streaming and an archive of previously recorded meetings is available on the District’s website at www.actransit.org. For technological reasons, recordings of meetings held outside of the Board Room cannot be streamed to the web. AVAILABILITY OF AGENDA RELATED MATERIALS Written agenda related materials for all open session regular meetings are available to the public 72 hours prior to the meeting or at the time the materials are distributed to a majority of the Board. Written materials presented at a meeting by staff or a member of the Board will be available to the public at that time, or after the meeting if supplied by an outside party. Agenda related materials are available on the District’s website or by contacting the District Secretary’s Office. ACCESSIBLE PUBLIC MEETINGS Meetings of the Board of Directors are accessible to individuals in wheelchairs. The Board Room is equipped with Assistive Listening Devices for individuals with a hearing impairment. Written materials in appropriate alternative formats, disability-related modification/accommodation as well as sign language and foreign language interpreters must be made 72 hours in advance of the meeting or hearing to help ensure availability. Please direct requests for disability related modification or accommodation and/or interpreter services to Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary, 1600 Franklin Street, Oakland, California, 94612 or call (510) 891-7201. AC Transit’s General Offices are generally served by bus lines 1, 11, 12, 51A, 72, 72M. The nearest accessible bus 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
December 11, 2013 2
Page 2 of 8
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING – Greg Harper, President Wednesday, December 11, 2013 at 5:00 p.m. 1.
Staff Contact or Presenter
ROLL CALL
2. PRESENTATIONS 2A. All Door Boarding Implementation and Review.
2B. Innovative Procurement Strategies - Leadership APTA Class of 2013. 3.
GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORT
4.
PUBLIC COMMENT
5.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Jason Lee San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Beverly Greene 891-7255 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.
5A. Consider approving Board of Directors and Standing Committee minutes of November 13, 2013.
Linda Nemeroff 891-7284
5B. Consider receiving the Accessibility Advisory Committee minutes of September 10, 2013 (Report 13-255).
Dennis Butler 891-4798
5C. Consider receiving quarterly Retirement Board Report (Report 13-296).
Hugo Wildmann 891-4889
6.
REGULAR CALENDAR
6A. Consider adoption of Resolution No. 13-046 amending Board Policy 328 (Fare Policy) to include the provision of a day pass fare instrument, to delete transfers as a fare instrument, to provide discounts for Clipper card usage, and amend the fare increase schedule effective July 1, 2014; and determine that the fare adjustments are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Report 13-240d).
Tom Prescott 891-7221
6B. Consideration of options for the allocation of AB 1107 funds to Special Transit Service District No. 2 (Report 13-134a).
Lewis Clinton 891-4752
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
December 11, 2013 3
Page 3 of 8
6C. Consider authorizing the General Manager to enter into a lease agreement for office space located at 3322 International Boulevard in Oakland for the Bus Rapid Transit Community Outreach Center (Report 13-160a).
Dennis Butler 891-4798
6D. Consider scheduling a special meeting for a Board Retreat on January 29, 2014, and approval of the draft agenda (Report 13-310).
Linda Nemeroff 891-7284
6E. Announcement of appointments to the Nominating Committee for the selection of President and Vice President for 2014. (verbal)
President Harper
RECESS TO STANDING COMMITTEES (as the Committee of the Whole)
Speakers will be invited to address a Committee at the time an item on the agenda is being considered or under Public Comment for items not on the agenda. Immediately following the Standing Committee Meetings, the Board meeting will reconvene at which time the Board may take action on any of the following Committee agenda items.
ALL COMMITTEES ARE ADVISORY ONLY. A.
PLANNING COMMITTEE – Mark Williams, 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 approval of the process for updating the District’s Title VI policies and related activities (Report 13-305).
Dennis Butler 891-4798
A-2.
Consider recommending receipt of report on the District's efforts to evaluate and implement Traffic Signal Priority (TSP) on Line 51, Bus Rapid Transit and other corridors as well as lessons learned from previous TSP installations [Requested by Director Harper – 9/30/09] (Report 13-223).
Dennis Butler 891-4798
A-3.
Consider recommending receipt of report on the process to expand service (Report 13-277).
Dennis Butler 891-4798
A-4.
Consider recommending receipt of the third quarter report on the East Bay Bus Rapid Transit Project (Report 13-274).
Dennis Butler 891-4798
B.
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE – Joe Wallace, Chairperson Held immediately following the Planning Committee meeting.
Staff Contact or Presenter(s)
Public Comment (for items not on the agenda)
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
December 11, 2013 4
Page 4 of 8
Briefing/Action Items: B-1.
Consider recommending approval of amendments to Board Policy 108 – Claims and Lawsuits: Settlement Authorizations, and the adoption of Resolution No. 13-050 establishing the authority for the settlement of claims and lawsuits and the repeal of Resolution No. 1155 (Report 13290a).
C.
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE – Elsa Ortiz, Chairperson Held immediately following the Operations Committee.
David Wolf 891-7178
Staff Contact or Presenter(s)
Public Comment (for items not on the agenda) Briefing/Action Items: C-1.
Consider recommending receipt of the Monthly Legislative Report and approval of legislative positions (Report 13-298).
Dennis Butler 891-4798
C-2.
Consider recommending approval to exercise the first one-year option to extend the advertising contract with Titan through June 30, 2015; and approve a one-year pilot program to evaluate issues associated with allowing Titan to sell full bus wraps on up to five percent (5%) of the District’s fleet (Report 09-128b).
Tom Prescott 891-7221
C-3.
Consider recommending approval to reappoint Hale Zukas as AC Transit’s representative on the Alameda County Transportation Commission’s Paratransit Advisory Planning Committee (Report 13309).
Linda Nemeroff 891-7284
D.
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: D-1.
Consider recommending receipt of the Report on Investments for September, 2013 (Report 13-282).
Lewis Clinton 891-4752
D-2.
Consider recommending receipt of the Report on Investments for October, 2013 (Report 13-308).
Lewis Clinton 891-4752
D-3.
Consider recommending receipt of the Monthly Budget Update for October, 2013 (Report 13-283).
Lewis Clinton 891-4752
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
December 11, 2013 5
Page 5 of 8
Briefing/Action Items: D-4.
Consider recommending receipt of report from the District Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee on FY 2012-13 Measure VV Tax Proceeds for the Year Ended June 30, 2013 (Report 13-302).
Lewis Clinton 891-4752
D-5.
Consider recommending that the General Manager be authorized to execute a contract amendment with Buck Consultants, LLC for actuarial services to increase the not to exceed funding amount to $712,164 (Report 09-171a).
Lewis Clinton 891-4752
D-6.
Consider recommending adoption of amendments to Board Policy 350 – Procurement Policy (Report 13-306).
Tom Prescott 891-7221
D-7.
Consider recommending approval of the fifth amendment to the contract with Best Contracting Services, Inc. for work associated with the General Office Chiller/Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Replacement Project, and authorize the General Manager to take further action necessary to fully closeout the contract, including execution of any related laws or release (Report 13-307).
Tom Prescott 891-7221
D-8.
Consider recommending the adoption of Resolution No. 13-049 authorizing the General Manger, or his designee, to file and execute applications with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for Cycle V Federal Transportation Administration Section 5317 New Freedom Funds (Report 13-303).
Tom Prescott 891-7221
D-9.
Consider recommending receipt of a status report regarding Districtowned real property leased to others (Report 13-264).
Dennis Butler 891-4798
RECONVENE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING – Greg Harper, President
Staff Contact or Presenter(s)
7.
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. PLANNING COMMITTEE: A-1. Consider approving the process for updating the District’s Title VI policies and related activities (Report 13-305). A-2. Consider receiving report on the District's efforts to evaluate and implement Traffic Signal Priority (TSP) on Line 51, Bus Rapid Transit and other corridors as well as lessons learned from previous TSP installations [Requested by Director Harper – 9/30/09] (Report 13-223).
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
December 11, 2013 6
Linda Nemeroff 891-7284
Dennis Butler 891-4798 Dennis Butler 891-4798
Page 6 of 8
A-3. A-4.
Consider receiving report on the process to expand service (Report 13277). Consider receiving the third quarter report on the East Bay Bus Rapid Transit Project (Report 13-274).
B. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE: B-1. Consider approving amendments to Board Policy 108 – Claims and Lawsuits: Settlement Authorizations, and the adoption of Resolution No. 13-050 establishing the authority for the settlement of claims and lawsuits and the repeal of Resolution No. 1155 (Report 13-290a). C. EXTERNAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE: C-1. Consider receiving the Monthly Legislative Report and approval of legislative positions (Report 13-298). C-2. Consider approval to exercise the first one-year option to extend the advertising contract with Titan through June 30, 2015; and approve a one-year pilot program to evaluate issues associated with allowing Titan to sell full bus wraps on up to five percent (5%) of the District’s fleet (Report 09-128b). C-3. Consider approving the reappointment Hale Zukas as AC Transit’s representative on the Alameda County Transportation Commission’s Paratransit Advisory Planning Committee (Report 13-309). D. FINANCE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE: D-1. Consider receiving Report on Investments for September, 2013 (Report 13-282). D-2. Consider receiving Report on Investments for October, 2013 (Report 13-308). D-3. Consider receiving the Monthly Budget Update for October, 2013 (Report 13-283). D-4. Consider receiving report from the District Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee on FY 2012-13 Measure VV Tax Proceeds for the Year Ended June 30, 2013 (Report 13-302). D-5. Consider authorizing the General Manager to execute a contract amendment with Buck Consultants, LLC for actuarial services to increase the not to exceed funding amount to $712,164 (Report 09171a). D-6. Consider adoption of amendments to Board Policy 350 – Procurement Policy (Report 13-306). D-7. Consider approving the fifth amendment to the contract with Best Contracting Services, Inc. for work associated with the General Office Chiller/Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Replacement Project, and authorize the General Manager to take further action necessary to fully closeout the contract, including execution of any related laws or release (Report 13-307).
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
December 11, 2013 7
Dennis Butler 891-4798 Dennis Butler 891-4798
David Wolf 891-7178
Dennis Butler 891-4798 Tom Prescott 891-7221
Linda Nemeroff 891-7284
Lewis Clinton 891-4752 Lewis Clinton 891-4752 Lewis Clinton 891-4752 Lewis Clinton 891-4752 Lewis Clinton 891-4752
Tom Prescott 891-7221 Tom Prescott 891-7221
Page 7 of 8
D-8.
D-9.
Consider adoption of Resolution No. 13-049 authorizing the General Manger, or his designee, to file and execute applications with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for Cycle V Federal Transportation Administration Section 5317 New Freedom Funds (Report 13-303). Consider receiving status report regarding District-owned real property leased to others (Report 13-264).
8.
CONSENT CALENDAR ADDENDA
9.
CLOSED SESSION/REPORT OUT
Tom Prescott 891-7221
Dennis Butler 891-4798
The Board is requested to authorize as recommended from the committee meetings above.
The items for consideration are listed below and will be reported on by the General Counsel as necessary at the end of the meeting.
David Wolf 891-7178
9A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9 (a))
Nallely Gonzalez v. AC Transit, ACSC Case No. RG12638271; Claim No. 10-2092 Sheila Jones v. AC Transit, ACSC No. RG12620431; Claim No. 11-4149 Gilda Chavez v. AC Transit, ACSC No. RG13674485; Claim No. 11-3923 Arul Edwin v. AC Transit, ACSC Case No. RG12637734; Claim No. 12-1954
9B. Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(b)) (Two Cases)
9C. 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
9D. Public Employee Performance Evaluation
(Government Code Section 54957) Title: General Manager, General Counsel, District Secretary
10.
AGENDA PLANNING
12.
BOARD/STAFF COMMENTS
13.
ADJOURNMENT Next Meeting: January 8, 2014, at 5:00 p.m.
(Government Code Section 54954.2)
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
December 11, 2013 8
Page 8 of 8
BOARD OF DIRECTORS PRESENTATIONS
December 11, 2013 Agenda Items 2A – 2B
9
This page intentionally blank
10
SFMTA Municipal Transportation Agency
11
12
The Challenge
13
14
All Aboard with Professor Muni 15
http://youtu.be/tlt6HVkiXoQ
s
The Need for All-Door Boarding Comparative Hourly Bus Boardin g Rate - Major US Cities 70
San Francisco & New York City 65 boardings per hour average
60
50 .._ :::::::J
0
:I:
.._ 40 Q) a.. tn
C)
c:
"C .._
30
ca 0
m 20
10
0
~ ~ ~ # ~ # ~ ~ ~ ~ # # <:;~~ #"'li~ ::P'l:i~ ~..;§~ ~s -~'l:i s:f ~~ ~o~ ~0o; ~
e'?i~~ «.<-'l>~ ~e.~ --?-o v~ "?"-<::-~'l>-"?::,.Q.; 'l>-~ (Q~ -~~ ~ ~0 ~ oflf ~~~ e:,'l>-~ 'v& ~~ v ~~'l:i ~<::'
&
(>~
~o
Source: Nat io n a l T ransit Data ba se (2010) Hou r ly Bus Boarding Rate calculated by divid ing unl inked passenger t ri ps by revenue veh icle hours for maj or cities and t r an sit system s. Includes elect ric tro lley buses and m ot or buses. 16
6
17
18
19
All-Door
X SF TRA~~PORTATION COD CAU FOR CTIONS 72 101 & E. DIVISION I __ NIA PENAL CO DE 72 104 640' SECTION
20
21
Customer Communications Muni Opens Its Doors for Faster, More Reliable Service Muni customers may enter through the rear doors of any bus or streetcar using the following proof-of-payment:
Clipp.,e Card
Limited UseTicket
must be tapped and h""" sufficient cash value. valid pass"' valid transler
must be tapped and have vahd rode "'valid transfor
Valid Paper Pass
ValidTransfer/Fare Receipt
Please note: Customers paying wnh cash must board through the front doors.
All-door boarding: Another way we're making your Muni better. ;-, "'",:·• ;,,r \1u" '"
. · If•
....
~''.'.'
h··~:~''··
.:·. , •r··
·,:'·',., ,.1
I
•~
~
,.. ''· , . ..,,
.-.·~ f\1
k:, ,,•,' '.,
,,,
'r!l
'r'.'
'r'
•
•·'''
··~~ , ',..-•w, ·~, "' wll'.vv ,,,.,,,
{
, 'l
~··
,
',,.,, ,,
"'
•,
1 3"
c Jn
•'.
',.,•..-'
:. -:: :: ....-.,.o..o
,
',1'
==-·.;,"'......
: ...
,.,,
,
·~. r
._
·,1
..... ,
. . ••••· .... ~~ . .... .,).. o;
"~·
~ ~ •. ~
I
SF M TA '
.
.
MuniCipal TransportatiOn Agency
Interior car cards in English, Chinese and Spanish provide an additional explanation of All-Door Boarding 12 22
23
-..
.....
.
...
....
u
'"
.....
:
'
.....
...,,
n
_.._ 'I
'
- -
)~
l
)
l
-
l
60\.
s.
-
,
)
.
•
J
1
1
7 li.
• ''
•
" A
G t
,.,..
7
'1
I
-
J
-
...
15valuation Mett.leEielegy .... ...
•
."'
-
-
-
- ...
•
'""
....
___ -_..
un 24
-
...
T:'.
,. "
It
lA
.... ....
-'"'
Performance Measurement Data Collection
25
Preliminary Analysis: Rear Door Usage 50%
- -- - ----- --------------------- ------------------ - ------ - --- ------------------- --------------------- - ---- - -- --------------------------------------- -
Pre-Implementation 45% 40% 35% 30% 25%
-------------- -- ---------- ---------------------- ------------....----. --- --------
Nearly twice as many customers are entering through the rear door
20% 15% 10% 5%
-----'
Jui-Sep 201 1 Oct-Dec 2011 Jan-Mar 2012 Apr-Jun 2012 Jui-Sep 2012 Oct-Dec 2012 Jan-Mar 2013 Apr-Jun 2013 Dat a for high-volume boarding locatio ns (stops where more t han 10 custo mers board a nd fewer t ha n 5 custome rs exit t he bus) 26
16
Preliminary Analysis: Rear Door Usage Rapid
Local
Community
Specialized (Express)
60o/o
Rear-Door Boardings have increased on different types of .___ rout~s throughout the system
(/)
0>
c
:0 40o/o l... ro 0 Ill l...
8 30°/o
0
10o/o Oo/o
FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2012 FY 2013 Data for high-volume boarding locations (stops where more than 10 customers board and fewer than 5 customers exit the bus) 27
17
All-Door Boarding Dwell Time Impacts (Seconds per Boarding Customer)
4.0
••• •••
a4
•
•
••
••• ••• ••
•
••
••
•
•
•
•••
•
••
•
•••
•
•
•
•• •••
•
•••••
•
••
•
•
•
•
•
•••
•
•
••
•
•
••
•
••••
•••• •••
•
•
••-
•
•
•-
•
•-
•
--
•-- •• ••
•••••
•••
•
•
•
•
•
•
••
•
•
••
•
•••
•
•
••
•
••
•
•
•
•
••
•
•••
••
•
•
•
•••
•
••
•
•
••
•
•
•••
•
•••
•
••••
••
•
•
•
•••
•
3.5
3.0 b.O
:.cc
-
2 .5
fa
0
I:C
G; 2.0 c.. U't
-g
s::: 0
u
C»
1.5
Distributing boardings optimally between the front and rear doors minimizes dwell times
V)
1.0
Potential to save up to 1 second per customer ·boarding at busy stops
0 .5
0-10%
10-20%
20-30%
30-400/o
40-50%
50- 60%
60-70%
70-80%
80-90%
90-100%
% of Customers boarding through the rear door Data for high-volume boa r ding locations (stops where more than 10 customers board and fewer than 5 cu stomers exit the bus) 28
18
29
...
POP Unit Statistics
Change
Transit Fare Inspector Positions
Added 10 positions for FY 2013 (Currently 41 FTEs ) Added 12 positions for FY 2014
Operating BudgetSalaries and Benefits
$900,000 budgeted increase
-
+$200,000 projected for FY 2016 +$922,000 actual (+62%)
Citation Revenues
0 30
31
• •••
•
• • •
..
• • • ••• •
... .•
•
•
••. .
•
•
•• •
• •• •
• • •0
• •
•••
• ••• •
• • •
•••
•• • •
•
• • •• •
•
•• •
....
•• • ••
•
••
•
••
•
'.'·•
• •• • • •• • • • • •
•
•
••
• •
•
• •
•
•
~· • · •-• • e :· . :- •
•••
•
•
.,..
·0 ·• ••
•
• ••
Transit Fare Inspector Deployment
•• • • • • •
•
•
•
'
•• •
I
•
• • •
•
•
Total customers with invalid POP 30.88
.....
CD VI
Invalid POP Rate by Location Surveyed
C.'Q.CD
> 10
o§
a.u; 3. 10 -o::l
=<->
roo >o
.=..-
<3
• • 0
20.29
10. 19
1. 9
•
• •
•
•
•
•
22 32
..
:> :;: • ,.,
;
" :. 0
e
1
..c . I<
.....
.
,
1(1Jtl(rAk"'5T
;
•
~
..
::
~
:r
~
~
"'
~
~ST'
~
i
z0 , 0
;
::.
~
~
--t...
.l~l"'' !Jl
:
CE~Ail C lA • f7 ~ 1
...
""""'"~St
23 33
Fare Compliance Proof-of-Payment Citations 25,000
---------------------- -- ---- --------------------- ------- ------------------------------------------------------- ---- -- --------------------------------------------- ------ ---- -----------
Post-Implementation
Pre-1 mplementation 20,000
15,000
10,000
5 ,000
Jui-Sep 2011 Oct-Dec 2011 Jan-Mar 2012 Apr-Jun 2012 Jui-Sep 2012 Oct-Dec 2012 Jan-Mar 2 013 Apr-Jun 2013 34
35
This page intentionally blank
36
Piggybacking
·
Review ~ cu Transit Industry Prope[tY. u . ·s: ~Jo1nt Procurements Buses Qj ..., 49 CFRPart 18 Misunderstanding V) ; " ' Prohibited Shortcomings FTA ~ 0 Gonduet Better Pricing c: Ii-i .
o.: e
.E 0
u
1
37
Innov ative Procureme nt Strategies leadership APT-A Class 2013
Emily Bergkamp Dial-A-Lift Manager Intercity Transit Olympia, WA
Diane Corral-lopez Deputy Executive Officer, Operations LA Metro los Angeles, CA
Janice R. Thomas, CPPB Senior Director, Office of Business Diversity & Civil Rights Metra Chicago, ll
Merlin Maley AlA~ l EED AP BD+C, Senior Associate RN l Design Denver, CO
Beverly D. Greene Director, legislative Affairs & . Community Relations AC Transit Oakland, CA
38
• Organizational Structures • Boartl Involvement • Planning & Strategy • Technology
3
39
SRANNING THE COUNTRY
40
...... 0
o:: .t; PACE ~ ~ MetroLINK
Suntran
:5
UTA
~ NJ TRANSI;f
~ w
V)
COnnect
i
.Eu
...,
~
·-
CIJ
~
S
GJ -=:::::
II!;:
:E £t:
~ ta -
..., z
·a ~ .
ao
5
41
:E
~~
~ 8 ~ King County Metro Intercity Transit
.5 Cl 0 V) u ~ .:= z o a:: GJ c:c
.:=
0IIIIi
Efficiency
6
42
IMPORTANT ASPECTS Of PROCUREMENT
I I
I
Good Product
I
I
Customer Service Clean Procurement Best Value
43
IMPACT OF
~ECHNOLOGY
PROCUREMENT • Accessibility
• E-Procurement
• Cutting &dge vs. Bleeding Edge 8
44
ON
MISSION POSSIBLE!
./Capital Improvements ./Cost Reduction ~Employee
Training
./State of Good Repair ./Planning & Strategy 45
This page intentionally blank
46
BOARD OF DIRECTORS CONSENT CALENDAR
December 11, 2013 Agenda Item 5A – 5C
47
This page intentionally blank
48
BOARD OF DIRECTORS ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT
MINUTES Regular Meetings of the Board of Directors and the Planning, Operations, External Affairs, and Finance and Audit Committees AC Transit General Offices 2"d Floor Board Room 1600 Franklin Street Oakland, CA 94612 Wednesday, November 13, 2013 at 5:00 p.m. Closed Session: 4:00 p.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 DAVID A. WOLF, GENERAL COUNSEL LINDA A. NEMEROFF, DISTRICT SECRETARY
Alameda-Cont ra Costa Transit District
November 13, 2013
49
Page 1 of 16
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING- Greg Harper, President Wednesday, November 13, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.
ACTION SUMMARY
! The Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Board of Directors held a ! regular meeting on Wednesday, November 13, 2013. The meeting was called to order at 4:06 p.m. for the purpose of Closed Session. All Board members were present, with the exception of Vice President Wallace and Director Young who were absent. The 1 District Secretary announced that the Board would convene in Closed 1 Session to discuss Items 9A-D as listed on the agenda. Closed Session i 1 concluded at 4:54p.m.
I
At 5:05 p.m., President Harper called the Board of Directors meeting ~~~
1.
2.
I ROLL CALL i Present: Ortiz, Williams, Davis, Peeples, Harper I Absent: Wallace (excused absence), Young (excused absence) Ii GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
I i ,I
INFORMATION ONLY
I General Manager David Armijo reported on the following:
l· Il
'
I
Inaugural run of the first Gillig commuter bus put into Transbay service on Line E, with sixteen more buses arriving in November and ' thirty-eight more in 2014; Korean delegation visit; Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Core Capacity Program; and Promotion of Alan Parella to Internal Audit Manager and Jim Cunradi to Transportation Planning Manager.
I'
I'
IMr. Armijo then introduced Nichele Laynes who presented a brief video I 'of the Gillig commuter bus launch as part of the Better Ride campaign. i Ms. Laynes added that feedback from passengers about the new bus has been overwhelmingly positive.
3.
INFORMATION ONLY
PRESENTATION I Update on federal legislative matters.
I Steve Palmer of Van Scoyoc Associates reported on the following:
1 I
The federal government shutdown and the coming milestones in the ' budget process, including: J> Creation of a Budget conference committee which is to report on a framework to reduce the deficit by December 131h. It is expected that the committee will set a spending cap for 2014 and possibly 2015 with the goal of avoiding sequestration; Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
November 13, 2013 50
Page 2 of 16
The second year of sequestration will take effect in early January -15 days after congress adjourns this year; 1 J> Expiration of the current continuing resolution on January 15 h J> may result in another government shutdown; J> Debt limit will need to be raised by February 7, 2014; and l> October 2014, MAP-21 expires, which could impact highway construction and transit funding. Discussion of a federal sales tax for transit and vehicle mile travel taxes; Transit representation on Metropolitan Planning Organizations; Buy America requirements for utility companies; Transit agency compliance regarding the development of safety and asset management plans as well as state of good repair as part of MAP-21; and Issuance by the Federal Transportation Administration of an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking comments on how to implement the requirements of MAP-21. J>
Mr. Palmer advised that sequestration is not bad for AC Transit because under the current continuing resolution, domestic spending (non-defense spending) will not be cut, noting that the formula programs, such as 5307, will not be affected by sequestration. Members of the Board inquired about Made in America utilities replacement and impacts on the BRT Project; status of Transportation Committees in the house and senate; talks that entail lifting 1 sequestration for defense spending; increase in the federal gas tax; future 5307 funding allocations; and MAP-21. '
I
JINFORMATION ONLY.
4.
!
I PUBLIC COMMENT 1•
1
Doug Bloch, Teamsters Union, commented on the lack of progress in the MV Transportation and First Transit labor negotiations. He said paratransit may be heading toward a strike because of low wages and the lack of affordable health coverage. Carlo Coleman, MV Transportation, commented that he recently went back to work after a health issue, saying that he had to pay out of pocket for medical care. He said he was struggling financially and is a working man who wants to support and be a provider for his
1
1
I
fumi~
Denise Tatum, First Transit, commented that wages are substandard and employees cannot afford medical insurance and have no pension plan. She advised that the union voted today on the last and final proposal and there is a potential for a work stoppage which would cause a crisis among disabled riders.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
1
November 13, 2013
51
'
Page 3 of 16
Adolph Felix, Business Agent for First Transit, wanted to make the Board aware of the potential paratransit work stoppage. He said that the Teamsters represent all kinds of workers who haul water, garbage, beer, etc. and it was hard to find someone who is paid as little as paratransit drivers. He said that medical coverage for a family amounted to more than half of a worker's take home pay and no one can cover their family. He said it is sad that we as a society pay so little for this work. Jane Kramer commented on transparency and accountability with regard to the public hearing on October 23, 2013, saying that asking speakers not to repeat comments limited public comment. She also 1 commented on statements made at the Board Retreat noting that i the Board was bypassing public input in making public policy by j relying on surveys rather than public discussion. Joseph Chow, Alameda, commented that many people don't know where they can get a Clipper Card. He suggested putting machines at the major shopping malls to load value on the card and eventually make cards available for purchase from these machines. Jerry Grace commented on routing buses around traffic near the 1 Fremont BART Station and Walnut Avenue. Efren Alarcon, representing workers at MV Transportation, said only 28 workers in his unit carry medical benefits. Single coverage costs a worker $430 per month and the company pays $210. For two, the worker pays $1000 and the company pays $210. And for a family, the company still only pays $210 and a worker would pay over $1600 a month. He also questioned who gets the money from the fines providers pay to Veolia for missed trips.
I
5.
CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: PEEPLES/ORTIZ to approve items SA, SB, and SC as presented. hems SD and SE were pulled off the consent calendar for questions by President Harper and Director Ortiz respectively. The motion carried by the following vote:
ADOPTED, APPROVED OR RECEIVED AS INDICATED
AYES:S: Peeples, Ortiz, Williams, Davis, Harper ABSENT:2: Young, Wallace SA. Consider approving Board of Directors and Standing Committee minutes of October 23, 2013.
58. Consider approving Board of Directors/Board Officers Retreat Minutes of October 30, 2013. SC. Consider authorizing the General Manager to attend the American Public Transportation Association 2014 Transit CEOs Seminar in New Orleans, Louisiana on February 8-11, 2014 (Report 13-304).
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
November 13, 2013
52
Page 4 of 16
SD. Consider the adoption of Resolution No. 13-043 confirming the approval of an agreement with the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees {AFL-CIO) Local 3916 to extend the 2011-2013 Collective Bargaining Agreement until March 31, 2014 (Report 13-269).
ADOPTED
[Staff Report 13-269 was provided at the meeting for the Board's consideration and incorporated into the file by reference.] Item SD was pulled off the consent calendar by President Harper to ask why the contract extension was a good idea. Chief Performance Officer Tom Prescott pointed out that because the District's labor issues were unsettled, AFCSME wanted to extend the contract six i months so that current issues could be resolved.
I I MOTION: ORTIZ/WILLIAMS to adopt Resolution 13-043 confirming the I approval of an agreement with the American Federation of State, i County & Municipal Employees (AFL-CIO) Local 3916 to extend the 2011-2013 Collective Bargaining Agreement until March 31, 2014. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:S: Ortiz, Williams, Davis, Peeples, Harper ABSENT:2: Young, Wallace SE. Consider receiving Retirement Board minutes of October 15, 2013 (Report 13-297).
RECEIVED
I
!
' Item SE was pulled off the consent calendar by Director Ortiz to inquire about the performance of GAA managers and why they failed to match the overall portfolio in terms of performance. Retirement System Manager Hugo Wild mann reported that the Retirement Board spends a good deal of time at meetings reviewing the performance of investment managers and why some are doing better/worse than the benchmark. He added that currently most of the managers are ! outperforming with the exception of GAA managers.
!
I MOTION: PEEPLES/WILLIAMS to receive the minutes as presented. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:S: Peeples, Williams, Ortiz, Davis, Harper ABSENT:2: Young, Wallace 6.
REGULAR CALENDAR
GA. Consider approving the Title VI Evaluation of the 2013 Fare Proposals (Report 13-240c).
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
November 13, 2013
53
APPROVED
Page 5 of 16
[A letter dated November 12, 2013, from the AC Transit Accessibility Advisory Committee regarding the Committee's comments an the Fare Proposal was provided at the meeting for the Board's review. The document is incorporated into the file by reference.] General Manager David Armijo introduced the item advising that the report is provided to the Board for receipt. Director Peeples clarified ! that the Title VI Analysis helps to provide the Board with the necessary ! information needed to render a decision on the fare proposals.
I Director of Service Development Robert del Rosario introduced Title VI J
Coordinator Sally Goodman who presented the staff report.
I Director Peeples stated that by giving an advantage to people who use i Clipper, Hispanics were being disproportionately disadvantaged (a Title \ VI issue) in addition to an Environmental Justice issue because of the I disproportionate impact on people who are poor. He further concluded from the Title VI analysis that those portions of the fare ! proposal that give an advantage to people who use Clipper cannot pass I Title VI or Environmental Justice and, therefore, should not be ! approved.
I
I President Harper pointed out that contrary to what the Board believed i in the past, the analysis showed that the ethnicity that used Clipper the I most were African Americans.
Ms. Goodman advised that overall, 40% of AC Transit's riders paid with 1 cash, while 55% of Hispanics paid with cash. She added that how the differences found by the analysis are judged determines whether they i are disproportionately high and adverse. She went on further to add i that in staff's opinion the findings don't represent disproportionately I high and adverse effects. j
I
I
Director Davis commented on access to Clipper, noting that utilization l is still low. He said that he does not necessarily see this as a Title VI ! issue, but an issue of marketing and outreach. f
I General Manager David Armijo commented that the District was trying i to find ways to help customers access and acclimate to Clipper through focused marketing efforts, outreach, and education. President Harper thought it would be interesting to see a cross tabulation ofthe ridership between age and income.
I
I Public Comment: i•
Alia Phelps, ACCE Riders for Transit Justice, commented that there needed to be more accessibility to Clipper at BART stations,
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
November 13, 2013
54
Page 6 of 16
including the purchase of other types of passes. She suggested that local libraries have Clipper and that the District needed to let people know where they can get Clipper and suggested that bus operators announce on the bus where Clipper cards can be purchased. Zoe levitt, Alameda County Public Health Department, commented on the need for affordable bus fares particularly for transit dependent populations throughout the county. She requested that AC Transit continue to be a national leader in setting affordable fares for those who need it the most. She urged the Board to reconsider the proposed increase to the youth/senior/disabled bus passes, noting that differential impacts may be greater because of other inequities that many transit riders face. MOTION: ORTIZ/WILLIAMS to receive the Title VI Evaluation of the 2013 Fare Proposals. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:S: Ortiz, Williams, Davis, Peeples, Harper ABSENT:2: Young, Wallace GB. Consider authorizing the General Manager to execute documents j related to the Central Contra Costa Transit Consortium (CCCTA) ! purchase of Gillig Buses over a five-year period (Report 13-273).
APPROVED
I I There was no presentation of the staff report. Director Peeples asked if there would be an opportunity to modify the bus specifications under the contract. Technical Services Manager Stuart Hoffman advised that modifications could be made to the "base bus" configured by CCCTA, noting that changes could be made to get the bus configuration the District wants. MOTION: ORTIZ/WILLIAMS to authorize the General Manager to execute documents related to the Central Contra Costa Transit Consortium purchase of Gillig Buses over a five-year period. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:S: Ortiz, Williams, Davis, Peeples, Harper ABSENT:2: Young, Wallace GC. Announcement of appointments to the BART/AC Transit liaison Committee. (verbal)
APPOINTMENTS ANNOUNCED
President Harper announced the appointment of Director Ortiz, Director Young and himself to the Committee.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
November 13, 2013
55
Page 7 of 16
RECESS TO STANDING COMMITTEES (as the Committee of the Whole) The Board meeting recessed to the Standing Committees at 6:41 p.m. ALL COMMITTEES ARE ADVISORY ONLY.
A.
! PLANNING COMMITTEE- Mark Williams, Chairperson
ACTION SUMMARY
i The Planning Committee convened at 6:41 p.m. All Committee i members were present with the exception of Director Young and Vice
i President Wallace.
I! Public Comment (for items not on the agenda) ! There was no public comment offered.
I
I Briefing/Action Items: A-1.
I Consider recommending receipt of Quarterly Report on the Transbay
RECOMMEND RECEIPT
I Transit Center Project (Report 13-27S).
i
I Senior Transportation Planner Linda Morris presented the staff report.
1
! I ! MOTION: PEEPLES/ORTIZ to forward to the Consent Calendar Addenda i
I recommending receipt; I Absent {5-0-0-2).
Director Young, Vice President Wallace -
I
A-2.
i Consider recommending receipt of Quarterly Report on the District's
I I I 1 1
!Involvement in External Planning Processes (Report 13-276).
i
RECOMMEND RECEIPT
i
'
'
I Director
of Service Development and Planning Robert del Rosario i presented the staff report.
'
l
!I
I'
I
!
i Absent (5-0-0-2).
1
! MOTION: PEEPLES/DAVIS to forward to the Consent Calendar Addenda 1 ! recommending receipt; Director Young, Vice President Wallace -~ ! I
I The Planning Committee adjourned at 6:52 p.m. B.
I OPERATIONS COMMITTEE- Joe Wallace, Chairperson
! '
I 1
President Harper convened the Operations Committee in the absence ! i of Chair Wallace at 6:52 p.m. All Committee members were present i i with the exception of Director Young and Chair Wallace. 1
ACTION SUMMARY
I
I Public Comment (for items not on the agenda) I Dollene Jones commented on public safety and
asked the Board to i move forward early with the Alameda County Sheriff's Department I contract in light of the recent incident on a bus whereby a student was i set on fire, She said that public safety on buses needs to be improved.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
November 13, 2013 56
Page 8 of 16
Briefing/Action Items: B-1.
Consider recommending receipt of the Quarterly Operations Performance Report for AC Transit Fixed Route Services (Report 13278).
RECOMMEND RECEIPT
Director of Maintenance Sal llamas presented the staff report. MOTION: ORTIZ/WILLIAMS to forward to the Consent Calendar I Addenda recommending receipt; Director Young, Chair Wallace - i Absent (5-0-0-2).
I
B-2.
I
Consider recommending approval to eliminate the photo ! RECOMMEND APPROVAL identification requirement for Youth Clipper cards (Report 13-220).
I i
Customer Services Manager Victoria Einhaus presented the staff I report.
I
I Director
I
1
Peeples expressed concern with fraud, noting that having picture identification on the card prevented adults from using the youth pass to ride the bus.
!
I
Director Davis felt that the current policy was a disservice to the community and requested that staff provide a report in six months to determine what the utilization of the youth card is and the comparable 1 impact on adult pass sales.
I
I Public Comment: 1
•
Makayla Major, ACCE Riders for Transit Justice, commented on the current process to obtain a Youth Clipper Card, noting that it needs to be more accessible. Jill Rather, New Voices Are Rising, commented on transportation for , students, noting that the process to obtain a Clipper card was too i cumbersome and needed to be simplified. Jerry Grace commented that a lot of the parents don't know how to get a youth Clipper card or adult card for that matter. He said that it was better to have picture identification on the cards. David lyons, ATU Local 192, invited directors to ride his line 49 bus in the morning, noting that by his estimation at least 50% of the youth use cash and would like to have a 31-day pass. He also said that prior to Clipper, 80% of the youth had a 31-day pass and that the vast majority of passengers pay the right fare. He also said fares going up faster than the standard of living, which encourages fraud.
MOTION: ORTIZ/DAVIS to forward to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending approval; Director Peeples - No; Director Young, Chair Wallace- Absent (4-1-0-2). Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
November 13, 2013
57
Page 9 of 16
The Operations Committee adjourned at 7:17 p.m. C.
C-1.
I EXTERNAL AFFAIRS COMMITIEE- Elsa Ortiz, Chairperson , i' The External Affairs Committee convened at 7:17 p.m. All Committee 1' i members were present with the exception of Director Young and Vice I
! President Wallace who were absent.
I
I Public Comment (for items not on the agenda) j There was no public comment offered. I! Briefing/Action Items:
1 1
ACTION SUMMARY
1
I j
1
Consider recommending receipt of the Monthly Legislative Report : RECOMMEND RECEIPT i and approval of legislative positions (Report 13-279). ,1 j
I
'
!
I Director of Legislative Affairs and Community Relations Beverly Greene ! presented the staff report.
l
! MOTION:
PEEPLES/WILLIAMS to forward to the Consent Calendar I Addenda recommending receipt; President Harper (out of seat), i Director Young, Vice President Wallace- Absent (4-0-0-3). j
C-2.
I Consider recommending receipt of the Metropolitan Transportation I Commission's 2012 ridership survey to serve as the AC Transit I Onboard Rider Profile Survey (Report 13-114a). I
I Senior
RECOMMEND RECEIPT
Transportation Planner Sally Goodman presented the staff
I report. \ j
MOTION: WILLIAMS/PEEPLES to forward to the Consent Calendar recommending receipt; President Harper (out of seat), Director Young, Vice President Wallace- Absent (4-0-0-3).
I Addenda 1
I The External Affairs Committee adjourned at 7:23 p.m.
l
D.
I FINANCE AND AUDIT COMMITIEE- Jeff Davis, Chairperson I The
Finance and Audit Committee convened at 7:23 p.m. All i Committee members were present, with exception of Director Young I and Vice President Wallace who were absent.
I
ACTION SUMMARY
I I
I
I Public Comment (for items not on the agenda) I There was no public comment offered. II
! . '
I
j Consent Items:
I MOTION: WILLIAMS/PEEPLES to forward Items D-1 through D-5 to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending adoption or receipt as i indicated; Director Young, Vice President Wallace- Absent (5-0-0-2). 1
;
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
November 13, 2013 58
I 1
I
i!
RECOMMEND ADOPTION OR RECEIPT AS INDICATED Page 10of16
D-1.
Consider recommending receipt of the FY 2013-14 First Quarter Travel and Meeting Expense Report for Directors and Board Officers (Report 13-280).
D-2.
Consider recommending receipt of the FY 2013-14 First Quarter Employee and Non-Employee Out-of-State Travel Report (Report 13281).
D-3.
Consider recommending receipt of the Surplus and Obsolete Materials Report for the Fourth Quarter of FY 2012-13 and First Quarter of FY 2013-14 (Report 13-206).
D-4.
Consider recommending adoption of Resolution No. 13-047 authorizing the General Manager or his designee to file and execute applications and funding agreements with the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services (CalCES) for allocations of Transit System Safety, Security & Disaster Response Account {TSSSDRA) Funds for FY 2013-14 (Report 13-294).
D-5.
Consider recommending adoption of Resolution No. 13-048 authorizing the General Manager or his designee to file and execute applications and funding agreements with the Alameda County Transportation Commission {ACTC) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for 2014 State Transportation Improvement Program {STIP) funding (Report 13-295). Briefing/Action Items:
D-6.
Consider recommending receipt of the Year-End Financial Statements and Independent Auditor's Report for the Year Ended June 30, 2013 (Report 13-284).
RECOMMEND RECEIPT
[The Independent Accountant's Report for Special Transit Service Districts No. 1 and No. 2 for the Year Ended June 30, 2013, was provided at the meeting for the Committee's review and is incorporated into the file by reference.] Chief Financial Officer Lewis Clinton pointed out some of the highlights of the operating year from a financial standpoint. Vicky Rodriguez and David Alvey, auditors for Maze and Associates, were also present. Ms. Rodriguez spoke about the audit procedures and findings, noting that the District had received an unmodified opinion, which is the cleanest opinion possible. She also gave an overview of the various accounting standards that were implemented with the audit. Internal controls were found to be adequate and no material weaknesses or significant deficiencies were reported.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
November 13, 2013
59
Page 11 of 16
MOTION: PEEPLES/HARPER to forward to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending receipt; Director Young and Vice President Wallace -Absent {5-0-0-3}. Director Ortiz left the meeting at 7:55p.m. D-7.
Consider recommending approval of the FY 2014-15 annual budget development process and calendar (Report 13-285).
RECOMMEND APPROVAL
Chief Financial Officer lewis Clinton presented the staff report.
I
MOTION: PEEPLES/WILLIAMS to forward to the Consent Calendar I Addenda recommending receipt; Director Young, Director Ortiz, and Vice President Wallace- Absent {4-0-0-3}. t
D-8.1 Consider recommending receipt of the Quarterly Report on the Status
RECOMMEND RECEIPT
of all Contracts and Purchase Orders over $100,000 (Report 13-286).
I Director of Procurement and Materials Jon Medwin presented the staff
1
i
report.
i
MOTION: PEEPLES/WILLIAMS to forward to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending receipt; Director Young, Director Ortiz, and 1 Vice President Wallace- Absent {4-0-0-3}.
I I
I
D-9.
I Consider
recommending receipt of the Disadvantaged Business ! Enterprise (DBE) Semi-Annual Payment Report for the period of April ! 1, 2013 through September 30, 2013 (Report 13-287).
RECOMMEND RECEIPT
I
I There was no presentation of the staff report. I I MOTION: HARPER/WILLIAMS to forward to
the Consent Calendar ! Addenda recommending receipt; Director Young, Director Ortiz, and i Vice President Wallace- Absent {4-0-0-3}.
l
D-10.! Consider recommending receipt of Annual Report on Welfare-toWork Grants and Lifeline Funding (Report 13-288).
RECOMMEND RECEIPT
Senior Capital Planning Specialist Ben Stupka presented the staff report.
I MOTION:
WILLIAMS/HARPER to forward to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending receipt; Director Young, Director Ortiz and Vice President Wallace- Absent {4-0-0-3}.
The Finance and Audit Committee adjourned at 8:05 p.m.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
November 13, 2013 60
Page 12 of 16
RECONVENE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING- Greg Harper, President The Board of Directors meeting reconvened at 8:05 p.m.
ACTION SUMMARY
7.
REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES District Secretary Linda Nemeroff reported that all of the items from the Planning, Operations, External Affairs and Finance and Audit Committee meetings had been referred to the Consent Calendar Addenda recommending receipt, approval or adoption as presented.
REPORT GIVEN
8.
CONSENT CALENDAR ADDENDA MOTION: DAVIS/WILLIAMS to receive, approve or adopt the items j referred to the Consent Calendar Addenda as indicated on the agenda. The motion carried by the following vote:
RECEIVED, APPROVED OR ADOPTED AS INDICATED
I I
I AYES:4:Davis, Williams, Peeples, Harper I ABSENT:3:0rtiz, Young, Wallace I The items brought before the Board were as follows; I A. I PLANNING COMMITTEE: A-1.
Consider receiving the Quarterly Report on the Transbay Transit Center 1 Project (Report 13-275). A-2. 1 Consider receiving the Quarterly Report on the District's Involvement in External Planning Processes (Report 13-276). 1
I
B. ' OPERATIONS COMMITTEE: B-1. Consider receiving the Quarterly Operations Performance Report for I AC Transit Fixed Route Services (Report 13-278). 1 B-2. Consider approving the elimination of the photo identification requirement for Youth Clipper cards (Report 13-220).
I
C. C-1. C-2.
D. D-1. D-2. D-3.
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE: Consider receiving the Monthly Legislative Report and approval of legislative positions (Report 13-279). Consider receiving the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's 2012 ridership survey to serve as the AC Transit On board Rider Profile Survey (Report 13-114a). FINANCE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE: Consider receiving the FY 2013-14 First Quarter Travel and Meeting Expense Report for Directors and Board Officers (Report 13-280). Consider receiving the FY 2013-14 First Quarter Employee and NonEmployee Out-of-State Travel Report (Report 13-281). Consider receiving the Surplus and Obsolete Materials Report for the Fourth Quarter of FY 2012-13 and First Quarter of FY 2013-14 (Report 13-206).
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
November 13, 2013 61
Page 13 of 16
D-4.
Consider adoption of Resolution No. 13-047 authorizing the General Manager or his designee to file and execute applications and funding agreements with the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services (CaiOES) for allocations of Transit System Safety, Security & Disaster Response Account {TSSSDRA) Funds for FY 2013-14 (Report 13294). D-5. Consider adoption of Resolution No. 13-048 authorizing the General Manager or his designee to file and execute applications and funding agreements with the Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission {MTC) for 2014 State Transportation Improvement Program {STIP) funding ! (Report 13-295). ! D-6. Consider receiving the Year-End Financial Statements and Independent 1· Auditor's Report for the Year Ended June 30, 2013 (Report 13-284). D-7. Consider approving the FY 2014-15 annual budget development process and calendar (Report 13-285). D-8. Consider receiving the Quarterly Report on the Status of all Contracts i and Purchase Orders over $100,000 (Report 13-286). D-9. Consider receiving the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Semi- ! Annual Payment Report for the period of April 1, 2013 through September 30, 2013 (Report 13-287). D-10 Consider receiving the Annual Report on Welfare-to-Work Grants and Lifeline Funding (Report 13-288).
i
9.
CLOSED SESSION/REPORT OUT General Counsel David Wolf reported out on the following:
REPORT GIVEN
MOTION: PEEPLES/ORTIZ to approve settlement of $70,000 in the matter of Jones v. AC Transit, ACSC Case No RG12645353, Claim No. 2011-0352. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:S:Peeples, Ortiz, Williams, Davis, Harper ABSENT:2:Young, Wallace 9A. Conference with Legal Counsel- Existing Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9 (a)) Gonzalez v. AC Transit, RG12638271, Claim No. 10-2092 Jones v. AC Transit, ACSC Case No RG12645353, Claim No. 2011-0352 Chavez v. AC Transit, ACSC Case No. RG13674485, Claim No. 2011-3923 Francisco, eta/. v. AC Transit, eta/., ACSC Case No. RG12617444
Quarterly Litigation Report Jones v. AC Transit, ACSC No. RG12-620431; Silveira, eta/. v. AC Transit, ACSC No. RG12-625090; Edwin v. AC Transit, ACSC No. RG12-637734; Newton v. AC Transit, ACSC No. RG13-667254; 1 • Newton v. AC Transit, ACSC No. RG13-667258; Gilmer, eta/. v. AC Transit, U.S. Dist. Ct. (No.Cai.Dist.), No. COS-05186 CW;
I·
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
November 13, 2013
62
Page 14 of 16
Forest Ambulatory Surgical Associates, L.P., et a/. v. United Hea/thcare Insurance UnitedHealth Group, Inc., eta/., U.S. Dist. Ct. (No.Cai.Dist.), No. C10-04911 EJD; Freeman v. AC Transit, ACSC No. RG13-68363S; and Claims of Escobar (13-0863) and Key (13-0843).
9B.
Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(b)) (Three Cases)
9C.
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
9D.
Public Employee Performance Evaluation {Government Code Section 549S7) Title: General Manager, General Counsel, District Secretary
10.
AGENDA PLANNING Referred to Operations Committee Director Davis requested a report on strategies to improve access to Clipper, i.e., increasing locations, marketing, and a short-term discount ride program. (President Harper concurred) Referred to Future Board Workshop 1 Director Peeples requested report on the programs being crafted by i CARB, California Energy Commission, etc. to fund the District's fuel cell 1 program as a result of recent legislation signed into law and what the j District's plan is to apply for the funding. (President Harper concurred)
Ii Referred to Finance and Audit Committee !I.
1
President Harper requested employment benefit plans.
an
informational
report
on
post-
! President Harper requested a report on why the District's unfunded liability associated with the retirement plan has not improved over the past three years. 11.
BOARD/STAFF COMMENTS Members of the Board commented on meetings and events attended since the last meeting.
12.
ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board of Directors, the meeting was adjourned at 8:22 p.m. The next meeting of the Board of Directors is scheduled for Wednesday, December 11, 2013.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
November 13, 2013
63
Page 15 of 16
Respectfully submitted/
~~ Linda A. Nemeroff District Secretary
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
November 13, 2013
64
Page 16 of 16
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-255 December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) Minutes of September 10, 2013
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider receiving the Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) minutes of September 10, 2013. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Minutes for September 10, 2013 were approved by the Accessibility Advisory Committee on November 12, 2013. Major topics included: Review of Draft 2013 AAC Top Priorities and Review of Quarterly ADA Complaints. 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.
65
Report No. 13-255 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 September 10, 2013
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:
66
Staff Report 13-255 Attachment 1
AAC Minutes
September 10, 2013
MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE AC TRANSIT ACCESSIBILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AAC) SEPTEMBER 10, 2013 Meeting came to order at 1:07 p.m. 1. Roll Call and Introduction of Guests
AAC members present: Janet Abelson Pam Fadem, Chair Don Queen Will Scott Hector Varela Hale Zukas
Scott Blanks, Vice Chair Steve Fort James Robson Deborah Taylor Marina Villena
AAC members absent: Shirley Cressey (excused) Yuli Jacobson (excused)
Jim Gonsalves (excused)
Staff:
Mallory Nestor-Brush, Accessible Services Manager Tammy Kyllo, Administrative Coordinator H.E. Christian Peeples, Board of Directors
Guests:
Patrick J. Forte, Commissioner on Aging, City of Oakland Karen Smulevitz, Commissioner on Aging, City of Oakland Danielle Roundtree Chris Mullin
2. Order of Agenda The order of the agenda was approved. 3. Approval of Minutes The minutes from the July 9, 2013 meeting were approved with the following amendment: Item #6 "Chair's Report", Chair Fadem requested another AC Transit Board Liaison be appointed to the Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) due to the current Board Liaison, Mark Williams, not attending any of the AAC meetings. Chair Fadem will send a letter to AC Transit Board of Directors requesting the change of the Board Liaison. 67
MOTION: Varela/Fort approved the July 9, 2013 AAC meeting minutes. 9 Yeas. 2 Abstentions. 4. Review of Draft 2013 AAC Top Priorities The AAC reviewed the Draft 2013 AAC Top Priorities and after the committee discussion proposed to approve the following Draft 2013 AAC Top Priorities:
• Advocate for the most equitable and accessible AC Transit service and equipment, and encourage AC Transit to be an industry leader in accessibility. • Advocate for increasing State and Federal funding for public transit. • Support and participate in driver training to ensure drivers are proficient, sensitive to the needs of seniors and people with disabilities, and help create an atmosphere that is welcoming to all riders. • Support and engage in activities to increase ridership of seniors and people with disabilities on the fixed route transit system. This includes general education to increase the public's knowledge and understanding of the needs of seniors and people with disabilities and a commitment to removing barriers throughout the transit system. Motion: Varela/Taylor Approve the Draft 2013 AAC Top Priorities 11 Yeas. Motion carries unanimously. 5. Review of Quarterly ADA Complaints Mallory Nestor-Brush, Accessible Services Manager, reported that the ADA-Conduct/ Discourtesy, ADA-Priority Seating Issue and ADA-Pass Up complaints were significantly higher compared to the same quarter last year. The Committee requested that Staff provide details on the ADA-Priority Seating for the next meeting. Abelson asked if complaints regarding wheelchairs can be identified. Staff will check with Customer Service on wheelchair identification. Taylor requested a comparison between the first year of ADA complaints database and current year. 6. Chair's Report Chair Fadem shared her letter to the AC Transit Board of Directors requesting the change of the Board Liaison to the Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) due to the current Board Liaison, Mark Williams, not attending any of the AAC meetings. Chair Fadem announced that Director Peeples has been appointed as the new Board Liaison. 7. Board Liaison Report Director Peeples reported that: • Board ofDirectors Meeting agenda items for September 11, 2013: o Inner East Bay Comprehensive Operations Analysis Urban Trunk Toolkit o Proposed revision of the District's fare structure
68
• The District is continuing to negotiate with ATU to avoid an AC Transit strike. Labor issues are ongoing with BART and there is a strong possibility of a BART strike on October 10, 2013. 8. Review of Lift/Ramp Road Call Report Mallory Nestor-Brush, Accessible Services Manager, reported that in the period of June 23, 2013- August 24, 2013, there were 32lift/ramp road calls. Of these 32 roadcalls, 11 were chargeable, or had mechanical issues. The Committee requested that route numbers be added to future reports. Taylor requested a onetime report for all road calls in the fleet to be compared to Lift/Ramp Road Calls. 9. Review of MCI Fleet Lift Report and Wheelchair Lift Cycling Report - MCI (6000 Series) Mallory Nestor Brush, Accessible Services Manager, reviewed the MCI Fleet Lift Report and Wheelchair Lift Cycling Report, which is a result of the settlement agreement regarding MCI fleet maintenance and pre-trip lift/ramp cycling by operators. 10. Service Review Advisory Committee (SRAC) Report Abelson reported that the SRAC met on Tuesday, September 3'd and three members, Yvonne Dunbar, Robert L. Kearney Jr., and Patricia Affonso, were seated or reseated. Officer elections were held and Janet Abelson and Don Queen were re-elected Chair and Vice Chair respectively. Chair Abelson also reported that the Paratransit Broker's office is moving a few doors down on Broadway and the new space will have a lovely meeting room and an area for Central Dispatch. There was also an update on the Mobility Resources Inventory Survey and a summary report on the 2013 Customer Satisfaction Survey. 11. ACTC PAPCO Report Zukas reported that the Alameda CTC 101h Annual Senior and Disabled Mobility Workshop will be held on Monday, October 7, 2013 from 9:30am- 3:30pm at Ed Roberts Campus. 12. Public Comments • Patrick J. Forte, Commissioner on Aging, City of Oakland, asked how many times drivers cycle the lift/ramp before leaving the yard. Mallory Nestor-Brush replied that each driver must cycle the lift/ramp once before leaving to make sure it is in working order. • Chris Mullin asked how to get information on bus stops that are temporarily closed due to construction. Director Peeples suggested signing up for eNews to receive that information. • Karen Smulevitz, Commissioner on Aging, City of Oakland, commented on how vital seating is for seniors at bus stops and on the bus.
69
13. Transit Correspondence This is an informational item for the committee. 14. Member Communications and Announcements • Deborah Taylor, would like to see an automatic announcement that states "please give up your seat for seniors and people with disabilities", as a reminder for passengers. • Jim Robson commented that buses are showing improvement in cleanliness. • Marina Villena shared that the Independent Living Resource Center San Francisco (ILRCSF) invites people with disabilities to join them and experience the wide variety of cultural and recreational activities San Francisco has to offer by giving away free tickets. 15. Staff Communications and Announcements None. 16. Set Next Agenda & Meeting Date The next AAC Meeting will be held Tuesday, October 8, 2013 at 1:00pm in the 2nd Floor Board Room of 1600 Franklin Street, Oakland. Agenda items include Review Fare Change Proposal and Brainstorm action items for the 2013 AAC Top Priorities. 17. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 3:10pm.
70
Staff Report 13-296
A C Transit Emp loyees' Retirement sYstem
(510) 891-7257 fax (510) 891-7169 [email protected]
To:
AC Transit Board of Directors
From:
Jeffrey Lewis - Chair, AC Transit Retirement Board
Re:
2013 Quarterly Retirement Board Report (#4)
November 2013
~
I am writing this report fewer than two months after what I thought was a very successful Joint Meeting. This report will focus on the following: 1) The investment performance of the Plan. 2) The recently approved Actuarial Valuation. 3) PEPRA and Plan Amendment 13-A- 16 Investment Resu lts Absent a sharp market sell-off in the next two months, 2013 investment results will exceed the actuarially assumed rate of7.375%. U.S. Equity markets are up by roughly 25%, international equity markets are up by 20%, emerging markets are roughly unchanged for the year and bonds are down a bit. As of the writing of this report the return (year-to-date) of the investment portfol io is in excess of 12%. As we are aware, in 2008 U.S . equity markets declined by 38%. Since that time the U.S. equity markets have returned in excess of 100%. If 20 I 3 produces a positive return for the equity markets it will mark the 5th straight year of positive returns. As was discussed at the Joint Meeting, we should be aware that in all likelihood in the years ahead we will see one (or more) years in which the equity markets decline in value and that a substantial decline should not be unexpected or viewed as unusual. Our latest investment results (as of 10/31/13) show that the portfolio returned 12% for the calendar year to date, 15% for the last 12 months, 9% per year (average) for the last 3years, and 6.6% for the last 10-years. Since inception of the fund (March 1992); the Plan has returned 8.2% on an annual basis. Actuarial Valuation At its November meeting, the Retirement Board approved the most recent Actuarial Valuation. The figures are identical to those discussed at the Joint Meeting and reviewed in the last Quarterly report. At its October meeting, the Board discussed the implications of the Governor signing AB 1222 and decided that the impact is so minimal that no changes would be made to the valuation.
The contribution from the District in its 2013/14 fiscal year will be $41.7 million, $23.4 million for the amortization of the unfunded liability, $0.80 million for expenses and the The AC Transit Employees' Retirement System is dedicated to providing a secure and predictable source of retirement income for eligible employees, retirees and beneficiaries
1600 Franklin Street Oakland, CA 94612
71
nonnal cost of $17.5 million. As a reminder, the Retjrement Board reduced the actuarially assumed rate of return from 7.5% to 7.375% this year and agreed to reduce the rate to 7.25% next year. Compared to the previous year, the funded ratio ofthe Plan improved from 59.3% to 63.9%, while the unfunded liability decreased from $293 million to $272 million. AB 1222 and Plan Amendment 13-A-16
When the Governor signed AB 1222 everything pertaining to PEPRA changed for AC Transit employees. We have spent time at our two most recent Board meetings discussing the impact of AB 1222 on Plan Amendment 13-A-16. Hugo Wildmann and the District have been discussing the Plan Amendment and AB 1222. The Retirement Board was also infonned that the 6% employee contribution is no longer being taken from any AC Transit employee. The Retirement Board will continue to discuss the implications of AB 1222 at upcoming meetings. Please feel free to call me, Jeffrey Lewis, at 839-6824, or Hugo Wildmann at, (8914889), if you would like to discuss this report or request additional infonnation.
20 I3 quarterly Rep on tJ4 draft after board
72
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR CALENDAR
December 11, 2013 Agenda Items 6A – 6E
73
This page intentionally blank
74
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-240d December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Resolution 13-046 Amending Board Policy 328 (Fare Policy)
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider the approval of Resolution 13-046 amending Board Policy 328 (Fare Policy: fares, fare structure, and fare increases) to include provision of a day pass fare instrument, to delete transfers as a fare instrument, to provide discounts for clipper card usage, and amend the fare increase schedule to be effective on July 1, 2014 and determining that the fare adjustment is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On September 11, 2013, the Board of Directors set Public Hearings on potential changes to AC Transit's fare structure. On September 25th, the Board modified the parameters of the hearings to i·nclude Dumbarton Express fares, and maintaining the price of a 31-day adult Transbay pass at $151.20. Public hearings were held on October 23, 2013, at 2 p.m. and at 5 p.m. at AC Transit General Offices. Staff also solicited comments on the proposed fare structure revisions at a series of public outreach meetings held from October 8, 2013 to October 16, 2013, throughout the AC Transit service area. This proposal is primarily designed to improve the efficiency and convenience of AC Transit' s fare payment system by eliminating transfers and instituting a day pass. In addition, the day pass will improve mobility for transit-reliant passengers by allowing an unlimited number of trips per day for a single price. This proposal also includes actions to create incentives for passengers to use Clipper, and proposes changes to local adult and youth/senior/disabled 31-day pass prices. These actions are a follow-up to the Board's April 14, 2013, deferral of a fare increase that was scheduled for implementation on July 1, 2013. At that time, staff proposed returning to the Board with a proposal that could include elimination of transfers and the introduction of a day pass. Both of these actions are in keeping with standard industry practice, as shown in the attached summary of fare products (Attachment 4). Few American transit agencies now use paid transfers. To passengers, transfer payments are an additional fare for trips which have the inconvenience of requiring two or more buses. For AC Transit, transfers are time consuming and costly to handle, fail to adequately compensate the District for rides, and have the potential for fraud . These fare structure changes will decrease boarding/dwell time for enhanced operations as well as encourage increased patronage. Staff returned to the Board on November 13, 2013, with a Title VI analysis on the proposed fare structure changes. This analysis found no disparate impacts. 75
Report 13-240d Page 2 of 8
BUDGETARY/FISCALIMPACT: This section of the report will discuss anticipated budgetary and fiscal impacts on AC Transit. Cost changes and impacts for passengers are discussed in the Background/Rationale section. Switching from transfers to day passes will all but eliminate the District's revenue from transfers, as well as reduce revenue from local cash fares. The day passes will represent a new source of revenue. Based on the experience of other transit agencies, staff anticipates that 15% of local adult fares would be paid with day passes, while 5% of youth and senior fares would be paid with day passes. However, in our financial calculation we have assumed a 10% adult take up rate, so as not to overestimate the impact of the passes. The lower youth/senior percentage would result from the fact that monthly passes for youth and seniors are priced so low, and therefore a higher percentage of youth/senior passengers would use monthly passes. This analysis makes the conservative assumption that the number of passengers riding the system will not change. However, it is anticipated that the convenience and improved access provided by the day pass will attract additional passengers. FY15 Proiected Farebox Revenue With Prooosed Dav Pass and Other Chanaes Fare Category Fare Type
Current Fares
FY13 Revenue
Proposed
(actual)
Fare
FY15 Projected Rev. with Day Pass (Eliminate Transfers)
Single Ride: Adult- Local
2.10
29,689,106
2.10
23,751,285
Adult - Transbay
4.20
4,505,183
4.20
4,505,183
Youth/Senior/Disabled- Local
1.05
4,772,822
1.05
4,295,540
Youth/Senior/DisabledTransbav
2.10
135,155
2.10
135,155
Adult Local 31 Day Pass
80.00
4,179,990
75.00
3,918,741
151.20
1,994,792
151.20
1,994,792
Multi-Ride: Adult- Transbay 31 Day Pass Senior/Disabled Monthly Pass
20.00
2,551,112
23.00
2,933,779
Youth 31 Day Pass
20.00
2,284,387
23.00
2,627,045
450,000 Eliminated
0
5.00
7,068,835
2.50
568,193 51,798,547 2.44%
Transfers: Transfers- Local***
0.25
Day Pass: Local Adult Day Pass Youth/Senior/Disabled- Local Total from all are categories 0 %change over FY13 Revenue
50,562,547
Assumptions: 1. No change in ridership 2. Local vs. Transbay ratio stays close to 1:2 3. No elasticity calculation due to no change in current fares for single rides 4. *Day Pass usage is calculated at 10% of total Local Adult (reduce local adult rev for round trip} =total 20% reduction in Local Adult Fare Revenue **Day Pass usage is calculated at 5% of total Local Y/8/D (reduce Y/S/0 rev for round trip)= total10% reduction in Local Y/S/0 Fare Revenue *"'*Transfers are estimated based on various statistical reports. Rev. as of 11/22/13
76
• ••
Report 13-240d Page 3 of 8 BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Process Beginning in late summer of 2012, AC Transit staff embarked on an analysis of the fare structure. The analysis included: o
Assessing new fare strategies
o
Charging a Fare per Boarding
o
Eliminating Transfers
o
Increasing Clipper Use
o
Introducing a Day and a 7 Day Pass
o
Expanding the Retail Sales Network
o
Reducing the Cost of the 31 Day Pass
Additionally, the analysis attempted to determine potential financial impacts, ridership impacts, and potential Title VI implications. The AC Transit Board was briefed on the analysis at its retreat on March 13, 2013 and at its April14, 2013 meeting deferred a fare increase scheduled for July 1, 2013. Since that time, staff has continued to evaluate and deliberate on how to best manage the fare structure in keeping with the goals of the fare policy (Simplicity, Appropriateness, Equity, Transparency, Policy Supportiveness, and Affordability). Attention was focused especially on a fare per boarding, elimination of transfers, introducing a day pass, and increasing Clipper use. Changes in fares would also be applicable to the Dum barton Express, which was unintentionally omitted from the initial Staff Report. Transfers and Day Passes This fare structure change centers on shifting from a fare and transfer system to a day pass system for local fares.
It represents a shift in longstanding AC Transit practice, but it is a shift
which numerous transit agencies have made. These include Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans), Regional Transit (Sacramento), Metro
(Los Angeles),
Orange
County Transportation
Authority (OCTA),
Metropolitan
Transportation System (San Diego), and Regional Transportation Commission (Las Vegas), among others (see Attachment 4) Shifting from transfers to day passes is beneficial for both passengers and AC Transit. Passengers gain a single convenient fare instrument which is valid for a whole day, not simply two hours. With a day pass, passengers can take additional trips beyond their daily commute at no additional charge. This represents a gain in mobility at no cost, which will probably be most valuable to low income passengers. The day pass eliminates the uncertainty (and sometimes conflict) about whether a transfer is valid for a given trip. As a convenient to use, affordably priced fare product, the potential for marketing the day pass is strong. At the same time,
77
Report 13-240d Page 4 of8 passengers who only take one or two bus rides per day can continue to pay cash fares at no additional cost (although some may opt for day passes simply for convenience). Day passes would be available from the farebox. They would be paper media with a magnetic strip and on Clipper. On Clipper, passengers using a day pass would be charged $2.00 for their first ride, $2.00 for the second ride, $1.00 for their third ride, and any subsequent rides would be free. This is known as an accumulator. The goal is to transition passengers from buying day passes at the farebox to buying them through Clipper. To make this a convenient option will require an expanded network of Clipper vendors and/or mechanisms for Clipper users without credit cards to auto load the card. The change from transfers to day passes has numerous advantages. There will be fewer and shorter transactions at the farebox. Dwell times at bus stops will be reduced and travel times will speed up. Speeding up bus travel times is a benefit to all passengers. The District will have fewer coins and fewer materials to handle. An entire class of potential disputes between drivers and passengers will be eliminated. Issuing transfers through the trim unit has reduced fraud and the elimination of transfers should result in a further reduction of fraud.
Cost of Using the Day Pass Depending on their riding pattern, passengers should experience little or no cost increase from this change. The 2012 MTC survey of AC Transit passengers found that 56% do not transfer on their trip, 36% transfer once, and 9% transfer two or more times. (The numbers cannot be precisely equated to the use of two or three buses because they include out of system transfers, staff is researching bus-specific transfers.) Passengers using two buses each way on their commute (and not already using a pass) now pay $4.70 per day, ($2.10 fare+ 25 cents for a transfer each way). These passengers will experience a fare increase of 30 cents per day, or 6% of their existing fare. If the 2011 fare recommendation of a $2.25 fare and 25 cents transfer had been implemented, these passengers would be paying exactly $5.00. Passengers using one bus each way will presumably not buy a day pass, unless they want to take additional rides on a given day.
Period of Validity for Day Passes The day pass would be valid for a service day. For example VTA's day pass is valid from the time purchased until 3 a.m. the next morning. Staff is analyzing ridership and service patterns to determine what the most appropriate time cutoff for AC Transit's day pass would be. Most American day passes follow this "service day" model. However, some day passes are issued on a 24 hour rolling basis, e.g. a pass bought at 11 a.m. Tuesday would be valid until 11 a.m. Wednesday. However, structuring and programming this day pass model into Clipper would be more complex, costly, and time-consuming than a service day model. In the interest of
78
Report 13-240d Page 5 of 8 implementing day passes as soon as possible and limiting use to a single day of service as staff intends, staff recommends following the VTA service day model.
Youth/Senior/Disabled Day Pass To assure that fare products are available to the widest range of passengers, we propose creation of youth/senior/disabled day pass costing $2.50 per day. We expect less usage of this pass, because the price of the monthly youth/senior/disabled pass is so low. Some agencies which offer day passes do not offer a reduced price youth/senior/disabled day pass.
Transfer Products Retained Interagency transfers, primarily to BART and on the Dum barton Express, will be retained under this proposal, as there is not a unified regional fare instrument. Similarly, in the absence of a Transbay day pass, free Transbay to local transfers, used by only a few dozen people per weekday, will be retained.
Cash Fares and Clipper Incentives This proposal maintains cash fares at their current levels, neither raising nor reducing them. This approach should help maintain our fare revenues. At the same time, we seek to move cash paying passengers onto Clipper. Clipper fare collection is cheaper for the district and greatly reduces bus dwell times while passengers pay their fares. In order to provide an incentive for cash payers to switch to Clipper, we propose a 5% discount on the local adult and youth/senior/disabled fare, including Dumbarton Express fares.
The local adult fare with
Clipper would be $2.00; the local youth/senior/disabled fare would be $1.00. A number of transit agencies provide discounts on fare products on their smart cards as an incentive to use the smart card. Increasing Clipper use is an objective that the District will also pursue through marketing campaigns and any other avenues that may be appropriate. Staff anticipates returning to the Board in the future to propose potential additional financial incentives to passengers opting to use Clipper. Until the Clipper network is expanded in the East Bay, the District's ability to move passengers to Clipper will be constrained. Staff will continue to work with MTC on an ongoing basis to increase Clipper vendor coverage in the East Bay.
Local and Transbay Pass Prices This proposal would make modest changes in some pass prices. Policy 328 sets a target that passes should cost 36 times the applicable cash fare. The target of 36 times the cash fare was the national average, and provides a discount for a monthly user. Under this proposal, the local adult monthly pass would drop from $80-a price grandfathered in to the 2011 policy-to $75, which is 36 times the $2.10 cash fare. The Transbay pass price, which is already at 36 times the cash fare of $4.20, would remain at $151.20
79
Report 13-240d Page 6 of 8
Youth/Senior/Disabled Pass Staff recognizes that the price of the youth/senior/disabled pass has attracted passionate concern. It has been a focus of discussions of transit affordability. At the same time, staff feels that if the price of that pass is too low, it reduces revenue to the District, constraining our ability to provide service to everyone (including youth). If the youth pass price is disproportionately low, it also raises questions of equity among our passengers. This disparity is also an incentive to fraud. This proposal would raise the youth/senior/disabled pass to $23 per month. Policy 328 developed a multiyear schedule to gradually raise the youth/senior/disabled pass price to 36 times the youth cash fare, in parallel with other passes. Currently the $20 pass price, among the lowest in the country, is only 19 times the fare. Under Policy 328, the price of the pass would go to $26.50 this year. This proposal is half as large an increase. At 36 times the cash fare, the youth pass price would be $36 per month. Staff believes the $23 figure moderates the impact of the increase while still moving towards the District's fare structure goals. At $23, AC Transit would still have one of the cheapest monthly youth passes in the country.
Seven Day Pass The 2011 fare policy included the creation of a seven day pass. A number of systems throughout the country have adopted this fare media. The seven day pass was intended to be a more affordable multi-ride pass for passengers unable to pay the full cost of a monthly pass at one time. The implementation of a seven day pass was determined to not be feasible at this time. After a meeting in May between the General Manager and the Executive Director of MTC, it was agreed that, if implemented, AC Transit would be the only agency in the Bay Area with such a fare instrument. That would cause additional programming time and costs with the Clipper contractor. Since the seven day pass is already in the policy and has been through the public hearing process, it is recommended that it remain a potential future fare media product.
Summary of Public Outreach Marketing staff has prepared a Summary of Public Outreach activities which is provided in Attachment 5.
Title VI Under federal guidelines, all fare change proposals must undergo review for compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. The review is to ensure that the changes would not result in disproportionately high or adverse effects on minority and low-income populations.
Staff
conducted a Title VI analysis and presented a full report on the analysis to the Board of Directors at its November 13, 2013, meeting. The analysis found that the changes did not result in disproportionately high or adverse effects on minority and low-income populations.
80
Report 13-240d Page 7 of 8
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Compliance Section 21080(b)(8) of the Public Resources Code and Section 15273 of the CEQA Guidelines exempt from the provisions of CEQA the proposed fare changes provided the District makes the required written findings justifying the use of the funds, as outlined in these sections, and the written findings are incorporated into the record. The exempt purposes for exempting a fare adjustment include: meeting operating expenses, including employee wage rates and fringe benefits; purchasing or leasing supplies, equipment, or materials; meeting financial reserve needs and requirements; obtaining funds for capital projects, necessary to maintain service within existing service areas; or obtaining funds necessary to maintain such intra-city transfers as are authorized by city charter. A resolution authorizing the fare changes has been prepared for the Board's consideration and includes the required written findings which are applicable to the District. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: The advantage of the proposed fare structure is that it provides a simple, appropriate, fair, transparent policy, both supportive and affordable in accordance with the Board Policy 328 goals as identified in this report. The elimination of transfers and focusing on prepaid fare media including day passes will speed up boarding and reduce fare payment conflicts. The disadvantage is that the current fare structure, especially with the use of transfers, is a long standing practice and it may be difficult for passengers to adjust and gain familiarity with the new structure. While the proposal is designed to minimize impacts on passengers, it is inevitable that some passengers will experience cost increases, most of them small (e.g., from $4.70 per day to $5.00 per day). An extensive community outreach and education program will help mitigate this to some extent and some leniency during the implementation period should be considered. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: Staff considered proposals concerning fare policy which we do not recommend. One such alternative was seeking to implement the fare and pass price increases set forth under the 2011 policy. However, such an action would have seemed contradictory to the Board's April action. Implementing that increase would not have dealt with transfer issues nor reduced the high local adult pass price. For these reasons, staff does not recommend this course of action. Another alternative would be leaving all fares and pass prices as-is. Again, this action would not have dealt with transfer issues, nor responded to pass prices that are currently at inappropriate levels. For these reasons, staff does not recommend this course of action.
81
Report 13-240d Page 8 of 8 PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Board Policy No. 328- Fare Policy: Fares, Fare Structure, and Fare Increases: Adopted 6/11/12 Staff Report 13-099: Resolution 13-022 deferring the scheduled implementation of the July 1, 2013 fare increase
ATTACHMENTS: 1:
Resolution No. 13-046 Amending Board Policy 328 (with exhibit)
2:
Fare Change Proposal for October 23, 2013 Public Hearing
3.
Public Hearing Notice
4.
Summary of AC Transit and Other Agencies' Fare Products
5.
Summary of Public Outreach Department Head Approval: Tom Prescott, Chief Performance Officer
Reviewed by:
Prepared by:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel Lewis G. Clinton, Chief Financial Officer Robert del Rosario, Planning and Marketing Director John Haenftling, Director of Project Controls & System Analysis Nathan Landau, Senior Transportation Planner Sue Lee, Treasurer Victoria Wake, Marketing Manager
82
SR No. 240d Attachment 1
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 13-046 A RESOLUTION AMENDING BOARD POLICY 328 (FARE POLICY: FARES, FARE STRUCTURE, AND FARE INCREASES) TO INCLUDE PROVISION OF A DAY PASS FARE INSTRUMENT, TO DELETE TRANSFERS AS A FARE INSTRUMENT, PROVIDE DISCOUNTS FOR CLIPPER CARD USAGE, AND AMEND THE FARE INCREASE SCHEDULE TO BE EFFECTIVE ON JULY 1, 2014 AND DETERMINING THAT THE FARE ADJUSTMENT IS EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT WHEREAS, the Board of Directors is authorized by Public Utilities Code section 25807 to establish reasonable rates and charges for the operation of the District; and; and WHEREAS, Board Policy 328 (Fare Policy: Fares, Fare Structure, and Fare Increases) was adopted on June 22, 2011 and implemented on August 1, 2011; and WHEREAS, a marketing audit conducted in late 2012 by Gobis and Associates recommended modifications to AC Transit's fare structure and collection method; and WHEREAS, at the March 13, 2013 AC Transit Board retreat staff was directed to further investigate fare structure modifications; and WHEREAS, at the April 24, 2013 AC Transit Board of Directors regular meeting Resolution No. 13-022 was adopted deferring the scheduled implementation of the July 1, 2013 fare increase pending further analysis of District staff's fare policy recommendations; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of September 11, 2013, the Board of Directors set public hearings for October 23, 2013, at 2:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. at 1600 Franklin Street in Oakland, California to consider a proposal to revise the fare structure to introduce a day pass, eliminate transfers, create Clipper discounts on local cash fares, to reduce the price of 31-day adult local passes, and to increase the price of the youth/senior/disabled pass; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of September 25, 2013 the Board of Directors amended the parameters of the October 23, 2013 public hearing to include the applicability of the proposed fare modifications to the Dum barton Express; and WHEREAS, notices of the October 23, 2013 public hearing were published in the following major local and ethnic newspapers: Tri-Valley Herald, San Mateo County Times, West County Times, El Mundo, Oakland Post, Sing Tao Daily, the Alameda Newspaper Group (ANG) which includes the Oakland Tribune, Hayward Daily Review, Fremont Argus and Alameda Times Star, as well as detailed information on the District's website; and WHEREAS, a brochure, in English, Spanish and Chinese, describing the fare change proposals was placed on the District's buses, in senior centers, libraries and other community sites in the affected service areas and mailed to local government officials in the affected cities and counties; and
Resolution No. 13-046
Page 1 o/4 83
SR No. 240d Attachment l
WHEREAS, on October 23, 2013 the Board of Directors held public hearings at 2:00p.m. and at 5:00 p.m. at AC Transit's General Office located at 1600 Franklin Street in Oakland, California and received comments from 30 speakers as well as 12 written comments, including one petition on the proposed fare adjustment proposals; and WHEREAS, approximately 219 additional comments were received via letters, faxes, voice mail and e-m ails before the public hearing and sent to all Directors, as well as placed in a binder in the District Secretary's Office for review by the Board of Directors; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, an evaluation of the Title VI implications of the fare proposals was prepared by the District's Title VI staff approved and received by the Board of Directors at its November 13, 2013 meeting; and WHEREAS, Public Resources Code section 21080(b){8) and 14 California Code of Regulations section 15273 exempts from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the establishment, modification, structuring, restructuring, or approval of rates, tolls, fares, or other charges which are for any of the purposes set forth in the exemption provided written findings are made; and WHEREAS, the required written findings are more particularly set forth in Section 3
below; NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District does resolve as follows:
Section 1. Amends Board Policy 328 (Fare Policy: Fares, Fare Structure and Fare Increases) to implement a day pass, eliminate local to local AC Transit transfers, adjust monthly pass prices, offer discounts to Clipper card users as said policy is set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated as part of this Resolution. Section 2.
Adopts the modified fares and schedule of planned fare increases as set forth in Exhibit A to this Resolution, attached hereto and incorporated as of part of this Resolution.
Section 3. Determines that the proposed fare adjustments are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to section 21080(b){8) of CEQA and section 15273 of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15273 of the Guidelines provide as follows: "(a) CEOA does not apply to the establishment, modification, structuring, restructuring, or approval of rates, tolls, fares, or other charges by public agencies which the public agency finds are for the purpose of:
1. Meeting operating expenses, including employee wage rates and fringe benefits, 2. Purchasing or leasing supplies, equipment, or materials, Resolution No. 13-046
Poge2of4 84
SR No. 240d Attachment I
3. Meeting financial reserve needs and requirements, 4. Obtaining funds for capital projects, necessary to maintain service within existing service areas, or 5. Obtaining funds necessary to maintain such intra-city transfers as are authorized by city charter." The Board finds and declares that the adjustments set forth in Exhibit A to this resolution are exempt from CEQA for the reasons stated above supported by the following: a. Obligations
1. The District has ongoing operating expenses, which include, but are not limited to existing collective bargaining agreements, costs for providing and maintaining the bus service provided to our customers, costs for paying for debt service and the costs of insurance, utilities and similar items. 2. The District needs to continue to purchase parts, supplies and equipment for the direct and indirect functioning of the organization. 3. The District has an obligation to pay its debt service on its Certificates of Participation (COPs) on the General Office building, the Finance/Human Resources Project and the 661h Avenue Property Acquisition, as well as any short-term (one-year) borrowing it may engage in either through Revenue Anticipation Notes or a line of credit.
This resolution repeals and supersedes any and all prior Resolutions that are in conflict with its contents. Section 4.
Section 5. Staff is authorized and directed to file such documents that may be required
by CEQA and Board Policy 512 based on the actions authorized by this Resolution. Section 6. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage by four
affirmative votes of the Board of Directors.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of December 2013.
Greg Harper, President
Resolution No. 13-046
85
Page3of4
SR No. 240d Attachment 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 11th day of December, 2013 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
Approved as to Form and Content:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel
Resolution No. 13-046
86
Page4of4
Resolution No. 13-046 Exhibit A
AC Transit BOARD POLICY
Policy No. 328 Category: Financial Matters
FARE POLICY: FARES, FARE STRUCTURE, AND FARE INCREASES PURPOSE
The purpose of this Board Policy is to set forth AC Transit's fare policy-the District's fares, its fare structure, planned fare increases-and the goals and rationales for them. This policy serves to codify the actions regarding fares, fare structure, and fare policies taken by the Board of Directors in approving Resolution No. 13-046 on December 11, 2013 DEFINITIONS
The specific fare or price levels and conditions for the various fare types below are contained in the attached Fare Tables in Exhibit A, Resolution No.13-046. Clipper Card or Clipper: The Bay Area regional stored-value transit electronic payment "smart card" administered by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). This card can be used to pay AC Transit fares if it is loaded with cash and/or AC Transit passes. Discount Fare: Discount fare shall be the fare required of passengers eligible for youth, senior, or disabled fares. EasyPass: Annual Transbay-value pass provided on Clipper to a defined universe of participants at qualified colleges, employers, and residential communities. Day Pass: Fare instrument, whether in paper form or electronic form on Clipper, that grants an AC Transit passenger the right to board an AC Transit bus(es) for one fare on the day of purchase. POLICY I.
GOALS OF THE FARE POLICY The following are the goals of the fare policy, as adopted by the AC Transit Board of Directors: Goal 1 - Simplicity: Fares and the fare structure should be easy to use for passengers, and easy to operate for the District. Goal 2 - Appropriateness: value for passengers.
Fares and the fare structure should provide a good
Goal 3 - Equity: Fares and the fare structure should be fair for all passengers. Goal 4 - Transparency: Fares and the fare structure should result in predictable costs and cost increases for passengers; and predictable revenue increases for the District. Page 1 of 14 Adopted: 6/22/11 Amended: 12/11/13 87
Resolution No. 13-046 Exhibit A Goal 5 - Policy Supportiveness: Fares and the fare structure should be supportive
of other District goals-service, land use, and social goals-and compliant with other regulatory mandates. Goal 6 - Affordability: Fares should be affordable to all passengers to ensure their full access to bus service and to prevent adverse impacts on socially vulnerable populations.
II.
RATIONALES FOR KEY PROVISIONS OF THE POLICY - This policy was developed after a review of policies and practices of local and national transit agencies. The following are rationales for key elements of the Policy: Transbay fare as twice local fare - Longstanding AC Transit practice, this also
approximates BART Transbay fares. This supports Goals 1, 2, and 3. Discount fares as 50% of base fare - The federally mandated discount for senior and disabled fares is 50% in the off-peak period. AC Transit has generally maintained discount cash fares as 50% of the adult fare, the most common discount fare level among American transit agencies. This supports Goals 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6.
31 -Day pass prices as thirty-six (36) times the applicable single-ride fare - This ratio is the median ratio between pass prices and cash fares among American transit agencies. For passengers who ride 5 days per week, or approximately 40 times per month, a pass priced at 36 times the single-ride fare provides a modest discount, with any "extra" trips (such as weekend trips) being free. Because some of AC Transit's discount passes are currently priced far below this level, the fare policy provides for a seven-year transition period, through 2018, to gradually bring them up to the target level. This supports Goals 2, 3, 4, and 6. Establishing 7-Day pass - These passes provide a discount for people who sometimes use the system heavily, but not for a full month. They provide a discount fare instrument for people who may have difficulty paying for a full month's pass at a time. This supports Goals 2, 3 and 6. Developing a ten-year schedule of fare increases - Developing a ten-year schedule of fare increases creates predictability for passengers, for the District, and for other agencies that work with AC Transit. Having a long-term plan for fare increases allows the District to respond to inflation, and also obviates the need for very large fare increases at one time. It allows a planned transition of discount pass prices to the target levels. A number of transit agencies regionally and nationally have moved to a longer-term approach. This supports Goals 2, 3, 4, and 6. Ill.
FARE STRUCTURE
Specific levels for the fares referred to in this section are found in the Fare Tables, Resolution No.13-046, Exhibit A.
A. Adult Local Fare as Base Fare - The adult local fare shall be the base fare, upon which other fares and pass prices are calculated. B. Transbay Fare - The adult Trans bay fare for shall be twice the adult local fare. Page 2 of 14
Adopted: Amended: 88
6/22/11 12/11/13
Resolution No. 13-046 Exhibit A C. Discount Fare - The discount fare shall be half of the applicable adult fare, local or Transbay. D. 31-Day Pass Prices -The target price of a 31-day pass shall be thirty-six (36) times the applicable adult or discount fare. However, pass prices through 2018 shall be governed by the schedule of graduated increases in the Fare Tables in Resolution No.13-046, Exhibit A. E.
EasyPass Prices - Prices under the EasyPass program shall be at the levels established in the EasyPass pricing matrices in Resolution No. 13-046, Exhibit A.
F.
7-Day Passes - As further described in Section IV.B. below, the District shall initiate the sale of 7-day local adult, local youth, local senior/disabled, and Trans bay adult passes. These passes shall cost ten (1 0) times the applicable single-ride fare.
G. Other Fares - The provisions of Resolution No. 13-046, Exhibit A (attached), concerning Free Rides, Dumbarton Express fares, Regional Transfers, Capitol Corridor, and Ferry Transfers shall govern these fares. IV,
FARE MEDIA
A. Existing Fare Media - Passengers may pay their fare using the follow media: 1. Cash - The passenger may pay the applicable fare in cash, either in bills and coins or as cash loaded on a Clipper card. 2. Day Pass - The passenger may pay the applicable fare for the day pass in cash, either in bills and coins or as cash loaded on a Clipper card. 3. Pass - The passenger may pay the applicable fare using a 31-Day Pass, an EasyPass (including Class Pass), or an RTC Monthly Pass, and either as a paper pass or a pass loaded on a Clipper card. 4. Discount transfer from BART - The passenger may use a BART-toBus transfer to receive a twenty-five cent ($0.25) discount against the otherwise applicable fare, either as a paper transfer or a transfer on a Clipper card. 5. Special Agency Ticket - The passenger may pay the applicable fare using a ticket provided by a qualified public or social service agency, or a qualified non-profit organization.
B.
Planned 7 -Day Pass - The District shall make available, at the earliest practicable date, passes valid for seven consecutive days of unlimited local or Transbay rides. These shall be made available only as a product on Clipper.
---·--·----·---
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Page 3 of 14
Adopted: Amended: 89
6/22/11 12/11/13
Resolution No. 13-046 Exhibit A V.
FARE AND PASS PRICE LEVELS
A. Future Planned Increases 1. Planned Fare Levels by Date - Exhibit A of Resolution No. 13-046 (following section V.B.) contains the approved fare and pass price levels, listed as AC Transit Table of Fares effective August 1, 2011; July 1, 2014; July 1, 2016, and July 1, 2018. 2. Financial Review Prior to Implementation of Fare Increases - Prior to each scheduled fare increase, the Board of Directors shall receive and consider a report on the fare revenue and financial situation of the District. 3. Overall Review of Fares and Pass Prices in Five Years - In 2016, five years after the initiation of this Policy, the Board of Directors shall conduct a review of the implementation of the Policy and its effects. B.
Discounted fares on Clipper Cards - The District shall make a discounted base fare available for both full fare paying passengers and discount fare paying passengers (youth, senior, disabled) to encourage more Clipper card utilization. This policy shall be implemented if, and only if, the Board of Directors determines that the policy is consistent with the requirements of Title VI.
Page 4 of 14
Adopted: Amended: 90
6/22/11 12/11/13
Resolution No. 13-046 Exhibit A
Exhibit A: Resolution 13-046
AC Transit Table of Fares Effec1ve f Augus t 1 2011 '
Adult
Youth Age 5-18 (No ID Required)
Seniors 65+, Disabled and Medicare Cardholder
Local Cash
$2.10
$1.05
(ID Required) $1.05
Local Transfer*
$0.25
$0.25
$0.25
Transbay Cash
$4.20
$2.10
$2.10
Transbay Transfer**
Free
Free
Free
BART-to-Bus***
$1.85
$0.80
$0.80
Cash
•
Good for 120 minutes (2 hours) and one use only .
** Issued on first bus upon payment of Transbay fare. Applies to Local-to-Transbay and Transbay-toLocal. Good for 120 minutes (2 hours) and one use only. ••• Local trips only. No discount on Transbay.
Adult
Youth Age 5-18 (No ID Required)
Local e-Cash
$2.10
$1.05
Seniors 65+, Disabled and Medicare Cardholder (ID Required) $1.05
Transbay e-Cash
$4.20
$2.10
$2.10
Local 31-Day
$80.00*
$20.00*
N/A
Transbay 31-Day
$151.20
N/A
N/A
Local Monthly
N/A
N/A
$20.00*
Local 7-Day**
$21.00*
$10.50*
$1 0.50*
Transbay 7 -Day
$42.00
N/A
N/A
Clipper Card Value
• Can be upgraded to Transbay with e-Cash. E-Cash must be present on card for upgrade. ** Will be available as soon as it can be implemented on Clipper after August 1, 2011.
Other Passes Local Senior/Disabled Monthly (sticker on RTC Discount Card)
Page 5 of 14
Adopted: Amended: 91
$20.00
6/22/11 12/11/13
Resolution No. 13-046 Exhibit A
EasyPass Pricing Matrices The General Manager is allowed pricing flexibility 15 percent above or below a matrix price point, and is allowed to offer up to a 20-percent discount to colleges in a one-year pilot program.
Effective August 1, 2011 For Businesses and Residential Communities
For Two- and Four-Year Colleges
100-500
10,001+
Adopted: Amended:
Page 6 of 14
92
6/22/11 12/11/13
Resolution No. 13-046 Exhibit A
Exhibit A: Resolution 13-046
AC Transit Table of Fares Eftecf1ve J UIY I 1 2014
'
Adult
Youth Age 5-18 (No ID Required)
Seniors 65+,
Local Cash
$2.10
$1 .05
Disabled and Medicare Cardholder (ID Required) $1.05
Day Pass
$5.00
$2.50
$2.50
Transbay Cash
$4.20
$2.10
$2.10
Transbay Transfer*
Free
Free
Free
BART-to-Bus**
$1 .85
$0.80
$0 .80
Cash
*
Issued on first bus upon payment of Transbay fare. Applies only to Transbay-to-Local. Good for 120 minutes (2 hours) and one use only.
**
Local trips only. No discount on Transbay.
Adult
Youth Age 5-18 (No ID Required)
Local e-Cash
$2 .00
$1 .00
Seniors 65+, Disabled and Medicare Cardholder (ID Required) $1 .00
Transbay e-Cash
$4.20
$2.10
$2.10
Day Pass e-Cash
$5.00
$2.50
$2.50
Local 31-Day
$75.00
$23.00
N/A
$151 .20
N/A
N/A
Local Monthly
N/A
N/A
$23.00
Local 7-Day*
$20.00
$10.00
$10 .00
Transbay 7-Day*
$42.00
N/A
N/A
Clipper Card Value
Transbay 31 -Day
*7 Day Passes are not available in the 2014 fare structure.
Other Passes Local Senior/Disabled Monthly (sticker on RTC Discount Card) Page 7 of 14
Adopted: Amended : 93
$23 .00 6/22/11 12/11/13
Resolution No. 13-046 Exhibit A
EasyPass Pricing Matrices The General Manager is allowed pricing flexibility 15 percent above or below a matrix price point, and is allowed to offer up to a 20-percent discount to colleges in a one-year pilot program. Effective July 1, 2014 For Businesses and Residential Communities
10,001+
For Two- and Four-Year Colleges
100-500
10,001+
$69 $65 $61 $58
Page 8 of 14
Adopted: Amended: 94
6/22/11 12/11/13
Resolution No. 13-046 Exhibit A
AC Transit Table of Fares Effecf1ve J UIY I 1' 2016 Adult
Youth Age 5-18 (No ID Required)
Seniors 65+, Disabled and Medicare Cardholder
Local Cash
$2.25
$1.10
(ID Required) $1.10
Day Pass
$5.00
$2.50
$2.50
Transbay Cash
$4.50
$2.20
$2.20
Transbay Transfer*
Free
Free
Free
BART-to-Bus**
$2.00
$0.85
$0.85
Cash
*
Issued on first bus upon payment of Transbay fare. Applies only to Transbay-to-Local. Good for 120 minutes (2 hours) and one use only.
** Local trips only. No discount on Transbay.
Adult
Youth Age 5-18 (No ID Required)
Seniors 65+,
Local e-Cash
$2.15
$1 .05
Disabled and Medicare Cardholder (ID Required) $1 .10
Transbay e-Cash
$4.50
$2.20
$2 .20
Day Pass e-Cash
$5.00
$2.50
$2.50
Local 31-Day
$81 .00*
$26.50*
N/A
Transbay 31-Day
$162.00
N/A
N/A
Clipper Card Value
Local Monthly
N/A
Local 7-Day** Trans bay 7-Day**
N/A
$26 .50*
$22.50*
$11 .00*
$11 .00*
$45.00
N/A
N/A
* Can be upgraded to Transbay with e-Cash. E-Cash must be present on card for upgrade. **7 Day Pass dependent on availability
Other Passes Local Senior/Disabled Monthly (sticker on RTC Discount Card)
Page 9 of 14
Adopted: Amended: 95
$26.50
6/22/11 12/11/13
Resolution No. 13-046 Exhibit A
EasyPass Pricing Matrices The General Manager is allowed pricing flexibility 15 percent above or below a matrix price point, and is allowed to offer up to a 20-percent discount to colleges in a one-year pilot program. Effective July 1, 2016
For Employers and Residential Communities
10,001+
For Two- and Four-Year Colleges
10,001+
--···-·-----
Page 10 of 14
Adopted: Amended: 96
6/22/11 12/11/13
Resolution No. 13-046 Exhibit A
AC Transit Table of Fares Effec f 1ve J UIY I 1' 2018 Adult
Youth Age 5-18 (No ID Required)
Seniors 65+, Disabled and Medicare Cardholder
Cash
(ID Required)
Local Cash
$2.35
$1.15
$1 .15
Local Day Pass
$5.00
$2 .50
$2.50
Transbay Cash
$4.70
$2.30
$2.30
Transbay Transfer*
Free
Free
Free
BART-to-Bus**
$2.10
$0.90
$0.90
*
Issued on first bus upon payment of Transbay fare. Applies only Transbay-to- Local. Good for
120 minutes (2 hours) and one use only. ** Local trips only. No discount on Transbay.
Adult
Youth Age 5-18 (No ID Required)
Seniors 65+, Disabled and Medicare Cardholder
Clipper Card Value
(10 Required)
Local e-Cash
$2.25
$1 .10
$1 .10
Transbay e-Cash
$4.70
$2.30
$2 .30
Day Pass e-Cash
$5.00
$2.50
$2 .50
Local 31-Day
$84.60*
$34.50*
N/A
Transbay 31 -Day
$169.20
N/A
N/A
Local Monthly
N/A
N/A
$34.50*
Local 7-Day**
$23.50*
$11 .50*
$11 .50*
$47.00
N/A
N/A
T ransbay 7 -Day
**
* Can be upgraded to Transbay with e-Cash. E-Cash must be present on card for upgrade. **7 Day Pass dependent on availability
Other Passes $34 .50
Local Senior/Disabled Monthly (sticker on RTC Discount Card)
Adopted : Amended:
Page 11 of 14
97
6/22/11 12/11/1 3
Resolution No. 13-046 Exhibit A
EasyPass Pricing Matrices The General Manager is allowed pricing flexibility 15 percent above or below a matrix price point, and is allowed to offer up to a 20 -recent discount to colleges in a one-year pilot program. Effective July 1, 2018
For Employers and Residential Communities
For Two- and Four-Year Colleges
10,001+
103
2 3 4
$96
Page 12 of 14
Adopted: Amended: 98
6/22/11 12/11/13
$72
Resolution No. 13-046 Exhibit A
Free Rides AC Transit employees, pensioners, and employee dependents may ride AC Transit buses free of charge. Criteria for free passage are: employees must be in uniform or present District I D card bearing current year's sticker or temporary District ID; Pensioners and Employee Dependents must present a current pensioner or dependent pass. Other free riders include: Peace Officers presenting an official badge and ID card, as well as children under the age of five.
Dum barton Express (DB, 081) AC Transit fares apply to Dum barton Express service. All AC Transit fare media are accepted, EXCEPT: - AC Transit EasyPass - UC Berkeley Bear Pass (faculty and staff) - UC Berkeley Class Pass Fare media from other operators are accepted as follows: Passes
Value
VTA Express Eco Pass
Transbay Fare Credit
VTA Day Pass
Local Fare Credit
VTA Monthly Pass
Local Fare Credit
SamTrans Monthly Pass
Local Fare Credit
Union City Transit Pass I Transfer +0.25
Local Fare Credit
Caltrain Monthly Pass
Local Fare Credit
BART-to-Bus Transfers
Free Local Ride*
*no discount on Transbay
Regional Transfer Policies All passes and transfers from transit systems with a reciprocal agreement (shown below) will be accepted by AC Transit for a local fare at intersecting points, transit centers, and BART stations. Agencies that have reciprocal agreements with the District (including agency-specific provisions where applicable):
Page 13 of 14
Adopted: Amended: 99
6/22/11 12/11/13
Resolution No. 13-046 Exhibit A
Capitol Corridor Customers alighting from Capitol Corridor and Amtrak California San Joaquin trains in Richmond, Berkeley, Emeryville, Oakland, Hayward and Fremont/Centerville are issued a twopart perforated transfer by the train conductor. Each half is worth a local fare and is accepted on any local AC Transit bus. These transfers are punched, indicating the month and day, are valid for 48 hours, and are deposited in the farebox (bill transport). They may be upgraded to a Transbay fare by adding a local cash fare.
County Connection (CCCTA) Fairfield/Suisun Transit Golden Gate Transit Sam Trans AC Transit will honor SamTrans local and express bus passes as a local fare credit in San Mateo County. They may be upgraded to a Transbay fare by adding a local cash fare.
Union City Transit Vallejo Transit VTA (Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority) WestCAT (WCCTA) Ferry Transfers -Alameda/Oakland, Harbor Bay The AC Transit portion of the boarding pass represents a local fare when surrendered. Ferry service boarding passes cannot be upgraded or used as part of a Transbay fare.
Page 14 of 14
Adopted: Amended: 100
6/22/11 12/11/13
SR 13-240d Attachment 2 Attachment 2: Fare Change Proposal for Public Hearing October 23, 2013 Fare Type
Current
Proposed
Current
Fare/Price
Fare/ Price,
Proposal
$2.10
$2.25
Rationales and Comments
2011 policy Local (adult) fare
Youth/Senior/Disabled
$1.05
$2.10 with
$1.10
Fare
Base fare for fare structure. Fare
reduction
unchanged to maintain revenue.
to $2.00
A discount on Clipper might is
for Clipper
designed to provide an incentive for
users
Clipper use.
$1.05
Set at SO% of adult fare, with Clipper
with
option.
reduction
to $1 on Clipper Local (adult) 31 day pass
$80.00
$81.00
$7S
$75 price would reduce pass price/ fare ratio to 36 as 2011 policy set (exactly 36 times would be $75.60).
Youth/
$20.00
$26.00
$23
Increase proposed is Y, what 2011 policy would cause. Pass price still
Senior/Disabled 31 Day Pass
moves towards equity at 36 times
fare, but at a slower pace. Youth pass remains one of the cheapest in the
country. Transfers
2Sc
2Sc
Eliminate
Transfers are potential source of
and
fraud, also insufficient payment for a
replace
ride. Transfers are inconvenient for
with day
passengers; delay boarding's require
passes
paper handling in AC Transit. Few
transit agencies now use paid transfers (see day pass for cost discussion). Transbay-local and ACBART transfers would be retained. Local (adult) Day Pass
NA
NA
$5.00.
Many agencies have replaced
transfers with passes good for a day's ride. A $5 fare would be 30c increase
for a round trip using two buses each way. Clipper day passes could be "accumulator" -first charging one or
two fares against card, and then turning into day pass when $5 paid. Youth/Senior/ Disabled
NA
NA
$2.50
Half of adult day pass price.
Transbay (adult) fare
$4.20
$4.50
$4.20
Fare unchanged to maintain revenue.
Transbay 31 day pass
$151.20
$162.00
$151.20
Unchanged
Transbay Youth/
$2.10
$2.25
$2.10
Set at Y, the adult Transbay fare.
Day Pass
Disabled Fare
101
This page intentionally blank
102
SR 13-240d Attachment 3 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Fare Structure Revision to AC Transit {including Dumbarton Express) to Implement Fare per Boarding, Day Pass, and Eliminate Transfers Notice is hereby given that the AC Transit Board of Directors will hold a Public Hearing on Wednesday, October 23, 2013, at 2:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. at the AC Transit General Offices, Second Floor Board Room, 1600 Franklin Street, Oakland, California, to receive public comment on a fare structure revision as more specifically described below under " PROJECT DESCRIPTION". The proposed fare policy revision is detailed on AC Transit's website at www.actransit.org, and available in printed format at the District' s General Offices, located at 1600 Franklin Street, Oakland, Cal ifornia, and at a variety of other locations, including county administrative offices, city halls, and main libraries located within the District's service area. For information on exact locations where the documents are available in your specific area, please telephone {510) 891-7175. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: • • • • •
Maintain all currently adopted fares as pay per boarding fares ($2.10 local adult, $1.05 youth/senior/disabled local fare, $4.20 Transbay, $2.10 Transbay youth/senior/disabled) Introduce discounted fares of $2 .00 for local adult trips, $1.00 for local youth/senior/disabled trips paid on Clipper. Introduce a local adult day pass priced at $5.00 (Introduce a youth/senior/disabled day pass priced at $2.50) . Eliminate transfers except for transfers between Transbay and local and interagency transfers. Set 31 day pass prices as follows: Local adult--$75 and Local youth/senior/disabled--$23 .
If approved by the Board of Directors, the fare structure revision will be implemented on July 1, 2014. Environmental Exemption By statute, the proposed fare increase is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21080{b) {8) and Section 15273 of its Guidelines. Your Comments Are Invited Public Comment on the fare policy revision is invited either in writing or at the public hearings scheduled for 2:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m . on Wednesday, October 23, 2013 at the AC Transit General Offices, Second Floor Board Room, 1600 Franklin Street, Oakland, Cal ifornia. The public is urged to subm it written comments by letter, facsimile, or email, which must be received no later than the close of the hearing on October 23, 2013. Written comments will receive the same attention as verbal comments received at the Public Hearing. Please address w ritten comments to the AC Transit Board of Directors, 1600 Franklin Street, Oakland, California, 94612; by facsimile at (510) 891-7157; or by email to [email protected]. Comments may also be submitted by voicemail at {510) 891-7201. For Spanish-language comments, call {510) 891-7291, and for the Chinese-language comments, call (510) 891-7292 . 103
Meeting site is wheelchair accessible. Upon request, a sign language interpreter will be present at the hearing. Foreign language interpreters can be provided, if needed. Please contact the District Secretary's Office at (510) 891-7201 by Thursday, October 17, 2013 at 5:00p.m., to make arrangements. For TDD for hearing impaired, call711, California Relay Service, and specify (510) 891-4700.
Transit to the Hearing Site All AC Transit bus lines serving downtown Oakland stop within walking distance of the public hearing site. For trip-planning, visit www.actransit.org or call 511 (and say, "AC Transit"). The site can also be reached via BART to the 191h St. Oakland station.
Please do not wear scented products to the meeting.
104
SR 13-240d Attachment 4 Summary of AC Transit and Other Agencies' Fare Products AC Transit and Other Agencies as of March, 2013 Cash Fare
Transfers
Day Pass
Youth/Senior Day Pass
Local
Senior/Youth
Monthly (or
Monthly (or
30 Day)
30 day) Pass
Pass Not Offered
Not Offered
$81
$20
Not Offered
$64
$22 (Free pass
ACTRANSIT
$2.10
$.25
Muni (San
Adult $2.00;
Free-valid
Visitor
Francisco)
Discount:
for 90
Passports
(without
on Clipper
senior/youth/
minutes
only, $14
BART)
pilot for lower income
disabled $.75
youth) VTA
$2.00; Some
(San Jose)
buses $1.25
Not Offered
$6.00
Discount: $1
Sen·,or/
$70
$25 senior/
Disabled
disabled, $45
$2.50;
youth
Youth $5.00
Samtrans
Adult $2.00;
Not offered
$6.00
Senior/
youth
$1 senior/
County)
disabled;
$3.00; Youth
Youth $1.25
$3.75
$1.50; Senior/
Not offered
$5.00
$25 senior/ disabled; $36
(San Mateo
Metro
$64
disabled
$1.80 Senior/
$75
$14 senior/
(Los
Disabled $.55
Disabled.
disabled; $24
Angeles)
$.25 off peak.
No youth day
student;
$1 student,
pass
K-12 students
K-12 students
only
only OCTA
Adult $2.00
Not Offered
$5.00
Senior/
(Orange
Senior/Disabled
Disabled
disabled
County)
$.75;
$1.50;
$22.25;
No youth fare
No youth day
$69
youth $40
pass $5.00
Senior/
Senior/
Trimet
Adult $2.50;
Cash fare
(Portland)
Senior/disabled
good for two
Disabled $2;
disabled $26;
$1.00
hours of rides
Youth $3.30
Youth $30
$100
Senior/
Youth $1.65 DART
Adult $2.50
Cash fare
$5.00.
(Dallas)
Senior/ Disabled/
good for two
Midday pass
Disabled/
disabled/
Youth $1.25
hours of rides
(930a-230p)
Youth $2.50
youth $40
$1.75
105
Senior/
$80
Senior/
This page intentionally blank
106
SR: 13-240d Attachment 5
Summary of Publicity and Outreach for Community Workshops and Public Hearing on Fare Structure Revision & Pricing Change Proposal
Conducted by Marketing & Community Relations and Media Affairs
Community & committee meetings • •
Held six community meetings: Fremont {10/8), Hayward {10/10), Oakland-Downtown {10/12), North Berkeley {10/14), Oakland-Fruitvale (10/15), and Richmond {10/16). Presented and discussed proposal at the Transbay Taskforce (10/8).
•
Presented and discussed proposal at the Accessibility Advisory Committee (10/8).
Printed materials • • •
Produced brochures in English, Spanish, and Chinese. Produced on-board car card. Produced Questions & Answers information sheet.
On-board information •
Posted car card.
•
Stocked brochures.
On-street signage •
Posted fare-proposal notice on NextBus electronic signs, including Fruitvale BART electronic screen.
Website, e-News, and schedule alerts •
Posted article with links to background information and questions & answers. Also posted Spanish and Chinese versions of the brochure.
•
Sent e-News messages to all subscribers, followed by targeted reminder messages by area. Added alert to schedule pages on AC Transit's website and 511.org website, with link to web article. Displayed alert on all NextBus website prediction pages, with link to web article.
• •
Public notices •
•
Placed legal notices in the Alameda Times Star, Fremont Argus, Hayward Daily Review, Oakland Tribune, San Mateo Times, West County Times, Sing Tao Daily (Chinese), and El Mundo (Spanish). Placed proposal documents at city halls, main libraries, and county administrative offices for public review.
Traditional and social media •
Sent general press release to all media outlets.
•
Posted multiple Facebook and Twitter announcements. 107
Advertising •
• •
Placed English-language display ads in the Alameda Times Star, Berkeley Post, Berkeley Voice, El Cerrito Journal, Fremont Argus, Hayward Daily Review, Montclarion, Oakland Post, Oakland Tribune, Piedmonter, Richmond Post, San Mateo Times, Tri-City Voice, and West County Times. Placed translated display ads in El Mensajero (Spanish), The World Journal (Chinese), and Sing Tao Daily (Chinese). Announced community meetings and public hearing via city-based cable TV bulletin boards and/or city websites.
Elected officials, community sites, and community groups • Sent e-mail announcement and brochures to all city, county, and state elected officials in service area. • Sent e-mail announcement and brochures to libraries, senior centers, middle- and highschools, school districts, chambers of commerce, neighborhood groups, transit agencies, and other community locations and organizations. • Sent or delivered Spanish- and Chinese-language brochures to organizations and community centers with Spanish-speaking or Chinese-speaking clientele. • Sent electronic text version of brochure to agencies and organizations that work with the visually impaired. In-person, by-request, and voicemail • Hired outreach team to deploy Spanish-speaking and Chinese-speaking staff to distribute translated brochures in the Fruitvale and Chinatown districts of Oakland. • Set up voicemail boxes in English, Spanish, and Chinese for brochure requests, comments, and requests for interpreters at public hearing. Publicity specific to Dum barton Express • Posted web article to DBX website and sent eNews to DBX subscribers. • Notified other DBX consortium members of proposed fare changes. • Included DBX reference in all AC Transit materials, including brochures, press release, and relevant display ads. Prepared by AC Transit Marketing & Community Relations, 10/7/13
108
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-134a December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Allocating AB1107 Funds to Special Transit Service District No. 2
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider the following options concerning the allocation of Assembly Bill 1107 (AB 1107) revenue to Special Transit Service District No. 2 (District 2): {1) Make no change. Continue operations and accounting as currently conducted with no allocation of AB1107 revenues to District 2; or (2) Allocate AB1107 revenue to District 2 using an approximate 11.67% allocation methodology; and adopt Resolution No. 13-051 directing Staff to implement the allocation of AB1107 revenue to District 2 commencing in the 2014/2015 fiscal year; or (3) Direct staff to conduct additional research if appropriate to investigate and report back on other allocation alternatives as suggested by the Board. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This staff report presents information related to the long standing issue of whether AB 1107 revenue should be allocated to District 2. Meetings were held with representatives of District 2 regarding the level of service and financial performance. District 2 representatives requested that consideration be given to the annexation agreement specifically as it relates to providing an equitable level of service consistent with the financial ability of District 2. Additionally, District 2 representatives believe the financial ability of the area should include an allocation of AB1107 revenue to District 2. The AB1107 revenue is based on the three BART Counties: Alameda, Contra-Costa and San Francisco. AC Transit's share of this revenue for FY 2012-13 was $34.8 million . Staff's conclusion is that the AC Transit Board appears to have the discretion (if it so desires) to allocate part of the AB1107 funding to District 2. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
Given the District's Enterprise Fund Accounting, the net position of the District will not be affected. However, if AB1107 funds are allocated, operating procedures between the two Special Transit Service Districts may affect service levels.
109
Report No. 13-134a Page 2 of 2 BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
Assembly Bill 1107 (AB1107) is a half-cent sales tax imposed in the three BART counties: Alameda, Contra Costa and San Francisco. By statute, BART receives 75% of the total collection, and the remaining 25% is administered by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and can be allocated to AC Transit, BART or San Francisco MTA for operations. By MTC policy, the 25% share administered by MTC is divided equally between AC Transit and San Francisco MTA for operations. There is a farebox recovery ratio requirement. In 1984 there was a change in the statute that allows operators to meet the fare box recovery ratio by combining fares with local assistance (i.e., BART transfers, contract services, property taxes and Measure VV, B and J revenues). The farebox recovery ratio requirement is 33%. The history of AB1107 indicates an intention to solve the financial woes for BART that predated Proposition 13 in 1978 and to address the financial woes for AC Transit and San Francisco MTA as a result of Proposition 13. This revenue source is provided to AC Transit for operations, and it is not tied to providing service to any particular city. The AB1107 revenue is generated in the BART service area including San Francisco which represents approximately 46% of the revenue that the District receives. Even if the District was not providing service to the Cities of Fremont and Newark, staff believes that this revenue would still be allocated to AC Transit based on the authorizing statute. The District began providing service to the Cities of Fremont and Newark, more commonly referred to as District 2 in 1974. The operating results for District 2 produced positive results for many years. Starting in 2008, the financial performance of District 2 operations produced negative results. Prior to that time period, representatives of the two cities inquired about District 2's eligibility for AB1107 funds. At the October 30, 2013 AC Transit Board Retreat, staff presented information outlining key dates in AC Transit's history and that of District 2, some of which are listed below: • • • •
1974 Annexation Agreements- Cities of Fremont and Newark. The Annexation Agreements call for "Equitable Level of Service" in annexed area consistent with financial ability of area. Annexation Agreements Pre-Date AB1107. AB1107 passed in 1977 - resulting in 25% of the half-cent sales tax split between AC Transit and SF MTA.
As directed by the Board, staff held several meetings with District 2 representatives to discuss the issue of allocation. The results of the meetings are as follows: •
All agree that the current accounting methodology for revenue and expenses between the two Special Transit Service Districts is acceptable and accurate.
•
All agree that based on the current formula for calculating farebox recovery ratios both Special Transit Service Districts meet the fare box recovery requirement.
•
All agree that AB 1107 as amended does not specify a separate allocation to the two Special Transit Service Districts, but allocates the funding to AC Transit.
110
Report No. 13-134a Page 3 of 3 The District's General Counsel has opined that if District 2, as a stand-alone entity, can meet the criteria for the allocation of AB1107 funds, i.e., continue meeting the farebox recovery requirement, then the Board would appear to have the discretion to allocate AB1107 funds to District 2, citing Public Utilities Code section 29142.4, subdivision (b) which preserves the separate status of the two Special Transit Service Districts.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: This report contains alternative courses of action with notable advantages and disadvantages.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: This report is being provided to inform the Board of findings related to a review of a District revenue source.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: October 30, 2013 Board Retreat AB1107 Update Staff Report 13-134, May 22, 2013 Assembly Bill 1107 (AB1107) Funding GM Memo No. 10-130a Adoption of an Allocation Methodology for Special Transit Service Districts One and Two.
ATTACHMENTS: 1: Resolution No. 03-051 2: Staff Report 13-134 3: Special Transit Service Districts No. 1 and No. 2 Schedule with Independent Accountant's Report Year Ended June 30, 2013 Department Head Approval:
Lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer
Reviewed by:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel
Prepared by:
Lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer
111
This page intentionally blank
112
SR 13-134a Att.l
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 13-051 A RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO IMPLEMENT THE ALLOCATION OF AB 1107 REVENUE TO SPECIAL TRANSIT SERVICE DISTRICT No. 2 COMMENCING IN THE 20142015 FISCAL YEAR WHEREAS, in 1974 the Cities of Fremont and Newark, California were annexed to AC Transit, now generally referred to as Special Transit Service District No. 2; and WHEREAS, on November 5, 1974, the voters of Fremont and Newark approved annexation into the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District subject to the terms and conditions set forth in separate annexation agreements; and WHEREAS, Paragraph 6 of the 1974 annexation agreements states that "the District will provide an equitable level of service to all parts of the annexed area consistent with the 1 financial ability of the annexed area;" and WHEREAS, Paragraph 9 of the 1974 annexation agreements requires a separate accounting for Special Transit Service District No. 1 and Special Transit Service District No. 2; and WHEREAS, the District annually provides the separate accounting specified in Paragraph 9 of the annexation agreements; and WHEREAS, annexation agreements are considered to be binding and enforceable under
Morrison Homes Corp. v. City of Pleasanton (1976) 58 Cai.App.3d 724, 734; and WHEREAS, in 1977 the California Legislature enacted Assembly Bill 1107 (AB 1107) amending the Public Utilities Code to provide revenue to support public transportation in the BART service area; and WHEREAS, AB 1107 specifically added Public Utilities Code section 29142.4 allowing the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) to allocate a portion of an existing half cent sales tax to each of three public transit agencies (BART, SF Muni, and AC Transit) provided they meet a 33% "farebox requirement;" and WHEREAS, Public Utilities Code section 29142.4, subdivision (b) specifically states that "the two special transit service districts of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District shall be considered separate transit districts" and remains current law; and WHEREAS, in 1979, the California Legislature enacted Assembly Bill 842 (AB 842) further amending the Public Utilities Code as to the availability of tax revenue to support public transit within the BART service area; and
1
1n the Fremont agreement the phrase "annexed area" is replaced with "special transit service district".
Resolution No. 13-051
Page 1 o/3 113
SR 13-134a Att.l
WHEREAS, AB 842 specifically repealed and replaced Public Utilities Code section 29142.5 allowing a five percent credit toward meeting the 33% "farebox requirement" among the three operators (BART, SF Muni and AC Transit); and WHEREAS, in 1984 the California Legislature enacted Assembly Bill 2337 (AB 2337) further amending the Public Utilities Code to allow MTC to consider as part of fare revenues certain local support which exceeded base level support, e.g., BART Transfers, Contract Services, Property Taxes and Measures V V, Band J; and WHEREAS, representatives of the cities of Fremont and Newark have repeatedly inquired over a period of several years about a possible allocation of some portion of AB 1107 funds to Special Transit Service District 2, including an effort in the 2004-2005 timeframe to draft a memorandum of understanding regarding the same; and WHEREAS, District staff met in 2013 with the Special Transit Service District's Financial, Technical, and Political Advisory Committees as directed by the Board of Directors of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District and found themselves to be in general agreement with the accounting methods presented by District staff; and WHEREAS, Special Transit Service District Nos. 1 and 2 have met the redefined "farebox requirement" since passage of AB 2337; and WHEREAS, the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District is not required by statute to allocate the AB 1107 funds it receives to Special Transit Service District No. 2; however, it may do so provided the "farebox requirement" continues to be met. NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District does resolve as follows: Section 1. District staff is hereby directed to implement, commencing in the 20142015 fiscal year, the allocation of AB 1107 revenue to Special Transit District No. 2 of approximately 11.67%, provided Special Transit Service District No. 2 continues to independently meet the fare box requirement of the law. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage by Section 2. four affirmative votes of the Board of Directors. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of December 2013.
Greg Harper, President
Resolution No. 13-051
Pagelo/3 114
SR 13-134a Att.l
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 11th day of December, 2013 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
Approved as to Form and Content:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel
Resolution No. 13-051
Page3o/3 115
SA 13-134A ATT.2,
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-134 MayZ2, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Assembly Bill1107 (AB 1107) Funding
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION IS!: Consider receiving report on AB 1107 Funding and farebox recovery for Special Districts One and Two. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Every year the District receives AB 1107 funding for its operations. This report brings the Board of Directors up to date on prior discussions regarding the allocation of AB1107 funds. In addition, this report provides statistics on the farebox recovery ratio for Special Transit Districts One and Two and provides a proposed timeline of activities staff would like to undertake to resolve this matter and bring this long standing issue to a close within the next 6 months. While there is no action requested by the Board with regard to this report, staff would like to solicit feedback from the Board on the proposed approach and timeline as well as any other components staff should consider, including possible allocation methodologies for further study. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: On March 27, 2013, Director Davis requested a discussion regarding AB1107 funds with respect to Special Districts One and Two. This matter was last discussed by the Board on June 9, 2010. At that time, the District was faced with difficult financial and operating challenges, including service cuts, expense and staff reductions, as well as fare increases. District Staff recommended the adoption of an allocation methodology for AB1107 funds for the two Special Transit Service Districts within AC Transit, but a methodology was not formally adopted. (See GM Memo No. 10·130a provided in Attachment 1.) AB1107 made permanent a half-cent sales tax imposed in three Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) counties: Alameda, Contra Costa, and the City and County of San Francisco. By statute, BART receives 75 percent of the total half-cent sales tax revenue collected. By policy of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), the remaining 25 percent is shared equally by the District and the San Francisco Municipal Railway (Muni) for transit operations. Because the
116
Briefing Item No. 13-134 Page2 of3 allocation of this funding, once received by the District, is discretionary, the Board of Directors has the authority to determine how these funds are used for District operations. Eligibility for AB 1107 Funding To receive- AB 1107 funds, fare revenues must equal at least 33% of operating costs. This is known as the "33 percent farebox recovery ratio requirement." In 1984, the law was amended to allow operators to meet the 33 percent farebox recovery ratio requirement by combining fares with local assistance, e.g., property/parcel taxes and county measures revenue. Over the last eight (8) fiscal years, Special Transit Service Districts One and Two have both met the 33 percent farebox recovery ratio requirement as illustrated in the following table. Farebox Recovery Ratio Chart 2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Special Transit District 1
53.9%
56%
54.5%
53.1%
51.7%
55.3%
52.2%
57.5%
Special Transit District 2
58.8%
56.2%
59.7%
52.1%
51.7%
49.9%
39.8%
51.9%
The Farebox Recovery Ratio is calculated as follows: D1=Passenger Fares+ BART Transfers+ Contract Services+ Property Taxes+ Measures W. Band J Total Expenses- Depreciation D2=Passenger Fares+ BART Transfers+ Contract Services+ Property Taxes+ Measure. B Total Expenses- Depreciation Next Steps Although this is presented as a briefing item, in addition to any other comments from the Board, District staff is seeking comments from the Board on the following: (1) resuming the development of a recommended AB 1107 allocation methodology, (2) continuing to work with the Policy Advisory Committee, the Technical Advisory Committee, and the Financial Advisory Committee (PAC/TAC/FAC) to develop an allocation methodology, and (3} developing a work plan with the goal of enabling the District Board to consider and adopt a recommended methodology. Staff's goal is to resolve this matter and bring this long standing issue to a close within the next 6 months. To that end, staff proposes the following timeline of activities:
117
Briefing Item No. 13-134 Page 3 of 3 Activity
Target
Hold meetings with the FAC, TAC and PAC in South Alameda County to discuss and receive feedback on possible allocation methodology strategies and suggestions for further study.
Next 60 to 90 Days (August/September)
Evaluate suggestions and feedback received from the FAC, TAC and PAC meetings.
30-45 Days (Early October)
Hold Board Retreat to discuss staff analysis and findings.
October 301h
Decision
November/December
At this time, staff is seeking feedback from the Board on the process outlined in this report and any other components that staff should consider, including possible allocation methodologies for further study. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
This briefing is provided to illustrate that the AB 1107 farebox recovery ratio requirement has been met and to resume and advance the dialog toward adoption of a formal allocation methodology. There are no disadvantages associated with this report. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
Staff found no practical alternatives to the course of action outlined in this report. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES:
GM Memo No. 10-130a -Adoption of an allocation methodology for Special Transit Service Districts One and Two. ATTACHMENTS: 1: GM Memo No. 10-130a Adoption of an Allocation Methodology for Special Transit Service Districts One and Two 2: Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Special Transit Service Districts No. 1 and No. 2 Schedule with Independent Accountant's Report, Year Ended June 30,2012
Prepared by:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer
118
SR 13-134 Att. 1
AC TRANSIT DISTRICT Board of Directors
GM Memo No. 10·130a Meeting Date: June 9, 2010
Committees: Operations Committee External Affairs Committee Board of Directors
B 181
Planning Committee Finance and Audit Committee .Financing Corporation
0
0 0
SUBJECT: Consider Recommending Adoption of the Allocation Methodology for Special Transit Districts One and Two RECOMMENDED ACTION:
D Information Only 0
Briefing Item
181
Recommended Motion
Adopt the Allocation Methodology for Special Transit Districts One and Two
Fiscal Impact: None
------·-··-· ·----· ·--·----·--..·--------
.
Background/Discussion: May 19. 2010 Finance and Audit Committee Meeting At the Finance and Audit Committee Meeting on this Item, the General Counsel was requested to advise on the District Board's discretion of allocating a portion of AB 1107 funds to Special Transtt Service District 2. Public Utilities Code Section 29142.4 sets forth the criteria for receipt of AB 1107 funds- be a participating member of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's (MTC) regional transit coordinating council; recovery at least 33% of its operaUng costs from fare revenues for a period established by MTC - a fiscal year, subject to a 5% credit if the 33% recovery had been met, and all three operators (AC Transit, BART and SF Municipal Railway System) together meet the 33% revenue ratio, plus any credit. AC Transifs two special transit service districts were considered as two separate transit districts for purposes of the legislation. See Attachment A. The history of AB 1107 indicates an intention to solve financial woes for BART that predated Proposition 13 in 1978 and to address the financial woes of AC Transit and Muni as a result of Proposition 13. See Attachment B. AC Transit's two special districts were segregated, it is presumed, In order for District 1 to meet the farebox recovery ratio since In 1977 District 2 had only been part of the District since its annexation in 1974 and its service was still in its infancy and still a semi-rural area. If Districts 1 and 2 had been considered a single entity for the legislation, AC Transit may not have qualified for any AB 1107 funds. If District 2, as a stand alone entity, can meet the criteria for the allocation of AB 1107 funds then the Board would appear to have the discretion of allocating AB 11 07 funds to District 2.
Board of Directors Meeting Date: telqllo r; Item No:_..-1,'-----
Rev.1/10 119
GM Memo No. 10-130a Meeting Date: June 9, 2010 Page 2 of3 The content of GM Memo No. 10-130 as presented to the Finance and Audit Committee Budgets and audited financials are maintained for both District 1 and District 2 for every fiscal year. Tbe audits are conducted based on agreed upon allocation methodologies between District staff and staff of both the City of Fremont and the City of Newark. Macias Gini & O'Connell LLP, the District's auditors also ensures that revenues generated as ~ result of ballot measures are being utilized in the areas in which 1hey were received. Staff is required to show documentation of expenses in legally required seNice areas. As can be seen in the 3rd Quarter statements attached, no revenue has been allocated to District 2 from any ballot measures approved only for District 1.
Cumulative Surplus (Deficit) for District 2 Management of the District and representatives of District 2 met and agreed that fiscal year 2003/04 would be the base year of evaluating the District's change In net assets related to District 2 activity and assumes a zero balance for the start of fiscal year 2004/05. The annual surpluses and/or defiCits for fiscal years 2005 through 2009 are derived from the "change in net assets" as reported in the annual Schedules of Revenues and Expenses by SeNice Area. The following is a schedule of surpluses and/or deficits in District 2 for the past five years. Fiscal Year
Sumlua fDeficitl
Cumulative Total
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
$2,756,950 2,696,346 1,546,882 (2,032,679) (1 ,461 ,025)
$2,756,950 5,453,296 7,000,178 4,967,499 3,506,474
AS 1107 Funding Source
AB 1107 is a half-cent sales tax imposed in the three BART counties: Alameda, Contra Costa and San Francisco. By statute, BART receives 75 percent of the total collection, and the remaining 25 percent is administered by MTC. Transit capital and operating expenses for BART, AC Transit, and San Francisco Muni are eligible for the 25·percent portion. By MTC policy, the 25 percent MTC administered share Is shared equally by AC Transit and San Francisco Muni for transit operations. There is a farebox recovery ratio requirement. In 1984 there was a change In the statute that allows operators to meet the farebox recovery ratio by combining fares with local assistance (i.e., property/parcel tax aild county measures revenues). The farebox recovery ratio requirement is 33o/o. There is a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) document entitled, "MOU Between Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, the City of Fremont, and the City of Newark
120
GM Memo No.10-130a Meeting Date: June 9, 2010 Page3of 3 Clarifying and Implementing the Annexation Agreements Between Those Parties as of November 1974." This document has never been fully executed. Staff is currently updating a working draft of this document to be discussed with the lwo cities, and submitted to the Board for adoption. Prior Relevant Board ActlonsiPoliclea: N/A Attachments: 1. 2. 3. A. B.
Macias Gini & O'Connell Special Transit Service Districts No. 1 and 2 Audited Financial Statements FY June 30, 2009 AC Transit Internal Financial Statement for Districts No. 1 and 2 March 30, 2010 FY 2009-10 & 2010-11Proposed Biennial Budget Analysis Property Taxes Subsides Public Utilities Code Section 29142.4 4 page excerpts from GM Memo No. 03-350 - Dlstricfs Financial History Report
Approved by: Prepared by: Date Prepared:
MaryV. King, Interim General Manager Lewis Clinton, Chief Financial Officer Kenneth C. Scheldig, General Counsel Kenneth C. Scheldlg, General Counsel June4,2010
121
Att. A to GM Memo No. 10·130a
AB 1107 Excerpt 29142.4, No funds shall be allocated to an entity pursuant to Section 29142.2, after January 1, 1978, unless, as determined by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the transit operator: (a) Is a participating member of a regional transit coordinating council which the commission shall establish to better coordinate routes, schedules, fares, and transfers among the San Francisco Bay area transit operators and to explore potential advantages of joint ventures in areas such as marketing, maintenance, and purchasing. The commission shall be a member of the cciuncil. (b) Establishes, for the period for which the funds are allocated, fare levels such that fare revenues equal at least 33 percent of its operating cost, which shall be all of its costs in the expense object classes, exclusive of the costs of the depreciation and amortization expense object classes, of the uniform system of accounts and records adopted by the State Controller pursuant to Section 99243. The allocation period shall not be lass than one calendar quarter nor longer than one fiscal year, as determined by . the commission. For purposes of this subdivision, the two special transit service districts of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District shall be considered separate transit districts. On and after July 1, 1981, the commission may grant, any operator which was in compliance with the 33 percent requirement prior to that date, a credit not to exceed 5 percent to meet that requirement on the basis of special operating characteristics of its transit system, including, but not limited to, its transfer and special fare policies. In no event shall the combined fare revenues of the three operators, excluding any credit granted by the commission, be less than 33 percent of their combined operating cost. (c) Has complied with standards established by the commission pursuant to Section 66517.5 of the Government Code.
122
This Page Left Intentionally Blank
123
SR 13-l34a Att. 3
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT Special Transit Service Districts No. 1 and No. 2 Schedule with Independent Accountant's Report
Year Ended June 30,2013
124
This Page Left Intentionally Blaok
125
MAZE
&ASSOCIATES
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT ON APPLYING AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES Board of Directors Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Oakland, California We have performed the procedures enumerated below, which were agreed to by the management of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (District), solely to assist you in evaluating the accuracy of the allocation between Special Transit Service Districts (STSD) No. 1 and No. 2 in the accompanying Schedule of Revenues and Expenses by Service Area (Schedule) for the year ended June 30, 2013. The District's management is responsible for the allocation methodology and the Schedule. This agreed-upon procedures engagement was conducted in accordance with the attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The sufficiency of these procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in the report. Consequently, we make no representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose. Our procedures and findings are as follows: GENERAL
A. We read the Special Transit Service Districts (STSD) No. 1 and No. 2 allocation methodology for consistency with the prior year. We inquired of the rationale for any changes in methodology with District management. · · Finding: No changes in the allocation methodology were noted in the current year.
SCHEDULE OF REVENUES AND EXPENSES BY SERVICE AREA A. We reconciled the Schedule to the audited financial statements. Finding: The Schedule reconciles to the audited financial statements. B. We compared service hours by STSD and by Alameda and Contra Costa counties for the year ended June 3 0, 2013 used for allocation in the supporting worksheets prepared by the District. Finding: The service hours by STSD and by Alameda and Contra Costa counties for the year ended June 30, 2013 are supported by worksheets prepared by the District.
925.930.0902 925.930.0135 e [email protected]
T
Accountancy Corporation
F
3478 Buskirk Avenue, Suite 215
w mazeassoclates.com
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
I
126
C. We performed analytical procedures over service hours by reviewing the net changes in service hours from the prior year to the year ended June 30, 2013 by Alameda and Contra Costa counties and STSD. ' Findings:
1. We noted total service hours increased2,097 or 0.1%. D. We compared service miles by STSD and by Alameda and Contra Costa counties for the year ended June 30, 2013 used for allocation to the supporting worksheets prepared by the District. Finding: The service miles by STSD and by Alameda and Contra Costa counties for the year ended June 30, 2013 are supported by worksheets prepared by the District.
E. We performed analytical procedures over service miles by reviewing the net changes in service miles from the prior year to the year ended June 30, 2013 by county and STSD. Findings:
!. Service miles by Alameda and Contra Costa counties agreed to the District's EAMS report for year ended June 30, 2013. 2. We noted total service miles decreased 72,699 or .3%. F. We recalculated the allocation of each financial statement caption in the Schedule by applying the District's allocation methodology for each caption to the District's total revenue or expense line item amount and compared this to the Schedule provided by the District. Finding: The allocation of each financial statement caption between STSD No. 1 and No. 2 is calculated in accordance with the methodology provided by the District.
We were not engaged to, and did not, conduct and audit, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion on the accompanying schedule. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the District's Board of Directors and management and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than those specified parties.
J'~~C..}~ September 20,2013
2 127
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF REVENUES AND EXPENSES BY SERVICE AREA FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 REVENUES: Farebox Bart Transfers Contract Services Advertising
STSD#l $ 50,136,255 2,328,144 5,601,848 1,606,380 63,850 3,490,302
STSD#2 $ 2,839,501 131,856 273,249 212,776 7,659 462,291
TOTAL $ 52,975,756 2,460,000 5,875,097 1,819,156 71,509 3,952,593
TOTAL REVENUES
63,226,779
3,927,332
67,154,111
SUBSIDIES Property Taxes Property Taxes Measnres AAIVV Local Sales Tax - Measnre B Local Sales Tax- Measnre J Local Operating Assistance State: AB1107 State AB2972 Home to School State- TDA State- STA State operating assistance other Federal Operating Assistance
63,480,911 29,438,709 22,804,453 3,977,908 13,537,386 34,812,465 2,000,000 47,197,802 17,613,062 3,882,040 11,674,287
15,878,852
TOTAL SUBSIDIES
250,419,023
33,711,952
284,130,975
TOTAL REVENUE AND SUBSIDIES
313,645,802
37,639,284
351,285,086
52,503,123 40,938,751 69,345,215 34,756,535 24,141,713 16,436,281 406,617 11,317,563 2,130,773 10,180,302 5,050,183 24,047,013 582,067 31,277,430
6,022,262 5,422,619 8,492,046 4,256,300 2,450,123 2,177,099 53,859 1,499,089 282,236 1,348,451 668,931 2,707,338 71,327 4,142,911
58,525,385 46,361,370 77,837,261 39,012,835 26,591,836 18,613,380 460,476 12,816,652 2,413,009 11,528,753 5,719,114 26,754,351 653,394 35,420,341
323,113,566
39,594,591
362,708,157
(1,955,307) 220,948
(11,423,071) 64,014,053
(1,734,359)
$ 52,590,982
Interest income
Other Income
EXPENSES Operator Wages Other Wages Fringe Benefits Pension Expenses Services Fuel & Lubricants Office/Printing Supplies Bus Parts/Main!. Supplies Utilities Insurance
Other Expenses Pnrchased Transportation Interest Expense Depreciation TOTAL EXPENSES Income (loss) before capital contributions Capital Contributions- Federal and Local CHANGE IN NET ASSETS
1,852,430 1,791,656
10,084,134 2,622,187 1,482,693
(9,467,764) 63,793,105 $ 54,325,341
$
3
128
79,359,763 29,438,709 24,656,883 3,977,908 15,329,042 34,812,465 2,000,000 . 57,281,936 20,235,249 3,882,040 13,156,980
Allocation Methodology (1) (3) (14) (2) (6) (14)
(7) (7) (11) (10) (14) (10) (10) (12) (5) (10) (14)
(4) (2) (13) (13) (2) (2) (2) (2) (2) (2) (2) (8) (9) (2)
(14)
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE SCHEDULE OF REVENUES AND EXPENSES BY SERVICE AREA FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,2013 (1)
General Special Transit Service District (STSD) No. 1 was the designation used from the creation of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (District) for its original territory, consisting of the cities and surrounding unincorporated area from Richmond and San Pablo through Hayward. STSD No. 1 extends from San Pablo Bay to Hayward, including the cities of Richmond, San Pablo, El Cerrito, Albany, Berkeley, Emeryville, Oakland, Piedmont, Alameda, San Leandro, Hayward, and the unincorporated areas of Ashland, Castro Valley, Cherryland; E1 Sobrante, Kensington, and San Lorenzo. STSD No. 2 was created through an annexation agreement and includes the City of Fremont and the City of Newark in southwestern Alameda County where the District operates a network of local routes. Local service within Union City is operated by a separate agency, Union City Transit Service to Palo Alto across the Dumbarton Bridge on the DB line is provided by the District under contract with a consortium of operators, led by the District.
(2)
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies and Schedule Presentation The accompanying Schedule was prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and the allocation methodology guidelines listed below. This Schedule does not present the financial position, changes in financial position, or cash flows of the DistrictAlameda-Contra Costa Transit District.
(3)
Basis of Accounting The Schedule has been prepared in accordance with the accrual basis of accounting.
(4)
Basis of Allocation The revenues and expenses on the Schedule are prorated between STSD No. 1 and No. 2 based on an allocation methodology that is specific to each fmancial statement caption. The primary allocation basis is an equal weighting of the relationship of hours and miles of service between the counties and the Special Transit Service District within the counties. The complete listing of allocation methodology is reported on page 4.
4
129
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT ALLOCATION METHODOLOGY FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (1)
(2)
Fare box revenues are allocated on the basis of estimated revenues for each route operated by a district as record by the GFI system. Estimated revenues consist of cash collected on a route, plus the impact of estimated revenues related to passes and tickets used on that same route. This revenue/expense line item is allocated to the district in whlch such services are provided, and then on the basis of the district's pro-rata share of service hours and service miles. Each district's allocation percentage is calculated using the following formula: (District svc. Hours/total svc. Hours)+ (district svc. Miles/total svc. Miles) 2
(3) (4) (5)
(6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)
(12) (13)
(14)
Bart transfer revenue is allocated on the basis of each district's pro-rata share of fare box revenues as calculated under (1) above. Actual operator pay per the general ledger is allocated to each district based on its prorata share of scheduled operator pay as recorded by the OTS 370 report. State transit assistance revenues are allocated to each district based on its pro-rata share of"qualifying revenues" whlch are defined by the District to include the following: property taxes, Measure VV revenues, Measure B revenues, Measure J revenues, fare box revenues and Dumbarton rehnbursement Revenues. Interest income is allocated to each district based on its pro-rata share of total revenues and subsidies, excluding interest income. Property taxes are allocated to each district on the basis of actual revenue as reported to the District bv Alameda and Contra Costa Countv. ADA paratransit subsidies are expenses that are allocated to each district based on its prorata share of ridershlp as reported to the District by its paratransit contractor. Interest expense is allocated to each district based on its pro-rata share oftotal expenses excluding interest expense. Allocation of thls revenue or expenses line item is not necessary as it is associated solely with a single district. Measure B revenues were allocated between the districts using two different methodologies. For the former Measure B, revenue are allocated using the formula in (2) above. Subsequentto May 31, 2002, Measure B revenues are based on the revised legislation, whlch allocates a specific portion of the total revenues received from each district TDA revenues are allocated to each district on the basis of actual revenues as reported to the District by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Fringe benefits and pension expenses are allocated using the sum of each District's pro-rata share of operator's wages and other wages divided by the sum oftotal o]J_erator W
5130
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-160a December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM: SUBJECT:
David J. Armijo, General Manager Lease Agreement for Community Outreach Center
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION IS): Authorize the General Manager to enter into a lease agreement in substantially identical format to the attached for office space located at 3322 International Boulevard in Oakland, California, to use as the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Community Outreach Center. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On October 23, 2013, the AC Transit Board of Directors reviewed Staff Report 13-160 that presented selection criteria for evaluating 11 commercial spaces for possible use as the BRT Community Outreach Center. The Board directed staff to engage the property owners of three of these locations for leasing and return to the Board to obtain authorization for the General Manager to enter into a lease with the one that offered the best terms for the District. Two of the three facilities are no longer available for lease. Staff is now seeking authorization to enter into a lease agreement for the remaining space located at 3322 International Boulevard in Oakland. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: The negotiated rent for 3322 International Boulevard is $4,000.00 per month. The net annual square foot price is $31.99. The District would be responsible for the cost of utilities, except for water and garbage which are paid by the landlord. The estimated cost of utilities is $300 per month. The fully loaded square foot cost of this lease is $34.44 per year and will remain fixed for three years. All tenant improvements will be performed by the landlord. The estimated cost to the District for this lease from 2014 through 2016, including utilities, is $155,000. The lease also includes a three year option period with a one-time 3% rent increase or Consumer Price Index adjustment, whichever is less. Option year 1 in 2017, as well as the three year base period, would be paid for as part of the BRT project funds, specifically the FTA Small Starts Grant (80%) and Measure B (20%). If the District chooses to exercise Option Years 2 and 3 in 2018 and 2019 respectively, then operation and maintenance funds would be needed to cover the leasing costs.
131
Report No. 13-160a Page 2 of 3 BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
AC Transit's BRT program involves design and construction along State Route 185 (International Boulevard), one of the District's busiest and most densely populated corridors. The Fruitvale area, in particular, has the second highest ridership numbers in the District. During construction, merchants, residents and visitors will experience project related disruptions and inconveniences. Staff believes that a Community Outreach Center can serve as the focal point to engage with and resolve problems encountered by the community as a result of the BRT project. Anticipating and addressing the impacts of the project will increase goodwill and community support of the project. In July 2013, staff identified basic characteristics for the outreach center and examined them to establish parameters for selecting a viable location. Multiple locations were identified, rank ordered and presented to the Policy Steering Committee (PSC} on September 30, 2013. Based . on feedback from the PSC, staff modified the selection criteria and updated the list to add a new location and to remove non-viable locations. On October 23, 2013 staff presented the revised list to the AC Transit Board.
The Board decided that three of the locations, 3322
International Boulevard, 4537 International Boulevard, and 4715 International Boulevard were the preferred options and asked staff to reevaluate these spaces while considering the cost to lease them. Subsequently, staff discovered two of the three locations were no longer available for lease. Staff negotiated with the third property owner to produce a lease that offers the best terms for the District and is seeking Board approval to authorize the General Manager to execute the lease.
Favorable lease terms include a three year fixed rental rate, a 60-day
cancellation notice after one year, the right to continue on a month to month tenancy without penalty and, maintenance services. The owner is willing to sign a three (3) year lease for $4,000 per month and pay for garbage disposal water and tenant improvements.
The attached lease agreement is substantially
complete, however, it may require minor edits and/or changes before the final document can be signed. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
The advantage of allowing staff· to negotiate a lease agreement for 3322 International Boulevard is the benefit of being able to secure a storefront at a reasonable rate, while obtaining a space that meets the District's requirements for a community outreach center in an area that allows for high visibility. Securing this lease will allow staff the time needed to open the center and establish a presence prior to the commencement of construction. Staff did not identify any disadvantages with leasing this space. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
Staff tried to consider the other preferred options, but they were already rented.
132
Report No. 13-160a Page 3 of 3
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Staff Report 13-160: Community Outreach Center ATTACHMENTS: 1:
Draft Lease
Department Head Approval:
Dennis W. Butler, Chief Planning & Development Officer
Reviewed by:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel Lewis Clinton, Chief Financial Officer David Wilkins, BRT Program Director Chris Andrichak, Senior Analyst Rachel V. Chatman, Attorney Ill Hallie Llamas, Real Estate Manager
Prepared by:
133
This page intentionally blank
134
13-160a_ Attachment 1
LEASE
This lease is made by and between Sam Qutob, an Individual ("Landlord") and Alameda -contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit), a Public Transportation Agency ("Tenant"), who agree as follows:
This lease is made with reference ta the following facts and objectives: A.
Landlord is the owner of the real property at 3322-A International Boulevard, Oakland, California, ("premises") as further described in Exhibit A, attached to and made a part of this lease.
B.
Tenant is willing to lease the premises from Landlord pursuant to the provisions stated in this lease.
C.
Tenant wishes to lease the premises for the purpose of operating an AC Transit Community Outreach Center.
D. Tenant has examined the premises and is fully informed of the condition thereof. 1. DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES Landlord leases to Tenant and Tenant leases from Landlord the certain portion of the building known as 3322-C International Boulevard consisting of approximately +1,500 square feet ("Premises") as further described above. 2.
TERM
The term of this lease shall commence on the January 1, 2014 and shall be for a period of THREE (3) years plus the partial month, if any, immediately preceding the first full calendar month of this lease. 3.
RENT
Tenant shall pay to Landlord as monthly rent, without deduction, setoff, prior notice, or demand, the sum of $4,000 per month in advance on the first day of each month, commencing on the date the term commences, continuing during the term. Monthly rent for the first month or portion of it shall be paid on the day the term commences. Monthly rent for any partial month shall be prorated at the rate of 1/30'h of the monthly rent per day. All rent shall be paid to Landlord at the address to which notices to Landlord are given. 4.
RENT INCREASE a.
The rent for the initial three-year lease period will be unadjusted at the sum of $4,000.00 per month in advance on the first day of each month.
b.
The monthly rent shall be increased at the commencement of the option period ("the adjustment date") to the lesser of the amount of the monthly rent in effect
135
immediately preceding the adjustment date plus three percent {3%); or the monthly rent as adjusted for the change in the Consumer Price Index {CPI), as calculated below. c.
The base for computing the CPI adjustment is the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (base years 1982-1984 = 100) for San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics ("Index"), which is in effect on the date of the commencement of the term ("Beginning Index"). The Index published most immediately preceding the adjustment date in question ("Extension Index") is to be used in determining the amount of the CPI adjustment. If the Extension Index has increased over the Beginning Index, the CPI adjustment shall be calculated by multiplying the monthly rent by a fraction consisting of the Extension Index as the numerator and the Beginning Index as the denominator. If the Index is discontinued or revised during the term, such other government index or computation with which it is replaced shall be used in order to obtain substantially the same result as would be obtained if the Index had not been discontinued or revised.
5.
SECURITY DEPOSIT
As security for the full and faithful performance by Tenant of each and every term, provision, covenant, and condition of this lease, Tenant shall deposit with Landlord cash in an amount equal to two {2) month's payment of rent. Such security shall be deposited on or before the effective date ofthis lease. a.
If Tenant defaults in respect to any of the terms, provisions, covenants and conditions of this lease, including but not limited to the payment of rent, Landlord may use the security deposit or any portion of it to cure the default or compensate the Landlord for all damage sustained by Landlord resulting from Tenant's default. If Landlord so uses any portion of the security deposit, Tenant will restore the security deposit to its original amount within ten {10) days after written demand from Landlord.
b.
Landlord will not be required to keep the security deposit separate from its own funds and Tenant shall not be entitled to interest on the security deposit. The security deposit will not be limitation on Landlord's damages or other rights under this lease, or a payment of liquidated damages, or an advance payment of the rent. It Tenant pays the rent and performs all of its other obligations under this lease, Landlord shall return the unused portion of the security deposit to Tenant within sixty {60) days after the end of the term; however, if Landlord has evidence that the security deposit has been assigned to an assignee of the Tenant, Landlord shall return the security deposit to the assignee. Landlord may deliver the security deposit to a purchaser ofthe premises and be discharged from further liability with respect to it.
136
6.
LATE CHARGES
Tenant acknowledges that late payment by Tenant to Landlord of rent and other sums due hereunder will cause Landlord to incur costs not contemplated by this lease, the exact amount of which will be extremely difficult to ascertain. Therefore, if any installment of rent or any other sum due from Tenant is not received by Landlord within ten (10) days after such amount is due, then, without any requirement for notice to Tenant, Tenant shall pay to Landlord a late charge equal to ten percent (10%) of such overdue amount. The parties agree that this late charge represents a fair and reasonable estimate of the costs that Landlord will incur by reason of late payment by Tenant. Acceptance of such late charge by Landlord shall in no event constitute a waiver of Tenant's default with respect to such overdue amount, nor prevent Landlord from exercising any of the other rights and remedies available to it. 7.
AGREED USE OF PREMISES; OPERATION
Tenant shall use and occupy the premises only for the agreed use, or any other legal use which is reasonably comparable thereto, and for no other purpose. Tenant shall not use or permit the use of the premises in a manner that is unlawful, creates damage, waste or a nuisance, or that disturbs occupants of or causes damage to neighboring premises or properties. Other than guide, signal and Seeing Eye dogs, Tenant shall not keep or allow in the premises any pets, animals, birds, fish, or reptiles. Landlord shall not unreasonably withhold or delay its consent to any written request for a modification of the agreed use, so long as the same will not impair the structural integrity of the improvements of the building, will not adversely affect the mechanical, electrical, HVAC, and other systems of the building, and/or will not affect the exterior appearance of the building. If Landlord elects to withhold consent, Landlord shall within 7 days after such request give written notification of same, which notice shall include an explanation of Landlord's objections to the change in the agreed use. The Tenant shall obtain a Conditional Use Permit from the City of Oakland for the intended use of the premises. This lease is subject to the City of Oakland's approval of the Conditional Use Permit. 8.
COMPLIANCE WITH LAW AND SAFETY
Tenant shall observe and comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, codes and regulations of governmental agencies, including federal, state, municipal and local governing bodies having jurisdiction over any or all of the Tenant's activities, including all provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1979 and all amendments thereto, and all applicable federal, state, municipal, and local safety regulations. All Tenants' activities must be in accordance with these laws, ordinances, codes, and regulations. 9.
UTILITIES
Landlord shall pay for all water for reasonable and normal drinking and lavatory use in connection with an office, and replacement light bulbs and/or fluorescent tubes and ballasts for standard overhead fixtures. Tenant shall pay for all gas, electricity, power, telephone, janitorial and other utilities and services specially or exclusively supplied and/or metered exclusively to the premises or to Tenant, together with any taxes thereon.
137
10. MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR Tenant shall keep and maintain in good order, condition and repair (except for reasonable wear and tear) all portions of premises including without limitation, all fixtures, interior walls, floors, ceilings, and plumbing servicing the leased premises. Tenant shall be responsible for payment of the cost thereof to Landlord as additional rent for that portion of the cost of any maintenance and repair of the premises, or any equipment (wherever located) that serves only Tenant, to the extent such cost is attributable to abuse or misuse by Tenant. Landlord shall keep in good order, condition and repair the foundations, exterior walls, exterior glass, windows and doors damaged by vandalism, structural condition of interior bearing walls, exterior roof, fire sprinkler system or other automatic fire extinguishing system, fire alarm and/or smoke detection systems, fire hydrants, and the common areas, parkways, driveways, landscaping, fences, signs and utility systems servicing the common areas.
11. IMPROVEMENTS AND ALTERATIONS Tenant shall not erect additions or structures nor make nor cause to be made any alterations, improvements, additions, or fixtures that affect the exterior or interior of the premises, nor shall Tenant mark, paint, drill or in any way deface any floors, walls, ceilings, or partitions of the premises without written consent of landlord. Tenant shall pay, when due, all sums of money that may be due or become due for any labor, services, materials, supplies or equipment furnished to or for Tenant, in, at, upon or about the leased premises and which may be secured by any mechanic's, materialmen's or other lien against the premises or Landlord's interest therein. All alterations, improvement or additions that are now or in the future attached permanently to the premises shall be the property of Landlord and remain with the premises at the termination of this lease, except that Landlord can elect within thirty (30) days of the termination of the lease require Tenant, at its cost, to remove any alterations, improvements or additions Tenant has made to the premises. Landlord will make requested improvements to Tenant's space as outlined in the Work Letter, attached hereto and made a part of this lease as Exhibit B. The costs of the improvements are at Landlords expense.
12. DEFAULT OR BREACH BY TENANT A "Default" by Tenant is defined as a failure by Tenant to observe, comply with or perform any of the terms, covenants conditions or rules applicable to Tenant under this lease agreement. A "Breach" by Tenant is defined as the occurrence of any one or more of the following Defaults, and where a grace period for cure after notice is specified herein, the failure by Tenant to cure such Default prior to the expiration of the applicable grace period, and shall entitle Landlord to pursue the remedies set forth in Section 13, Landlord Remedies.
138
a.
Except as expressly otherwise provided in this lease, the failure by Tenant to make any payment of Base Rent or any other monetary payment required to be made by Tenant hereunder as and when due, provided such failure continues for ten {10) business days following written notice thereof by or on behalf of Landlord to Tenant, the failure by Tenant to provide Landlord with reasonable evidence of insurance or surety bond required under this lease agreement, or the failure ofTenant to fulfill any obligation under this lease agreement which endangers or threatens life or property, where such failure continues for a period of ten {10) days following written notice thereof by or on behalf of Landlord to Tenant.
b.
Except as expressly otherwise provided in this lease agreement, the failure by Tenant to perform any provision of this lease if the failure to perform is not cured within 30 days after notice has been given to Tenant. If the default cannot reasonably be cured within 30 days, Tenant shall not be in default of this lease if Tenant commences to cure the default within the 30 day period and diligently and in good faith continues to cure the default.
c.
Notices given under this paragraph shall specify the alleged default and the applicable lease provisions, and shall demand that Tenant perform the provisions of this lease or pay the rent that is in arrears, as the case may be, within the applicable period of time, or quit the premises. No such notice shall be deemed a forfeiture or a termination of this lease unless Landlord so elects in the notice. The purpose of the notice requirements set forth in this section is to extend the notice requirements of the unlawful detainer statutes of California.
13. LANDLORD'S REMEDIES Landlord shall have the following remedies if Tenant commits a default. These remedies are not exclusive; they are cumulative in addition to any remedies now or later allowed by law. a.
Tenant's Right to Possession Not Terminated: Landlord can continue this lease in full force and effect, and the lease will continue in effect as long as Landlord does not terminate Tenant's right to possession, and Landlord shall have the right to collect rent when due. If the Tenant has vacated the property, during the period Tenant is in default, Landlord can enter the premises, and relet them, or any part of them, to third parties for Tenant's account. Reletting can be for a period shorter or longer than the remaining term ofthe lease. No act by Landlord allowed by this paragraph shall terminate this lease unless Landlord notifies Tenant that Landlord elects to terminate this lease. After Tenant's default and for as long as Landlord does not terminate Tenant's right to possession of the premises, Tenant shall have the right to assign or sublet its interest in this lease if Tenant obtains Landlords consent, but Tenant shall not be released from liability.
139
14. LANDLORD'S RIGHT TO TERMINATE LEASE If Tenant is in default or breach of this lease, Landlord can terminate Tenants right to possession of the premises at any time. No act by Landlord other than giving notice to Tenant shall terminate this lease. Acts of maintenance, efforts to relet the premises, or the appointment of a receiver on Landlord's initiative to protect Landlords interest under this lease shall not constitute a termination of Tenant's right to possession.
15. TENANT'S RIGHT TO TERMINATE LEASE So long as Tenant is not in breach or default of this lease, and after twelve (12) months from the commencement of the lease, Tenant can terminate this lease at any time by providing Landlord with a sixty (60) day notice. After receiving notice, Landlord can place a sign on the premises and with prior notice may show the property to prospective tenants.
16. INDEMNIFICATION Tenant shall indemnify, defend and hold Landlord harmless from: 1) all claims of liability for any damage to property or injury or death to any person occurring in, on, or about the premises; 2) all claims of liability arising out ofTenant's failure to perform any provision of this lease, or any act or omission by Tenant, its agents, contractors, invitees or employees; and 3) all damages, liability, fines, penalties, and any other consequences arising from any noncompliance or violation of applicable laws, ordinances, codes, or regulations, including but not limited to the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1979 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Except, however, that Landlord shall hold Tenant harmless from all claims of liability for damage resulting from the acts or omissions of Landlord or its authorized representatives.
17. INSURANCE Tenant at its cost shall maintain public liability and property damage insurance with a single combined liability limit of $1,000,000 and property damage limits of not less than $200,000 insuring against all liability ofTenant and its authorized representatives arising out of and in connection with Tenant's use or occupancy of the premises. All insurance shall insure performance by Tenant of the preceding indemnity provisions. Tenant, a Public Agency, reserves the right to self-insure with respect to liability. Nothing herein shall prevent Tenant from obtaining coverage, on terms and with limits it may determine at its own discretion. Landlord shall obtain and keep in force a policy or policies of insurance in the name of Landlord with loss payable to Landlord, any ground-Landlord, and to any Lender insuring loss or damage to the building and/or premises. The amount of such insurance shall be equal to the full insurable replacement cost of the building and/or premises, as the same shall exist from time to time, or the amount required by any Lender, but in no event more than the commercially reasonable and available insurable value thereof. Tenant owned alterations and utility installations, trade fixtures, and Tenant's personal property shall be insured by Tenant not by Landlord. If the coverage is available and commercially appropriate, such policy or policies shall insure against all risks of direct physical loss or damage (except the perils of flood
140
and/or earthquake unless required by a Lender), including coverage for debris removal and the enforcement of any applicable requirements requiring the upgrading, demolition, reconstruction or replacement of any portion of the premises as the result of a covered loss.
18. DAMAGE OR DESTRUCTION If the premises are totally or partially destroyed from any cause, rendering the premises totally or partially inaccessible or unusable, Landlord may elect to terminate this lease or continue this lease in effect by giving notice to Tenant within thirty (30) days of the date of destruction. If Landlord elects to continue this lease in full force and effect, then Landlord shall restore the premises and the rent shall be abated, from the date of destruction until the date restoration is completed, in an amount proportionate to the extent to which the destruction interferes with Tenant's use of the premises. If Landlord fails to give notice of its decision to terminate or continue this lease within the period stated, Tenant may elect to terminate this lease. Despite any other provisions of this Paragraph if the Premises is destroyed or damaged, as set forth above, during the last twelve (12) months of the Term, Landlord and Tenant shall have the option to terminate this lease by giving written notice of the exercise of that option within thirty (30) days after said damage or destruction.
19. EARLY POSSESSION Any provision herein granting Tenant Early Possession of the premises is subject to and conditioned upon the premises being available for such possession prior to the Commencement Date. Any grant of Early Possession only conveys a non-exclusive right to occupy the premises. If Tenant totally or partially occupies the premises prior to the Commencement Date, the obligation to pay Rent shall be abated for period of such Early Possession.
20. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING Tenant shall not voluntarily assign or encumber its interest in this lease or in the premises, or sublease all or any part of the premises, or allow any other person or entity (except Tenant's authorized representative) to occupy or use all or any part of the premises, without first obtaining Landlord's written consent. Any assignments, encumbrance, or sublease without Landlord's consent shall be voidable and, at Landlord's election, shall constitute a further waiver of the provisions of this paragraph.
21. ENTRY Landlord and its authorized representatives shall have the right to enter the premises at all reasonable times for any of the following purposes: to determine whether the premises are in good condition and whether Tenant is complying with its obligations under the lease; to do any acts that may be necessary to protect Landlord's interest in the premises; or to perform Landlord's duties under this lease. Except in cases of an emergency to protect Landlords property, Landlord shall provide Tenant with at least 24 hour notice before entering the premises. Landlord shall not be liable in any manner for any inconvenience, disturbance, loss of business, nuisance, or other damage arising out of Landlord's entry on the premises as provided in this section, except damage resulting from the acts omissions of Landlord or its authorized representatives.
141
22. NOTICES All notices required or permitted by this lease or applicable law shall be in writing and may be delivered in person (by hand or by courier) or may be sent by regular, certified or registered mail or U.S. Postal Service Express Mail, with postage prepaid, or by facsimile transmission, and shall be deemed sufficiently given if served in a manner specified in this Paragraph 23. For the purposes of this lease, notices shall be addressed as follows, as appropriate: To the Landlord:
Sam Qutob 3332 International Boulevard Oakland, CA 94601
To the Tenant:
AC Transit c/o Real Property Manager 1600 Franklin Street Oakland, CA 94612
AC Transit c/o General Manager 1600 Franklin Street Oakland, CA 94612
23. DATE OF NOTICE Any notice sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, shall be deemed given on the date of delivery shown on the receipt card, or if no delivery date is shown, the postmark thereon. If sent by regular mail the notice shall be deemed given 72 hours after the same is addressed as required herein and mailed with postage prepaid. Notices delivered by United States Express Mail or overnight courier that guarantees next day delivery shall be deemed given 24 hours after delivery of the same to the Postal Service or courier. Notices transmitted by facsimile transmission or similar means shall be deemed delivered up on telephone confirmation of receipt (confirmation report from fax machine is sufficient), provided a copy is also delivered via delivery or mail. If notice is received on a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, it shall be deemed received on the next business day.
24. WAIVERS a.
No waiver by Landlord of the default or breach of any term, covenant or condition hereof by Tenant, shall be deemed a waiver of any other term, covenant or condition hereof, or of any subsequent default or breach by Tenant of the same or of any other term, covenant or condition hereof. Landlord's consent to, or approval of, any such act shall not be deemed to render unnecessary the obtaining of Landlord's approval of, any subsequent or similar act by Tenant, or be construed as the basis of an estoppels to enforce the provision or requiring such consent.
b.
The acceptance of Rent by Landlord shall not be a waiver of any default or breach by Tenant. Any payment by Tenant may be accepted by Landlord on account of moneys or damages due Landlord, notwithstanding any qualifying statements or conditions made by Tenant in connection therewith, which such statements and/or conditions shall be of no force or effect whatsoever unless specifically agreed to in writing by Landlord at or before the time of deposit of such payment.
142
25. EXCUSABLE DELAYS If the performance of any act required of Landlord or Tenant is prevented or delayed by reason of strikes, lockouts, labor disputes, act of God, acts of the public enemy, fire, floods, epidemics, freight embargoes or other cause beyond the control of the party required to perform an act, the performance of such act shall be excused for the period of the delay and the period for the performance of such act shall be extended for thirty (30) days. 26. OPTIONS TO RENEW So long as Tenant is not in default under this lease, either at the time of exercise or at the time the extended term commences, Tenant will have the option to extend the initial term of this lease for an additional period ofTHREE (3) years (the "option period") on the same terms, covenants, and conditions of this lease. Tenant must give written notice of its election to do so to Landlord at least 90 days, but not more than one year, prior to the expiration date of the initial lease term. Tenant shall have no other right to extend the term beyond the option period. 27. HOLDING OVER If Tenant remains in possession of the premises with Landlord's consent after the expiration of the term of this leases without having exercised any option to renew this lease, or after the termination of any such option period, such possession by Tenant shall be construed to be a tenancy from month-tomonth, terminable on thirty (30) days' notice given at any time by either party. All provisions of this lease, except those pertaining to term, shall apply to the month-to-month tenancy. 28. FORCE MAJEURE Landlord shall incur no liability to Tenant with respect to, and shall not be responsible for any failure to perform, any of Landlord's obligations hereunder if such failure is caused by any reason beyond the control of Landlord, including, but not limited to, governmental rule, regulation, ordinance, fire, earthquake, civil commotion, or failure or disruption of utility services. The amount of time Landlord has to perform any of Tenant's obligations shall be extended by the amount of time landlord is delayed in performing such obligation by reason of any force majeure occurrence whether similar to or different from the foregoing types of occurrences.
29. ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATE a.
Each party (as "responding party") shall at any time, within ten (10) business days of receipt of a written request from the other party ("requesting party") execute, acknowledge and deliver to the requesting party a statement in writing (i) certifying that this lease is unmodified and in full force and effect (or, if modified, stating the nature of such modification and certifying that this lease, as so modified, is in full force and effect) and the date to which the rent and other charges are paid in advance, if any, and (ii) acknowledging that there are not, to the responding party's knowledge, any uncured defaults on the part of the requesting party, or specifying such defaults if any are claimed. Any such statement may be conclusively relied upon by any prospective purchaser or encumbrancer of the premises or of the business of Tenant.
143
b.
At the requesting party's option, the failure to deliver such statement within such time shall be a material default of this lease by the party who is to respond, without any further notice to such party, or it shall be conclusive upon such party that (i) this lease is in full force and effect, without modification except as may be represented by the requesting party, (ii) there are no uncured defaults in the requesting party's performance, and (iii) if Landlord is the requesting party, not more than one month's rent has been paid in advance.
30. AITORNEY'S FEES In the event of any action or proceeding brought by either party against the other under this lease, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover for the fees of its attorneys in such action or proceeding such amount as may be determined by the Arbitrator or trier of fact. 31. MISCELLANEOUS The words "Landlord" and "Tenant" as used herein shall include the plural as well as the singular. If there be more than one Tenant, the obligations hereunder imposed upon Tenant shall be joint and several. Submission of this instrument for examination or signature by Tenant does not constitute a reservation of or option for lease and it is not effective as a lease or otherwise until execution and delivery by both Landlord and Tenant. The faithful and timely performance of each of Tenant's and Landlord's obligations under this lease shall, at the election of Landlord, be a condition precedent to the performance of Landlord's obligations under this lease. The agreements, conditions and provisions herein contained shall, subject to the provisions as to assignment, apply to and bind the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. If any provision of this lease shall be determined to be illegal or unenforceable, such determination shall not affect any other provision of this lease and all such other provisions shall remain in full force and effect. This lease shall be governed by and construed pursuant to the laws of the State of California.
32. QUIET ENJOYMENT Provided that Tenant performs all of its obligations hereunder, Tenant shall have peaceable enjoyment of the premises during the lease term free of claims by or through Landlord, subject to all of the terms and conditions contained in this lease.
33. BROKER'S COMMISSION The parties represent to each other that no broker is involved, and that each holds the other harmless with respect to their individual obligations to pay commissions.
34. SURRENDER OF PREMISES, REMOVAL OF PERSONAL PROPERTY At the termination of this lease, Tenant shall give up and surrender the premises, in as good state and condition as reasonable use and wear and tear thereof will permit damage by fire and the elements excepted. Tenant shall remove all property which is not a fixture of or permanent attachment to the premises and which is owned and was installed by Tenant during the term of this lease.
144
35. TERMS BINDING ON SUCCESSORS All the terms, covenants and conditions of this lease shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the successors and assigns of the parties to this lease. The provisions of this section shall not be deemed as a waiver of any of the conditions against assignment in this lease.
36. TIME OF ESSENCE Time is of the essence with respect to the performance of all obligations to be performed or observed by the parties under this lease.
37. COVENANTS AND CONDITIONS All provisions of this lease to be observed or performed by Tenant are both covenants and conditions. In construing this lease, all headings and titles are for the conveniences of the parties only and shall not be considered a part of this lease. Whenever required by the context, the singular shall include the plural and vice versa. This lease shall not be construed as if prepared by one of the parties, but rather according to its fair meaning as a whole, as if both parties had prepared it.
38. BINDING EFFECT: GOVRERNING LAW This lease shall be binding upon the parties, their person representatives, successors and assigns and be governed by the laws of the State of California. Any litigation between the parties hereto concerning this lease shall be initiated in the county in which the premises are located.
39. ENTIRE AGREEMENT, AMENDMENTS This lease and all exhibits attached and any documents expressly incorporated by reference contain the entire agreement between the parties regarding the lease of the premises described herein and shall supersede any and all prior agreements, oral or written, between the parties regarding the lease of these premises. This lease cannot be altered or otherwise modified except by a written amendment.
40. CONSENT OF PARTIES Whenever consent or approval of either party is required, that party shall not unreasonably withhold such consent or approval.
145
Landlord and Tenant executed this lease as of the date written on the first page of this lease. LANDLORD:
By: ~0-w_n_e_r---------------------------
TENANT: Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
Approved as to form and content:
By:
By: David J. Armijo General Manager
David A. Wolf General Counsel
146
EXHIBIT A
I
1111' !!.04'
. ::!
!-,.
22.11'
;,. 0
5 2.n·s -= ""
""
~ RR ~·~ RE
.
7.10'
I
1 1o.oo· SECOND LEVEL
11.08'
.
AIIEAZ
-I
3.02'
. ARE'Al
. . ---
3322 INTERNATIONAL BLVD
•
-. -
13.08' 7.05' • .,...j
.2.11·
SC'AI.E: l. •10'
147
EXHIBITB
WORK LETTER AGREEMENT 33221NTERNATIONAL BOULEVARD This WORK LETTER AGREEMENT ("Work Letter Agreement") is entered into as--=----,::-:---- by and between , ("Landlord"), a n d - - - - - - - - ("Tenant"). RECITALS: A. Concurrently with the execution of this Work Letter Agreement, Landlord and Tenant have entered into a lease (the "Lease") covering certain premises (the "Premises") more particularly described in the lease. All terms not defined herein have the same meaning as set forth in the lease. To the extent applicable, the provisions of the lease are incorporated herein by this reference. B. In order to induce Tenant to enter into the lease and in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter contained, Landlord and Tenant agree as follows:
1. TENANT IMPROVEMENTS. As used in this Work Letter Agreement, the term "Tenant Improvements" or "Tenant Improvement Work" means collectively those items of tenant improvement construction relating to the Premises ("Office Improvements") described below. Tenant, the Work Schedule shall be deemed to be approved by Tenant as submitted. 2. WORK SCHEDULE. Within ten (10) days after the execution of this lease, Landlord will deliver to Tenant, for Tenant's review and approval, a schedule ('Work Schedule") which will set forth the timetable for the planning and completion of the installation of the Tenant Improvements and the Commencement Date of the lease. The Work Schedule will set forth each of the various items of work to be done or approval to be given by Landlord and Tenant in connection with the completion of the Tenant Improvements. The Work Schedule will be submitted to Tenant for its approval, which approval Tenant agrees not to unreasonably withhold, and, once approved by both Landlord and Tenant, the Work Schedule will become the basis for completing the Tenant Improvements. All communications with respect to the matters covered by this Work Letter Agreement are to be made in writing in compliance with the notice provisions of the lease. 3. TENANT IMPROVEMENTS. Listed below are Tenant improvements agreed to be constructed by Landlord for the Tenant. Landlord acknowledges that all work performed shall be in a good an workmanlike manner, in conformance with any and all applicable federal, state, county or municipal laws, rules and regulations. Tenant Improvements include the following: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
carpet/flooring Install a rear door Build a ramp or stairs to access the rear door. Install metal frame and a security screen on rear door New front security gate Add additional outlets {3) Provide new fixtures in restroom Front entry door sensor alert Tinting on upstairs window Provide a separation between the rear door and the space beneath the stairs 2- Small kitchen cabinets in rear room (with hot water heater/sink) 2- Divider gates separating the space Level floor in front entry way Enclose utility box located on exterior wall of building New kitchen sink
148
•
Install a lever handle on restroom door
4. CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION OF TENANT IMPROVEMENTS. Landlord will observe and comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, codes and regulations of governmental agencies, including federal, state, municipal and local governing bodies having jurisdiction over any or all of the Tenant Improvements, including all provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1979 and all amendments thereto, and all applicable federal, state, municipal, and local safety regulations. All of Landlords' activities must be in accordance with these laws, ordinances, codes, and regulations.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned Landlord and Tenant have caused this Work Letter Agreement to be duly executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the date of the Lease. EXECUTED as of _ _ _ _, 20_. LANDLORD: Sam Qutob an individual By: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
TENANT: ACTRANSIT a Public Agency
By: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
149
Staff Report 13-310
BOARD OF DIRECTORS ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT
DRAFT AGENDA Board of Directors/Board Officers Retreat AC Transit General Offices 10th Floor Conference Room 1600 Franklin Street Oaklan d, CA 94612
Wednesday, Ja nu ary 29, 2014, at 10:00 a.m.
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS GREG HARPER, PRESIDENT (WARD 2) JOE WALLACE, VICE PRESIDE NT (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 DAVID A. WOLF, 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 t elephone. For questions, contact the District Secretary's Office at (510) 891-7201. Alameda-Contra Costa Transit Dist rict
January 29, 2014
150
Page 1 of 3
Staff Report 13-310 BOARD OF DIRECTORS/BOARD OFFICERS RETREAT - 1Greg Harper, President Wednesday, January 29, 2014, at 10:00 a.m.
1. Z.
Staff Contact or Presenter
ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMENT Any person may directly address the Board at this time on any items of interest to the public that is within the subject matter and jurisdiction of the Board. Speakers wishing to address a specific agenda item will be invit ed to address the Board at the time the item is being considered. Two (2) minutes are allowed for each item.
3.
3A.
DISCUSSION ITEMS: Morning Session: Discussion rega rding the development of the Short-Range Transit Plan.
Dennis Butler
891-4798
3B.
Afternoon Session: Brown Act, Ethics and Conflict of Interest Training.
David Wolf Jayne Williams
891-7178
4.
BOARD/STAFF COMMENTS (Government Code Section 54954.2)
5.
ADJOURNMENT
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
January 29, 2014 151
Page 3 of 3
This page intentionally blank
152
PLANNING COMMITTEE
December 11, 2013 Agenda Items A-1 – A-4
153
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-305 December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: SUBJECT:
Planning Committee AC Transit Board of Directors David J. Armijo, General Manager Title VI Program Update
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider approval of staffs process and for updating the District's Title VI policies and related activities. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Title 49 CFR Section 21.9(b) requires recipients of federal funds to document their compliance with the Civil Rights Act by submitting a Title VI program to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) every three years. Regulations outlining new requirements for the program were established by the FTA in October 2012, and the District's program update must be submitted by October 1, 2014. Policies requiring update include service standards and data collection and reporting methods; newly required policies addressing public participation and setting thresholds to assist fare and service equity analyses must be developed. Staff anticipates the need for $156,000 in consulting efforts, most of which will be spent on the extensive public outreach, as required by the new FTA guidance. Staff considered peer agencies' recent costs and conducted an independent cost estimate to establish what resources would be needed for this effort. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: If approved by the Board, staff will include a line item in the Mid-year Budget Adjustment for up to $156,000 for the Board to consider in the future along with other budget adjustments.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Title VI Program Update Title VI of the Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin, and Board Policy 502 establishes the District's commitment to social and environmental justice and to involvement of the people of Alameda and Contra Costa Counties in making decisions pertaining to transit policy, service design, and operations. Recipients of federal funds are required to regularly update and submit proof of their efforts to comply with Title VI. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has set October 1, 2014 as the deadline for the District's next submission, and staff have begun activities to ensure that the District will meet 154
Report No. 13-305 Page 2 of 4 this deadline. The effort required to fully execute some of the required tasks exceed the capacity of in-house resources, especially those relating to the degree of community outreach required. In October 2012, the federal government issued new guidance on Title VI compliance {FTA Circular 4702.1B). There are many new required elements, as shown below, since the last time the District updated its program, and while the circular provides recipients with best practices for meeting this mandate, and examples for each of the tasks, a significant effort will be necessary to meet the deadline. In particular, the circular requires recipients to promote inclusive public participation while developing policy and carrying out planning activities. Given the large geographic extent of the District, staff estimates this will require public meetings throughout the service area {in Richmond, Oakland, Hayward, Fremont, etc,) as well as meetings with community based organizations, educational institutions, and agencies which provide services to Title VI protected populations. Translation will be provided at some of these meetings to ensure persons with limited proficiency in English are able to fully participate in the process. In addition, mailings, media ads, and social media outlets will all be utilized as techniques for effective public outreach. Extensive data collection and analysis will be necessary to meet the circular's requirement to report on the demographic make-up ofthe District and to assist in focusing public outreach. At least one element, defining new Title VI policies to set thresholds for determining Disparate Impacts on minority populations and Disproportionate Burdens on low-income populations, must be completed before the District may conduct any major service change. Program Requirements The circular mandates several new elements, the development of which will require a large amount of staff hours and other resources: •
Public Participation Plan, including information about outreach methods to engage minority and limited English proficient populations {LEP)
•
Language Assistance Plan for providing language assistance to LEP persons
•
Major service change policy, disparate impact policy, and disproportionate burden policy, and a description of the public engagement process used for setting the policies
•
Transit monitoring program and reporting of results
The following policies and activities are already in place, but will need review and possible revision taking into account the new regulations: •
Setting of service standards and policies
•
Setting of fare and service adjustment policies
•
Creating demographic and service profile maps and charts
155
Report No. 13-305 Page 3 of 4 •
Collection and reporting of ridership demographics and travel patterns
Finally, there are a number of requirements which are not new, and which the District already complies with, including notifications to the public, complaint form and procedures, reporting of Title VI investigations and racial makeup of non-elected committees, results of service and fare equity analyses, and a process for Board of Directors' approval of Title VI policy decisions.
As indicated above, development of the policies and plans necessary for a successful Title VI program update will require an intensive outlay of resources. In order to estimate what this effort might cost AC Transit, staff first considered peer agencies' recent costs for similar activities. One agency spent approximately $275,000 over the last two years creating their Public Participation Plan, using consultant services for the entire project. Staff believes the District can reduce such costs by supplementing consultant support with in-house staff. Using this approach, staff created an independent cost estimate which suggests the program update may be conducted with approximately $156,000 in funds. Other Title VI Activities Along with the program update, the circular mandates several ongoing activities. Among them are in-depth consideration of Limited English Proficiency (LEP) persons during public outreach, requirements around posting public information and dealing with complaints, and maintenance of a transit monitoring program. Fare change proposals are being considered currently by the Board, and if approved, their implementation will be monitored for Title VI compliance. In preparation for a possible service expansion, staff will conduct a service equity analysis to ensure Title VI protected populations will not bear any disproportionately high or adverse effects from such changes. Staff will continue to conduct all other recurring elements of the District's Title VI program such as responding to complaints and ensuring information about the District's compliance is accessible to the public. Because of the increase in Title VI activities, the District recently staffed a Senior Transportation Planner position, with Title VI coordination being a major part of that person's duties. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
Approval of this request will ensure resources are available to meet an important deadline and help ensure the District remains eligible to receive Federal funds. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
Per Title 49 CFR Section 21.9{b), recipients of federal funds are required to document their compliance with the Civil Rights Act by submitting a Title VI program to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) every three years. Considering this requirement, there are no practical alternatives associated with the action recommended in this report.
156
Report No. 13-305 Page 4 of 4
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Board Policy 501- Customer Contact Policy and Title VI Complaint Process Board Policy 502- Community Involvement Program/Environmental Justice Board Policy 550- Service Standards and Design Policy Board Policy 551- Title VI Service Review and Compliance Report Policy
ATTACHMENTS: 1.)
Independent Cost Estimate (ICE)
Department Head Approval: Reviewed by: Prepared by:
Dennis Butler, Chief Planning and Development Officer David A. Wolf, General Counsel Lewis G. Clinton, Chief Financial Officer Robert del Rosario, Director of Service Development Sally Goodman, Title VI Coordinator
157
This page intentionally blank
158
Title VI Program Update
SR 13-305 Attachment 1
Assumptions Labor Type Proj Mgr
Hourly Rate 150
Sr Consultant
125 100
Jr Consultant Admin
Hours Base Contract
50
Proj Mgr
Sr Consultant
Jr Consultant
Admin
Units
Unit Cost
Task Cost
FY
Task Contract Line Item 1: Title VI Work Plan Draft Work Plan for Title VI Policy & Plan Review and finalize Title VI work plan w/District
16
40
16
24
96
10,200
13/14
8
8
8
8 4
32 8
3,400
13/14
600
13/14
4
Submit monthly status reports
$14,200 Contract Line Item 2: Title VI Policy development Prepare Draft Policies & Definitions (Major Service Change, Disparate Impact, Disproportionate Burden policies; Adverse Impact definition) Plan and Conduct Public Outreach:
16 24
80 120
24 24
200 288
21,600 31,800
13/14
120
8
24
24
8
64
7,000
13/14
80
13/14
- media outreach - 10 mtgs with CBOs - 5 community meetings -preparation & materials for 1 public hearing Review and finalize Draft Policies & Definitions w/District Conduct Public Hearing
$60,400 Contract Line Item 3: New Board Policies to BOD Review all relevant existing Board Policies
6,800 8,600
13/14 13/14
5,600 $21,000
13/14
4,800
13/14
activities above)
13/14
Prepare draft Public Participation and Language Assistance Plans
10,800 7,400
13/14
Prepare draft Board Policies
16 24
24 24
16
Review and finalize Board Policies w/District
16
16
16
16
16
16
Contract Line Item 4: Title VI Public Participation Plan Contract Line Item 5: Title VI language Assistance Plan 8
Review existing public outreach and language assistance plans and activities
40
Conduct public outreach as required (may be included with outreach
Review and finalize Plans w/District
16
32
8
24
32 24
24
104
16
72
13/14
$23,000 Contract Line Item 6: Transit Monitoring Program 8
Review existing transit monitoring efforts
8
Prepare draft transit monitoring program Review and finalize Transit Monitoring Program w/District
8
8
16 16
24 24
8 40
56
3,800 5,600
13/14
16 16
56
5, 600
13/14
8
8
40
64
48 168
16 16 16
32
13/14
Contract Line Item 7: Title VI Triennial Plan Prepare Work Plan for Title VI Triennial Plan development Prepare Final Report for Title VI Triennial Plan Submission
Direct Costs - Copies, printed mat' Is, meeting supplies, phone, computer Direct Costs- Translation Services 216
Total
159
488
484
268
1,456
5,800
13/14
15,800 $21,600
14/15
$6,000
13/14
$10,000 $156,200
13/14
This page intentionally blank
160
Report No: Meeting Date:
TR/1/VS/T
13-223 December 11, 2 013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Planning Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Traffic Signal Priority (TSP) Assessments
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider recommending receipt of report on the District's efforts to evaluate and implement Traffic Signal Priority (TSP) on Line 51, BRT and other corridors and provide some lessons learned from previous TSP installations. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Traffic Signal Priority (TSP) refers to a device incorporated into a traffic signal to detect buses along a corridor and provide an extension to the "green" signal time. This device feature allows a bus to successfully pass through intersections without stopping. The District currently uses an infrared (IR) 'Opticom' TSP system along the 72R and lR Rapid corridors. These systems have operated with varying degrees of success over the past decade and have had numerous challenges with functionality and monitoring. Given the number of AC Transit and regional projects that incorporate TSP into the design, staff has evaluated the different TSP products available for implementation. There are a number of factors to consider in the evaluation including: functionality, compatibility, operations and maintenance. Based on these factors, staff has outlined the benefits and constraints of each TSP product and concluded that a dual lnfrared/GPS-based existing technology is the most costefficient and operationally suitable for implementation in any projects within the AC Transit service area. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: There are no budgeta ry or fiscal impacts associated with this report. However, various projects requiring TSP will bear the cost of the system. The cost will vary depending on the project and the number oftraffic signals to be equ ipped .
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Traffic Signal Priority (TSP) refers to a device incorporated int o a traffic signal to detect buses along a corridor and provide an extension to the "green" signal t ime. This device feature can, with certain parameters, permit a bus to pass through intersections without stopping. This advantage can significantly reduce travel time fo r a route along a corridor. The District currently 161
Report No. 13- 223 Page 2 of 5 uses an infrared {IR) 'Opticom' TSP system along the 72R and 1R Rapid corridors originally developed by 3M and subsequently bought by Global Traffic Technologies {GTT). This technology, originally installed in 2003 and 2006 (respectively), exists at approximately 129 signalized intersections within the District. The 72R passes through 47 intersections equipped with TSP. The 1R passes through 50 intersections along East 14th/International equipped with TSP and 32 intersections along Telegraph equipped with TSP for a total of 82. These systems have operated with varying degrees of success over the past decade. Daily reports concerning their operational condition are frequently disrupted and unreliable. Although devices might still be operating properly in the field, staff has had difficulty monitoring their activity because of this. Ongoing maintenance of this technology, involving coordination between 12 agencies in the region, has proven to be cumbersome and expensive. The IR TSP system is line-of-sight dependent meaning there must a clear sight line between the traffic signal and the bus for wireless communication. It also requires more frequent and more involved maintenance then newer GPS-based TSP systems. Newer systems are also better equipped with software management tools to monitor operations and more easily identify problem locations. There are currently several projects under development that will require TSP at signalized intersections throughout the District's service area. Existing regional projects under construction have already installed TSP systems for the district at numerous intersections. The following is a list of some of the larger projects that have installed or will install TSP along District corridors over the next three years:
Project East Bay SMART Corridors Project Interstate 80 Integrated Corridor Mobility Project
Benefitting Corridor/Route
# TSP Equipped Intersections
72R & lR
Approx. 129
>20 including I not limited to: L51B, Transbay, 72R
Approx. 70
Line 51 Corridor Delay Reduction & Sustainability Project
Line 51A & 51B
Approx. 78
Webster Street SMART Corridor Project
Line 51A
Approx. 6
East Bay Bus Rapid Transit Project
EB BRT
Approx.117
Undefined Expected Projects
Multiple Lines
Estimated >100 I 3 years
162
Technology Type
Opticom Infrared GTT/Opticom Dual lnfrared/GPC Proposed GTT/Opticom Dual lnfrared/GPC GTT/Opticom Dual lnfrared/GPC Proposed GTT/Opticom Dual lnfrared/GPC To Be Determined
Report No. 13- 223 Page 3 of 5 Staff is evaluating commercially available TSP systems. Currently, the industry offers approximately a half dozen or so options of various of-the-shelf GPS-based TSP systems. These options vary widely in terms of design characteristics, space requirements, features, signal controller dependencies and limitations. Most options offer very similar functionality. Research and development by vendors continues to quickly advance the technology available. Partnering agencies involved in current projects are requiring specific functionality and certain conditions to be met for future TSP deployments. Finally, the adoption of a single Transit Signal Priority (TSP) system platform by the District would minimize the operation and maintenance efforts/costs. These and other factors are considered as staff determines the best TSP system suited for the District. Emergency Vehicle Preemption (EVP) systems are already in place at most intersections where TSP exists or is being proposed. These EVP systems were manufactured by the same company as the District's existing IR legacy systems. Some new commercially available TSP systems could require that the EVP and TSP elements be separated thus adding cabinets, equipment, hardware connections, software, and new TSP interfaces to existing traffic cabinets/signal controllers. All existing EVP equipment/interfaces must remain fully operational and unimpeded with the installation of any new TSP systems. They must be able to fully integrate into the signal system while maintaining a clear separation between the TSP equipment and traffic signal controller hardware connections. Maintenance and operation is expected to be substantially less than the existing Opticom Infrared system. This includes the level of staffing, equipment troubleshooting, and performance monitoring needed.
It is important to note that an upgraded system is also
expected to be more reliable as well. However, if TSP/communication systems are too complex, there could be a point of diminishing returns. More tools and features would be required to achieve a high level of service reliability. Without a high level of service reliability for operations and maintenance, TSP systems will not function properly at the level they were intended to operate. Partner agencies - Given the District and its agency partners have already invested in building and maintaining the existing (GTT/IR) TSP system platform along numerous corridors for many years now, agencies are already familiar with the level of operations and maintenance activities needed for an upgraded TSP system. In fact, upgrading to the new GTT/GPS platform districtwide has already been met with approval from many agencies. District staff, in collaboration with consultant teams, have value-engineered various TSP technologies to determine the best possible system platform for AC Transit partner agencies. The result is a staff recommendation to upgrade to a system that addresses the issues outlined above. The likely solution is to update the existing GTT/IR TSP technology to the new GTT/GPS TSP technology or a compatible equivalent, which is estimated to provide the district numerous benefits.
163
Report No. 13- 223 Page 4 of 5 ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: There are advantages and disadvantages associated with adopting the GTI/GPS TSP system platform equivalent district-wide: Advantages • • • • • • • • • • •
Seamlessly integrates into existing traffic signal architecture and operation. Requires no additional equipment to maintain existing EVP system without impediment. Fully compatible with existing traffic signal and emergency preemption systems. Creates a single technology platform for the District. Easily expandable to other corridors. Achieves the highest efficiency and most practicable level of TSP benefits. Is immediately acceptable to all agency partners. Mutually beneficial to other agencies because of the potential for shared use of the equipment for both TSP and emergency preemption. Cost effective. Matured, well supported & widely used product. GTI/GPS TSP equipment already existing at intersections within the District.
Disadvantages • • •
Dependency upon one manufacturing vendor to keep future product selection fully compatible, affordable, technologically competitive. Specifying a project technology could create a more expensive environment for contractors during construction. There are other newer/more complex TSP systems that have more functionality. However, the functionality of the GTI or equivalent system does meet AC Transit's requirements under the various projects previously mentioned.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: The available TSP technologies were screened using the following seven {7) defined criteria. Each potential TSP technology provides various capabilities and characteristics. Therefore, the application of this defined screening criteria provides a method for qualitatively comparing each technology. 1. Currently available with TSP and EVP -this criterion is to make sure that the TSP system also has integrated the emergency vehicle preemption {EVP) system. This is necessary since EVP is required to be retained along the corridor. 2. Cost Effectiveness & Capital Cost Impacts- this criteria is to ensure that the, proposed TSP system is affordable. It also relates to potential cost impacts to the District on TSP corridors. 3. Ease of Installation- this criteria relates to the ability to be installed properly and thus operated and maintained properly.
164
Report No. 13- 223 Page 5 of 5 4. Numerous Deployments in the Region and around the Country- this criteria relates to the system's stability, sustainability, and proven track record. 5. Regional familiarity with TSP Technology- this criteria relates to the local agency staff knowhow of the operation and maintenance ofthe TSP technology. 6. Integration and compatibility of existing traffic signal controllers- this criteria relates to the system's ability to be deployed along district corridors, it's ability to interface with existing systel)1s, and it's acceptance by the local agencies. 7. Operation & Maintenance Cost Impact- this criteria relates to the potential O&M cost impacts to the District on TSP corridors. The recommendation of a TSP technology was based on qualitative criteria and the operational needs. Based on this evaluation of alternatives, the GTI/GPS-based system is the ideal system for AC Transit's needs. If the District were to select another alternative, certain system functionality and compatibility would be lost.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: There are no relevant board actions/policies associated with this staff report.
ATIACHMENTS: There are no attachments associated with this staff report.
Department Head Approval:
Dennis W. Butler, Chief Planning and Development Officer
Reviewed by: Prepared by:
Robert del Rosario, Director of Service Development Wil Buller, Traffic Engineer
165
This page intentionally blank
166
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-277 December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Planning Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Process to Expand Transit Service
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider receiving report on the process to expand transit service for the District. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The process for determining potential service expansion includes three phases: The Planning Phase- Development of the service expansion plan based on existing policies and studies, projected demand, and public input. The Outreach Phase - Execution of the public hearing process including public notification, community outreach and the formal public hearing. Concurrently, staff conducts the Title VI analysis and environmental review for the proposed plan. The Implementation Phase -Development and execution of a marketing strategy, development of schedules, updating of public information systems and service-related applications, and preparation and implementation of the associated sign-up. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
There are no budgetary/fiscal impacts associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
When operating revenues increase, AC Transit may consider increasing service levels, introducing new service, and increasing system ridership . The systematic approach to introducing more transit service in the District includes planning, outreach and implementation. Planning Phase
The first phase of the service expansion process is the planning phase and is based on analysis of demand and studies, such as the recent Comprehensive Operations Analysis (COA). In addition, public input forms an important component of service planning. Service expansion planning is guided by Board Policy 550, {{Service Standards and Design Policy."
167
Report No. 13-277 Page 2 of 3 Once a plan is developed from these inputs, staff develops the financial component comprised of both operating and capital costs. After staff sets a plan and establishes the operating and capital costs, the plan goes to the Board of Directors for consideration. At that point, the Board determines if the plan and associated environmental review should advance to a public hearing or if it requires revision. If the plan advances, staff begins the Title VI analysis as outlined in Board Policy 551, "Title VI Service Review and Compliance Report Policy," and environmental review in accordance to Board Policy 512, "Environmental Evaluations of Transit District Projects," to ensure compliance with the Civil Rights Act, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (if the plan incorporates federal funds). Overall, the Planning Phase for expanding service typically requires a three-month schedule to reach a decision by the Board to proceed with a public hearing. Outreach Phase
The Outreach Phase includes both the formal notification process for the public hearing and a series of community outreach meetings throughout the area affected by the service adjustments. Though the community meetings are currently not required under Board Policy 163 and the public hearing process, they are extremely useful in receiving public input on the plan and providing clarification on any plan elements. The meetings also provide a less formal forum to provide public feedback on the plan. Because of this, staff has since supplemented every public hearing notification process with community meetings as recently as the Central and South County Restructuring Plan public outreach effort last summer. The Outreach Phase culminates with the public hearing conducted by the Board on the proposed plan and the associated environmental reviews. Based on review of the proposed plan, the environmental document and the public comments received, the Board can ask staff to revise the plan and review environmental impacts and mitigations, or approve the plan for implementation along with the final environmental document. At this same time, staff completes the Title VI analysis of the plan to ensure compliance. The findings of the Title VI report and the final environmental document provide the Board with additional information to make a decision on the plan. With the required notification period for public hearings and production time for materials and the community outreach meetings, the Outreach Phase for expanding service requires another two months to complete. Implementation Phase
Once the Board of Directors approves a service expansion plan, staff proceeds with implementation which includes: • • •
Developing and executing a marketing strategy for the expanded service; Preparing new schedules and other related reports in Hastus; Exporting the data from the scheduling system to update the District's information systems and applications such as:
168
Report No. 13-277 Page 3 of 3
• •
o Computer-aided Dispatch/Auto Vehicle Location (CAD/AVL) o Automated Vehicle Announcement o Google Transit/511.org/Nextbus o Bus stops/maps/timetables o Automatic Passenger Counters o Headsigns Training for operators, supervisors, and customer service representatives on the new service as needed; and Conducting the sign-up.
Because of the number of separate systems involved in implementation and the production of materials for the public and operations staff, the implementation phase typically requires three months to complete. Following implementation, staff from Service Planning and the Operations departments continually coordinate on evaluating the new service and making adjustments where needed. This evaluation period continues for six months to a year, and could extend longer when observing and measuring the effectiveness of new routes and service. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: There are no advantages or disadvantages associated with this briefing report because it outlines an existing process for expanding service. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: Staff considered numerous process alternatives before developing the one described here in. This process conforms with Board Policy guidance and generally accepted planning principles. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Board Policy 163- Public Hearings Processes for the Board of Directors Board Policy 512- Environmental Evaluations ofTransit District Projects Board Policy 540- Service Adjustments Board Policy 550- Service Standards and Design Policy Board Policy 551- Title VI Service Review and Compliance Report Policy ATTACHMENTS: None Department Head Approval:
Dennis Butler, Chief Planning and Development Officer
Reviewed by:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel Sally Goodman, Title VI Coordinator Robert del Rosario, Director of Service Development
Prepared by:
169
This page intentionally blank
170
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-274 December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Planning Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
East Bay Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Quarterly Report
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider receiving the third quarter report on the East Bay Bus Rapid Transit Project (BRT). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This quarterly report provides an update of the progress, achievements, and accomplishments made in the program since Board approval of the of the Downtown Oakland to San Leandro (DOSL) Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) in April 2012 and a look at the way ahead. Attachment 1 presents a synopsis of Key Project Milestones and Attachment 2 provides a status of community outreach activities. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: The current estimated cost, as of November 2013, of the proposed LPA is $178.0 million escalated to year of expenditure. The total funds committed to date are $150.4 million with an additional $27.6 million in FTA Small Starts Funding anticipated for FY2015. This would bring the total committed funding to $178 million. The following table shows the summary of funding commitments. Environmental FTA Small Starts FTABus Measure B RM2 STIP
$1.4 $0.1 $3.6 $1.7 $1.5
Preliminary Engineering
$6.6 $1.9 $0.3
Final Design
$12.3 $2.1 $3.3
Construction
$54. 8 $0.9 $0.6 $42.9
$75.0
$39.8 $3. 7
$39.8
$0.3
1-Bond PTMISEA
$0.3 Total
$8.6
$3.1 $9.4 $44.9 $1.5
ACTC Commitment District Funds
Total
$4.0 $0.3
$8.8
171
$18.0
$142.7
$178.0
Report No. 13-274 Page 2 of 7 BACKG ROU NO/RATIONALE:
The District's East Bay BRT project is designed to provide superior public transit through one of the District' s busiest corridors. The BRT service will feature 5-minute headways, light-rail-like bus stations with ADA compliant passenger amenities, Traffic Signal Priority {TSP} for advancing buses through signalized intersections, passenger safety features, diesel-electric hybrid, du al sided 5-door buses, dedicated bus lanes, and improved lighting and passenger facilities. Project Schedule
Figure 1 provides an overview of proposed revisions to the project schedule made in third quarter followed by key initiatives and program targets. Over the last several months the BRT Project team has conducted a rigorous engineering analysis of the preliminary schedule. Staff incorporated a mandatory FTA requirement to add a 20% contingency to the overall schedule and accounted for the extended time required to complete Preliminary Engineering and other factors. The resulting analysis proposed the Revenue Service Date be adjusted from April 2016 to November 2017. The complete detailed analysis was presented to the AC Transit Board of Directors On October 9, 2013. Figure 1 - High Level Project Schedule
Milestones I De live rabies
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
Q2 1 Q3 1 Q4 0 1 1 o2 1Q3 1Q4 0 1 1 o2 1 Q3 1 Q4 Q1 1Q2 1Q3 1Q4 Ql 1 02 1 Q3 1 Q4 Ql 1o2l Q3 1 Q4 Milestones
lA
lA
PE Compl e
ROD
fj RSD
I
Fi nal Desi gn Real Estate Acquisition
6.
SSGA Issuance
I
I I
Vehicle Procurement Advance Utilities Construction
Parki ng Lot & Fruitvale Bypass
I I
Roadway I Comr unications I Stations I Landscape
I I I
I
I
Start-up and Test ing Contingency
I I
Legend:
1.
ROD (Record of Decision) represents t he FTA fin al approval of the scope of the project and ends the enviro nment al phase.
2.
SSGA (Small Starts Grant Agr eem ent ) r epr esents FTA's fin al agr eement t o provide the r emaini ng Sm alls Starts fund ing.
3.
RSD (Revenue Start Dat e) t he date the District plans to st art passenger service.
172
I
Report No. 13-274 Page 3 of 7 •
Preliminary Engineering (PE) PE activities were extended into the third quarter to address input captured during the 50 inter-agency meetings conducted since the first quarter. BRT station configuration development, station architecture, right of way engineering, utility mapping and conflict coordination; value engineering and roadway geometry were some of the key work activities. Several preliminary design plans and supporting technical studies/reports were completed during this period culminating in a draft Final PE Report submitted to agency partners in September 2013.
For the purposes of the Master Cooperative
Agreement, the following set of documents together constitutes the completion of the Preliminary Engineering Phase: ,; The COA Conformance Standards ,( The 40% Geometric Approval Drawings as amended to include City comments. ,; The Reevaluated Project Schedule; with 40% milestones added. ,; The Revised Baseline Cost Estimate. •
Final Design (FD) The Design Team started work on FD activities in March 2013. This initial phase was followed in the second quarter by work on the 65% Design plans, which will more accurately define BRT station configuration and location, systems and communications design, right of way engineering, utility mapping and conflict coordination and roadway geometry. These elements will be included in a 65% Design for the Major Infrastructure package for review by our Agency Partners in July 2014. Completion of all design work is expected for Bid Package 1 -Advance Utility Relocation in July 2014; Bid Package 2 Parking Lots and Fruitvale Bypass in August 2014; and Bid Package 3 - Major Infrastructure in March 2015.
•
Real Estate Acquisition Right of Way Acquisition should begin in the fourth quarter and the appraisals for the parking mitigation sites (033-2124-034-01 and 043-4582-011) will be finalized now that Phase 2 environmental studies were completed at the end of the third quarter. The two parcels at the Fruitvale Bypass intersection (parcels 025-0692-005 and 033-2186-001) will be revised due to design configuration changes of the intersection. Once the new design, new maps and legal descriptions are ready and transmitted to the right-of-way agent, the appraisals will be revised to reflect the changes.
•
Vehicle Procurement The District intends to purchase 27, 60-foot, articulated, 5-door, diesel-electric hybrid buses for the BRT as part of its routine bus fleet replacement management plan to 173
Report No. 13-274 Page 4 of 7 replace older buses being retired from the fleet. Procurement was initiated by issuance of a full and open RFP on December 29, 2012. Proposals are due in January 2015 and contract award is expected in April 2015. Status af Third Party Agreements
Master Cooperative Agreements and Operations & Maintenance Agreements are used by public agencies to provide direction, guidance, and information regarding the responsibilities and obligations each agency has and who will pay for them.
These documents ordinarily
contain provisions for construction management, securing permits and ownership of completed facilities as well as reimbursement of staff costs, construction inspection, hazardous material management, and project closeout. The FTA requires that these agreements be executed by the time the Small Starts Grant Agreement application is submitted. Master Cooperative Agreements (MCA): Caltrans MCA- Executed May 6, 2013 City of San Leandro MCA- Executed June 27, 2013 City of Oakland MCA- Executed August 30, 2013 Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Agreements: Caltrans O&M- Anticipated December 31, 2013 City of San Leandro O&M- Executed June 27, 2013 City of Oakland O&M- Anticipated February 2014 Utility Agreements are made between utility providers and project sponsors that contain provisions for the payment and execution of the design and construction of relocated utilities affected by the project. The term Franchise Rights is often used to describe which entity has authority to work on utilities and who is responsible to pay fees for that work. The FTA requires that these agreements be executed by the time the Small Starts Grant Agreement application is submitted. Other Key Program Activities
•
Project Labor Agreement and Construction Careers Policy District staff in collaboration with an outside legal consultant, developed a policy similar to that permitted by federal funding sources on transportation projects in Los Angeles, CA.
Staff collaborated with community groups such as "Revive Oakland" whose
coalition serves to influence jobs policies on public projects in Oakland. The District incorporated the Construction Careers Policy into a Project Labor Agreement (PLA), to provide a workable and effective hiring program for the Bus Rapid Transit Project. The negotiated PLA and Careers Policy was presented to the Policy Steering Committee on September 30, 2013 and adopted by the Board on October 23, 2013. 174
Report No. 13-274 Page 5 of 7 •
Artistic Enhancement Program The Artistic Enhancement Program will result in the procurement of artist services, and the design and implementation of artistic enhancements that are directly integrated into the BRT station architecture. The program is summarized in the most recent Draft Artistic Enhancement Strategy that includes descriptions of the intent behind the artistic enhancements, related city,
Federal Transit Administration {FTA), and Caltrans
requirements and policies, level of community involvement in the design process and station design elements appropriate for integrated artistic enhancements. The Program was developed in coordination with the cities of Oakland and San Leandro and will continue throughout the design and construction phases. It also includes details related to the selection and procurement of lead artist(s) and a pre-qualified pool of artists/artisans. Two Requests for Qualification (RFQ) solicitations were developed and released on October 2, 2013. Qualifications are due on December 9, 2013 from which a short-list of lead and supporting artists will be furthered evaluated for final selection. •
Transit Signal Priority Transit Signal Priority {TSP) is currently in development. The use of TSP has shown to provide improved transit route schedule adherence and improved transit travel time efficiency while minimizing impacts to normal traffic operations.
This is achieved
primarily through reducing the amount of time transit vehicles have to wait at signalized intersections along its route.
The District desires to standardize the on-board bus
communications systems throughout the fleet in order to achieve a system-wide common infrastructure that optimizes bus deployment and operation while being more cost-effective to maintain. Plans include the use of TSP initially for the Line SlA/B Project followed by the BRT project. TSP is a technology that shortens the time it takes a traffic signal to provide a traffic signal "green" indication for an approaching bus to a signalized intersection, thus shortening the time buses will normally have to wait at a traffic signal. TSP uses various technologies and equipment to determine where a bus is located along its route, and whether it is behind its schedule or headway. If it is behind its schedule or headway, the TSP system will request priority at the next signalized intersection, or series of intersections. The priority request is sent wirelessly to the traffic signal controller which then is responsible for implementing the priority operations, which consists of signal timing adjustments to provide the bus a green indication once the bus arrives at that intersection. The signal timing adjustments include increasing the green time window for a bus to get through the signalized intersection by reducing the amount of green time provided for traffic movements that do not have buses.
175
Report No. 13-274 Page 6 of 7 Given the amount of traffic signals along the BRT corridor, it is anticipated that the use of TSP will result in measurable travel time savings and improved reliability of transit vehicle headways. The BRT TSP system will include GPS-based equipment on-board the BRT buses to provide bus location information, wireless communications for BRT buses to communicate with each other to determine the headway status as well as to send TSP requests from the BRT buses to the TSP equipment installed in roadside cabinets which then places the TSP request to the traffic signal controllers. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: This is a status report and there is no Board action prompting the examination of advantages or disadvantages of a particular action. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: This report does not recommend any action. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: 1. GC Memo 10-045 - Adopted a Motion to Enter into a Project Labor Agreement or Project Stabilization Agreement for the Bus Rapid Transit Project
2. Resolution 12-035 reconfirming AC Transit's commitment to negotiate a Project Labor Agreement or Project Stabilization Agreement for the Bus Rapid Transit Project 3. GM Memo 13-208 - East Bay Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Milestone Status and Quarterly Report 4. GM Memo 11-073a -Contract award to Parsons Transportation Group for preliminary engineering and design services associated with the East Bay Bus Rapid Transit 5. GM Memo 12-030- Received East Bay Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Quarterly Update. 6. GM Memo 12-083a - Board adopts Resolution No. 12-018 certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the East Bay Bus Rapid Transit Project, and selection of the Downtown Oakland-San Leandro Alternative (DOSL) as the Locally Preferred Alternative for the Project, and authorizing the filing of a Notice of Determination. 7. Staff Report 12-072a -Contract award to Gannett Fleming for Program Management and Construction Management services for the Bus Rapid Transit Project. 8. Staff Report 12-177 - Quarterly Report on East Bay Rapid Transit. 9. Staff Report 13-005 - the Board authorized the General Manager to sign the MCA for Caltrans. 10. Staff Report 13-107 -the Board authorized the General Manager to sign the MCA for City of San Leandro. 176
Report No. 13-274 Page 7 of 7
11. Staff Report 13-171 - the Board authorized the General Manager to sign O&M Agreement for City of San Leandro.
12. Staff Report 13-184 - the Board authorized the General Manager to sign the MCA for City of Oakland and deferred action on O&M agreement. ATTACHMENTS:
1:
Attachment 1- BRT Project Milestones Update
2:
Attachment 2- BRT Status Report- Community Outreach Activities
Department Head Approval:
Dennis W. Butler, Chief Planning & Development Officer
Reviewed by:
Chris Andrichak, Senior Analyst, Capital Planning & Grants
Prepared by:
David Wilkins, BRT Program Director
177
This page intentionally blank
178
Page 1 of 4
Report No. 13-274 Attachment 1
Project Milestones- Past, Present, & Future: In order to facilitate the effective and responsive management of this program, we have organized and managed this project using the following major milestones to comply with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidelines for Small Starts grant funded projects. For each milestone we have described associated costs, deliverables and decision points. Environmental
•
• • •
Purpose - During the planning and environmental phase, the District assures that the project clears the environmental impacts of the project, with acceptable mitigation measures, in accordance with the NEPA and receives clearance through FTA action. The project team performs necessary studies to address potential impacts such as traffic, noise, air quality, and biological resources. This is accomplished through an Environmental Assessment (EA). The purpose of an EA is to determine if certain aspects of the proposed project have the potential for significant adverse social, economic, or environmental impact and if present, create the foundation for preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR). Cost - $8. 7M Key Deliverables o February 2012- Submittal of EIS/EIR Critical Decision Points o April 2012- Certification of EIS/EIR by AC Transit Board of Directors; Adoption of Downtown Oakland to San Leandro (DOSL) Alignment as the Revised Local Preferred Alternative (LPA) o June 2012 - Final EIS/EIR approved and Record of Decision (ROD) issued by Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
Preliminary Engineering
•
• •
Purpose - The design team advances the project from the conceptual design to a level of design that further defines all significant elements that will enable a more accurate estimate of the construction project costs and impacts. The developed technical and cost information will serve as the basis for subsequent funding and implementation decisions. A major objective of preliminary engineering, is for the Project Manager to ensure that the design team investigates the merits of all reasonable or viable configurations and designs. These investigations require in-depth analysis of all components, their interrelationships, and their costs. In addition, supplemental environmental review requirements are completed. Cost - $8.8M (Includes Design & Project Management) Key Deliverables o August 2012- Submittal of complete Small Starts Application to FTA for Federal Fiscal Year 2014 o December 2012- Value Engineering Study
179
Page 2 of4
o
•
December 2012 -Advertisement of Vehicle Procurement Request for Proposal (RFP) o March 2013- Real Estate Acquisition Management Plan (RAMP) o April 2013- Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) o April 2013- Bus Fleet Management Plan (BFM P) o April 2013- Project Management Plan (PMP) o May 2013- Operations and Maintenance Plan (OMP) o May 2013- Draft Business Impact Plan o June 2013- Safety and Security Management Plan (SSMP) o June 2013- Draft Parking Impact Plan o July 2013- Draft 40% Geometric Approval Drawings (GAD) o 4th Quarter 2013 -Final 40% GAD Critical Decision Points o April 2012- Notice to Proceed (NTP) for Preliminary Engineering o June 2012- Approval of the Project Report by Caltrans District 4 o July 2012 - Cities of Oakland and San Leandro Council Actions for Continued Project Development o August 2012- Notice to Proceed for PM/CM Services o May 2013- AC Transit Board vote to authorize execution of Caltrans MCA o May 2013- Execution of Caltrans Master Cooperative Agreement (MCA) o June 2013- San Leandro City Council vote to authorize execution of O&M o June 2013- AC Transit Board vote to authorize execution of San Leandro MCA and O&M o June 2013- Execution of San Leandro MCA & O&M o July 2013- Oakland City council vote to authorize execution of MCA and O&M o July 2013 - AC Transit Board vote to authorize execution of Oakland MCA, but deferred action on the O&M to 4th quarter 2013 o 4th Quarter 2013- Completion of PE phase
Final Design
•
•
Purpose - Final design begins once the PE report is complete and endorsed by the project partners. Only the City of Oakland requires sign-off of the PE Report by the Public Works Director. At this point, the revised baseline scope, schedule, and cost of the Project are established. The project will include the features and amenities required by MCAs with agency partners and that make the BRT unique. The final design team will develop the construction bid packages from this baseline which will contain the final drawings and specifications for the project required to solicit and obtain construction contract bids. The final drawings and specifications will also detail the property or ROW needed to accommodate the project, include the appropriate permits and associated conditions from other agencies, and any coordination of work with or by third parties (e.g., utility companies). The project manager will oversee the final design efforts of the design team through reviews of design drawings and specification submissions at the 65 percent and 100 percent complete stages of design. Cost- $18.0M (Includes Design & Project Management)
180
Page 3 of 4
•
Key Deliverables o September 2013- Submittal of complete Small Starts Update to FTA o October 2013- Revised Baseline Cost Estimate I Schedule established o November 2013 - Submission of Categorical exemption 130 (c) for the supplemental environmental assessment done to address station shifts and additions adopted during the PE phase. o Early February 2014 - Execute Revised Oakland O&M agreement o February 2014 - Submission of Final Small Starts Grant Agreement (SSGA) application to FTA o April 2014 - Oakland City Council approves revised draft final Business Impact Mitigation Plan and Parking Impact Mitigation Plan o June 2014- Real estate acquisition complete- includes two full takes for parking lots and one partial takes for traffic mitigation o July 2014 - 100% design and construction documents completed for Advance Utility Construction package o July 2014-65% design package for Major Construction package completed o August 2014 - 100% design and construction documents completed for Parking Lot & Traffic Mitigation construction package o March 2015- 100% design package completed for Major Construction package
•
Critical o o o o
Decision Points September 2013- Execution of City of Oakland MCA November -December 2013 - Execution of Caltrans O&M December - January 2013 - Executed Utility Agreements between District and various utility owners to proceed with Design efforts December- January 2014- Revised Oakland O&M for City Staff Review
o o
January- February 2014- Revised Oakland O&M to City Council for approval February 2014- Submission of Final Small Starts Grant Agreement (SSGA) application to FTA
o o o o o o o
March 2014 - Oakland City Staff reviews revised Draft Final Parking Impact Mitigation Plan and Business Impact Mitigation Plan April 2014 - Oakland City Council approves revised Draft Final Parking Impact Mitigation Plan and Business Impact Mitigation Plan August 2014- Release of Invitation for Bid (IFB) for Advance Utility Construction Contract September 2014 - Release of Invitation for Bid (IFB) for Parking Lot & Traffic Mitigation Contract July 2014 - Utility providers complete utility designs for relocation and initiate actions to start construction activities June -July 2014- SSGA issued by FTA to allow Bid Packages 2 and 3 to proceed with Construction March 2015- 100% design package completed for Major Construction package
181
Page 4 of 4
o
April 2015- Release of IFB for Major Construction Contract authorized by AC
Construction •
• •
•
Purpose - Contractors, procured by the District, construct the project's facilities, and fabricate and install equipment. The work is done in accordance with the plans and specifications developed during the design phase. Following construction the facilities and equipment are integrated and tested. The project's highest levels of activity, in terms of numbers of personnel and costs incurred per day, occur during construction. Cost - $142.6M (Includes Construction, Construction Management, Real Estate Acquisition, Vehicle Procurement, Unallocated Contingency, & Financing) Key Deliverables o June 2015- Completion of Advance Utility Relocation o July 2015- Completion of Parking Lots & Traffic Mitigation Measures o February 2017 - Completion of Major Construction, including roadway pavement, station installation, systems installation, and landscaping Critical Decision Points o October 2014- Award of Parking Lot & Traffic Mitigation Contract authorized by AC Transit Board of Directors o November 2014- Award of Advance Utility Construction Contract authorized by AC Transit Board of Directors o April 2015 -Award of Vehicles Procurement Contract authorized by AC Transit Board of Directors o July 2015 - Award of Major Construction Contract authorized by AC Transit Board of Directors
Operations & Maintenance •
• •
Purpose - After completion of start-up and testing, efforts the BRT will enter into the Operations & Maintenance phase. During this phase, the District will be obligated to fulfill its requirements as negotiated in the Operations & Maintenance (O&M) Agreements with the cities of Oakland and San Leandro, and Caltrans. Key Deliverables o TBD Critical Decision Points o November 2017- AC Transit begins Revenue Service for the BRT
182
Page 1 of 2 Report No. 13-274 Attachment 2
BRT Status Report- Other Key Program Activities
Community Outreach As a result of the completion of preliminary engineering during 3rd I 41h quarter 2013, BRT Community Outreach transitioned to a new phase. BRT consultant team added a new full-time Community Outreach Team Manager to lead the execution of the outreach effort. Starting in the third quarter, the main thrusts of the outreach effort were to finalize the Comprehensive Community Outreach Program and begin to revise and enhance the draft Business Impact Mitigation {BIM) Plan. The BIM plan will be informed by the Parking Impact Plan that is being developed separately by the Design Team. These plans will coordinate AC Transit's community outreach efforts going forward. The types of activities encompassed in the plans include: • Establishing the Community Outreach Office on or before March 1, 2014 and maintaining ongoing communication with communities and stakeholders impacted by upcoming BRT construction • Keeping these communities and stakeholders informed of the status of BRT projects: developing multi-lingual informational materials, establishing and maintaining a BRT informational website, attending community meetings • Engaging in direct communication with business and other stakeholders to receive input and concerns • Continuing to identify the parking and other potential impacts to business owners along the corridor and implementing mitigation measures Additionally, BRT community outreach efforts will now begin to interface with the construction contracting process to include 1) outreach to potential construction contractors to encourage bidding and participation in the upcoming construction work, 2) outreach to community workforce organizations to identify employment vehicles to comply with the Construction Careers Policy Program measures. •
Summer 2013 Outreach Campaign: AC Transit conducted several workshops and meetings with community groups to address their concerns on parking and business impacts. These meetings resulted in a commitment from the District to continue to keep these groups informed as we revise the parking and business impact mitigation plans based on further enhancements to the roadway geometry and station locations, functional needs access, art enhancement and station architecture.
•
Fall I Winter 2013 Outreach Campaign: AC Transit has been working to assemble various Community Outreach materials. Five key messaging themes were approved and targeted messaging for specific audiences has been initiated. A BRT Overview/Fact Sheet was developed. likewise, a new BRT website was developed with a soft launch expected in Early December 2013. AC Transit is also working on securing potential BRT advertising sponsorships. Materials to support this effort were developed for presentation to the Policy Steering Committee on December 9, 2013. AC Transit
183
Page 2 of 2
attended a series of meetings held by community groups and associations in the East Bay. These included meetings held by Fruitvale Business Improvement District hosted by Unity Council, Transform, City of Oakland, and the Oakland Sustainable Neighborhood Initiatives for International Boulevard (OSNI). At these meetings input was captured, issues of improving communication between City of Oakland and BRT team were addressed, and updates on project were provided. Community Outreach information was presented at the AC Transit BRT Policy Steering Committee meeting on September 30, 2013 and again on December 9, 2013.
184
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
December 11, 2013 Agenda Item B-1
185
This page intentionally blank
186
Report No: Meeting Date:
13- 290a December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Operations Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel
SUBJECT:
Board Policy 108
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider approving amendments to Board Policy 108 - Claims and Lawsuits Settlement Authorizations and the adoption of Resolution No. 13-050 establishing the authority for the settlement of claims and lawsuits and the repeal of Resolution No. 1155. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Board Policy No. 108 sets forth the settlement authority of the Risk Manager, General Manager and General Counsel to settle tort claims and lawsuits brought by third parties against the District. It was last updated April 26, 2000, by the adoption of Resolution No. 1155, which also repealed Resolutions Nos. 668 and 471. A revision to Board Policy No. 108 is necessary as it is outdated and incomplete because it does not address other claims/litigation matters such as workers' compensation, employment, and other non-personal injury claims and lawsuits. Adopting Resolution 13-050 will bring Board Policy No. 108 into alignment with District practice. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
Currently, Board Policy No. 108 (BP 108), as adopted by Resolution No. 1155 provides that the Risk Manager, or his/her designee, has authority to approve or deny all claims filed pursuant to the California Tort Claims Act and may consider late claim applications. The Risk Manager, or his/her designee, also has the authority to settle claims up to $15,000, for personal injury or property damage. The General Manager, with the concurrence of the Risk Manager, or his/her designee, and the General Counsel, has authority to settle personal injur/ or property damage claims between $15,001 and $30,000. Only the Board can approve settlements above $30,000 for personal injury or property damage claims. In litigation matters, the General Counsel, or his/her designee, may settle a suit for personal injury or property damage up to $15,000. Settlements of personal injury or property damage lawsuits $15,001 to $30,000 require the approval of the General Counsel, with the concurrence of the General Manager and the input of the Risk Manager. Any settlements of lawsuits for personal injury or property damage that exceed $30,000 require Board approval. 187
Action Item No. 13-290a Page 2 of 2 Resolution No. 1155 also sets forth the same authority limits on a per party basis for matters with more than one party arising out of a single accident/incident. Requests for settlements above $15,000 for claims or lawsuits must be discussed jointly with the Risk Management Department and General Counsel's Office before a proposed settlement is presented to the General Manager or Board. Property damage settlements are processed separately and are not included in the threshold amount when settling a related personal injury claim. BP 108 was discussed at the Board retreat on October 30, 2013, where it was determined that the policy should be amended to address the current organizational structure and to add settlement authority limits for employment and non-tort related claims/lawsuits at the same level as is currently provided for tort claims/lawsuits. The proposed Resolution will address not only the settlement authority limits, but will also provide authority for the Claims and Liability Administrator in place of the Risk Manager. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: Amending BP 108 would provide settlement authority for claims/litigation areas not clearly covered by the existing Policy and would make it conform to the current District organizational structure and practice. There are no disadvantages associated with this report. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: The Board directed the Office oft he General Counsel to update the policy at the retreat held on October 30, 2013. The Board directed staff to separately address workers' compensation settlement authority. There are no alternatives. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: 5R 13-290 GC Memo Nos. 00-093 and 00-093A, BP 108 and Resolution No. 1155 BP 108B and Resolution No. 668 BP 108A and Resolution No. 471 ATTACHMENTS:
1:
Board Policy No. 108, including Resolution No. 13-050
Department Head Approval:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel
Reviewed by:
David J. Armijo, General Manager Lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer David A. Wolf, General Counsel Denise C. Standridge, Attorney IV
Prepared by:
188
Att. 1 to SR 13-290a
AC Transit BOARD POLICY
Policy No. 1 08
Category: Board and General Administrative Matters
CLAIMS AND LAWSUITS SETTLEMENT AUTHORIZATIONS
I.
PURPOSE To identify the authority delegated by the Board of Directors to the Risk ManagerCiaims and Liability Admi nistrator, the General Counsel Manager and the General ManagerCounsel regarding the settlement of claims and lawsuits. of any type, brought against the District -by third parties.
II. DEFINITIONS In accordance with Government Code section 935.4 and Public Utilities Code section 24938 and 25702, the Board of Directors delegates to the Risk ManagerCiaims and Liability Ad ministrator, the General Manager Counsel and the General Manager Counsel the authority to settle claims and lawsuits, of any type, brought against the District by third parties as spelled out identified in Resolution No. 13-050.~ attached and incorporated into this Policy. Ill. REPORTING During each calendar quarter, the Board of Directors shall receive a report through the General Counsel advising the Board of settlements authorized under Resolution No. -t-+ee13-050.
Page 1 of 1
Adopted: Amended: 189
5/7 9, 7/88 4/00, 12/13
This page intentionally blank
190
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 13-0SO A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT ESTABLISHING THE AUTHORITY FOR THE SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS AND LAWSUITS AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 1155 WHEREAS, Transit District Law (Public Utilities Code § 25702) provides the District may sue and be sued in all actions and proceedings, in all courts and tribunals of competent jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, Transit District Law (Public Utilities Code § 24938) requires the General Counsel to take charge of all suits and other legal matters to which the District is a party or in which it is legally interested; and WHEREAS, California Government Code § 935.4 authorizes the Board of Directors to delegate authority for the settlement of claims filed against the District by third parties under the California Tort Claims Act (Government Code§ 900, et seq.); and WHEREAS, the Board adopted Resolution 1155 (Resolution Establishing Authority for the Settlement of Claims and Lawsuits) on April 26, 2000; and WHEREAS, Resolution 1155 references positions and practices which no longer exist in the District or which are inadequate; and WHEREAS, it is the purpose of this resolution to update the authority for the handling of claims and litigation which are filed against the District regardless if they are brought under the California Tort Claims Act; and NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Alameda-Contra costa Transit District does resolve as follows: SECTION 1. In accordance with the above, the Board of Directors delegates the authority to settle claims and lawsuits to the positions and in the amounts identified below: A.
Claims.
1.
The Claims and Liability Administrator, or his/her designee, is authorized and directed to handle all phases of the Claims Procedure for claims brought pursuant to the California Tort Claims Act, including but not limited to the following:
a.
Initial consideration and approval or denial of all claims filed with the District pursuant to the California Tort Claims Act; and
b.
Consideration of late claims applications.
Page 1 of4
Resolution No. 13-050
191
B.
C.
2.
The Claims and Liability Administrator, or his/her designee, may allow, compromise or settle a claim for personal injury or property damage which does not exceed fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000).
3.
The General Manager, with the concurrence of the Claims and Liability Administrator and General Counsel, shall approve any allowance, compromise or settlement of a claim of any type which exceeds fifteen thousand dollars {$15,000) but does not exceed thirty thousand dollars ($30,000.)
4.
The approval of the Board of Directors shall be required for any allowance, compromise or settlement of a claim of any type in excess of thirty thousand {$30,000), as recommended by the General Counsel, with the concurrence of the General Manager and Claims and Liability Administrator.
Litigation 1.
The General Counsel, or his/her designee, may compromise or settle a suit of any type against the District, which does not exceed fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000).
2.
The General Counsel, with the concurrence of the General Manager and input of the Claims and Liability Administrator, shall approve any compromise or settlement of a suit of any type against the District, which does not exceed thirty thousand dollars ($30,000).
3.
The approval of the Board of Directors shall be required for any compromise or settlement of a suit of any type against the District in excess of thirty thousand dollars ($30,000), based on the recommendation of the General Counsel, with the concurrence of the General Manager and input of the Claims and Liability Administrator.
Claims and Litigation of any Type Involving More than One Party Arising from a Single Accident/Incident !Aggregate Cases)
1.
Property damage settlements will be processed as separate matters even if injury claims arise from the same accident/incident. Thus, it will not be required to add the amount of a property damage settlement to a personal injury settlement in determining the settlement authority thresholds contained in Sections A2-4 and 81-3 above.
2.
Multiple claims/lawsuits arising from the same accident/incident which have an aggregate exposure in excess of thirty thousand dollars {$30,000) will be reported to the Board in the Quarterly Litigation Report.
Resolution No. 13-050
Page 2 of 4
192
D.
3.
Individual claims/lawsuits arising from the same accident/incident whose settlements exceed thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) will be approved by the Board of Directors pursuant to the procedures set forth in Sections A and B above. Claims or lawsuits whose individual settlement amount is thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) or below will be approved by the appropriate administrative level set forth in Sections A and B above.
4.
After all individual claims/lawsuits that arise from a single accident/incident have been resolved; a final tally of the number of claimants/plaintiffs and the aggregate amount of the combined settlements will be reported to the Board in the Quarterly Litigation Report.
Risk Management/Office of General Counsel Review of Claims/Lawsuits Prior to the consideration of allowing, compromising or settling any claims or lawsuits, of any type, in excess of fifteen thousand ($15,000), as identified above, the Risk Management Department and the Office of the General Counsel shall meet and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of any proposed allowance, compromise or settlement. The views of the individuals from each department shall be considered by the Claims and Liability Administrator and the General Counsel in making the determination of the disposition of the claim or litigation in accordance with the provisions of this resolution as set forth above.
SECTION 2. The Treasurer-Controller of the District shall cause a warrant to be issued upon the treasury of the District in the following circumstances: A.
Upon the written order of the Claims and Liability Administrator, or his/her designee, for allowances, compromises or settlements within the Claims and Liability Administrator's authority as specified in Section 1, above.
B.
Upon the written order of the General Counsel, or his/her designee, for allowances, compromises or settlement within the General Counsel's authority as specified in Section 1, above.
C.
Upon the written order of the General Manager, or his/her designee, for allowances, compromises or settlements within the General Manager's authority as specified in Section 1, above.
D.
Upon approval by the Board of Directors, as specified in Section 1, above.
SECTION 3:
Resolution 1155 is repealed in its entirety.
SECTION 4: This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage by four affirmative votes oft he Board of Directors.
Poge3of4
Resolution No. 13-050
193
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of December 2013.
Greg Harper, President Attest:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary I, Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary for the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors held on the 11th day of December 2013 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
Approved as to Form and Content:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel
Resolution No. 13-050
Page4of4
194
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
December 11, 2013 Agenda Item C-1 – C-3
195
This page intentionally blank
196
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-298 December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
REPORT
STAFF 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 receipt of the Monthly Legislative Report.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Senate Select Aging Committee held a hearing on transportation for seniors in rural areas. The Senate was in recess this past week. The House returned from recess last week. California has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU} with other states toward an aggregate goal of getting 3.3 million zero emission vehicles in service by 2025. San Jose Mayor Reed has launched a proposal for pension reform through the initiative process in 2014. The California Legislature will return to session on January 6, 2014.
BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Federal Legislation Update Transportation for Seniors The Senate Select Aging Committee held a hearing which focused on transportation challenges for elderly seniors, predominantly in rural areas. The large number of baby boomers beginning to turn 65 years of age and entering retirement necessitates the study of viable transit options for that demographic group in rural areas.
State Legislation Update 1} Zero Emission Vehicle MOU California joined the states of New York, Massachusetts, Maryland, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Oregon in a special taskforce to increase the number of zero emission vehicles in operation
197
Report No. 13-298 Page 2 of 2 to 3.3 million by the year 2025. The states have signed a MOU to collaborate, increase awareness and expand the fueling and charging network for electric and hydrogen vehicles. 2} Pension Reform Act of 2014 Initiative The mayors of San Jose, Pacific Grove, San Bernardino, and Santa Ana have submitted an initial proposal to amend the California Constitution to allow pension and health care benefits to be changed after an employee is hired. The Pension Reform Act of 2014 is led by San Jose Mayor Reed and may be eligible to begin gathering signatures at the beginning of December.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: This report is being provided to inform the Board of monthly legislative activities and to seek its approval to support or oppose legislation affecting AC Transit. This provides clear direction to legislators, and other bodies, of AC Transit's positions.
ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS: This report provides an update of monthly legislative activities. AC Transit could opt to defer from legislative positions and operate without making its positions known, leaving the District vulnerable to unfavorable legislation.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Staff Report 12-253: 2013 Federal and State Legislative Advocacy Programs
ATTACHMENTS: 1:
2: 3:
4:
Federal Update from VanScoyoc Associates State Legislative Report from Platinum Advisors FY 2013 Federal Advocacy Program FY 2013 State Advocacy Program
Department Head Approval: Prepared by:
Dennis Butler, Chief Planning & Development Officer Beverly Greene, Director of Legislative Affairs & Community Relations
198
SR: 13-298 Attachment 1
VANSCOYOC Transportation Update November II, 2013 Steven 0. Palmer, Vice President David Haines, Manager Last Week
Hearing: Transportation for Seniors. On November 6, the Senate Select Aging Committee held a hearing entitled "Transportation: A Challenge to Independence for Seniors." The hearing focused on the challenges that transportation poses for elderly seniors, in particular those who live in rural areas. Witnesses included the Therese McMillan, Deputy Administrator, Federal Transit Administration (PTA), as well as representatives from the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Center on Senior Transportation, and !TN America.
The House was out of session last week and will return Tuesday, November 12.
This Week
Hearing: Hurricane Sandy Recovery. On Thursday, November 14, the full Transportation and Infrastructure Committee will hold a hearing on the status of Hurricane Sandy recovery efforts and federal agencies' progress in implementing recovery objectives, allocating funding, and meeting deadlines. Witnesses will include Peter Rogoff, PTA Administrator; Victor Mendez, Administrator, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA); Joe Szabo, Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration (FRA); Elizabeth Zimmerman, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA); and General Thomas Bostick, Commanding General, Corps of Engineers. Hearing: LAX Shooting. On Thursday, November 14, the Committee on Homeland Security's Subcommittee on Transportation Security will hold a hearing regarding TSA's Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques (SPOT) program and the initial lessons learned from the shooting at Los Angeles International Airport on November I. Witnesses will include John Pistole, Administrator, Transportation Security Administrator (TSA); Daniel Gerstein, Deputy Under Secretary, Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate; Stephen Lord, Managing Director, Government Accountability Office; and Charles Edwards, DHS Office of Inspector General.
The Senate will not be in session next week and will return to Washington the week of November 18. ###
199
This page intentionally blank
200
SR: 13-298 Attachment 2
November 15, 2013 TO:
Director Greg Harper, President, and Members of the Board David J. Armijo, General Manager Beverly Greene, Director, Legislative Affairs & Community Relations
FR:
Steve Wallauch Platinum Advisors
RE:
Legislative Update
Zero Emission Vehicles: California signed on to an MOU with the states of New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Maryland, and Oregon to get 3.3 million zero emission vehicles on the road by 2025. These states will convene a taskforce to share ideas on expanding the fueling and charging network for electric and hydrogen vehicles. The main purpose of this MOU is to pool each state's policy resources, share solutions, and primarily raise awareness about expanding the use of zero emission vehicles. Climate Agreement: Governor Brown joined via teleconference Governor Kitzhaber of Oregon, Governor lnslee of Washington and the British Columbia Premier to announce what is being called an historic partnership that will align each state' s policies on combating climate change and promoting clean energy. The transportation section of the compact seeks to harmonize 2050 greenhouse gas reduction targets, sets a goal of 10% zero emission vehicles for public and private fleets by 2016, adopting low carbon fuel standards, deploying high speed rail across the region, and support emerging markets and innovation for alternative fuels. Pension Reform Initiative: A group of Mayors lead by San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed submitted an initiative proposal to enact the Pension Reform Act of 2014. Title and summary are expected to be complete by December 5, at which time signature gathering process may start in order to place this proposal on the November 2014 ballot. However, it now sounds like this effort may be placed on hold until 2016. The proposal would amend the California Constitution to remove the contractual right that pension and retiree health care benefits cannot be changed once the employee is hired . A copy ofthe draft initiative can be found here: https://oag.ca .gov/system/files/initiatives/pdfs/130026%20%2813-0026%20%28Pension%20Reform%29%29.pdf 1
201
Mega-Projects: The Senate Committee on Transportation & Housing will hold the first of three hearings on November 13 in Sacramento to examine the delivery of "mega-projects." The hearings will build on Senator DeSaulnier's legislative efforts this past year. Governor Brown signed SB 425 (DeSaulnier), a scaled back proposal that allows a public agency to create a peer review group for any project. Prior versions of the bill required establishing a peer review group for any project with a cost exceeding $1 billion. In addition, the Governor vetoed SB 110 (DeSaulnier), which would have created a safety review task force for the east span of the Bay Bridge. The planned series of hearings will focus on improving the oversight and minimizing risks associated with mega-projects. The November 13th hearing in Sacramento will provide background on prior mega-project experiences such as Boston's Big Dig. The remaining two hearings will look at the Bay Bridge project, and Caltrans management of major projects. The remaining two hearing have not been scheduled yet. The outcome of these hearing will result in legislation for managing future mega-projects, such as High Speed Rail and the Delta water diversion project.
Infrastructure Bank: The Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (1-Bank) adopted changes to its Infrastructure State Revolving Fund Program. The most significant changes are expanding the range of loans, and adding "Economic Expansion Projects" to the list of eligible projects. Prior loans ranged from $250,000 to $10 million. The new range is from $50,000 to $25 million, and larger loans can be approved if conditions warrant. The new category of Economic Expansion Projects includes educational, industrial, commercial, recreational, and social welfare projects. Infrastructure projects already eligible for loans, but will benefit from the higher limits, include city streets, county highways, as well as drainage, water supply and flood control projects.
Coordination: The Governor's Reorganization Plan created the California State Transportation Agency (CaiSTA), and it placed the Department of Housing & Community Development (HCD) in a separate agency. Given the increasingly important link between transportation and housing, the Reorganization Plan directed the CaiSTA and the Business, Consumer Services & Housing Agency (BCSH) to coordinate policy and programs, but the Plan provided little direction on how to carry that out. Recently, the CaiSTA and the BCSH Agency agreed to a "charter" outlining the coordination process. One oft he objectives oft he charter is to determine opportunities for integrated housing and transportation planning and investment. The charter creates a Steering Committee that will meet quarterly to establish direction and goals, and monitor progress of meeting those priorities. This group includes the Secretaries from both agencies as well as the Directors from HCD, Caltrans, the CTC, and the California Housing Finance Agency. A subgroup, or Workgroup, will be formed consisting of the deputies as well as representatives from the Office of Planning & Research and the High Speed Rail Authority. While the charter mentions "transparency" these meetings will likely not be open to the public.
2
202
SR: 13-298 Attachment 3
2013 Federal Advocacy Program Funding •
FY 2012 Grant Opportunities- Secure federal funds for key capital projects and support funding for 2013 Project Priorities for: o o
East Bay BRT Improvements within the Small Starts Program and other programs 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.
Pagel l 203
•
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 12 204
SR: 13-298 Attachment 4
2013 State Advocacy Program Funding •
Support efforts to implement the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) that at least maintains funding level for mass transit projects and programs for bus operators in the Bay Area.
•
Support the development and implementation of an expenditure plan for AB 32 cap and trade revenue that provides an equitable investment in mass transit capital improvements, operations, and infillltransit oriented development.
•
Support efforts that create new sources of operating funds with equitable distribution to reflect urban transit needs.
•
Support efforts to sustain existing transit revenues .
•
Support efforts that would exempt public transit providers from state sales tax.
•
Support efforts to provide funding for lifeline services including, but not limited to, services for access to work, school or medical facilities.
•
Support local ability to increase fees and gas taxes to be used for local mass transit purposes.
•
Support legislation and programs that would provide funding for global warming initiatives, clean air and clean fuels and that support implementation of AC Transit's Climate Action Plan.
•
Seek funding for East Bay Bus Rapid Transit.
•
Support congestion pricing strategies and legislation that provide an equitable multimodal distribution of generated revenues.
•
Support legislative or administrative action to remove State barriers so that Medicaid transportation funds can be used for public 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.
Page l l 205
•
Support legislation and programs that would provide funding for employee benefits programs.
•
Support funding initiatives that relieve the fiscal burden of mandatory regulations.
Equipment and Operations •
Support legislation or administrative action that would direct Caltrans to establish and maintain HOV lanes on state highway routes and to improve existing HOV lane management to maximize throughput.
•
Support incentives to provide bus contra flow lanes on the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge to/from the Transbay Terminal.
•
Support legislation to exempt public transit vehicles from state and local truck route ordinances.
•
Support legislation or administrative action that would direct Caltrans to permit permanent use of freeway shoulders by public transit buses.
Transit Incentives •
Support legislation to provide incentives for employees and employers to use public transportation to commute to work, including tax credits for purchasing transit passes.
•
Support Clean Air Initiatives that encourage increased public transit use.
•
Support incentives that would give auto insurance credits to heavy transit users.
•
Support common fare programs between Bay Area systems.
•
Support legislation to provide incentives for local governments and developers to incorporate transit passes into the cost of housing.
Environment and Transit Supportive Land Use
•
Support efforts that provide a new form of tax increment financing that promotes economic investment through transit oriented development, and requires the approval of all affected taxing entities.
•
Advocate for transit-supportive legislation that addresses climate change, healthy communities and environments.
Page 12 206
•
Foster transit supportive land use initiatives that require coordination with transit providers in the initial stages of local planning or project development that impacts transit, including density level decisions or transit oriented developments (TODs); and advocate for the required use of: o Transit streets agreements, and o Complete streets plans in which local transportation plans anticipate use of all modes.
•
Support legislation that requires reporting of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) annually through DMV renewal.
Policy Interests •
Support simple majority vote for local transportation ballot tax initiatives.
•
Support legislation to allow District to ban persons for specified offenses from entering district property.
•
Seek revisions to the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) grandfather clause that supports direct representation of transit properties on local transportation policy boards.
•
Redefine agency as Rapid Transit District.
•
Support legislation for STA formula reform that includes federal operating funding as eligible revenue.
•
Support efforts that maintain existing Workers' Compensation regulation.
Page /3 207
This page intentionally blank
208
Report No: Meeting Date:
09-128b December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
External Affairs Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Titan Contract Extension and Pilot Program to Sell Full Bus Wraps
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider approving proposal to exercise the first one-year option to extend AC Transit's contract with Titan through June 30, 2015. Consider approving a one-year pilot program to evaluate rider reaction, maintenance costs, and safety issues associated with allowing Titan to sell full wraps on up to 5% of the District's fleet. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: AC Transit entered into a contract with Titan that began on July 1, 2009 for the sale of advertising on AC Transit buses. The contract duration is five (5} years, with five (5}, one-year extension options. The initial five-year contract period ends on June 30, 2014. Titan has performed well during the past four and half years, with revenues that consistently exceed the contract's Minimum Annual Guarantee (MAG}. Staff believes it is in the District's best interest to exercise the first option so as to extend the contract for an additional year. AC Transit would also like to amend the current contract to allow Titan to stage a one-year pilot program to sell full wraps on up to 5% of the AC Transit fleet. By allowing the sale of full wraps on a portion of the fleet, AC Transit has the opportunity to significantly increase ad revenue . BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: There is no expected budgetary impact of exercising the one-year contract extension. The budgetary impact of allowing the sale of full wraps is expected to be an increase in revenue given the higher value of full wraps compared to other available bus media. In the event that full wraps are not sold, revenue would remain the same and there would be no budgetary impact.
209
Report No. 09-128b Page 2 of 5 BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
Transit advertising is an important source of non-fare revenue for AC Transit, providing support for service enhancements and/or the restoration of services that were previously eliminated or reduced. Since the start of the contract, Titan has had a positive track record of increasing ad revenue despite the reduction in AC Transit's fleet. AC Transit has consistently earned 65% of revenue rather than the MAG, and fiscal year 2012/13 was the highest revenue year of the contract to date. With continued improvement of the overall economy, staff expects this trend to continue and has no reason to believe that rebidding the contract would result in superior performance by another vendor. The table below summarizes Titan's sales performance over the past four and half years.
Year
Revenue
Revenue Share (65%)
Minimum Annual Guarantee (MAG)
True Up (revenue share minus MAG)
2009/2010
$1,742,840
$1,132,846
$780,000
$352,846
2010/2011
$1,695,736
$1,102,229
$1,000,000
$102,229
2011/2012
$1,643,118
$1,068,027
$1,030,000
$38,027
2012/2013
$2,129,451
$1,384,216
$1,060,900
$323,316
2013/2014 (July-Oct)
$734,189
$477,223
$1,245,794
The small decreases in revenue seen in FY 2010/11 and in 2011/12 is attributed to the reduction in AC Transit's fleet that in 2009, when the contract began, included 634 buses but now includes 569 buses. In light of the fact that the bus fleet has been reduced by more than 5%, the base MAG may be adjusted in 2014 to reflect this smaller fleet size. According to the contract, Titan can adjust the MAG anytime the fleet size deviates by more or less than 5%; however, to date they have not chosen to exercise this option. Staff would attempt to maintain the current MAG. AC Transit has been satisfied with Titan's sales performance to date and expects continued revenue growth should the District exercise the option to extend the contract through June 2015. Out of a total current fleet of 569 buses, AC Transit has 563 buses for which Titan has exclusive rights to sell advertising. The availability of specific ad types is shown below by vehicle type. The only buses on which advertising is not permitted are the 12 fuel cell buses and the four 30-foot buses used for the Oakland Shuttle.
210
Report No. 09-128b Page 3 of S Bus Type
In Fleet
King Ads
Queen Ads
Tail Ads
Interior Ads
30' VanHools
32
0
so
so
128 89 6S
128 178 6S
0 0 6S
68
68
68
0 0 0 0 6S 68
0
3S' VanHools 40' VanHools 60' VanHools
32 0
31
38
24
31
620
23 77 563
46 77 650
0 0 189
23 0 187
667 0 3,947
40' Gillig 40' NABI low-floors 40' NABI 3000/3100s 60' New Flyers 4S' MCI coaches TOTAL
0 0 0 1,300 1,360
The following are Titan's four-week rates for one unit of each ad type on an AC Transit bus: Unit
Rate
Tail
$382
Queen King
$44S $9S4
Partial Wrap (max 30% window coverage)
$9,600
Full wrap
$10,SOO
Currently the revenue from a typical AC Transit bus ad configuration- one king, one queen, and one tail - is $1,781 per month. If that same bus instead had a full wrap, the revenu e would be $10,SOO, a potential revenue increase of 489% for one bu s. According to the current contract with Titan, full wraps are not allowed on AC Transit buses; however, modified wraps covering no more than 30% of window space on any single side except for the rear of the bus are allowed. Other than the contract restrictions, staff is unaware of any Board policies that specifically prohibit the sale of full wraps. While the modified or partial wrap is priced almost as high as a full wraps, it is, according to Titan, an unpopular option for advertisers and has not been sold on an AC Transit vehicle in over a year. Furthermore, since other transit agencies, including Muni, do allow full wraps, advertisers, according to Titan, would prefer not to have to develop custom creative work to accommodate AC Transit's restrictions. If the Board approves the pilot program to sell full wraps, staff recommends that Titan be required to restrict the number of buses with full wraps at any one time to no more than S% of the existing fleet that accommodates ads - or 28 buses out of S63- during the pilot test period . Additionally, the full wrap option would be offered as a one-year pilot program starting immediately upon approval by the Board. During the pilot period, AC Transit staff and Board 211
Report No. 09-128b Page 4 of 5 would evaluate the program to ensure that the wraps are not contributing to a higher number of passenger complaints, increased maintenance costs, or safety concerns. In consulting with multiple transit agencies across the country in preparation for this report, staff found that visibility and security were the most common issues raised when agencies considered offering full wraps. Most agencies, however, found that in practice, these issues were not ultimately problematic and were outweighed by solid revenue increases. The following transit agencies are among the many that currently offer full wraps: •
Muni-SFMTA
•
County Connection-CCTA
•
Boston-MBTA
•
Philadelphia-SEPTA
•
Los Angeles-MTA
Titan has provided AC Transit with a sample of the material used on windows for full wraps. This widely-used material is a calendared adhesive-backed PVC vinyl that is perforated with a pattern of round, evenly spaced holes. It allows graphics printed on the surface of a window to be seen from the outside, but appears invisible to the people inside looking out. The natural light inside the vehicle is dimmed slightly by the window covering, which is why AC Transit staff proposes full wraps initially as a one-year pilot. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
Exercise One Year Option:
The advantage of exercising the first-year option in the contract
with Titan is that AC Transit is able to maintain what has thus far been a positive contract relationship. As mentioned earlier, Titan has performed well financially, and AC Transit has benefitted by consistently earning 65% of revenue instead of the MAG. Staff has no reason to believe that rebidding the contract would improve the District's position. Sale of Full Wraps:
There are two primary advantages to allowing the sale of full wraps on AC
Transit buses:
1. First, full wraps generate more revenue than conventional transit advertising. 2. Second, full wraps may allow the District to participate in multi-agency advertising programs with other Titan clients. According to Titan, clients prefer to implement one campaign across multiple Bay Area transit properties and do not want to incur the extra work and expense of developing custom creative work for individual agencies. This is particularly true for national advertisers such as Coca Cola, Proctor and Gamble, and Geico, who use wrapped buses and pay premium national rates for the privilege.
212
Report No. 09-128b Page 5 of 5 AC Transit's primary concerns with full wraps are visibility and safety/security. Visibility is a subjective measure and refers to the extent to which passengers looking outside the bus have a clear and unobstructed view. Safety and security concerns refer to potential emergency situations in which it might be necessary or desirable for law enforcement officials or AC Transit staff to have an unobstructed view inside the bus from the outside. Full wraps have been used on public buses since the early 1990s, and to the best of staff's knowledge, there have been no serious safety-related issues reported. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: The alternative to exercising the first one-year option in the Titan contract is to go out to bid for a new advertising contract starting July 1, 2014. The alternative to allowing the sale of full wraps is to maintain the status quo as defined in the current contract or to adjust the requirements proposed in this report. For example, AC Transit could restrict the number of fully wrapped buses to a flat number rather than a percentage of fleet, or fully wrapped buses could be restricted to vehicles coming out of certain divisions and/or to certain vehicle types. The Board could also consider allowing full wraps on an ongoing basis, rather than as a one-year pilot. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: GM Memo No. 09-128a Approval of five-year contract with Titan ATTACHMENTS: 1: Image of bus with full wrap
Department Head Approval:
Tom Prescott, Chief Performance Officer
Reviewed by:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel Lewis G. Clinton, Chief Financial Officer John Haenftling, Director of Project Controls & Systems Analysis Victoria Wake, Manager of Marketing & Community Relations Karen Bakar, Marketing Administrator
Prepared by:
213
This page intentionally blank
214
SR NO. 09-128b Attachment 1
215
This page intentionally blank
216
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-309 December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
External Affairs Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
SUBJECT:
Appointment of AC Transit Representative to the Paratransit Advisory Planning Committee
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider approving the reappointment of Hale Zukas as AC Transit's Representative to the Alameda County Transportation Commission's (CTC) Paratransit Advisory Planning Committee (PAPCO). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The term of AC Transit's representative to PAPCO will expire in January, 2014. The Alameda CTC has requested that AC Transit either reappoint the incumbent, Hale Zukas, or appoint a new member. Given Mr. Zukas's record of service on the committee, it is requested that he be reappointed to PAPCO, subject to approval by the Alameda CTC. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
The District is in receipt of a letter (Attachment 1) from the Alameda CTC, advising that the term of appointment for AC Transit's representative to PAPCO will expire in January, 2014. PAPCO makes decisions on transportation funding for seniors and people with disabilities to address planning and coordination issues regarding paratransit services in Alameda County. PAPCO members advise the Alameda CTC on the development and implementation of paratransit programs, including a grant program. All 23 members must be Alameda County residents who use transportation that supports seniors and people with disabilities. The Alameda CTC has requested that AC Transit either reappoint the incumbent, Hale Zukas, or appoint a new member. Mr. Zukas has been AC Transit's representative to PAPCO since 2002 and continues to be a valued member of the committee often volunteering for many of the subcommittee meetings as well as attending meetings of other Alameda CTC committees. AC Transit staff supports the reappointment of Mr. Zukas for a two-year term commencing in January 2014. 217
Report No. 13-309 Page 2 of 2 Board Policy 103 - Appointment of Non-Board Members or Staff to External Committees generally requires the External Affairs Committee to make a recommendation of one or more potential appointees or recommend to the Board the process to be used for seeking and selecting candidates for appointment. It is requested that the External Affairs Committee recommend that the Board of Directors reappoint Hale Zukas to PAPCO. The appointment is subject to approval by the Alameda CTC. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: The most notable advantage to the reappointment of Mr. Zukas would be his consistent representation of AC Transit's interests on PAPCO. Given that Mr. Zukas is a member of PAPCO in good standing, staff cannot identify any disadvantages to this request for reappointment. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: While staff found no practical alternatives to the course of action outlined in this report, under Board Policy 103 the External Affairs Committee could recommend other candidates for the appointment or it could recommend a process for seeking and selecting candidates for the appointment. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Board Policy 103: Appointment of Non-Board Members or Staff to External Committees. DS Memo No. 11-248: Reappointed Hale Zukas as AC Transit's representative to PAPCO. ATTACHMENTS: 1: November 16, 2013 Letter from the Alameda CTC
Reviewed by:
Prepared by:
David J. Armijo, General Manager David A. Wolf, General Counsel Mallory Nestor-Brush, Accessible Services Manager Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
218
,-,:;it!~ ~-~· v ~/
Staff Report 13-309 Attachment 1
~ALAMEDA
~ CountvTran)p_oriation'-----'------'-------,-----------------~
Comrn~ssron
-....::···~1,\\\.~
1111 Broadway, Sulte 800, Oakland, CA 94607
510.206.7400
.
- ..
~·-
......................
www.AlamedaCTC.org
____.....
· RE:CEIVED November 15, 2013
Nov2:o zo13 DISTRICT SECRETARY'S OFFICE
Ms. Elsa Ortiz, Director ACTransit 558 Horton St. #255 Emeryville, CA 94608 Dear Director Ortiz:
This letter provides the current information regarding your appointments to the Alameda County Transportation Commission (Alameda CTC) community advisory committees. Attached is a list of current appointees, their contact information, and appointment dates as well as committee vacancies. To appoint arepresentative, check the appropriate box on the attachedform and sign on the indicated line. For a new appointment, please complete the attached committee application(s), include the · resume of the appointee, and return the documents to Alameda ere, Attention: Angie Ayers, by mail, email ([email protected]),or faX to (510) 893-6489. Thank you for your assistance in filling .· these seats. · · Sincerely,
Tess Lengyel, Deputy Director of Planning and Policy
Enclosu:re: cc:
Attachment A
Arthu:r L. Dao, Executive Director Matt Todd, Principal Transportation Engineer Naomi Armenta, Paratransit Coordinator Sylvia Stadmire, PAPCO Chair David Armijo, General Manager, AC Transit
219
Attachment A Alameda CTC Community Advisory Committee Appointment Detail for Director Elsa Ortiz, AC Transit Check the box{es) and date and sign this form to approve reappointment of members whose terms are expiring or to appoint new members.
Paratransit Advisory and Planning Committee (PAPCO)
0
Reappoint (action required)
Date
Hale Zukas 2801 Milvia Street Berkeley, CA 94703 Email: h'[email protected] Phone: (510) 848-5215 · Terin Began: January 2012 Term Expires: January 2014
Director Elsa Ortiz, AC Transit
To fill a vacancy, submit a committee application and corresponding resume to the Alameda County Transportation Commission {Alameda CTC) for each new member. Return the form{s) by mail, email, or fax to: AlamedaCTC Attn: Angie Ayers 1111 Broadway, Suite 800 Oakland, CA 94607 Email: [email protected] Fax: 51 0-893-6489
220
FINANCE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE
December 11, 2013 Agenda Items D-1 – D-9
221
This page intentionally blank
222
~I
Report No: Meeting Date:
TRAA/5/T
13-282 December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Monthly Report on Investments
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider Receiving Monthly Report on Invest ments for September 2013. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: As of September 30, 2013 the District had the following investments: Repurchase Agreement (REPO)
$25 million (Collat eral ized 102%)
Money Market Account
$91.89 million (Collateralized 110%)
Money Market Account
$1.75 million (small banks; all FDIC insured)
BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: There are no budgetary or fiscal impacts associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: In compliance with Section 15.0 of Board Policy 336, Investment Policy, the Monthly Report on Investments for September 2013 is forwarded to the Board of Directors for review. The portfolio contained in the Report for September 2013 is in compliance with Board Policy 336, Investment Policy. The District is able to meet its expenditure requirements for the next six months. Return on the District's investments is small due to the market conditions and ultra conservative investment approach. Daily roll-over of REPO and collateralized money market accounts is done with preservation of principal foremost in mind.
223
Report No. 13-282 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 on September 2013.
Department Head Approval:
Lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer
Prepared by:
Beverly Abad-Fitzgerald, Treasury Administrator
224
ALAMEDA - CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT MONTHLY REPORT ON INVESTMENTS FOR THE GENERAL FUND SEPTEMBER 30, 2013
(/)
JJ ~
"'I
"'
Cl>
"' > -;
:-<
~
225
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
226
INVESTMENT SUMMARY FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS/OTHER FUND SEPTEMBER 30, 2013
TYPE MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS REPO'S TREASURY BILLS DISCOUNT NOTES AGENCY BONDS
Average Interest Rate%
0.248% 0.015% 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
$21 '136,640.50 $25,000,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$21 '136,640.50 $25,000,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$21 '136,640.50 $25,000,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
45.81% 54.19% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
$46,136,640.50
$46,136,640.50
$46,136,640.50
100.00%
Carrying Value
Par Value
Fair Value
%of Total
$72,500,283.80 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$72,500,283.80 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$72,500,283.80 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
$72,500,283.80
$72,500,283.80
$72,500,283.80
100.00%
Page 2271
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT INVESTMENT OVERVIEW FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS PROCUREMENT/OTHER FUND SEPTEMBER 30, 2013
2013 DESCRIPTION
2014
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
YTD AVERAGE
JUN
CURRENT MONTH AVERAGE INTEREST RATES
Repurchase Agreements (current month)
0.012% 0.070%
0.020% 0.070%
0.015% 0.070%
0.016% 0.070%
0.080% 0.070%
0.072% 0.070%
0.061% 0.070%
0.071% 0.070%
Current Month Daily Fed Funds Average
0.060%
0.090%
0.030% 0.139% 0.083%
0.110% 0.040% 0.136% 0.077%
0.100%
Current Month Daily 3 Month T Silt Rate Average Monthly Avg of Daily Fed Funds (12 month avg) Monthly Avg 3 Month T Bill Rate (12 month avg)
0.010% 0.133% 0.069%
0.027% 0.136% 0.076%
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
7
9
7
DAYS 8
$25,000,000 $93,625,417
$25,000,000 $93,631,187
$25,000,000 $93,636,924
$25,000,000 $93,631,176
Money Market Accounts (current month)
Govt Securities held at month end Treasury Bills (purchased in current month) Discount Notes (purchased in current month)
Agency Bonds (purchased in current month)
AVERAGE INTEREST RATE
Repurchase Agreements (12-month avg) Money Market Accounts (12-month avg) Govt Securities held at month end Treasury Bills (Portfolio)
Discount Notes (Portfolio) Agency Bonds (Portfolio)
INVESTMENT BENCHMARKS
AVERAGE MATURITY OF INVESTMENTS Repurchase Agreements Treasury Bills Discount Notes Agency Bonds
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
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
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$118,631' 176
$118,625,417
$118,631,187 $118,636,924
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$29,657,794
228
Page2
ALAMEDA· CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RETURN ON INVESTMENTS FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS PROCUREMENT/OTHER FUND SEPTEMBER 30, 2013 2014
2013
RETURN ON INVESTMENTS
JUL
Repurchase Agreements Money Market Treasury BUJs Discount Notes
Bonds Total return on investments
Interest received Total return on investments
SEP $306 5,287
$389
$410
5,392
5,446
0 0
0 0
$5781
$5856
$389
Accrued interest
AUG
$389
5,392
5,467
$5781
$5856
OCT
DEC
NOV
JAN
MAR
FEB
YTD
APR
MAY
JUN
TOTAL $1,105 $16,125
0 0 $5593
0 0 $0
0 0 $0
0 0 $0
$292 5,301 $5593
0 $0
0 $0
0 0 $0
0 0 $0
0
0
!0
!0
0 $0
0 0
!0 !0 !0
$9
0 0 $0
0 0 $0
0 0 $0
$17 230
0
0
!0
$9
0 $0
0 $0
$1,070 $16,160 $17 230
PORTFOLIO INVESTED Average daily portfolio available for investment Average daily portfolio invested
$58,531,748
$58,531,748 $29,166,667
$29,166,667
49.83%
49.83%
%of average daily portfolio invested
CARRYING VALUE GENERAL FUND PORTFOLIO
FY 13114 Jul2013 A"g Sep
$45,496,647 $46,135,214 $46,136,641
FY 12/13
Oct
Oct
Nov Dec
Nov Dec
Jan 2014
Jan 2013
Feb Mac Ap' May
Feb Mac
Ap' May
J""
J""
CARRYING VALUE BUS/OTHER PORTFOLIO Jul2013
$73,128,770
Jul2012
""• Oct
$72,495,973
""'
$72,500,284
$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
Sep
Oct
May
Nov Dec Jan 2013 Feb Ma' Ap' May
J""
J""
Nov Dec Jan 2014 Feb Ma' Ap'
$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
Jul2011
$35,460,813
Jul2010
""' Oct
$25,463,299
A"g Sep
Sep
Nov Dec
Jan 2012 Feb Ma'
Ap' May
J""
$49,623,413
$49,184,941 $48,916,111
229 Page3
$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
Oct Nov Dec
Jan 2011 Feb Mac
Ap' May
J""
Jul2011 A"g Sep
Oct Nov Dec
Jan 2012 Feb Ma'
Ap' May
J""
$5,743,559 $5,743,605 $5,743,649 $5,743,695 $5,743,739
$5,743,817 $5,375,346
$5,375,389 $34,699,100 $32,551 ,967
$32,553,678 $34,703,831
$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
FY11f12
FY 12113
FY 13/14
Sep
$42,603,947
Jul2012 A"g Sep
FY 10/11
FY 11/12
Jul2010
""• Oct
Sep
$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
Nov Dec Jan 2011 Feb Ma' Ap' May
$5,743,468
J""
$5,743,513
$5,743,423
ALAMEDA - CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT DETAIL OF PORTFOLIO FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS PROCUREMENT/OTHER FUND SEPTEMBER 30, 2013 Purchased From
TYPE
Settlement Date
Maturity Date
Days to Maturity
MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS Wells Fargo Local Banks
Bank Of America
TREASURY BILLS:
Maturity Rate%
Carrying Value
Par Value
Fair Value
0.425% 0.248%
0.070% 0.425% 0.248%
19,383,019.75 1,753,620.75 21 '136,640.50
19,383,019.75 1,753,620.75 21,136,640.50
21 '136,640.50
0.010%
0.010%
25,000,000.00
25,000,000.00
25,000,000.00
TOTAL DISCOUNT NOTES
0.00
0.00
0.00
TOTAL BONDS
0.00
0.00
0.00
46,136,640.50
46,136,640.50
46,136,640.50
0.070% TOTAL MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS
REPO'S
Purchased Rate%
TOTALREPO
09/24/13
10!01/13
7
19,383,019.75 1,753,620.75
TOTAL TREASURY BILLS
AGENCY DISC NOTES:
AGENCY BONDS:
IPORTFOLIO -GENERAL FUND MONEY MARKET:
Wells Fargo MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS
CaiEMA CalEMA Grant No. 6461
Bus Procurement
0.070%
0.070%
0.070% 0.070%
0.070% 0.070%
2,014,283.68 2,013,275.61 68,472,724.51 0.00
2,014,283.68 2,013,275.61 68,472,724.51 0.00
2,014,283.68 2,013,275.61 68,472,724.51 0.00
0.070%
0.070%
72,500,283.80
72,500,283.80
72,500,283.80
118,636,924.30
118,636,924.30
118,636,924.30
TREASURY BILLS: AGENCY DISC NOTES:
AGENCY BONDS:
IPORTFOLIO - OTHER (CaiEma/Bus Procurement) ITOTAL PORTFOLIO COMPOSITION OF PORTFOLIO : Money Market Repurchase Agreements Treasury Bills Discount Notes Bonds
GENERAL FUND 45.81% 54.19% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00%
2304 Page
OTHER (CaiEma/Bus Procurement) 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00%
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS FOR THE MONTH ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2013
SETTLEMENT DATE
MATURITY DATE
DAILY "REPO" INVESTMENT$
CURRENT # INTEREST OF DAYS RATE
INTEREST EARNED
INTEREST RECEIVED
CASH RECEIPT
AIR ACTIVITY
NET ACTIVITY
AVERAGE INVESTMENT AMT.INV • #OF DAYS/ DAYS IN MONTH:
30
BANK OF AMERICA
08/27/13 09/03/13
09/03/13 09/10/13
$25,000,000.00 $25,000,000.00
7 7
0.0100% 0.0300%
13.89 145.83
48.61 145.83
25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00
-34.72 0.00
-25,000,000.00 0.00
09/10/13 09/17/13
09/17/13 09/24/13
7
0.0100%
48.61
25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00
0.00 0.00
10/01/13
0.0100% 0.0100%
48.61 48.61 0.00
25,000,000.00
7 7
48.61 48.61
09/24/13
$25,000,000.00 $25,000,000.00 $25,000,000.00
0.00
0.00 0.00 25,000,000.00
$100,000,000.00
7
0.0150%
$305.55
$291.66
$125,000,000.00
-$34.72
$0.00
TOTAL
Page 231 5
5,833,333.33 5,833,333.33 5,833,333.33 5,833,333.33 5,833,333.33 $29,166,666.65
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT GENERAL FUND GOVERNMENT SECURITIES SUMMARY FOR THE MONTH ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 2013 CUSIP
AGENCY
DAYS
SETTLEMENT
MATURITY
DISCOUNT
PAR
DATE
DATE
RATE(%)
VALUE
NUMBER
Treasu
Bills Matured:
Treasu
Bills Held at Month End:
TOTAL TREASURY BILLS
COST
HEU>
MARKET
FAIR
RATE
RATE
VALUE
(%)
CARRYING VALUE
MONTH 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
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total Government Securities- Aged
0.00
0.00
0,00
Variance
0.00
0.00
0.00
DURING
DURING
MONTH
MONTH
0.00
CARRYING VALUE
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
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 0.00
Discount Notes Matured:
Discount Notes Held at Month End:
TOTAL DISCOUNT NOTES A on
Bond Matured
Agency Bond Held at Month End:
TOTAL BONDS
TOTAL GOVERNMENT SECURITIES Government Securities 90 days and less
Government Securities
over 90 days
I
2326 Page
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-308 December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Monthly Report on Investments
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider Receiving Monthly Report on Investments for October 2013. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As of October 31, 2013 the District had the following investments: Repurchase Agreement (REPO}
$25 million (Collateralized 102%}
Money Market Account
$91.89 million (Collateralized 110%}
Money Market Account
$1.75 million (small banks; all FDIC insured}
BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
There are no budgetary or fiscal impacts associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
In compliance with Section 15.0 of Board Policy 336, Investment Policy, the Monthly Report on Investments for October 2013 is forwarded to the Board of Directors for review. The portfolio contained in the Report for October 2013 is in compliance with Board Policy 336, Investment Policy. The District is able to meet its expenditure requirements for the next six months. Return on the District's investments is small due to the market conditions and ultra conservative investment approach. Daily roll-over of REPO and collateralized money market accounts is done with preservation of principal foremost in mind.
233
Report No. 13-308 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 on October 2013.
Department Head Approval:
Lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer
Prepared by:
Beverly Abad-Fitzgerald, Treasury Administrator
234
ALAMEDA - CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT MONTHLY REPORT ON INVESTMENTS FOR THE GENERAL FUND OCTOBER 31, 2013
235
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
236
INVESTMENT SUMMARY FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS/OTHER FUND OCTOBER 31, 2013
TYPE MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS REPO'S TREASURY BILLS DISCOUNT NOTES AGENCY BONDS
Average Interest Rate% 0.248% 0.032% 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
$22,548,537.90 $25,000,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$22,548,537.90 $25,000,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$22,548,537.90 $25,000,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
47.42% 52.58% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
$47,548,537.90
$47,548,537.90
$47,548,537.90
100.00%
Carrying Value
Par Value
Fair Value
%of Total
$71,093,537.54 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$71,093,537.54 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$71,093,537.54 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
$71,093,537.54
$71,093,537.54
$71,093,537.54
100.00%
Page 237 1
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT INVESTMENT OVERVIEW FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS PROCUREMENT/OTHER FUND OCTOBER 31, 2013
2013 DESCRIPTION
YTD AVERAGE
2014
JUL
AUG
SEP
NOV
OCT
DEC
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
C!JRRENT MONTH AVERAGE INTEREST RATES
Repurchase Agreements (current month) Money Market Accounts (current month) Govt SecuriUes held at month end Treasury Bills (purchased in current month) Discount Notes (purchased in current month) Agency Bonds (purchased in current month)
0.012% 0.070%
0.020% 0.070%
0.015% 0.070%
0.070%
0.020% 0.070%
0.080% 0.070%
0.072% 0.070%
0.061% 0.070%
0.051% 0.070%
0.066% 0.070%
0.060%
0.110% 0.040% 0.136% 0.077%
0.100%
0.090%
0.030% 0.139% 0.083%
0.010% 0.133% 0.069%
0.045% 0.127% 0.062%
0.090% 0.031% 0.134% 0.073%
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
7
9
7
7
8
$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 $93,633,901
0.032%
AVERAGE INTEREST RATE Repurchase Agreements (12-month avg) Money Market Accounts (12-month avg) Govt Securities held at month end Treasury Bills (Portfolio) Discount Notes (Portfolio) Agency Bonds {Portfolio) 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
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
DAYS
INVESTMENTS AT CARRYING VALUE Repurchase Agreements Money Markel Treasury Bills Discount Notes Agency Bonds
INVESTMENTS AT COST
$118,625,417
$118,631,187 $118,636,924 $118,642,075
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$118,633,901
$118,625,417
$118,631,187 $118,636,924 $118,642,075
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$39,544,634
Page2 238
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RETURN ON INVESTMENTS FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS PROCUREMENT/OTHER FUND OCTOBER 31, 2013
RETURN ON INVESTMENTS Repurchase Agreements Money Market Treasury Bills Discount Notes Bonds Total return on investments Interest received Accrued interest Total return on investments
2013 SEP
OCT
$389 5,392
$410 5,446
0 0 $5 781
0 0
0 0
$5856
$5 593
0 0 $6131
0 0 $0
0 0 $0
0 0 $0
0 0 $0
0 0 $0
0 0 $0
$292 5,301 $5593
$632 5,499 $6131
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
0 $0
0
$389
$389
5,392
5,467
$5 781
$5856
NOV
JAN
FEB
YTD
AUG
$306 5,287
DEC
2014 MAR
JUL
APR
MAY
JUN
TOTAL
0 0 $0
0 0 $0
$1,772 $21,589 $0 $0 $0 $23 361
0 $0
0 $0
$1,702 $21,659 $23 361
$667 5,464
$0
PORTFOLIO INVESTED Average daily portfolio available for investment Average daily portfolio invested
$54,655,834
$54,655,834 $33,870,968
$33,870,968
61.97%
61.97%
% of average daily portfolio invested
CARRYING VALUE GENERAL FUND PORTFOLIO Jul2013 A"g Sep
Oct
$45,496,647
Jul2012
$46,135,214 $46,136,641 $47,548,538
A"g Sep
Oct No• Dee Jan 2013 Feb
No• Dee Jan 2014 Feb Mac
Mac
AP'
Ap'
May
May
J""
J""
Jul2013 A"g Sep
Oct
$73,128,770 $72,495,973 $72,500,284 $71,093,538
Jul2011 A"g Sep
Oct No• Dee Jan 2012 Feb Ma'
Ap' May
J""
$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 A"g Sep
Oct
No• Dee Jan 2014 Feb
No• Dee Jan 2013 Feb
Mac Ap' May
Ap'
J""
J""
Mac May
Page 2393
$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
Jul2010 A"g Sep
Oct No• Dee Jan 2011 Feb Mac
Ap' May
J""
Jul2011 A"g Sep
Oct No• Dee Jan 2012 Feb Mac
Ap' May
J""
$5,743,559 $5,743,605 $5,743,649 $5,743,695 $5,743,739 $5,743,817 $5,375,346 $5,375,389 $34,699,100 $32,551,967 $32,553,678 $34,703,831
$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
FY 10/11
FY 11/12
FY 12/13
FY 13/14
Jul2010 Aoog Sep
Oct No• Dee Jan 2011 Feb Mac
Ap' May
J""
$5,742,841 $5,742,990 $5,743,090 $5,743,140 $5,743,184 $5,743,245 $5,743,291 $5.743,332 $5,743,378 $5,743,423 $5,743,468
$5,743,513
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT DETAIL OF PORTFOLIO FOR THE GENERAL FUND & BUS PROCUREMENT/OTHER FUND OCTOBER 31, 2013 Purchased
TYPE
''"m
Settlement
Maturity
Date
Date
Days to Maturity
MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS Wells Fargo Local Banks
Bank of America
TREASURY BILLS:
Maturity Rate%
Par Value
Fair Value
20,794,276.38 1,754,261.52 22,548,537.90
20,794,276.38 1,754,261.52
20,794,276.38
0.425% 0.248%
22,548,537.90
22,548,537.90
0.040%
0.040%
25,000,000.00
25,000,000.00
25,000,000.00
TOTAL DISCOUNT NOTES
0.00
0.00
0.00
TOTAL BONDS
0.00
0.00
0.00
47,548,537.90
47,548,537.90
47,548,537.90
TOTAL REPO
10/29{13
11/05/13
7
0.070%
Carrying Value
0.070% 0.425% 0.248%
TOTAL MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS
REPO'S
Purchased Rate%
1,754,261.52
TOTAL TREASURY BILLS
AGENCY DISC NOTES:
AGENCY BONOS:
IPORTFOLIO - GENERAL FUND MONEY MARKET: Wells Fargo MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS
CaiEMA CaiEMA Grant No. 6461 Bus Procurement
0.070%
0.070%
0.070% 0.070%
0.070% 0.070%
1,309,034.38 1,308,026.25 68,476,476.91 0.00
1,309,034.38 1,308,026.25 68,476,476.91 0.00
1,309,034.38 1,308,026.25 68,476,476.91 0.00
0.070%
0.070%
71,093,537.54
71,093,537.54
71,093,537.54
118,642,075.44
118,642,075.44
118,642,075.44
TREASURY BILLS: AGENCY DISC NOTES:
AGENCY BONOS:
IPORTFOLIO - OTHER {CaiEma/Bus Procurement) ITOTAL PORTFOLIO COMPOSITION OF PORTFOLIO : Money Market Repurchase Agreements Treasury Bills Discount Notes Bonds
GENERAL FUND 47.42% 52.58% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00%
Page 2404
OTHER (CaiEma/Bus Procurement) 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00%
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS FOR THE MONTH ENDED OCTOBER 31, 2013
SETTLEMENT DATE
MATURITY DATE
DAILY ''REPO" INVESTMENT$
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
09/24/13 10/01/13 10/08/13 10/15/13 10/22/13 10/29/13 TOTAL
10/01/13 10/08/13 10/15/13 10/22/13 10/29/13 11/05/13
$25,000,000.00 $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 7
0.0100% 0.0100% 0.0300% 0.0700% 0.0100% 0.0400%
0.00 48.61 145.83 340.28 48.61 83.33
48.61 48.61 145.83 340.28 48.61 0.00
25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00
-48.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 111.11
-25,000,000.00 0.00 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 5,645,161.29
$125,000,000.00
7
0.0320%
$666.66
$631.94
$150,000,000.00
$62.50
$0.00
$33,870,967.74
Page5 241
ALAMEDA- CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT GENERAL FUND GOVERNMENT SECURITIES SUMMARY FOR THE MONTH ENDED
OCTOBER 31, 2013 CUSIP NUMBER
AGENCY
SETTLEMENT DATE
Trea.su
Bills Matured:
Treasu
Bills Held at Month End:
MATURITY DATE
DISCOUNT RATE(%)
DAYS HELD
PAR
VALUE
TOTAL TREASURY BILLS
COST
MARKET
RATE
FAIR VALUE
RATE
CARRYING
MONTH
1%)
VALUE
INT. EARNED
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
DURING MONTH
0.00
DURING MONTH
CARRYING
VALUE
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
000
Discount Notes Matured:
Discount Notes Held at Month End:
TOTAL DISCOUNT NOTES Agency Bond Matured
Agency Bond Held at Month End:
TOTAL BONDS
TOTAL GOVERNMENT SECURITIES Government Securities 90 days and less
I
Government Securities over 90 days
0.00
000
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total Government Securities- Aged
0.00
000
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Variance
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
Page6 242
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-283 December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Monthly Budget Update
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION IS):
Consider recommending receipt of the Monthly Budget Update for October 2013, the fourth month of operations of Fiscal Year 2013-14. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The District's operating results for the month ending October 31, 2013 for FY 2013-14 reported on a budgetary basis was under budget by a 2.1% or approximately$ 0.6 Million. Most of the dynamics seen in previous months remained present in the District's operation. On a Year-ToDate (YTD) basis, the District's operating expenses are under budget by approximately $3.3 Million or 3.1%. Overall, labor costs were $0.5 Million or 2.9% under budget for the month. This was due primarily to a positive total Labor Cost variance on a YTD basis, caused by lower than expected total salaries and wages expenses coming from the Operations area. Offsetting this was the negative variance caused by the absence of forecasted contributions to healthcare costs by all District employees. As a result of not having a contract in place with the District's largest employee union; Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU), the District has incurred additional labor costs of $1.1 million due to this employee group not contributing to its Health and Welfare costs. Finally, on the labor cost component of the District's operations, current positive variances related to pension contributions and the American Disabilities Act (ADA) program will be addressed once the new actuarial cost study and new East Bay Paratransit Consortium (EBPC) contract are incorporated. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
243
Report No. 13-283 Page 2 of 3
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
During the month of October, most of the dynamics seen in previous months associated with the general fund operating expense budget remained in place, as you can see in Attachment 1. Labor Costs are basically at projected budget levels on an YTD basis showing a 0.8% positive variance despite the absence of contributions by ATU employees towards health and welfare costs, which had been forecasted to be in place since the beginning of the fiscal year. The District stopped collecting contributions to health and welfare costs for employees that are members of the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) as a result of the previous contract expiring June 30, 2013, and not having a new contract beginning July 1, 2013. The District's adopted budget for FY 2013-14 was developed under the assumption that all employees, including members of ATU, would be making contributions to the cost of health and welfare premiums starting July 1, 2013. The effect of not having contributions will be addressed as a part of the mid-year review. As of October, this could represent a budget adjustment of approximately $ 1.1 Million. As explained previously, the main reason why total labor costs have been kept at par to budgetary levels is that total wages in the Operations area, associated with Operators, Maintenance Technicians and clerical workers have remained consistently under budget. These lower total costs of wages are seen not just in Overtime wages, as discussed previously, but also in Regular Time wages. This is the principal reason why Total Salaries and Wages is $1.3 Million or 3.6% under Budget between July and October 2013. The positive variance seen for Pension Contributions YTD will be adjusted once the new Actuarial Cost Study is incorporated into the District's annual pension contributions, which will also require a budget amendment at mid-year. Non-Labor expenses for the month of October were on net at budget levels, a net position driven mostly by a significant jump in recorded expenses associated with water consumption (reported under Utilities) and Use Taxes, which are subject to further review by Staff. The month also shows a slightly negative {-1.6%) variance in fuel prices. The variance resulted from purchases of diesel fuel being higher than budgeted during the month of September, which is the only month for that occurrence. Prices should recede back under budget for November since diesel fuel prices went down to lower than budgeted levels in early October. Bus parts and other materials continued on a positive trend and displayed a 3.5% positive variance and were under budget for the month. Casualty and liability costs were positively impacted by a higher than expected recovery of losses in claims during the month. Finally, other expenses did not show much activity during the month due to a lower level of expense in dues and subscriptions, employee incentives costs and promotional and media ads. On a YTD basis the cumulative variances for non-labor costs still show positive variances, particularly in Services with $0.9 Million or 11.7% under Budget, Other Materials and Supplies with $0.5 Million or 9.5% under Budget, Casualty and Liability at $0.2 Million or 6.1% under
244
Report No. 13-283 Page 3 of 3 budget and Fuel and Lubricants variance remained positive in spite of some unexpected pressures upwards on diesel fuel prices during September, with a 1.5% positive variance YTD. As explained previously, although the ADA Program would appear to have generated a positive variance of up to $ 1.0 Million YTD, this is mostly the result of temporary effects in the recording of invoices, which are not fully reflecting the rates associated with the new EBPC contract. It is very likely that the new contract in effect from July 2013 will require a budget amendment to reflect the new cost ofthis program. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: This report does not recommend a course of action with notable advantages or disadvantages. 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:
Lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer
Prepared by:
Hernan Vargas, Budget Manager
245
This page intentionally blank
246
FY13/14 Operating Expense Trend Analysis Preliminary October 2013 August
July Operating Expenses (OOO's) Salary & Wages Fringe Benefits Pension Fund Total Labor Costs Adjusted Labor Costs
Budget 8,982 6,435 3,519 18,936 18,852
Actual 8,558 6,647 3,090 18,295 18,295
Var$ 424 (212) 429 641 558
Var% 4.7% -3.3% 3.4% 3.0%
Budget 8,982 6,435 3,519 18,936 18,852
1,856 1,596 1,314 494 841 103 2,251 85
1,912 1,574 1,353 401 820 111 2,392 93
(55) 21 (39) 94 20 (8) (141) (8)
-3.0% 1.3% -2.9% 18.9% 2.4% -7.6% -6.3% -9.5%
27,392
26,950
442
1.6%
12.2%
Actual
Var$
Var%
Budset
September Actual var$
October (Preliminary) Actual Var$
*
Total FYTD Var%
Actual
Var%
Var$
12.0% 2.0% 1.5%
Budget 8,982 6,435 3,519 18,936 18,852
(361) 29 309 (35) (57) (5) 19 (100)
-19.5% 1.8% 23.5% -7.2% -6.7% -4.9% 0.8% -118.1%
1,856 1,596 1,314 494 841 103 2,251 85
1,850 1,621 1,268 619 774 108 2,257 28
6 (25) 46 (125) 67 (5) (6) 57
0.3% -1.6% 3.5% -25.4% 8.0% -4.9% -0.3% 66.7%
7,425 6,383 5,255 1,976 3,363 412 9,004 339
6,559 4,757 1,929 3,158 432 7,973 329
866 99 498 47 206 (20) 1,031 10
88
0.3%
27,392
26,829
563
2.1%
109,566
106,222
3,344
8,538 8,017 3,085 19,640 19,640
444 (1,583) 434 (705) (788)
4.9% -24.6% 12.3% -3.7% -4.2%
8,982 6,435 3,519 18,936 18,852
8,567 6,900 3,097 18,564 18,564
415 (465) 422 372 288
1,856 1,596 1,314 494 841 103 2,251 85
579 1,523 1,133 379 666 105 1,091 23
1,277 73
68.8% 4.6%
181 115 175 (2) 1,160 62
13.8% 23.2% 20.8% -2.2% 51.5% 73.1%
1,856 1,596 1,314 494 841 103 2,251 85
2,217 1,566 1,005 530 897 108 2,232 185
27,392
25,140
2,252
8.2%
27,392
27,304
Var% 4.6% -7.2%
Budget
3,076 18,304 18,304
20 169 443 632 549
0.2% 2.6% 12.6% 3.3% 2.9%
35,927 25,739 14,076 75,743 75,409
34,624 27,830 12,348 74,802 74,802
1,303 (2,091) 1,728 940 607
8,961 6,266
3.6%
-8.1% 12.3% 1.2% 0.8%
Services Fuel & Lubricants Other Materials & Supplies Utilities & Taxes Casualty & Liability Interest Expense ADA Consortium and Other Purchased Other
6,284
11.7% 1.5%
9.5% 2.4% 6.1% -4.9% 11.4% 3.1%
Total Operating Expenses
3.1%
*Note: October 2013 additional accruals and final adjustments could still be performed by the Accounting department. Budget review of actual figures could lead to further adjustments.
(/)
::0
247
This page intentionally blank
248
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-302 December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Report from the Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee on Measure VV Proceeds
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION IS):
Consider Receiving a Report from the District Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee on FY 201213 Measure VV Tax Proceeds for the Year Ended June 30, 2013. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In addition to the reporting requirements set forth in Section 3 of Resolution 08-044 which placed Measure W on the ballot, an independent fiscal oversight committee of community representatives (the Committee) was established. The Committee shall review the use of the special account funds and provide its own annual written report at the same regular meeting of the Board of Directors that the Chief Financial Officer's report is received by the Board. The Committee's report also shall be referred to the appropriate Board Standing Committee and subsequently considered by the Board along with the recommendations of the Board Standing Committee. The District received approximately $29.4 million in Measure VV funding for FY 2012-13, ending June 30, 2013. This revenue is used to cover the cost of operations and maintenance of bus service within Special Transit Service District No. 1 (District 1). In the attached financial statements, there is a Schedule of Maintenance Costs Funded by measure VV Taxes. The schedule shows that total maintenance costs for District 1 was $S3.3 million. After taking into account the Federal funding available for this cost, the net cost remaining that can be covered by Measure VV funding is $44.8 million, thus 100% of the Measure VV funding was applied to this cost leaving $15.3 million to be funded by other resources. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
Audited statements for Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2013 show Measure VV Tax Receipts of $29.4 million to AC Transit, Special Transit Service District No. 1.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
On December 3, 2013, staff presented CFO Staff Report 13-01 regarding FY 2012-13 Measure VV Tax proceeds for AC Transit Special Transit Service District No. 1 to the District Parcel Tax
249
Report No. 13-302 Page 2 of 2 Fiscal Oversight Committee. The report included the Measure VV Schedules with Independent Accountant's Report, Year Ended June 30, 2013. Fiscal Year 2012-13 Measure VV proceeds total approximately $29.4 million, and were applied to expenditures in District 1. In accordance with the requirements established by the Board of Directors, the Oversight Committee is required to formulate a written report and/or resolution and submit it to the AC Transit Board of Directors. The Oversight Committee received, reviewed and approved the report and attested that Measure VV funds received in FY 2012-13 have been spent in accordance with the intent of the Measure by adopting Resolution 13-01 (Attachment 1). It is requested that the Board acknowledge receipt of Resolution 13-01 from the District Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2013. The District Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee Agenda and the accompanying packet of information for the meeting of December 3, 2013 are attached.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: Receipt of the annual Measure VV Audited Financial Statements and the supporting Alameda Contra Costa Transit District Report for FY 2012-13
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: An alternative analysis is not required for this report.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Staff Report 12-285, December 12, 2012 Report from the Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee on Measure W Proceeds.
ATTACHMENTS: 1:
CFO Staff Report No. 13-01 Consider Receiving Report from the Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee on FY 2012-13 Measure VV Proceeds
Department Head Approval:
Lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer
Reviewed by:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel
Prepared by:
Lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer
250
CFO Report No: Meeting Date:
13-01 December 3, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
District Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
Lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer
SUBJECT:
FY 2012-13 Measure W Tax Proceeds to AC Transit Special Transit Service District
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider Review and Approval of the Measure W Financial Statement and the Adoption of Resolution 13-01 Determining that the Measure W Funds Collected during the 2012-13 Fiscal Year have been Appropriated and Expended in Special Transit Service District One for Operation and Maintenance Activities. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: In addition to the reporting requirements set forth in Section 3 of Resolution 08-044, an independent fiscal oversight committee of community representatives (The Committee) was created on August 8, 2002, with the adoption of Resolution No. 2067. The Committee membership has been established in Resolution Nos. 2098 and 05-031. The Committee shall review the use of the special account funds and provide its own annual written report at the same regular meeting of the Board that the Chief Financial Officer's report is received by the. Board. The Committee's report also shall be referred to the appropriate Board Standing Committee and subsequently considered by the Board along with the recommendations of the Board Standing Committee. The District received approximately $29.4 million in Measure W funding for FY 2012-2013, ending June 30, 2013. This revenue is used to cover the cost of operations and maintenance of bus service within Special Transit Service District No. 1 (STSD #1). In the attached financial statements there is a Schedule of Maintenance Costs Funded by Measure VV Taxes. The schedule shows that total maintenance costs for STSD #1 was $53.3 million. After taking into account the Federal funding available for this cost, the net cost remaining that can be covered by Measure W funding w~s $44.8 million. 100% of the Measure W funding was applied to this cost, leaving $15.3 million to be funded by other resources. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT: Audited financial statements for FY ending June 30, 2013 show Measure W Tax Receipts of $29.4 million to AC Transit, Special Transit Service District No. 1.
251
Report No. 13-01 Page 2 of 3
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Measure AA is a 2002 Alameda County and Contra Costa County (Counties) voter approved ballot measure authorizing the Counties to levy and collect a $24 per year parcel tax over 5 years for the purposes of preserving affordable local transportation services that allow seniors and people with disabilities to remain independent, take students to and from school, help East Bay residents commute to work and reduce traffic and air pollution by reducing the number of cars on the road. The voters in Special Transit District 1 approved Measure BB, in replacement of Measure AA, which authorizes the AC Transit District to levy a special tax in the amount of $48 per year, per parcel for ten years, commencing July 1, 2005. The voters in Special Transit District 1 approved Measure VV, in replacement of Measure BB, which authorizes the AC Transit District to levy a special tax in the amount of $96 per year, per parcel for ten years, commencing July 1, 2009.
Proceeds from this special tax can only be used to fund the
operations and maintenance of bus service within Special Transit Service District (STSD) No_ 1.
Revenue Collection History for each Measure
BB**
$15.1MM $29.3MM
VV***
$29.4
*first year of revenue collection began FY03/04 **first year of revenue collection began FYOS/06 ***first year of revenue collection began FY09/10
Funds used for the operation and maintenance of bus services by AC Transit in Special Transit Service District No. 1 (District 1). See attachment, Measure W Schedules with Independent Accountant's Report of Operations and Maintenance Expenses by County and Special Transit Service District, year ended June 30, 2013. The revenue provided by Measure VV funds is essential to the sustainability of District operations. At November 12, 2008 Board of Directors meeting. The Board approved adoption of ~esolution No. 08-064 establishing the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee, appointing its membership, repealing Resolution No. 2098, and amending Resolution Nos. 2067, 2135, 08-051 and 08-044 as appropriate (GM Memo No. 08-284). In accordance with AC Transit Resolution No. 2067 and 2135 the District Parcel Tax Committee is requested to review the use of Measure VV funds as accounted for on the attached report
252
Report No. 13-01 Page 3 of 3 and to provide a written report to the AC Transit Board of Directors at their Special Board meeting of December 11, 2013. Resolution 13-01 is attached for your consideration.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: Receipt of the annual Measure VV Audited Financial Statements and the supporting Alameda Contra Costa Transit District Report for FY 2012-2013.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: This report does not recommend an action
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: Staff Report 12-285, December 12, 2012
ATTACHMENTS 1: 2: 3:
Resolution 13-01 Measure W Schedules with Independent Accountant's Report. AC Transit Audited Financial Statements, Year Ended June 30, 2013
Department Head Approval: Prepared by:
David Armijo, General Manager Lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer
253
This page intentionally blank
254
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT PARCEL TAX FISCAL OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE RESOLUTION NO. 13-01 A RESOLUTION DETERMING THAT THE MEASURE VV FUNDS COLLECTED DURING THE 2012-13 FISCAL YEAR HAVE BEEN APPROPRIATED AND EXPENDED IN SPECIAL TRANSIT SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 1 FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES WHEREAS, on November 5, 2002 the voters in Special Transit Service District No. 1 (District 1) approved Measure AA which imposed a $24 dollar per parcel per year tax on properties in District 1, for five years, for the operation and maintenance of AC Transit's activities in District 1; and WHEREAS, AC Transit Resolution No. 2098 created the Measure AA Oversight Committee for the purpose of determining that the monies collected under Measure AA were spent in District 1 for the operation and maintenance of AC Transit' services in District 1, as those terms are defined in AC Transit Resolution No. 2067; and WHEREAS, on November 2, 2004 the voters in District 1 approved Measure BB, increasing the amount of the parcel tax to $48.00 per parcel per year for ten years commencing on July 1, 2005; and WHEREAS, as a consequence of the passage of Measure BB (with an increased time period and amount) Resolution No. 05-031 was adopted repealing Resolution No. 2098 and establishing the Measure AA/BB Oversight Committee, appointed its membership and amended Resolution No. 2067 z;1d 2135 modifying the reporting period from ~eptember 301h .to December 31 51 of each year; and WHEREAS, on November 4, 2008 the voters in District 1 approved Measure VV, increasing the amount of the parcel tax to $96.00 per parcel per year for ten years, commencing on July 1, 2009; and WHEREAS, a special meeting of the Alameda Contra-Costa District Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee (the Committee) was held on December 3, 2013 during which the Committee reviewed information provided by Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District's Chief Financial Officer contained in CFO Memo no. 13-01; NOW THEREFORE, the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee does resolve as follows:
Section 1. Determines that the monies collected pursuant to Measure VV during the 2012-13 Fiscal Year were appropriated and expended for the operation and maintenance of AC Transit services in District 1. Section 2. Board of Directors.
Authorizes the transmittal of a copy of this resolution to the AC Transit
Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee Resolution No. 13-01 255
Pagel ofZ
Section 3. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage by four affirmative votes of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 3'd day of December 2013.
Attest:
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 Special Meeting of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee held on the 3rd day of December, 2013 by the following roll call vote: AYES:
MEMBERS WILliAMS, CHEKAL-BAIN, APODACA, BODINE, CHAIR ABELSON
NOES:
NONE
ABSENT:
MEMBERS JOHNSON, VIRAMONTES
ABSTAIN:
NONE
Approved as to Form and Content:
Parcel Tax Fiscal Oversight Committee Resolution No. 13-01 256
Pagelo/2
CFO Report
Alameda-(;ontra Costa Transit District Measure VV Schedules with Independent Accountant's Report Year Ended June 30,2013
257
No.
13-01 Att.2
This Page Left Intentionally Blank
258
MAZE
& ASSOCIATES
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT ON APPLYING AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES Board of Directors Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Oakland, California We have performed the procedures enumerated below, which were agreed to by management of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (the District), solely to assist you in evaluating service hours, service miles, and the allocation of operations and maintenance expenses by county and Special Transit Service District (STSD) set forth in the accompanying schedules for the year ended June 30, 2013. The District's management is responsible for the accompanying schedules. This agreed-upon procedures engagement was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The sufficiency of these procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in the report. Consequently, we make no representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose. Our procedures and findings are as follows: GENERAL
a.
We read the Measure VV voter approved ballot measure noting that the ten-year parcel tax is levied for the purposes of providing essential transportation services, including the operation and maintenance of bus services within District I.
b. We traced Measure VV funds received for the year ended June 30, 2013 to the District's general ledger and to the independent confirmations received from the County of Alameda and the County of Contra Costa.
SCHEDULE OF SERVICE HOURS AND SERVICE MILES BY COUNTY AND SPECIAL TRANSIT DISTRICT a.
We tested the schedule for clerical accuracy and noted no clerical errors.
b. We compared service hours for the year ended June 30, 2013 to the worksheets prepared by the District and found them to be in agreement. c. We compared STSD No. I service hours for the year ended June 30, 2013 to the worksheets prepared by the District and noted agreement of service hours by county. d. We recomputed the net changes in service hours during the year ended June 30, 2013 by county and STSD, and noted no errors. T
925.930.0902 925.930.0135 [email protected]
Accountancy Corporation 3478 Buskirk Avenue, Suite 215
F
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
w mazeassoclates.com
E
I 259
Findings:
I. Service hours by STSD and by Alameda and Contra Costa counties agree to the District's OTS 370 report for the year ended June 30, 2013. 2. We noted total service hours increased 2,096 or 0.1%. e.
We compared service miles by STSD for the year ended June 30, 2013 to worksheets prepared by the District and found them to be in agreement.
f.
We compared STSD No. 1 miles for the year ended June 30, 2013 to the worksheets prepared by the District and noted agreement of service miles by county.
g.
We recomputed the net changes in service miles during the year ended June 3 0, 2013 by county and STSD, and noted no errors. Findings:
I. Service miles by STSD and by Alameda and Contra Costa counties agreed to the District's OTS 370 report for the year ended June 30, 2013. 2. We noted total service miles increased 72,699 or .3%.
SCHEDULE OF OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE EXPENSES BY COUNTY AND SPECIAL TRANSIT SERVICE DISTRICT
a.
We tested the schedule for mathematical accuracy and noted no mathematical errors.
b.
We compared total expenses to the District's unaudited Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Fund Net Position for the Transit Fund for the year ended June 30, 2013, and found them to be in agreement.
c.
We recomputed the total expenses before allocation by county and STSD, and noted no errors.
d.
We compared service hours and service miles by county and STSD to the Schedule of Service Hours and Service Miles by county and STSD and found them to be in agreement.
e.
We recomputed the service hours and service miles allocation percentages and noted no errors.
2 260
f.
We traced expenses, allocated by county and STSD, to a worksheet prepared by the District and found them to be in agreement. We noted that the District computed the allocated expenses for Contra Costa County, STSD No. 1 as follows: Total Expenses before allocation X (Service Hours allocation% (a) +Service By County and STSD Miles Allocation% (b)) 2 Contra Costa County STSD I Service Hours Total STSD 1 Service Hours
(a) Service Hours allocation%=
Contra Costa County STSD 1 Service Miles Total STSD 1 Service Miles
(b) Service Miles allocation%=
g. We recomputed expenses allocated to Contra Costa County, STSD No. 1 using the above calculation and found the recomputed expenses to be in agreement with amounts calculated by the District after giving effect to rounding. h. We compared the method used to allocate operations and maintenance expenses to Alameda STSD No.2 to the District's stated allocation methodology and found them to be in agreement. i.
We noted that the District computed the allocated expenses for Alameda County STSD No. I as follows: 1.
2.
j.
Total expenses before Allocation by county and STSD
Expenses allocated to Contra Costa County
Expenses allocated to Alameda County
STSDNo.l
Expenses allocated to Alameda County
Expenses allocated to Alameda County STSDNo.2
Expenses allocated to Alameda County STSDNo. I
We noted that the District allocated total operations and maintenance expenses to STSD No. 1 by adding the sum of expenses allocated to Contra Costa County STSD No. 1 plus expenses allocated to Alameda County STSD No. 1.
k. We recomputed the total allocation of operations and maintenance expenses to Alameda County and Contra Costa County STSD No. I, and found the recomputed expenses to be in agreement with amounts calculated by the District after giving effect to rounding.
I.
We verified that the Measure VV proceeds received by the District did not exceed the operations and maintenance expenses allocated to STSD No. 1.
m. We noted that total District operations and maintenance expenses allocated to STSD No. 1 exceeded Measure VV funding of $29,438,709 by $293,674,857 for the year ended June 30, 2013.
3 261
SCHEDULE OF MAINTENANCE COSTS FUNDED BY MEASURE VV TAXES n. We obtained the Schedule of Maintenance Costs Funded by Measure VV Taxes (Schedule) from the District. o. We agreed Total Modal Expenses reported on the Schedule for function code 041 Vehicle Maintenance and 042 Non-vehicle Maintenance to the District's National Transit Database Report, Operating Expenses (F-30) form with out exception. p. We recalculated the percentage used to allocate costs reported on the Schedule by using expense allocations reported in the Special Transit Service Districts No. 1 and
No. 2 Schedule with independent Accountant's Report. q. We recalculated the percentage used to allocate Federal Preventative Maintenance Awards reported on the Schedule by using the allocation reported in the Special Transit Service Districts No. 1 and No. 2 Schedule with Independent Accountant's Report.
r.
We agreed Measure VV Taxes to the Special Transit Service Districts No. 1 and No. 2 Schedule with Independent Accountant's Report.
s.
We compared Net Costs Remaining after Applying Federal Awards to Measure VV Taxes and noted costs exceed Measure VV taxes.
We were not engaged to, and did not, conduct an audit, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion on the accompanying schedule. Accordingly, we do not express such an opm10n. Had we performed additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the District's Board of Directors and management and the Measure VV oversight committee and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than those specified parties.
November 14, 2013
4 262
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT Schedule of Service Hours and Service Miles by County and Special Transit Service District Year Ended June 30, 2013
For the Year Ended June 30, 2012
Net Increase/ (Decrease)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2013
SERVICE HOURS Contra Costa- STSD No. 1 Alameda- STSD No. 1 Alameda- STSD No. 2 Total Alameda service hours Total STSD No. I service hours
194,776
(259)
194,517
1,382,971 185,255
8,439 (6,083)
1,391,410 179,172
1,568,226
2,356
1,570,582
1,577,747
8,180
1,585,927
2,512,699
(46,579)
2,466,120
16,206,625 2,837,796
92,853 26,425
16,299;478 2,864,221
19,044,421
119,278
19,163,699
18,719,324
46,274
18,765,598
SERVICE MILES Contra Costa- STSD No. I Alameda- STSD No. I Alameda- STSD No.2 Total Alameda service miles Total STSD No. I service miles
5 263
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT Schedule of Operations and Maintenance Expenses Funded by Measure VV Taxes by County and Special Transit Service District Year Ended June 30, 2013
Before Allocation Contra Costa Bl: County and STSD Coun!l: STSD #1
STSD#l
Alameda Conn!l: STSD#2
Total STSD#l
Total
EXPENSES Operator wages Other wages Fringe benefits
$
Pension expenses
"'
Services Fuel and lubricants Office/printing supplies Bus parts/maintenance supplies T.Jti!ities Insurance Other expenses ADA paratransit joint venture Interest expense Depreciation Total expenses
$
58,525,385 46,361,370 77,837,261 39,012,835 26,591,836 18,613,380 460,476 12,816,652 2,413,009 11,528,753 5,719,114 26,754,351 653,394 35,420 341
$
362,708, !57
6,669,708 5,200,634 8,809,235 4,415,279 3,066,830 2,087,975 51,654 1,437,721 270,682 1,293,250 641,547 3,054,800 73,943 3,973,313
$
45,833,415 35,738,117 60,535,980 30,341,256 21,074,883 14,348,306 354,963 9,879,842 1,860,091 8,887,052 4,408,636 20,992,213 508,124 27,304 Il7
41,046,571
282,066,995
Measure VV revenues
5 050 571
Total Measure revenues
5 050,571
Net deficit Service Hours Allocation Percentage Service Miles
Allocation Percentage Average
$
(35,996,000)
$
$
6,022,262 5,422,619 8,492,046 4,256,300 2,450,123 2,177,099 53,859 1,499,089 282,236 1,348,451 668,931 2,707,338 71,327 4,142 9II
$
39,594,591
51,855,677 41,160,736 69,028,026 34,597,556 23,525,006 16,525,405 408,822 II,378,931 2,142,327 10,235,503 5,077,567 23,699,551 579,451 31,447,028
$
52,503,123 40,938,751 69,345,215 34,756,535 24,141,713 16,436,281 406,617 II,317,563 2,130,773 10,180,302 5,050,183 24,047,013 582,067 31,277,430
321,661,586
323,113,566
24,388,138
24,388,138
29,438,709
24,388,138
24,388,138
29,438,709
(257,678,857)
$
(39,594,591)
$
(297,273,448)
$
(293,674,857)
194,517 12.27%
1,391,410 87.73%
1,585,927 100%
2,466,120 13.14%
!6,299,478 86.86%
18,765,598 100%
12.70%
87.30%
See accompanying notes to the schedule.
264
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT Schedule of Maintenance Costs Funded by Measure W Taxes by County and Special Transit Service District Year Ended June 30, 2013
Maintenance Costs and Funding Total Modal Expenses 041 Vehicle Maintenance 042 Non-Vehicle Maintenance Total Maintenance Costs Funding: Federal Preventative Maintenance awards Net Costs Remaining After applying Federal Awards Measure VV Taxes Net costs funded by other resources
STSD#l Amount
$46,625,015 6,650,527
%
89.08% 89.08%
53,275,542
STSD#2 Amount %
$5,715,595 815,264
10.92% 10.92%
6,530,859
8,512,334
88.73%
44,763,208
1,081,190
5,449,669
29,438,709
100.00%
$15,324,499
265
$52,340,610 7,465,791 59,806,401
11.27%
9,593,524
50,212,877 29,438,710
$5,449,669
7
Total
$20,774,167
This Page Left Intentionally Blank
266
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT Notes to the Schedule of Service Hours and Service Miles by County and Special Transit Service District and The Schedule of Operations and Maintenance Expenses by County and Special Transit Service District Year Ended June 30,2013
1. General On November 30, 2004, the voters approved Measure BB, which superseded the Measure AA parcel tax authorizing Alameda and Contra Costa Counties (the Counties) to levy and collect a parcel tax for the purposes of "preserving affordable local public transportation
services that allow seniors and people with disabilities to remain independent, take students to and from school, help East Bay residents commute to work and reduce trqffic and air pollution by reducing the number of cars on the road." The tax became effective on July 1, 2005 and was to terminate on June 30, 2015. However, on November 4, 2008, the voters approved Measure VV, which supersedes the Measure BB parcel tax. Measure VV became effective July 1, 2009 and increased the annual parcel tax to $96 per parcel. Measure VV is effective though June 30, 2019. Proceeds from this special tax can only be used to fund the operation and maintenance of bus service within Special Transit Service District (STSD) No. I. The District received approximately $29.3 million in Measure VV taxes during the year ended June 30,2013. 2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies and Schedule Presentation These schedules are prepared under the guidelines of the agreement between the Contra Costa Transportation Authority and the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District that essentially allocates expenses between STSD No. I and STSD No. 2. Consequently, they do not present the fmancial position, changes in fmancial position, or cash flows of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District. 3. Basis of Accounting The Schedule of Operations and Maintenance Expenses by County and Special Transit Service District has been prepared in accordance with the accrual basis of accounting. 4. Basis of Expense Allocation The expenses on the Schedule of Operations and Maintenance Expenses by County and Special Transit Service District are prorated to the Counties and the Special Transit Service Districts. It is based on an equal weighing of the relationship of hours and miles of service between the Counties and the Special Transit Service Districts within the Counties.
9 267
This Page Left Intentionally Blaok
268
CFO Report 13-01 Att. 3
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT Schedule of Revenues and Expenses of Measure B Funds with Independent Auditor's Report For the Year Ended June 30, 2013
269
This Page Left Intentionally Blank
270
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT For the Year Ended June 30, 2013
Table of Contents Page Independent Auditor's Report ................................................................................................................... ! Management's Discussion and Analysis (Required Supplementary Information) .............................. 7 Basic Financial Statements: Business-type Activity- Enterprise Fund: Statement of Fund Net Position .................................................................................................. 18 Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Fund Net Position ...................................... 19 Statement of Cash Flows ............................................................................................................ 20 Pension Trust Fund: Statement of Plan Net Position ................................................................................................... 21 Statement of Changes in Plan Net Position ................................................................................ 22 Notes to the Basic Financial Statements ............................................................................................. 23 Required Supplementary Information: Schedules of Funding Progress ........................................................................................................... 48 Other Supplementary Information: Comparative Schedules of Fund Net Position .............................................................................., ...... 50 Comparative Schedules of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Fund Net Position ........................ 51 Comparative Schedules of Cash Flows ............................................................................................... 52 Comparative Schedules of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Fund Net PositionBudgetary Basis- Business-type Activity- Enterprise Fund- Transit Only ............................... 53 Schedule of Revenues, Subsidies and Expenses, Budget Versus ActualBusiness-type Activity- Enterprise Fund- Transit Only ............................................................. 54 Schedule of Revenues and Expenses by Service AreaBusiness-type Activity- Enterprise Fund- Transit Only ............................................................. 55 Notes to Other Supplementary Information ........................................................................................ 57
271
This Page Left Intentionally Blank
272
MAZE
& ASSOCIATES
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT Board of Directors Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Oakland, California
Report on Financial Statements We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the business-type activity of the AlamedaContra Costa Transit District (District) as of and for the year ended June 30, 2013, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the District's basic financial statements as listed io the Table of Contents.
Management's Responsibility for the Financial Statements Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements io accordance with accounting priociples generally accepted io the United States of America; this includes the design, implementation, and maiotenance of iotemal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of the fmancial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.
Auditor's Responsibility Our responsibility is to express opioions on these financial statements based on our audit. We did not audit the fmancial statements of the AC Transit Pension Trust Fund. Those fmancials statements were audited by other auditors whose report hereon has been furnished to us, and our opioion, insofar as it related to the amounts iocluded for the AC Transit Pension Trust Fund, is based on the report of the other auditor. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditiog standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contaioed io Government Auditing Standards We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opioions.
Opinions In our opioion, based on our audit and the report of the other auditors, the financial statements referred to
above present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of the busioess-type activity and Pension Trust Fund of the District as of June 30, 2013, and the respective changes in financial position and, where applicable, cash flows thereof for the year then ended io conformity with accounting priociples generally accepted io the United States of America.
3478 Buskirk Avenue, Suite 215
925.930.0902 ' 925.930.0135 E [email protected]
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
w mazeassoclates.com
T
Accountancy Corporation
1 273
Emphasis ofMatters
Management adopted the prov1s1ons of the following Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statements, which became effective during the year ended June 30, 2013 and had material effects on the financial statements: Statement 63 -Financial Reporting ofDeferred Outflows ofResources, Deferred Inflows ofResources, and Net Position. See Note 1 to the fmancial statements for relevant disclosures. Statement 65 - Items Previously Reported as Assets and Liabilities. See Note 8 to the fmancial statements for relevant disclosures. The emphasis of these matters does not constitute a modification to our opinions. Other Matters Required Supplementary Information
Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that Management's Discussion and Analysis, and Schedule of Funding Progress be presented to supplement the basic fmancial statements. Such information, although not a part of the basic fmancial statements,. is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, who considers it to be an essential part of fmancial reporting for placing the basic fmancial statements in an appropriate operational, economic or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management's responses to our ioquiries, the basic fmancial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic fmancial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance. Other Information
Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the fmancial statements that collectively comprise the District's basic fmancial statements as a whole. The Other Supplementary Information Section as listed in the Table of Contents is presented for purposes of additional analysis and is not a required part of the basic fmancial statements. The Other Supplementary Information is the responsibility of management and was derived from and relates directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic fmancial statements. The information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and certaio additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements or to the basic fmancial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opioion, the Other Supplementary Information is fairly stated, in all material respects, io relation to the basic fmancial statements as a whole.
2 274
Other Reporting Required by Government Auditing Standards In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated September 20, 2013, on our consideration of the District's internal control over f"mancial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the District's internal control over f"mancial reporting and compliance.
Pleasant Hill, California September 20, 2013
3 275
This Page Left Intentionally Blank
276
Management's Discussion and Analysis
277
This Page Left Intentionally Blank
278
Management's Discussion & Analysis This discussion and analysis of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District's financial performance provides an overview of the District's activities for Fiscal Year 2013 with comparisons to the prior fiscal year. We encourage readers to consider the information presented here in conjunction with the transmittal letter contained in the Introductory Section and with the statements and related notes contained in the Financial Section.
Financial Highlights •
At June 30, 2013, total assets were $464.7 million, an increase of$48.5 million or 12 percent compared to June 30, 2012. In Fiscal Year 2012, total assets were $416.2 million. Total current assets at June 30, 2013 were $230.5 million, an increase of $36.1 million or 19 percent due largely to the receipt of grant funds restricted for future capital programs, offset by slightly lower receivables. Capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation, increased $12.4 million. Other Non-Current Assets remained constant.
•
At June 30, 2013, total liabilities were $145.3 million, a decrease of$3.5 million or 2 percent compared to June 30, 2012. Total current liabilities were $62.9 million, with a $2.3 million decrease, or 3 percent primarily due to lower accrued expenses, and unearned revenue, at year end. Total other non-current liabilities increased by $1.7 million or 3 percent from June 30, 2012 due to increases in OPEB liabilities, that were partially offset by favorable actuarial results related to claims.
•
For Fiscal Year 2013, Operating Revenues increased by $2.8 million or 5 percent. There were increases in Passenger fares revenues of $1.2 million, Contract Services of $0.3 million, and in "Other'' operating revenues of $1.3 million. In the case of passenger fares, it should be noted that the fares charged to passengers did not change during the period, indicative of a corresponding increase in passengers carried.
•
In Fiscal Year 2013, total operating expenses were $336.4 million, a decrease of $13.7 million or 4 percent compared to $350.1 million in Fiscal Year 2012. The 2013 results were mostly due to significant decreases in "Net Expenses of Joint Venture", primarily due to a temporary increase in State Transit Assistance Lifeline funding to this category, and the application of Regional Measure 2 revenue. "Other Expenses" is down as well. Olher decreases in overall Salaries & Wages, fringe benefits, depreciation, and other materials and supplies, which were partially offset by increases in the Services, and Insurance, categories also contributed to this result.
•
For Fiscal Year 2013, non-operating revenues were $261.8 million, which is an increase of$0.2 million compared to Fiscal Year 2012. While this result provides an impression of overall flat performance in this category, there were however notable changes. Federal funds available for operations continued to decrease, in this fiscal year by $20.3 million when compared to June 30, 2012. This was due to District mandates that emphasized capital investments, rather than operating programs. There were off setting increases in Property Taxes, Sales Tax based subsidies, as well as State, and other Local subsidies. Some of these were due to growth in the sales tax base and improving property values, in certain instances one rime funding was also received from these sources.
•
At June 30, 2013, net position was $319. million, an increase of $51.5 million or 19 percent from June 30, 2012. The 2013 increase was primarily due to continued State contributions for capital projects, and reduced expenses. At June 30, 2012, net position was valued at $267.5 million*
• Overview of the Financial Statements The Financial Section of this report presents the District's financial statements as two components: basic financial statements and notes to the financial statements. It also includes other supplemental information in addition to the basic financial statements.
Basic Financial Statements The Statement of Net Position presents information about assets and liabilities with the difference between the two reported as net position. The change in net position over rime is an indicator of whether the financial position of the District is improving or deteriorating.
7 279
The Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position reports how have changed during the year and presents a comparison between operating revenues and operating expenses. Operating revenues and expenses are related to the District's principal business of providing bus transit services. Operating expenses include the cost of direct services to passengers, administrative expenses, contracted services and depreciation on capital assets. All other revenues and expenses not included in these categories are reported as non-operating. The Statement ofCash Flows reports inflows and outflows of cash and is classified into four m'\ior components: •
Cash flows from operating activities which includes transactions and events reported as components of operating income in the statement of revenues, expenses and changes in net position.
•
Cash flows from non-capita/financing activities which include operating grant proceeds as well as operating subsidy payments from third parties and other non-operating items.
•
Cash flows from capital and related financing activities which arise from the borrowing and repayment (principal and interest) of capital-related debt, the acquisition and construction of capital assets and the proceeds of capital grants and District contributions.
•
Cash flows from investing activities which includes the proceeds from the sale of investments and receipt of interest. Outflows in this category include the purchase of investments.
Notes to the Financial Statements Various notes provide additional information that is essential to a full understanding of the information provided in the basic financial statements. These are found immediately following the financial statements to which they refer.
Other Information This report also presents certain required supplementary information in accordance with the requirements of GASB. In addition, supplementary information and associated notes concerning compliance with the District's annual budget appear immediately following the required supplementary information.
Analysis of Basic Financial Statements Assets: •
At June 30, 2013, total assets were $464.3 million, an increase of$46.8 million or 11 percent compared to June 30, 2012. In Fiscal Year 2012, total assets were $416.2 million. As of June 30, 2013 total current assets are $230.1 million, an increase of $35.7 million or 18 percent, mainly due to the receipt of grant funds, restricted for future capital programs, and an increase in inventory of $1.2 million, offset by a net reduction in receivables of $3.3 million due to timing. As of June 30, 2013 capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation increased by $12.4 million. The net capital assets increase was mainly due to capital asset additions of new Bus fleets, as well as other fixed asset categories.
280
8
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Net Assets (in thousands) Fiscal Year J!ndedJnne 30,2013 2013 Assets Current Assets Capital Assets Other Non-Current Assets Total Assets
230,074 231,768 2,488 464,330
$
$
$
62,889 27,777 54,652 145,318
Net Position Invested in Capital Assets, net ofrelated debt $ Restricted for Capital Purchases Restricted for Debt Service Unrestricted $ Total Net Position
202,095 74,531 1,605 40,781 319,012
$
Total liabilities and Net Assets
464,330
liabilities Current Liabilities Long Term Portion ofCOPS Other Non-Current liabilities Total liabilities
$
$
$
$
Change
2012 194,418 219,332 2,488 416,238
$
35,656 12,436
$
48,092
65,162 30,616 52,994 148,772
$
187,570 46,893 1,174 31,829 267,466
$
416,238
%
18% 6% 0% 12% =
(2,273) (2,839) 1,658 (3,454)
-3% -9"/o 3% -2%
$
14,525 27,638 431 8,952 51,546
59% 37% 28% 19%
$
48,092
$
=
8%
== 12% ==
Liabilities: •
At Jnne 30, 2013, total liabilities were $145.3 million, a decrease of $3.5 million or 2 percent when compared to Jnne 30, 2012. This includes a decrease of $2.3 million in current liabilities. The overall decrease in this category included a $4.6 million dollar decrease in accrued expenses, mainly due to timing and fewer obligations, including a $2.0 million decrease in nnearned revenue, and a series of smaller reductions, including but not limited to, interest payable, and other accrued liabilities. These reductions were partially offset however, by an increase in current portion of claims liabilities of $2.9 million, and in OPEB liabilities of $1.1 million. Other non-current liabilities are $54.7 million, an increase of$1.7 million over FY-11/12. This included increases in long term OPEB obligations of $2.8 million due to higher actuarial results and a funding level during the period that had not yet caught up with those changes, and smaller increases in paid leave, offset by a reduction in long term claims liabilities of $1.7 million due to some shifts from long term to short term classifications. Total Liabilities at Jnne 30, 2012 were $148.8 million.
Net Position: •
At June 30, 2013, net position was $319 million, an increase of$51.5 million or 19 percent from Jnne 30, 2012. The 2013 increase was primarily due to continued state contributions for capital projects. At June 30,2012, net position was valued at $267.5 million;* which was after the implementation of GASB 65 which resulted in a restatement that lowered prior fiscal year net position by $1.3 million, from $268,761 to $267,466.
9
281
Revenue and Expense: Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Statement ofRewnues, Expenses and Changes in Net As sets (in thousands) For the Years 1!1uledJune 30,2013 and June 30,2012 2012
2013
Changes
%
Revenues Operating Revenues Passenger Fares
$
50,357
$
49,125
$
1,232
3%
Contract Services
8,330
8,021
309
4%
Other
4,720
3,408
1,312
38%
2,853
5%
9%
Total Operating Revenues
$
Non-Operating Rewnues Property Ta>es
63,407
$
60,554
$
108,799
100,150
8,649
Local Sales Ta>es
58,683
54,609
4,074
7%
Local Funds
66,745
60,901
10%
Federal
12,070
32,458
5,844 (20,388)
-63%
State
15,953
13,193
2,760
21%
Gain (Loss) on sale of capital assets
(1,175)
Interest Income Total Non-Operating Revenues Total Revenues
(293)
(882)
301%
764
585
179
31%
261,839
261,603
236
0%
325,246
322,157
3,089
1%
58,526
58,384
142
0%
Expenses Operating Expenses Operator Wages
46,363
48,328
(1,965)
-4%
116,849
117,593
(744)
-1%
Depreciation
35,420
37,899
(2,479)
-7%
Fuel&Oil
18,613
18,593
Other Wages Fringe Benefits
20
0%
Other Materials & Supplies
12,393
13,913
(1,520)
-11%
Services Insurance
26,593
20,547
6,046
29%
11,529
Net &penses ofJoint Venture Other Total Operating Expenses Non-Operating Expenses Interest &pense Total Expenses Loss before Contributed Captal Captal Contributions
9,262
2,267
24%
2,249
11,396
(9,147)
-80%
7,842
(6,322) (13,702)
-45%
336,377
14,164 350,079
1,338
1,720
(382)
-22%
337,715
351,799
(14,084)
-4%
17,173
-58%
(12,469)
(29,642)
64,015
47,878
16,137
34%
18,236 250,525
33,310
183%
16,941
7%
Change in Net Position
51,546
Net Position, beginning of year*
267,466
* Restatements due to implementation ofGASB 65: Net Position, end of year
$
-4%
319,012 10 282
$
(1,295) 267,466
$
51,546
19%
=
Operating Revenue: •
For Fiscal Year 2013 total Operating Revenue was $63.4 million an increase of$2.9 million or 5 percent over fiscal year 2012 when Operating Revenues were $60.6 million. The components Operating Revenue include Passenger Fares, Contract Services, and Other Operating Revenues. For Fiscal Year 2013 passenger fares were $50.4 million, an increase of$1.2 million or 3 percent compared to Fiscal Year 2012 when passenger fares totaled $49.1 million. The 2013 passenger fares showed an increase in the sales of most fare products, and due to the fact that there were no changes in the fare structure, support reported increases in ridership. There also was continued growth in the use of smart card fare media, particularly for full adult fares during this period. There was a mild increase in contract fares, primarily due to the increase in ''Easy Pass" sales attributable to marketing efforts directed towards that program. Other Operating Revenues increased by $1.3 million primarily due to a one time utility rebate for the installation of a fuel cell system, for electrical generation at one of our operating divisions.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Comparison of Operating Revenue Fiscal Year 2012/13 vs. Fiscal Year2011112 60
so
I :~ ~
20 10
Passenger Fares
Contmct Services Operating Revenue categories CFY-2012/13
Other
8FY-2011'12
Non-Operating Revenue: •
For Fiscal Year 2013, non-operating revenues were $261.8 million, an increase of $0.2 million compared to Fiscal Year 2012. On the surface this gives the impression that activity was flat, however, changes between categories did occur. The most significant of these changes, is a decrease of Federal preventive maintenance funds of$20.4 million over Fiscal year 2012. This wind down of the Federal preventive maintenance program is due change in emphasis by the District from operating funds, to investments in capital projects and programs. During 2013, the loss of federal preventive maintenance funds was effectively offset by a series of increases, some of them temporary, over Fiscal Year 2012, in Property Taxes, Local Sales Taxes and Other Local and State Funds. Property Taxes increased $8.6 million, due in part to a regional economic recovery and property tax funds received that otherwise would have gone to local redevelopment agencies, which have been eliminated by the State of California. It is not clear if the District will continue to receive a portion of those funds in the future. Local Sales Taxes increased by $4.1 million over Fiscal year 2012 due to the on-going regional economic recovery. Local funds increased by 5.8 million, largely due to increases in Transportation Development Act allocations, Regional Measure 2 and other local assistance funds. State funds had an overall increase of $2.8 million. In Fiscal Year 2012, nonoperating revenues were $261.6 million.
II 283
The "Composition of Non-Operating Revenue" pie charts illustrates that from FY-11/12 (below) to FY-12/13 (above) Federal funds, as a total of non-operating revenue, decreased from 13 percent to 5 percent , due to a reduction in operating funds for the Preventive Maintenance programs. Major shifts in composition between these fiscal years show increases in Property Taxes by of 4%, Local funds by 2%, Local Sales Tax by 1%, and also State by1%. Given that the non-operating revenue was in total within $0.2 million between these fiscal years, the ability for the local and state funds to fill behind the decrease in Federal Operating funds is notable, and suggestive, in part, of on-going economic and real estate market recoveries in the region. When comparing the graphics, it indicates that other categories did not significantly fluctuate.
GJPropertyTa:{es a sate of capital Assets DLocal Funds a Federal •State aLocal Sales Taxes atnterestlneome
12 284
Expense Highlights Operating Expenses: •
In Fiscal Year 2013, total operating expenses were $336.4million, a decrease of $13.7 million or 4 percent compared to Fiscal Year 2012 when total expense was $350.lmillion. Salary, Wages, and Fringe decreased in 2013 by $2.6 over prior year, other decreases included depreciation of 2.5 million, other materials & supplies of $1.5 million, expenses of joint venture of $9.1 million, and other expenses by $6.3 million. Increases included the categories of Services, mainly due to inter agency pass though payments of$5.2 million and Insurance due to higher premiums paid during the period related to an incident that settled in 20 II. The largest decrease was in Net Expenses of Joint Venture of$9.1 million. During this period the expense portion of this category increased by$2.5 million, due to increases in cost of the Para-transit services, and the first full year of outsourcing the Dumbarton bridge service to a third party provider. The revenue increase for this category consisted of $9.4 million was from State Transit Assistance funds, most of which will not be recurring, and $2.4 million of regional measure 2 funds which is expected to be permanent. The next largest decrease was in the category "Other Expenses" of $6.3 million. This decrease was primarily due to not having a pending settlement as we had in the prior period. Decreases in Salary, Wages and fringe was the result of management's efforts to control overtime costs, and while there were increases as predicted in fringe benefits, mainly due to medical and contractually scheduled reductions in the unions contributions for medical, these were offset during the period by a favorable actuarials for workers compensation and sick leave.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Operating Expenses - FY-2012/13 vs. 2011112 140 120 100 80
60 40 20 0 Operator Wages Other Wages FrinseBenefits Depreciatioo.
Fuel &Oil
Materials& SUppUes
Senices
Insurance
Joint Venture
Other
E~eoseCategortes
aFY-2012113
aFY-2011/12
I
Non-Operating Expenses: •
In Fiscal Year 2013, non-operating expense was $1.4 million, compared to $1.7 million in Fiscal Year 2012. The slight decrease is largely due to the more favorable interest rate from the refunding of the 2001 COPS, which is covered in the Debt section.
Capital Program The District received capital contributions of$64.0 million in Fiscal Year 2013 compared to $47.9 million in Fiscal Year 2012, an increase of $16.1 million over Fiscal Year 2012. This included $27.6 million in State Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account Program (PTMISEA) Funds. During the period the District received two new bus fleets as a part of the on-going bus replacement program.
13 285
Some ofthe capital acquisitions Included: • • • • •
Revenue Vehicle Replacement ($42.3 Million) Bus Rapid Transit program ($11.2 Million) Maintenance Facilities, and buildings rehabilitation ($1.2 million) Fuel Cell program for Bio Gas electricity generation ($6.9 Million) Security improvements ($1.3 million) Additional information concerning the District's Capital Assets can be found in Note #6- Capital Assistance in the Notes to the Financial Statements.
Debt On February I, 2012 the District issued Refunding Certificates of Participation Series 2012 to take advantage of lower interest rates. The proceeds from the issuance, $9.8 million, were used to refund the 2001 COPS. At June 30, 2013, the outstanding principal component of the annual lease payment was $9.8 million. The District plans to repay the obligation over six years, which will conclude by August 2018.
In December 2007, the District issued a $13.5 million COPS to finance its new Finance Human Resources computer system (FHR Project). The COPS are secured by specified capital assets. At June 30,2013, the principal component of the annual lease payment was $7.3 million and the District plans to repay the obligation over ten years, which will conclude by August, 2017. In February 2009 the District issued a $15.0 million COPS to help fund the July 2008 purchase of property located at 66"' avenue in East Oakland. At June 30, 2013, the principal component of the annual lease payment was $13.9 million. The COPS are secured by specified capital assets and the District plans to repay the obligation over twenty-five years, which will conclude by August 2034. Additional information on the District's long-term debt can be found in note (8) to the basic financial statements
Subsequent Events • The current labor agreement with A.C. Transit's largest labor union (ATU 192) expired on June 30"', 2013. While two tentative agreements have been reached to date, membership has declined both of them. Currently A.C. Transit sought and received a 60 day cooling off period from the governor of the State of California. This cooling off period ends mid-December 2013. • Since the labor agreement with ATU 192 expired, the pre contract OPEB Trust contribution rates have come back in to effect. It is expected that these higher contribution rates will significantly reduce the growth of related liabilities. • The labor agreement (AFSCME 3916) with most management employees expired on September 30, 2013. However, an agreement was reached to extend the current contract until March 31,2014. • During the course of the fiscal year ended June 30, 2013 A. C. Transit adopted and implemented the state mandated pension reform act (State of California Assembly Bill 1140, also known as "PEPPRA") which applied to all new employees. Subsequently the unions brought a lawsuit in federal court, on the basis of a 1964 federal law that had provisions to protect the labor agreements of transit workers. The result of this action was that the federal court put the implementation of Assembly Bill 1140 on hold, to provide time for the challenges work their way through the federal courts. • During September and October 2013, AC Transit held public meetings to review a proposal for a new fare structure. As currently proposed, this new structure would eliminate bus transfers, requiring passengers to pay for each trip segment but in return, the current proposal also provides for a reduced price on unlimited monthly bus passes, and the option for customers to purchase a new "day pass". It is anticipated, that whatever is finally adopted, will be implemented within the next twelve months.
14 286
Economic Factors As Beacon Economics reports, the US financial markets have been behaving erratically recently for a number of possible reasons including fear of a slowdown in an already paltry economic recovery, the end of quantitative easing, and worry over another bubble forming in the financial and housing markets. These reactions, however, seem to be 'overreactions' as the U.S. economy continues a slower-than-usual but ongoing expansion. The U.S. economy has been averaging slightly over 2% growth-a number it will likely match in the second quarter of 2013. This is below average in the long run-but not by much. Beacon mentions that the total impact on the economy from the sequestration is not liable to be very large, coming to about $100 billion in spending out of a $15 trillion dollar economy-roughly one-half of 1% The East Bay labor market recovery continues to move forward in 2013 with the Constroction industry acting as one of the major drivers of local employment growth. Total nonfarm employment in April increased by 900 jobs over the previous month, and since April oflast year the East Bay has added back 13,900 jobs, a 1.7% increase. Nonfarm employment in the state overall grew only marginally faster at 1.9% year-over-year. The latest numbers show the local economy is moving in the right direction and catching up to growth in the state overall. Another major driver of industry growth in the East Bay has been the Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services sector. These high wage jobs are a boon to the local economy, and as major tech centers in the South Bay and San Francisco ramp up activity, the East Bay is enjoying its role as the source of a skilled labor force that commutes to areas of high employment growth. The East Bay's residential real estate market has grown significantly over the last year. The median price for an existing single-family home was nearly $400,000 as of the first quarter of 2013, a 25% increase over the median price in the first quarter of2012 ($319,000). One reason for the rising prices is a shortage of homes available for sale in the East Bay. With demand outpacing supply, prices that are in line with incomes, historically low mortgage interest rates, and a larger number of East Bay residents finding work, prices have jumped. Another contributing factor to the East Bay's, and the nation's, housing recovery is the decline in the number of distressed properties on the market. Each quarter there are fewer and fewer mortgages in default, and fewer homes go into foreclosure. According to DataQuick, defaults in the East Bay were down 66% in the first quarter of2013 over one year ago, and foreclosures were down 63% over the same time period. Finally, taxable sales in the East Bay area have accelerated notably during the calendar year, and therefore the Metropolitan Transportation Commission is revising its projected allocations on subsidies derived from those taxable sales upwards.
Requests for Information This financial report is designed to provide our citizens, taxpayers, customers and creditors with a general overview of the District's finances and to demonstrate accountability for the funds the District receives. If you have questions about this report or need additional financial information, please contact the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, attn: Chief Financial Officer, 1600 Franklin St. Oakland, California 94612.
15
287
This Page Left Intentionally Blank
288
Basic Financial Statements
289
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT STATEMENT OF FUND NET POSITION BUSINESS-TYPE ACTIVITY - ENTERPRISE FUND JUNE 30, 2013 (In thousands) ASSETS CURRENT ASSETS: Cash and cash equivalents (Note 3) Restricted cash and cash equivalents Receivables: Federal and local grants: Capital Planning, operating and other Property tax Local sales tax Other, principally trade receivables
95,891 71,829
$
18,946 2,250 10,799 8,076 3,358 43,429
Total receivables ~ net
3,672 12,164 3,089
Due from Pension Trust Fund (Note 5) Inventories at average cost Prepaid expenses
230,074
Total current assets NONCURRENT ASSETS: Restricted for certificates of participation: Cash and cash equivalents (Note 3): Capital assets (Note 4): Nondepreciable Depreciable, net
2,488 32,394 199,374
Total capital assets, net
231,768
Total noncurrent assets
234,256
Total assets
464,330
LIABILITIES CURRENT LIABILITIES: Accounts payable and accrued expenses Accrued salaries and wages Current portion of accrued vacation and sick leave Due to Pension Trust Fund (Note 5) Unearned revenue Other accrued liabilities Accrued interest payable Current portion of OPEB obligation (Note 10) Current portion of claims liabilities (Note 13) Current portion of remediation obligations (Note 12) Current portion of certificates of participation (Note 8)
12,513 1,628 14,974 3,442 5,555 4,804 604 1,276 14,873 186 3,034 62,889
Total current liabilities NONCURRENT LIABILITIES: Accrued vacation and sick leave OPEB obligation (Note I0) Claims liabilities (Note 13) Remediation obligations (Note 12) Certificates of participation (Note 8)
7,476 5,101 40,608 1,467 27 777 82,429
Total noncurrent liabilities
145,318
Total liabilities
NET POSITION Net investment in capital assets Restricted for capital purchases (Note II) Restricted for debt service
202,095 74,531 1,605 40,781
Unrestricted
TOTAL NET POSITION
$
See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements.
18 290
319,012
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN FUND NET POSffiON BUSINESS-TYPE ACTIVITY- ENTERPRISE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (In thousands)
OPERATING REVENUES: Passenger fares Contract services Other
$
50,357 8,330 4,720
Total operating revenues
63,407
OPERATING EXPENSES: Operator wages Other wages Fringe benefits Depreciation (Note 4) Fuel and oil Other material and supplies Services Insurance Net expenses of joint venture Other
58,526 46,363 116,849 35,420 18,613 12,393 26,593 11,529 2,249 7,842
Total operating expenses
336,377
Operating loss
(272,970)
NONOPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSE): Operating assistance: Property taxes Local sales tax (Note 7) Local funds (Note 7) Federal (Note 7) State (Note 7) Loss on sale of capital assets Interest income Interest expense
108,799 58,683 66,745 12,070 15,953 (1,175) 764 (1,3382
Net nonoperating revenues
260,501
Loss before capital contributions
(12,469)
CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS (Note 6)
64,015
CHANGE IN NET POSITION
51,546
NET POSITION, beginning of year
267,466
Restatements due to implementation of GASB 65 (Note 8) NET POSffiON, end of year
$
See accompanying notes to the basic fmancial statements.
19 291
319,012
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS BUSINESS-TYPE ACTIVITY- ENTERPRISE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,2013 (In thousands) CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Cash received from customers Cash payments to suppliers for goods and services Cash payments to employees for services Other operating receipts
$
58,687 (79,128) (222,276) 3,155 (239,562)
Net cash used in operating activities CASH FLOWS FROM NONCAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Operating assistance received Interest paid on notes payable
278,430 (205)
Net cash provided by noncapital financing activities
278,225
CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Acquisition and construction of capital assets Capital contributions received Proceeds from sale of capital assets Principal paid on certificates of participation Interest paid on certificates of participation
(49,161) 51,133 130 (1,650) (1,221)
Net cash used in capital and related financing activities
(769)
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: Invesbnent income
361
Net cash provided by investing activities
361
CHANGE IN CASH AND CASH EQUNALENTS
38,255
CASH AND CASH EQUNALENTS, beginning of year
131,953
CASH AND CASH EQUNALENTS, end of year SUMMARY OF CASH AND CASH EQUNALENTS REPORTED ON THE STATEMENT OF NETPOSillON: Unrestricted cash and cash equivalents Restricted cash and cash equivalents Total cash and cash equivalents reported on the Statement of Net Position
$
170,208
$
95,891 74,317
$
170,208
RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING LOSS TO NET CASH USED IN OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Operating loss Adjustments to reconcile operating loss to net cash used in operating activities: Depreciation Effect of changes in assets and liabilities: Receivables Inventories Due from Pension Trust Fund Prepaid expenses and OPEB asset Accounts payable and accrued expenses Accrued salaries and wages Accrued vacation and sick leave Unearned revenue Due to Pension Trust Fund Other accrueds Long term liabilities
($272,970)
35,420 402 (1,201) (324) 424 (4,635) 267 (119) (1,967) 149 (511) 5,503
Net cash used in operating activities
$
See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements.
20 292
(239,562)
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT
STATEMENT OF PLAN NET POSITION- PENSION TRUST FUND DECEMBER31, 2012 (In thousands) ASSETS
Contributions receivable Receivable from brokers Interest receivable on investments Investments at fair value (Note 3): Short-term investments Equity securities Equity funds Fixed income funds Global asset allocation funds Real estate funds Total investments for payment of accrued pension costs
$
3,082 98 106 11,380 61,358 177,901 176,199 44,913 10,101 481,852
Total assets
485,138
LIABILITIES AND DEFERRED INFLOWS
Accrued expenses Due to Enterprise Fund Payable to brokers for unsettled transactions
136
3,478 71
3,685
Total liabilities NET POSITION HELD IN TRUST FOR PENSION BENEFITS
See accompanying notes to the basic fmancial statements.
21 293
$
481,453
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PLAN NET POSITION- PENSION TRUST FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2012 (In thousands)
ADDITIONS: Employer contributions Investment income: Earnings on investments Net appreciation in fair value of investments Investment expenses Net investment income
$
38,374 6,020 51,579 (857) 56,742
Total additions
95,116
DEDUCTIONS: Benefit payments Administrative expenses
40,732 799
Total deductions
41,531
NET INCREASE NET POSITION HELD IN TRUST FOR PENSION BENEFITS: Beginning of year Endofyear
53,585 427,868 $
See accompanying notes to the basic fmancial statements.
22 294
481,453
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (1) THE FINANCIAL REPORTING ENTITY Organization -The Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (the District) is a political subdivision of the State of California established in 1956 and is subject to Transit District Law as codified in the California Public Utilities Code. Reporting Entity- The District follows the provisions of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 14, The Financial Reporting Entity, as amended. This statement sets forth
accountability of a government's elected officials to their constituents as the basic criteria for inclusion of an organization in a governmental reporting entity. The governmental reporting entity consists of the District (primary government) and organizations for which the District is financially accouritable. Financial accountability is defmed as the appointment of a voting majority of the component unit's board, and (i) either the District's ability to impose its will on the organization or (ii) the potential for the organization to provide a fmancial benefit to, or impose a fmancial burden on the District. The basic fmancial statements include legally separate component units, which are so fmancially intertwined with the District that they are, in substance, part of the District. The component units discussed below are included in the District's reporting entity because of the significance of their operational or financial relationships with the District. For financial reporting purposes, the District's basic fmancial statements include all financial activities that are controlled by or are dependent upon actions taken by the District's Board of Directors. As such, the basic fmancial statements include the fmancial activities of the District's Special Transit Service Districts (Special Districts) No. 1 and No. 2 and other areas in which the District has contracted to provide transit service. Because these districts are not legally separate entities, they are not considered component units under GASB Statement No. 14. Special District No. 1 was the designation used from the creation of the District for its original territory, consisting of the cities and unincorporated areas from roughly Richmond and San Pablo through Hayward. Special District No. 2 was created by annexation agreements among the cities of Fremont and Newark, the County of Alameda and the District and ratified by a subsequent special election in November 1974 in Fremont and Newark. All property within the Special Districts is subject to taxes that may be levied by the District. In May 1988, the District created AC Transit Financing Corporation (the Corporation), a nonprofit
public benefit corporation incorporated in the State of California under the guidelines of the Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law. Legally separate from the District, the Corporation is blended with the primary government because its sole purpose is to provide fmancial assistance to the District by fmancing, refmancing, acquiring, constructing, improving, leasing and selling buildings, equipment, land, building improvements, and other public improvements. The fmancial activities of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District Employees' Pension Plan (the Plan) are fiduciary in the basic fmancial statements because the Plan exclusively serves the employees of the District. The fmancial position and changes in fmancial position of the Plan are reported on a calendar year basis.
23 295
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (1) THE FINANCIAL REPORTING ENTITY (Continued) The Plan is administered by the five-member Retirement Board made up of two representatives of the general public selected by the District's Board, two District employees who are elected officials of the Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 192 (ATU) and one District employee selected by the District's Board of Directors from the employees who are not represented by ATU. The Retirement Board has administrative and fiduciary responsibility over the Plan. The Retirement Board utilizes a third-party banking institution as custodian over the Plan's assets. Separate fmancial statements for the Corporation and the Plan may be obtained from the District Controller. (2) SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Basis ofPresentation The basic fmancial statements provide information about the District's enterprise fund and the pension trust fund. Separate statements for each fund category - enterprise and fiduciary - are presented. The basic fmancial statements are reported using the economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recorded when earned and expenses are recorded when a liability is incurred, regardless of the timing of the related cash flows. On an accrual basis, revenues from property taxes are recognized in the fiscal year for which the taxes are levied; revenue from sales taxes are recognized in the fiscal year when the underlying exchange occurs; revenue from grants is recognized in the fiscal year in which all eligibility requirements have been satisfied; and revenue from investments is recognized when earned.
Enterprise Fund (proprietary funrf) - The accounts of the District are organized on the basis of a proprietary fund-type, specifically an enterprise fund. The activities of this fund are accounted for with a set of self-balancing accounts that comprises the District's assets, deferred outflows, liabilities, deferred inflows and net position, revenues and expenses. Enterprise funds account for activities (i) that are fmanced with debt that is secured solely by a pledge of the net revenues from fees and charges of the activity; or (ii) that are required by laws or regulations that the activity's cost of providing services, including capital costs (such as depreciation or debt service), be recovered with fees and charges, rather than with taxes or similar revenues; or (iii) with pricing policies that establish fees and charges designed to recover its costs, including capital costs (such as depreciation or debt service). Enterprise funds distinguish operating revenues and expenses from nonoperating items. Operating revenues and expenses generally result from providing services and producing and delivering goods in connection with an enterprise fund's principal ongoing operations. The principal operating revenues of the District's Enterprise Fund are charges to passengers for services provided. Operating expenses include the cost of services, administrative expenses, and depreciation on capital assets and equipment. All revenues and expenses not meeting this defmition are reported as nonoperating revenues and expenses.
24 296
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (2) SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued) When both restricted and unrestricted resources are available for use, it is the District's policy to use restricted resources first, then unrestricted resources as they are needed.
Pension Trust Fund- The Pension Trust Fund accounts for the accumulated resources to be used for retirement annuity payments to all members of the Plan. Cash and Cash Equivalents- For purposes of the statement of cash flows, the District considers all highly liquid investments with a maturity of three months or less when purchased to be cash equivalents. Any restricted cash and investments used to service debt principal and interest payments of the District would not be considered cash equivalents. Investments - The District applies the provisions of GASB Statement No. 31, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Certain Investments and for External Investment Pools, which require governmental entities to report certain investments at fair value in the statement of net position and the statement of plan net position and recognize the corresponding change in fair value of investments in the year in which the change occurred. In accordance with GASB Statement No. 31, the District has reported its investments at fair value based on quoted market information obtained from fiscal agents or other sources. Restricted for Certificates of Participation - In connection with the 2007 Certificates of Participation, the District was required to establish and maintain a reserve fund in the amount of $1.3 5 million. Pursuant to a trust agreement by and between the Corporation, the District, and the trustee, the restricted assets in the fund can only be used to service lease payments on the outstanding certificates of participation. In connection with the 2009A Certificates of Participation, the District was required to establish and maintain a reserve fund in the amount of $1.138 million. Pursuant to a trust agreement by and between the Corporation, the District, and the trustee, the restricted assets in the fund can only be used to service lease payments on the outstanding certificates of participation. The reserves are reported as non-current.
Pension Plan - The District's noncontributory pension plan provides retirement benefits for all qualifYing union and non-union employees. The District's annual contribution to fund the Plan is actuarially determined based on a percentage of gross payroll, which includes the normal cost of the Plan plus amortization of prior service costs over a period of not more than thirty years. Cash and investments in the Plan are restricted by law to provide for the future payment of pension benefits and related expenses. Inventories - Inventories consist primarily of bus replacement parts and fuel and are stated at · average cost. Inventory usages are charged to expense, on a weighted-average basis, at the time that individual items are withdrawn from inventory.
25 297
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (2) SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)
Capital Assets - Capital assets are stated at cost and are depreciated using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets, as follows: Building, structures and other improvements Revenue equipment Service vehicles and other equipment Engines and transmissions Revenue vehicles (Mini Vans)
30 years 12 years 3 to 10years 5 years ?years
The District's policy is to capitalize all property and equipment with a cost greater than $1,000 and a useful life of more than one year.
Operating Assistance - Grants are accounted for as nonoperating revenue as soon as all eligibility requirements have been met. Contract Services - The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) allocates a portion of the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District's (BART) State Transportation Assistance funds to the District for allowing BART passengers to ride District buses at a discounted rate when they provide a BART transfer. Allocations from MTC totaled $2.46 million for the year ended June 30, 2013 and are recorded as contract services. See Note 14 for related party disclosures on the Consortium. Property Taxes, Collection and Maximum Rates - The State of California (State) Constitution . Article Xlli A provides that the maximum basic property tax rate on any given property may not exceed 1% of its assessed value unless an additional amount for general obligation debt has been approved by voters. Assessed value is calculated at 100% of market value as defmed by Article Xlli A and may be increased by no more than 2% per year unless the property is sold, transferred or improved .. The State Legislature has determined the method of distribution of receipts of the tax levy among the counties, cities, school districts and other districts, including the District. Alameda and Contra Costa counties assess properties, bill for, collect and distribute property taxes. Property taxes are recorded as nonoperating revenue (including secured delinquent property taxes) net of estimated uncollectible amounts, in the fiscal year of levy. Assessed values are determined annually by the Assessor's Offices of Alameda and Contra Costa counties on January I, and become a lien on the real properties at January I. The levy date for secured and unsecured properties is July 1 of each year. Secured taxes are due November I and February 1 and are delinquent if not paid by December 10 and April 10, respectively. Unsecured property tax is due on July 1 and becomes delinquent after August 31. The District accrues delinquent property taxes fro111 Contra Costa County. The cumulative amount of delinquent taxes uncollected for the current and prior years has been recorded as a receivable. The District, through the County of Alameda (County), is under the Teeter plan whereby, delinquent taxes are received by the District from the County's own funds in the event that delinquent taxes are not received by a certain due date. In return, the District forgoes the penalties and interests that would accrue on these delinquent property taxes.
26 298
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,2013 (2) SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued) On November 30, 2004, the voters approved Measure BB, which superseded the Measure AA parcel tax. Measure BB increased the amount of annual parcel tax to $48 per year and the term of the tax to 10 years from the date of implementation. The tax became effective on July I, 2005 and was to terminate on June 30, 2015. However, on November 4, 2008, the voters approved Measure VV, which supersedes the Measure BB parcel tax. Measure VV became effective July 1, 2009 and increased the annual parcel tax to $96 per parcel. Measure VV is effective through June 30, 2019. The revenue derived from this measure is to be used to sustain public transportation services provided by the District in Special District No. I. The District received approximately $29.4 million in Measure VV taxes during the year ended June 30, 2013.
Compensated Absences- The personnel policies of the District generally allow employees to accrue up to 240 hours of vacation and 140 days of sick leave. Unused accrued vacation is paid to the employee upon termination from District employment. Unused accrued, vested sick leave is paid, upon retirement, to those employees with ten or more years of District service. Capital Contributions- The District receives grants from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and state and local transportation funds for the acquisition of buses and other equipment and improvements. Capital contributions are recorded as revenues after net nonoperating revenues and the cost of the related assets is included in capital assets. Net position - The financial statements utilize a net position presentation. categorized as investment in capital assets, restricted and unrestricted.
Net position are
•
Investment in capital assets - This category groups all capital assets into one component of net position. Accumulated depreciation and the outstanding balances of debt that are attributable to the acquisition, construction or improvement of these assets reduce the balance in this category.
•
Restricted net position - This category represents restrictions on net position externally imposed by creditors or imposed by law through constitutional provisions or enabling legislation. At June 30,2013, the District has restricted net position in the amount of$1.35 million related to the 2007 Certificates of Participation (COPS) and $57.007 million for the future acquisition of buses (See Note 11 ). The net position restricted for debt service are maintained in a reserve fund to service lease payments on the outstanding 2007 COPS.
•
Unrestricted net position- This category represents net position of the District, not restricted for any projects or other purposes.
Use of Estimates - Management has made estimates and assumptions relating to the reporting of assets and liabilities and revenues and expenses to prepare the basic fmancial statements in conformity with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
27
299
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (3) CASH AND INVESTMENTS
Investment policy - The District's investment policy, which is more restrictive than required by tbe California Government Code, stipulates the type, maturity limit, and diversification of securities held by the District. The objectives of the policy, in order of priority, are compliance with applicable laws, preservation of capital, liquidity to meet required cash demands and maximization of income. The District's investment policy does not permit investments in medium term notes, municipal securities or reverse repurchase agreements, which are permitted by the California Government Code. In accordance with the District's investment policy, the District may invest in the following types of investments, subject to certain restrictions, such as rating quality or maximum percentages of the portfolio: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
Repurchase agreements Securities ofU.S. government and its agencies California Local Agency Investment Fund Negotiable certificates of deposit Commercial paper (f) Bankers acceptances The Plan's investments are invested pursuant to investment policy guidelines established by the Retirement Board. The long-term asset allocation of the investment portfolio is to have 33% of the portfolio invested in domestic equities, 20% in international equities, 37% in domestic fixed income securities, and I 0% in three global asset allocation funds. The portfolio is managed by investment managers hired by the Board. The Board utilizes both active and passive management in the domestic equity portfolio. The Board has chosen to manage the investment risks described by Government Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 40 by requiring investment managers to abide by certain guidelines that are tailored to the portfolio that the manager manages. These guidelines specify the amount of credit, interest, and foreign currency risk that a manager may take and the performance objective of the portfolio. The allocation to global asset allocation Funds allow the investment managers to adjust the portfolio managed based on which asset classes (primarily stocks and bonds) they consider desirable. The specific asset allocation decisions are made by the investment managers within their investment policy limits. Global asset allocation results in the placement of the asset allocation decision on the investment manager, rather than the Retirement Board.
28 300
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (3) CASH AND INVESTMENTS (Continued}
Presentation - At June 30, 2013 (December 31, 2012 for the Plan}, the District's cash and investments consisted of the following (in thousands):
Cash and cash equivalents Investments Total Reported in the Enterprise Fund as: Cash and cash equivalents Restricted cash and cash equivalent
$
170,208 481,852
$
652,060
$
95,891 74,317
Reported in the Pension Trust Fund as: Investments restricted for payment of accrued pension costs (at December 31, 2012)
481,852
$
Total
652,060
Fund Investments - Specific Risks As of June 30, 2013, the District had the following investments and maturities (amounts are in thousands): Investment Maturities Standard& Fair Value Poor's Rating Less Than I Year Investment Type $ 25,000 Not rated Bank Repurchase Agreements $25,000 67,403 Aaam 67,403 Money Market Mutual Funds $ 92,403 $92,403 Total Interest Rate Risk- The District has limited exposure to interest rate risk due to its liquidity needs to meet cash flow demand requirements. All of its investments have a remaining maturity at date of purchase of three months or less. None of the District's investments are highly sensitive to interest rate changes. Credit Risk - The District's credit rating risk is governed by the California Government Code 53 601 which limits investments in money market mutual funds to the highest ranking attained by the rating agency which is Aaam. The District had investments in U.S. government agencies, bank repurchase agreements (underlying of U.S. Treasury securities) and in money market mutual funds. There are no credit limits on the securities of U.S. Treasury since these investments are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government.
29 301
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,2013 (3) CASH AND INVESTMENTS (Continued)
Concentration of Credit Risk- The District manages this risk by requiring that no more than 20% of its total investment portfolio (with the exception of securities of the U.S. Treasury or U.S. government agencies) be invested in a single security type or with a single financial institution. Disclosure requirements state that any investments in a single security type or held with a single fmancial institution that are greater than 5% of the District's investments must be disclosed, except for investments in external pools and mutual funds. In fiscal year 2013, the District had $25 million of its investments invested in repurchase agreements.
Custodial Credit Risk - Custodial credit risk for deposits is the risk that in the event of a bank failure, the District's deposits may not be returned to it. The California Government Code requires California banks and savings and loan associations to secure governmental deposits by pledging government securities as collateral. The market value of pledged securities must equal at least 110% of the District's deposits. California law also allows fmancial institutions to secure governmental deposits by pledging first trust deed mortgage notes having a value of 150% of the District's total deposits. Such collateral is considered to be held in the District's name. Pension Trust Fund- Specific Risks Interest Rate Risk - For the Plan, interest rate risk is managed through the duration of its fixed income securities. Bond prices are highly sensitive to the movement of interest rates. A decline in interest rates will tend to increase bond prices while an increase in rates will depress prices. Duration is a measure of interest rate risk with a higher duration signifying greater price volatility in response to a change in interest rates. At December 30, 2012, the Plan did not have any direct investment in fixed income securities.
Credit Risk - For the Plan, fixed income assets are invested in two pooled investment vehicles and with an outside money manager. As of April 2010, the Plan converted all of the fixed income investments of the Plan to investments in commingled pools or mutual funds. As of December 31, 2012, $10.5 million was invested in a short term pooled investment fund managed by State Street Corporation. This fund is not rated.
Concentration of Credit Risk- The Plan also has investments that represent 5% or more of Plan net position as of December 31, 2012. The Plan had no investments in a single issuer that equaled or exceeded 5% of Plan net position. Foreign Currency Risk- Foreign currency risk is the risk that the changes in foreign exchange rates will affect the fair value of an investment denominated in a foreign currency. The Plan has, or could have, exposure to foreign currencies through its investment in several commingled investments. As of December 31,2012, investments in international funds totaled $88.9 million.
30 302
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (4) CAPITAL ASSETS Following is a summary of capital assets at June 30, 2013 (in thousands):
Non-depreciable capital assets: Land Work in progress
June 301 2012
Additions
$27,662 730 28,392
$3 48,273 48,276
265,820 157,513 194 670 618,003
212 673 885
Retirements
Transfers
June 30 2 2013
($44,274) (44,274)
$27,665 4 729 32 394
29,888 2,011 12,375 44,274
277,588 159,053 207 645 644,286
Total Depreciable capital assets Revenue equipment Service vehicles and other equipment Buildings, structure and improvements Total Less accumulated depreciation Revenue equipment Service vehicles and other equipment Buildings, structure and improvements
(168,464) (130,273) (128,32§.)
(18,063) {9,958) (7,399)
16,888 683
(169,639) (139,548) (135,725)
Total
(427,063)
(35,420)
17,571
(444,912)
190 940
(34,535)
(1,305)
$219,332
$13,741
($1,305)
Depreciable capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation Capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation
($18,120) (683) (73) (18,876)
$44,274
199 374 $231,768
(5) INTERFUND RECEIVABLES/PAYABLES
The Enterprise Fund in the accompanying basic financial statements is reported as of June 30, 2013 and the Pension Trust Fund is reported as of December 31, 2012; therefore, interfund payables and receivables do not equal. Interfund receivables and payables arise due to the timing of reimbursements from the Pension Trust Fund for administration costs and retiree benefits payments made by the District and payments to the Pension Trust Fund for contributions based on covered payroll. December 31, 2013 (in thousands) Interfund receivable Enterprise fund
$3,082
December 31, 2012 (in thousands) Interfund payable Interfund receivable Pension trust fund Enterprise fund
31 303
$3,254
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (6) CAPITAL ASSISTANCE
The District has 18 grant contracts in process with the PTA that provide federal funds for the acquisition of buses, other equipment and improvements. Under the terms of the grants, proceeds from equipment sold or retired are refundable to the federal government in proportion to the original federal capital grant funds used in the purchase. The District has also received allocations of funds generated from net bridge toll revenues of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge and from PTMISEA grants, see Note 11 (State grants). These funds are received under provisions of the California Streets and Highways Code and are allocated based on claims approved by the MTC. These grants are summarized for the year ended June 30, 2013 as follows (in thousands): Federal grants State grants
$ $
12,887 51,128 64,015
(7) OPERATING ASSISTANCE
State and Local Operating Assistance - The Transportation Development Act (TDA) creates in each local jurisdiction a Local Transportation Fund that is funded by a Y. cent from the retail sales tax collected statewide. The State Board of Equalization returns these funds to the local jurisdiction according to the amount of sales taxes collected in that jurisdiction. TDA funds are allocated to the District from Alameda and Contra Costa counties to meet, in part, the District's operating requirements. The allocation is based on population within the District. Supplementary service revenues (AB 2972) are formula allocated funds that are passed to the District through the Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) for OUSD's home to school service program. Funds are allocated for this program based on the cost of running the OUSD program as a percentage of total school districts statewide applying for these funds. Welfare to work grant funding is provided by the State to match the federal welfare to work program that is used to fund the District's Job Access and Reverse Commute program. The welfare to work grant is funded based on the population within a local area that are below the poverty level and comprise CalWORKS recipients. The Job Access and Reverse Commute program provides transportation to key low-income neighborhoods, homeless centers and targeted work centers particularly during evening, night and weekend hours.
32
304
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,2013 (7) OPERATING ASSISTANCE (Continued)
Below is a summary of state and local operating assistance for the year ended June 30, 2013 (in thousands): Local funds: Transportation Development Act Regional Measure 2
$ $
State operating assistaoce Operating Revenues Supplementary Service/Welfare to Work Pass thru
$
$
53,979 12,766 66,745
10,071 2,000 3,882 15,953
Local Sales Tax- The local sales tax assistance (AB1107) is derived from the one-half percent retail tax imposed on the three BART counties (Alameda, Contra Costa and San Francisco). Of the total amount collected, 75% is a direct BART subsidy with the District and the San Francisco Municipal Railway System (MUNI) sharing the remaining 25% equally. In 1987, the District began receiving local sales tax revenue under Measure B. Approved by the
voters of Alameda County, Measure B provides for the collection and distribution by the Alameda County Transportation Authority of a one-half percent transactions and use tax. The District is authorized to receive 11.617% of the annual tax collected under the condition that the money be used for service exclusively in Alameda County. In 2009, the District began receiving local sales tax revenue under Measure J, which is an extension of existing Measure C one-half percent sales tax for fmancing of transportation projects in Contra
Costa County. As a transit operator in Contra Costa County, the District is eligible to submit project proposals to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) for funding under Measure J. Local sales tax assistance for the year ended June 30, 2013, is summarized below (in thousands): $ 34,812 19,893 3,978 $ 58,683
AB1107 MeasureB MeasureJ
Section 5307 Funding Sources- All federal funding sources are distributed by FTA after approval by the MTC. Federal funding sources for the year ended June 30, 2013 are summarized below (in thousands): $ 9,594 Preventative maintenance Americans with Disabilities program - ADA set aside 2,476 1,088 Americans with Disabilities Act paratransit program - lease (1,088) Less amount reported within net expenses of joint venture $12,070 At June 30, 2013, Federal Section 5307 funds totaling $2,250 were recorded as a receivable.
33
305
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,2013 (8) LONG-TERM LIABILITIES The following is a summmy of changes in the District's long-tenn liabilities for the year ended June 30, 2013 (in thousands): Original Issue Amount
2007 Certificates ofParticipation $ 4%4.15%, due 08/01/2017 Less unamortized premium 2009A Certificates of Participation 3%-6.125%, due 08/01/2034 Less unamortized discount 2012 Refunding Certificates of Participation 4%-4.75%, due 08/01/2018
13,500
Balance June 30, 2012 $
15,000
14,295 (404)
9,840
9,840 32,470
Total Long-Term Debt Less: Amount due within one year Total Long-Term Debt, net
8,600 139
Retirements
$
(1,280) (27)
Balance June 30, 2013 $
(370) 18
s
(1,659)
30,844
$
1,330 27
13,925 (386)
380 (18)
9,840
1,315
30,811
(1,626) $
7,320 112
Amount due within one ~ear
$
3,034
(3,034) $
27,777
On December 19, 2007, proceeds from the issuance of $13,500,000 of Certificates of Participation, Series 2007 (2007 COPS) were used to acquire and install a financial and human resources/payroll software system, including wiring and implementation of support services during the first year following completion. Interest on the 2007 COPS is payable semi-annually on Februmy 1 and August I of each year through the year 2017. On Februmy I, 2009, proceeds from the issuance of $15,000,000 of Certificates of Participation Series 2009A (2009A COPS) were used to acquire the land at 66th Avenue and all existing facilities and improvements. Interest on the 2009A COPS is payable semiannually on Februmy I and August I of each year through the year 2034. On Februmy I, 2012, The District issued Refunding Certificates of Participation Series 2012 (2012 COPS). The proceeds from the issuance of the $9,840,000 were used to refund and retire the 2001 COPS. Interest on the 2012 COPS is payable semi-annually on Februmy I and August I of each year through the year 2018.
34
306
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,2013 (8) LONG-TERM LIABILITIES (Continued) The District's debt service requirements to maturity for each of the next 5 fiscal years and thereafter are summarized as follows (in thousands): For The Year Ending June 30 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019-2023 2024-2028 2029-2033 2034-2035
Principal $
Total Unamortized premium and discount Total payment
Interest
3,025 3,430 3,530 3,645 3,770 4,215 3,155 4,235 2,080
$
31,085
$
1,245 1,140 1,027 910 786 3,188 2,428 1,316 131 12,171
Total $
4,270 4,570 4,557 4,555 4,556 7,403 5,583 5,551 2,211
$
43,256
~274}
$
30,811
Debt Limit Board policy on debt limitation (as defmed by Ordinance No. 3773) states that "total armual debt service expenses shall not exceed ten percent of operating revenue (including subsidies) provided that in no event shall such indebtedness exceed twenty percent of the assessed value of all real and personal property within the District." The District's legal annual debt service limit as June 30, 2013, is approximately $33 million.
Arbitrage The Tax Reform Act of 1986 instituted certain arbitrage restrictions with respect to the issuance of tax-exempt bonds after August 31, 1986. Arbitrage regulations deal with the investment of all taxexempt bond proceeds at an interest yield greater than the interest yield paid to bondholders. Generally, all interest paid to bondholders can be retroactively rendered taxable if applicable rebates are not reported and paid to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) at least every five years. During the current year, the District performed a calculation to determine if there were any excess investment earnings on the District's COPS at June 30, 2013, and as a result of this calculation the District does not expect to incur a liability.
GASB65 With the early implementation of GASB 65, Items Previously Reported as Assets and Liabilities, the District has restated and eliminated deferred bond issuance costs previously recognized. The net impact to the beginning balance of net position is shown on the Statement of Revenue, Expenses and Changes in Net Position.
35
307
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (9) PENSION PLAN
Plan Description - The Plan is a noncontributory single-employer defmed benefit pension plan, which provides retirement benefits for all qualifying union and non-union employees. Administration of the Plan is performed by the Plan's management staff and overseen by the Plan's Retirement Board.
The District makes contributions, based upon the Plan's actuarial calculation each fiscal year. The Plan's members are members of the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU), the America Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) and unrepresented employees. Each union vesting period is based upon its individual collective bargaining entity, which is 5 years for all employees other than A TU employees, who have an 8-year vesting requirement. Actuarial methods and assumptions The actuary used the following assumptions and methods in calculating the armual required contribution and the funded status: Valuation date January 1, 2012 Actuarial cost method Entry Age Normal Level percentage open Amortization method Remaining amortization period 16 years (decreasing one year armually, 12 year minimum 50% of2008 investment loss is amortized over 30 years Asset valuation method Market value less unrecognized investment gains or losse~ during the prior four years, phased in at 20% per year, but required to be within 20% of market value. Actuarial assumptions: 7.5% Investment rate of return* 3.5%- 7.0% for ATUIIBEW participants Projected salary increases* 3.5% for AFSCME and non-represented participants *Includes inflations at 3.0% Cost of living adjustments None
Actuarial valuations of an on-going plan involve estimates of the value of reported amounts and assumptions about the probability of occurrence of events far into the future. Amounts detennined regarding the funded status of the plan and the armual required contribution of the District are subject to continual revision as actual results are compared with past expectations and new estimates are made about the future. The schedule of funding progress, presented as required supplementary information following the notes to the financial statements, presents multi-year trend infonnation about whether the actuarial value of plan assets is increasing or decreasing over time relative to the actuarial accrued liabilities for benefits. Basis of Accounting - Contributions are recognized as revenues in the period in which employee services are performed. Benefits and refunds of prior contributions are recognized when due and payable in accordance with the terms of the Plan. Investments are stated at fair value. Quoted market values are used to value investments. Investment gains and losses are based on average cost. Purchases and sales of securities are recorded on the trade date.
36
308
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (9) PENSION PLAN (Continued)
Funding Policy - The District's contributions to the Plan nonnally are made in accordance with actuarially detennined requirements. The Plan's funding policy provides for actuarially determined periodic contributions so that sufficient assets will be available to pay benefits when they are due. Significant actuarial assumptions used to compute the actuarially determined contribution requirement are the same as those used to compute the District's actuarial accrued liability. The District's annual required contribution in the current year was $38,962 representing 100% of projected actuarial payroll. The three-year trend information for the Plan is as follows (dollars in thousands): Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2011 June 30, 2012 June 30, 2013
Annual Pension Cost{APC)
$
37,861 38,624 38,962
Percentage ofAPC Contributed 100% 100% 100%
Net Pension Obligation $
Funded Status and Funding Progress - The unfunded actuarial liability is being amortized as a level percentage of expected payroll on an open basis over twenty-one years. As of January 1, 2013, the most recent actuarial valuation date, the funded status of the plan was as follows (dollars in thousands):
Actuarial accrued liability {AAL) Actuarial value of plan assets Unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL) Funded ratio (actuarial value of plan assets/AAL) Annual covered payroll (active plan members) UAAL as a percentage of annual covered payroll
$ $
$
721,195 453,422 267,773 63% 126,239 . 212%
A schedule of funding progress that shows a trend analysis of funding progress can be found in the required supplementary information. The Plan issues stand-alone fmancial statements and copies of these statements can be obtained from the AC Transit Retirement Department, 1600 Franklin Street, Oakland, CA 94621.
37
309
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (10) POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS OTHER THAN PENSIONS ATU Local192 Benefit Trust Plan Description The ATU Local 192 Benefits Trust (the Trust) administers a single-employer defined benefit post employment plan to assist eligible retirees with their medical costs. The Trust consists of ~ee programs that provide other post employment benefits: the ATU Retiree Health & Welfare Program, the AFSCME Retiree Medical Program and the IBEW Retiree Medical Program. The Trust provides medical benefits to all vested retirees at least 55 years old by paying a portion of the medical insurance premiums or reimbursement of eligible medical expenses not to exceed the maximum negotiated rates. Rates are negotiated between the District and the respective bargaining units. The Trust's board of trustees has historically adopted rates based on the premiums offered by participating providers. Funding Policy The District is required to make contributions to the Trust based on the number of hours worked by active union employees. The establishment and modification of the memorandums of understanding between the District and the respective bargaining units creates the authority under which the District is obligated to make its contributions. For fiscal year 2013, the required contribution rates were as follows:
Bargaining Unit
Contribution Rate
ATU Local192 AFSCME IBEW
$0.65 per hour per employee No contribution $0.55 per hour per employee
Annual OPEB Cost and Net OPEB Obligation (Asset) The District's annual other post employment benefit (OPEB) cost is equal to the annual required contribution (ARC), an amount actuarially determined in accordance with the parameters of GASB Statement No. 45. The ARC represents a level of funding that, if paid on an ongoing basis, is projected to cover the normal cost of each year and unfunded actuarial liabilities amortized over thirty years.
38 310
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,2013 (10) POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS OTHER THAN PENSIONS (Continued)
The following table shows the components of the District's annual OPEB cost for the year, the amount contributed to the plan, and changes in the District's net OPEB asset to the plan (in thousands): Annual required contribution $ 5,013 Interest on net OPEB obligation 70 Adjustment to annual required contribution --=-~(6=.:0;'-) OPEB cost 5,023 Contribution made (1,808) Increase in net OPEB obligation 3,215 Net OPEB obligation- beginning of year 1,404 $ 4,619 Net OPEB obligation- end of year The District's annual OPEB cost, the percentage of annual OPEB cost contributed to the plan, and the net OPEB asset for the current year is as follows (in thousands):
Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2011 June 30, 2012 June 30, 2013
Percentage of AnnualOPEB Cost Contributed 66.5% 39.9% 36.0%
Annual OPEBCost 4,334 $ 4,561 5,023
NetOPEB Obligation (Asset) (1,338) $ 1,404 4,619
Funded Status and Funding Progress The unfunded actuarial accrued liability is being amortized as a level dollar of expected payroll on an open basis over thirty years, beginning July 1, 2007. As of June 30, 2013, the funded status of the plan was as follows (in thousands): Actuarial accrued liability (AAL) Actuarial value of plan assets Unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL) Funded ratio (actuarial value of plan assets/AAL) Annual covered payroll (active plan members) UAAL as a percentage of annual covered payroll
39
311
$ 81,355 6,237 $ 75,118
7.7% 110,995 67.7%
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (10) POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS OTHER THAN PENSIONS (Continued)
Actuarial Methods and Assumptions Actuarial valuations of an on-going plan involve estimates of the value of reported amounts and assumptions about the probability of occurrence of events far into the future. Examples include assumptions about future employment, mortality, and the healthcare cost trend. Amounts determined regarding the funded status of the plan and the annual required contribution of the District are subject to continual revision as actual results are compared with past expectations and new estimates are made about the future. The schedule of funding progress, presented as required supplementary information following the notes to the financial statements, presents multi-year trend information about whether the actuarial value of plan assets is increasing or decreasing over time relative to the actuarial accrued liabilities for benefits. Projections of benefits for fmancial reporting purposes are based on the substantive plan (the plan as understood by the District and plan members) and include the types of benefits provided at the time of each valuation and the historical pattern of sharing of benefit costs between the District and plan members to that point. The actuarial methods and assumptions used include techniques that are designed to reduce short-term volatility in actuarial accrued liabilities and the actuarial value of assets, consistent with the long-term perspective of the calculations. In the actuarial valuation as of January 1, 2012, the actuarial cost method used was the projected unit credit method. This method allocates the present value of benefits for each individual attributable to service to date, using future compensation projected to retirement. The amortization method used was the level dollar open method; the remainiog amortization period is 30 years. The actuary uses market value to determine the actuarial value of the plan assets. The actuarial assumptions include an investment rate of 5%, an inflation rate of 3.5%, a healthcare cost trend rate of 10% for fiscal year grading down 1.0% each year to 5.0% for fiscal year 2018 and beyond. The Trust issues stand-alone fmancial statements and copies of these statements can be obtained from the District Controller, 1600 Franklin Street, Oakland, CA 94621.
Retiree Benefits Non-Trust Plan Plan Description The District administers a single-employer defined benefit post employment plan called the Retiree Benefits Non-Trust Plan (the OPEB Plan) to assist eligible retirees with their medical costs. The OPEB Plan provides medical, dental, vision and life insurance benefits to all vested retirees and their spouses at least 55 years old by paying the current participating providers' insurance premiums. The medichl insurance benefit is also available for a retiree's dependent, if applicable. The OPEB Plan differs from the Trust in that it provides Trust plan members supplemental healthcare benefits in addition to medical benefits, as well as providing medical benefits to District employees who are unrepresented. Insurance premium rates are negotiated between the District and the respective bargaining units. The District has historically adopted rates based on the premiums offered by participating providers. The OPEB Plan does not issue stand-alone financial statements.
40
312
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (10) POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS OTHER THAN PENSIONS (Continued)
Funding Policy The District has historically funded the OPEB Plan on a pay-as-you-go basis. There is currently no requirement for either the District or the OPEB Plan members to make contributions to the OPEB Plan. Annual OPEB Cost and Net OPEB Obligation The District's annual other post employment benefit (OPEB) cost is equal to the annual required contribution (ARC), an amount actuarially determined in accordance with the parameters of GASB Statement No. 45. The ARC represents a level of funding that, if paid on an ongoing basis, is projected to cover the normal cost of each year and unfunded actuarial liabilities amortized over thirty years. The following table shows the components of the District's annual OPEB cost for the year, the amount contributed to the plan, and changes in the District's net OPEB obligation to the plan (in thousands): $ 2,524 Annual required contribution Interest on net OPEB obligation 51 Adjustment to annual required contribution --::-~(6:':9'!-) OPEB cost 2,506 Contribution made (1,871) 635 Increase in net OPEB obligation Net OPEB obligation- beginning of year 1,123 Net OPEB obligation- end of year $ 1,758 The District's annual OPEB cost, the percentage of annual OPEB cost contributed to the plan, and the net OPEB obligation for the current and prior years are as follows (in thousands}:
Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2011 June 30, 2012 June 30, 2013
Percentage of AnnualOPEB Cost Contributed 93.5% 102.5% 74.7%
Annual OPEB Cost 1,396 $ 1,551 2,506
41 313
NetOPEB Obligation (Asset2 1,162 $ 1,123 1,758
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATE:MENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (10) POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS OTHER THAN PENSIONS (Continued)
Funded Status and Funding Progress The unfunded actuarial accrued liability is being amortized as a level dollar of expected payroll on an open basis over thirty years, beginning July I, 2007. As of June 30, 2013, the funded status of the plan was as follows (in thousands): Actuarial accrued liability (AAL) Actuarial value of plan assets Unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL)
$ 31,930
Funded ratio (actuarial value of plan assets!AAL) Annual covered payroll (active plan members) UAAL as a percentage of annual covered payroll
0% $117,641 27.1%
$ 31,930
Actuarial Methods and Assumptions Actuarial valuations of an on-going plan involve estimates of the value of reported amounts and assumptions about the probability of occurrence of events far into the future. Examples include assumptions about future employment, mortality, and the healthcare cost trend. Amounts determined regarding the funded status of the plan and the annual required contribution of the District are subject to continual revision as actual results are compared with past expectations and new estimates are made about the future. The schedule of funding progress, presented as required supplementary information following the notes to the fmancial statements, presents multi-year trend information about whether the actuarial value of plan assets is increasing or decreasing over time relative to the actuarial accrued liabilities for benefits. Projections of benefits for fmancial reporting purposes are based on the substantive plan (the plan as understood by the District and plan members) and include the types of benefits provided at the time of each valuation and the historical pattern of sharing of benefit costs between the District and plan members to that point. The actuarial methods and assumptions used include tecimiques that are designed to reduce short-term volatility in actuarial accrued liabilities and the actuarial value of assets, consistent with the long-term perspective of the calculations.
In the actuarial valuation as of June 30, 2013, the actuarial cost method used was the projected unit credit method. This method allocates the present value of benefits for each individual attributable to service to date, using future compensation projected to retirement. The amortization method used was the level dollar open method; the remaining amortization period is 30 years. The actuarial assumptions include an investment rate of 4.5%, an inflation rate of3.2%, a healthcare cost trend rate of 10% for fiscal year 2013 grading down 1.0% each year to 5.0% for fiscal year 2017 and beyond, and a dental and vision cost rate of3.0%.
42 314
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,2013 (11) COMMITMENTS
PTMISEA Grants The Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006, approved by the voters as Proposition lB on November 7, 2006, includes a program of funding in the amount of $4 billion to be deposited in the Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA). Of this amount, $3.6 billion in the PTMISEA is available to project sponsors in California for allocation to eligible public transportation projects. During fiscal year 2010, the District submitted a Corrective Action Plan requesting additional PTMISEA grant funding on top ofits fiscal year 2009 allocation to purchase buses. The California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) determined that the District was eligible to receive an additional allocation totaling $8.826 million (2009 allocation). The funds were sent to the District prior to its purchase of the buses but are committed to funding future bus purchases. The funds must be encumbered within three years and expended within three years of being encumbered. In fiscal year 2013, the District received grant funds for the purchases of buses and Transit Access Improvement projects in the amount of$27.574 million. The following table shows the changes in activity related to the PTMISEA grant funds during the fiscal year as well as the remaining commitment as of June 30, 2013 (in thousands):
Total Allocations as of June 30, 2012 46,893 $
Cumulative Expenses Total Allocations Incurred through received in June 30,2013 FY2013 27,611 12,586 $ $
43
315
Interest Income $ 27
Commitment at June 30, 2013 $ 74,531
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (12) CONTINGENCIES
Lease and Use Agreementfor the Temporary Terminal and Transit Center In September 2008, the District approved a Lease and Use Agreement for the Temporary Terminal
and the new Transit Center with the Transbay Joint Powers Authority (the TJPA). The agreement sets forth the parties' rights and obligations up to the year 2050 with respect to (a) the District's bus operations in the Temporary Tenninal and the new Transit Center; (b) the District's contribution to offset annual operating costs for the Temporary Terminal and Transit Center; and (c) the District's capital contributions to build the Transit Center in the sum of $57,000,000 (in 2011 dollars). The District's $57,000,000 contribution will be funded through a combination of payments from various grant funded sources and a proposed passenger facilities charge. Projected contributions are scheduled as follow (in thousands): Payments $ 8,302 2014 2015 7,758 2016 4,626 2017 987 960 2018 2019-2023 5,284 2024-2028 5,901 2029-2033 6,282 2034-2034 340
Claims and Potential Litigation There are claims and litigation pending, which are considered normal to the District's operation of the transit system. The District maintains insurance coverage for such incidents, as summarized in Note 13, and provisions have been made in the fmancial statements for estimated losses under the self-insurance retention limits of insurance policies.
Pollution Remediation The District has an estimated $1.653 million in liabilities for the monitoring and potential clean-up costs for pollution remediation obligations. The District has several locations where soil and groundwater has been contaminated. The Alameda County Health Care Services Agency (ACHCS) and the Alameda County Water District (ACWD) issued directives to the District to perform groundwater monitoring and require conceptual models and feasibility studies to address possible mitigation measures. The estimated liabilities were measured at current value using the expected cash flow technique for each obligating event based on current and estimated costs. Changes to estimated liabilities will be made when new information, such as changes in remediation plans, technology and legal or regulatory requirements, becomes available.
44 316
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT
NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,2013 (13) RISK MANAGEMENT
As of June 30, 2013 the District has the following coverages: Deductible
Coverage Limit
General Liability
$200,000
$2,000,000 per occurrence with excess up to $55,000,000
Workers' Compensation
1,000,000
Statutory Limit
100,000
$100,000,000
Type of Coverage
Property, B&M, Auto Physical Damage
The District accrues a liability for claims and litigation (including a reserve for claims incurred but not reported) based on an actuarial study. The liability includes allocated and unallocated claims adjustment expenses and incremental claim expense. In addition, the District is partially self-insured for health and dental exposure. Management has evaluated the potential liability and recorded an accrual, which includes an amount for incurred but not reported claims. During the year ended June 30, 2013, the actuarial estimates based on the 75th percentile discounted at 3.0 to 3.5% to estimate its liability for worker's compensation and the public liability claims were $43.7 million and $11.7 million, respectively. Changes in the reported liability resulted from the following (in thousands):
Balance at June 30, 2011 Claims and changes in estimates Claim Payments Balance at June 30, 2012 Claims and changes in estimates Claim Payments Balance at June 30, 2013
Workers' Compensation Liabili!l: $ 41,143 13,303
$
Public Liability $ 7,297 6,708
Health and Dental Liabili!l: 225 $ 4,685
~9,971~
(4,257~
~4,793)
44,475 11,571 (12,377) 43,669
9,748 8,998 (7,051) 11,695
117 4,110 (4,110) 117
$
$
Total 48,665 24,696 (19,021) 54,340 24,679 (23,538) $ 55,481
$
The classification of the current and long-term portion of the self-insurance liabilities for the year ended June 30, 2013 are summarized as follows (in thousands): Current 8,820 5,936 117 $ 14,873
Workers' compensation liability $ Public liability Health & Denta11iability
45
317
Lonl1!-terrn $ 34,849 5,759 $
40,608
Total 43,669 11,695 117 $ 55,481
$
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,2013 (14) JOINT VENTURE
In 1994, the District and BART executed an agreement establishing the East Bay Paratransit Consortium. The District supports the project primarily through its own operating funds, with some financial assistance from Alameda County Measure B funds. The purpose of the Consortium is to provide Americans with Disabilities complementary paratransit services in Alameda and western Contra Costa counties. The area served encompasses the AC Transit/BART coordinated service area. Revenues and expenses for the Consortium are split evenly between the District and BART, respectively, and the District's financial statements reflect its portion of revenues and expenses as operating activities. The District has no equity interest in the Consortium. Effective October 1, 2003, the Consortium discontinued the practice of rotating lead agency responsibilities on an annual basis. Key administrative support functions are now permanently assigned to each participating agency. Also effective October 1, 2003, a Service Review Advisory Committee (SRAC) was established to serve in an advisory capacity to the Service Review Committee. The primary mission of the SRAC will be to advise on planning, policy and other matters related to the Consortium; advocate for high quality, safe, reliable and courteous paratransit services; and to provide a forum for public input and participation in the review, assessment and evaluation of the ADA paratransit service.
In fiscal year 2013, the District incurred expenses of $26.684 million related to the Consortium.
46
318
Required Supplementary Information (Other than MD&A- Unaudited)
319
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF FUNDING PROGRESS ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT EMPLOYEES' PENSION PLAN (UNAUDITED) YEAR ENDED DECEMBER31, 2012 (In Thousands)
Pension Actuarial Plan Actuarial Valuation Date
Actuarial Value of Assets
Actuarial Accrued Liability
January I, 2010 January I, 2011 January I, 2012
$ 391,062 428,644 453,422
$ 625,116 692,487 721,195
Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability 234,054 263,843 267,773
$
Funded Ratio
Covered Payroll
Unfunded Liability as a Percent of Payroll
63% 63% 63%
$ 136,127 126,536 126,239
172% 223% 212%
SCHEDULE OF FUNDING PROGRESS ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT EMPLOYEES' POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS OTHER THAN PENSION (UNAUDITED) YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (In Thousands) A. ATU Local 192 Benefits Trust
Actuarial Valuation Date June 30,2010 June 30,2012 June 30, 2013
Actuarial Value of Assets 8,895 8,542 6,237
$
Actuarial Accrued Liability $
70,574 80,381 81,355
Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability 61,679 71,839 75,118
$
Funded Ratio
Covered Payroll
13% 11% 8%
$ 120,000
Unfunded Liability as a Percent of Payroll
103,858 110,995
52% 69% 68%
Funded Ratio
Covered Payroll
Unfunded Liability as a Percent of Payroll
0% 0% 0%
$130,000 111,792 117,641
20% 26% 27%
B. Retiree Benefits Non-Trust Plan
Actuarial Valuation Date June 30,2010 June 30, 2012 June 30,2013
Actuarial Value of Assets $
Actuarial Accrued Liability $
25,328 28,498 31,930
Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability $
25,328 28,498 31,930
48 320
Other Supplementary Information
321
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT COMPARATIVE SCHEDULES OF FUND NET POSffiON BUSINESS-TYPE ACTIVITY- ENTERPRISE FUND JUNE 30, 2013 AND 2012 (In thousands) 2013 ASSETS CURRENT ASSETS: Cash and cash equivalents Restricted cash and cash equivalents Receivables: Federal and local grants: Capital Planning, operating and other Property tax Local sales tax Other, principally trade receivables
$
95,891 71,829
2012
$
129,423 42
18,946 2,250 10,799 8,076 3358
6,064 19,692 9,823 7,790 3760
Total receivables . net
43429
47,129
Due from Pension Trust Fund Inventories at average cost Prepaid expenses
3,672 12,164 3,089
3,348 10,963 3,513
230074
194418
2,488
2,488
32,394 199,374
28,392 190 940
Total capital assets, net
231768
219,332
Total noncurrent assets
234~56
221,820
Total assets
464,330
416,238
12,513 1,628 14,974 3,442 4,804 604 5,555 1,276 14,873 186 3,034
17,148 1,361 15,093 3,293 5,315 1,314 7,522 232 12,010 248 1626
62,889
65 162
7,476 5,101 40,608 1,467 27,777
7,023 2,295 42,330 1,346 30 616
Total current assets NONCURRENT ASSETS: Restricted for certificates of participation: Cash and cash equivalents (Note 3) Capital assets (Note 4): Nondepreciable Depreciable, net
LIABILITIES AND DEFERRED INFLOWS CURRENT UABIUTIES: Accounts payable and accrued expenses Accrued salaries and wages Current portion of accrued vacation and sick leave Due to Pension Trust Fund Other accrued liabilities Accrued interest payable Unearned revenue Current portion ofOPEB obligation Current portion of claims liabilities Current portion of remediation obligations Current portion of certificates of participation
Total current liabilities NONCURRENT LIABIUTIES: Accrued vacation and sick leave OPEB obligation Claims liabilities Remediation obligations Certificates of participation Total noncurrent liabilities Total liabilities NETPOSffiON Net investment in capital assets Restricted for capital purchases Restricted for debt service Unrestricted $
TOTALNETPOSffiON
50 322
82,429
83610
145,318
148 772
202,095 74,531 1,605 40,781
187,570 46,893 1,174 31 829 267,466
319,012
$
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT COMPARATIVE SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN FUND NET POSITION
BUSINESS-TYPE ACTIVITY - ENTERPRISE FUND FOR THE YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 AND 2012 (In thousands) 2012
2013
OPERATING REVENUES: Passenger fares Contract services Other
$
Total operating revenues
50,357 8,330 4,720
$
49,125 8,021 3,408
63,407
60,554
58,526 46,363 116,849 35,420 18,613 12,393 26,593 11,529 2,249 7,842
58,384 48,328 117,593 37,899 18,593 13,913 20,547 9,262 11,396 14,164
336,377
350,079
(272,970)
(289,525)
NONOPERATJNG REVENUES (EXPENSE): Operating assistaoce: Property taxes Local sales tax Local funds Federal State Gain (loss) on sale of capital assets Interest income Interest expense
108,799 58,683 66,745 12,070 15,953 (1,175) 764 (1,338)
100,150 54,609 60,901 32,458 13,193 (293) 585 (1,720)
Net nonoperating revenues
260,501
259,883
Loss before capital contributions
(12,469)
(29,642)
CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS
64,015
47,878
CHANGE lN NET POSffiON
51,546
18,236
267,466
250,525
OPERATING EXPENSES: Operator wages Other wages Fringe benefits Depreciation Fuel and oil Other material and supplies Services Insurance Net expenses of joint venture Other Total operating expenses Operating loss
NET POSITION beginning of year Restatement due to implementation of GASB 65
(1,295)
NET POSffiON end of year
$ 51
323
319,012
=$====26:;7,.,;,4:66=
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT COMPARATIVE SCHEDULES OF CASH FLOWS BUSINESS-TYPE ACTIVI1Y - ENTERPRISE FUND FOR THE YEARS ENDED JUNE 30,2013 AND 2012 Qn thousands) 2012
2013
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Cash received from customers Cash payments to suppliers for goods and services Cash payments to employees for services Other operating receipts
$
58,687 (79,128) (222,276) 3,155
Net cash used in operating activities CASH FLOWS FROMNONCAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVII1ES: Operating assistance received Principal paid on notes payable Interest paid on notes payable
$
57,146 (72,959) (223,554) 5,128
(239,562)
(234,239)
278,430
271,834
(205)
Net cash provided by noncapital financing activities CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND RELATED FINANCING ACTIVII1ES: Acquisition and construction of capital assets Capital contributions from grants Proceeda from sale of capital assets Principal paid on certificates of participation Interest paid on certificates of participation Net cash provided by (used in) capital and related financing activities
(205)
278,225
271,629
(49,161) 51,133 130 (1,650) (1,221)
(15,298) 54,762 (134) (4,729) (1,475) 33,126
(769)
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: Interest received on investments Net cash provided by investing activities CHANGE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS CASH AND CASH EQUNALENTS, beginning of year
361
585
361
585
38,255
71,101
131,953
60,852
CASH AND CASH EQUNALENTS, end of year
$
170,208
$
131,953
SUMMARY OF CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AND INVESTMENTS REPORTED ON THE STATEMENT OF NET ASSETS: Cash and cash equivalents (unrestricted) Restricted cash and cash equivalents Total cash and cash equivalents reported on the statement of net assets
$
$
$
95,891 74 317 170,208
$
129,423 2,530 131,953
$
(272,970)
$
(289,525)
RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING LOSS TO NET CASH USED IN OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Operating loss Adjustments to reconcile operating loss to net cash used in operating activities: Depreciation and amortization Effect of changes in assets and liabilities: Receivables Inventories Due from Pension Trust Fund Prepaid expenses and OPEB asset Accounts payable and accrued expenses Accrued salaries and wages Accrued vacation and sick leave Unearned revenue Due to Pension Trust Fund Other accrueds Long term liabilities
35,420
37,899
402 (1,201) (324) 424 (4,635) 267 (119) (1,967) 149 (511) 5,503 $
Net cash used in operating activities
52 324
(239,562)
(632) 189 (238) 1,070 6,067 (854) 325 2,352 484 1,034 7,590 $
(234,239) .
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT COMPARATIVE SCHEDULES OF REVENUES, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN FUND NET POSITION BUDGETARY BASIS - BUSINESS-TYPE ACTIVITY- ENTERPRISE FUND- TRANSIT ONLY FOR THE YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 AND 2012 (In thousands) 2013
OPERATING REVENUES: Passenger fares Bart transfers Contract services Advertising Interest income Other
$
2012
52,976 2,460 5,875 1,819
$
3,952
51,323 2,855 4,873 1,174 34 2,234
67,154
62,493
79,360 29,439 24,656 3,978 15,329 34,812 2,000 57,282 20,235 3,882 13,157
70,882 29,269 23,038 3,522 12,101 32,501 2,225 52,840 12,780 (20) 33,111
72
Total operating revenues SUBSIDIES Property taxes Property taxes - Measure VV Local sales tax - Measure B Local sales tax - Measure J Local operating assistance State - AB Ill 07 State - AB2972 Home to School State-TDA State- STA State operating assistance other Federal operating assistance Total subsidies
284,130
272,249
Total revenue & subsidies
351,284
334,742
58,525 46,362 77,837 39,013 26,592 18,613 461 12,817 2,413 11,528 26,754 5,719 653
58,384 48,328 78,968 38,625 20,547 18,593 535 13,378 2,577 9,262 24,238 11,587 1,847
327,287
326,869
Net revenues
23,997
7,873
Capital contributions Depreciation
64,015 (35,420)
47,878 (37,899)
EXPENSES: Operator wages Other wages Fringe benefits Pension expense Services Fuel and lubricants Office/printing supplies Other materials and supplies Utilities Insurance Expenses of joint venture Other expenses Interest expense Total expenses
$
Excess of revenues over expenses
52,592
See accompanying notes to other supplementary information. 53 325
$
17,852.00
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, SUBSIDIES AND EXPENSES, BUDGET VERSUS ACTUAL BUSINESS-TYPE ACTMTY -ENTERPRISE FUND - TRANSIT ONLY FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (In thousands)
Final Budget
Actual OPERATING REVENUES: Passenger fares Bart Transfers Contract services Advertising Interest income Other
$
52,976 2,460 5,875 1,819 72 3,952
$
50,433 2,460 4,399 1,150 50 2,498
Variance with Final Budget Positive (Negative~
$
2,543 0 1,476 669 22 1,454
67,154
60,990
6,164
79,360 29,439 24,656 3,978 15,329 34,812 2,000 57,282 20,235 3,882 13,157
73,002 29,241 23,757 3,938 12,655 33,800 2,000 53,175 21,304
6,358 198 899 40 2,674 1,012
22,291
4,107 (1,069) 3,882 (9,134)
Total subsidies
284,130
275,163
8,967
Total revenue & subsidies
351,284
336,153
15,131
58,525 46,362 77,837 39,013 26,592 18,613 461 12,817 2,413 11,528 26,754 5,719 653
60,176 47,789 73,547 39,137 22,126 20,145 634 14,866 3,037 9,535 26,759 6,222 1,741
1,651 1,427 (4,290) 124 (4,466) 1,532 173 2,049 624 (1,993) 5 503 1,088
327,287
325,714
(1,573~
Total operating revenues SUBSIDIES Property taxes Property taxes - Measure VV Local sales tax - Measure B Local sales tax - Measure J Local operating assistance State- AB1107 State- AB2972 Home to School State- TDA State- STA State operating assistance other Federal operating assistance
EXPENSES: Operator wages Other wages Fringe benefits Pension expense Services Fuel and lubricants Office/printing supplies Other materials and supplies Utilities Insurance Purchased transportation Other expenses Interest expense Total operating expenses
23,997
Excess of revenues over expenses
$
10,439
(35,420)
Depreciation and amortization
64,015
Capital contributions $
Change in net position
52,592
See accompanying notes to other supplementary information. 54 326
$
13,558
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF REVENUES AND EXPENSES BY SERVICE AREA BUSINESS-TYPE ACTMTY ·ENTERPRISE FUND: TRANSIT ONLY FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 (In thousands) Special Transit District 1 REVENUES: Passenger fares BART transfers Contract services Advertising Interest income Other
$
Total operating revenues
50,136 2,328 5,602 1,606 64 3,490
Special Transit District 2 $
2,840 132 273 213 8 462
Total $
52,976 2,460 5,875 1,819 72 3952
63,226
3,928
67154
63,481 29,439 22,804 3,978 13,537 34,812 2,000 47,198 17,613 3,882 11,674
15,879
1,483
79,360 29,439 24,656 3,978 15,329 34,812 2,000 57,282 20,235 3,882 13,157
Total subsidies '
250,418
33,712
284,130
Total revenues and subsidies
313,644
37,640
351284
52,503 40,939 69,345 34,757 24,142 16,436 407 11,318 2,131 10,180 24,047 5,050 582 31,277
6,022 5,423 8,492 4,256 2,450 2,177 54 1,499 282 1,348 2,707 669 71 4,143
58,525 46,362 77,837 39,013 26,592 18,613 461 12,817 2,413 11,528 26,754 5,719 653 35,420
323,114
39,593
362,707
(1,953)
(11,423)
SUBSIDIES Property taxes Property taxes - Measure VV Local sales tax • Measure B Local sales tax • Measure J Local operating assistance State- AB1107 State - AB2972 Home to School State-IDA State· STA State operating assistance Federal operating assistance
EXPENSES: Operator wages Other wages Fringe benefits Pension Services Fuel and lubricants Office/printing supplies Bus parts/maintenance supplies Utilities Insurance Purchased transportation Other expenses Interest Expense Depreciation Total expenses Income (loss) before capital contributions
(9,470)
Capital contributions
63,794
Change in net position
$
54,324
1,852 1,792
10,084 2,622
$
(1,732)
See accompanying notes to other supplementary information.
55
327
64,015
221
$
52,592
This Page Left Intentionally Blank
328
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO OTHER SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,2013
Budgetary Basis ofAccounting The District's fiscal policies establish the framework for the management and control of the District's resources to ensure that the District remains fiscally sound. The District's goals and policies, which are approved by the Board of Directors, determine where and how District resources should be dedicated. For this reason, District goals, objectives, short and long-range planning and performance analyses are incorporated into the budget development process. It is the policy of the District that the Board of Directors approves an annual budget prior to the beginning of each fiscal year. The budget is developed generally using the accrual basis of accounting. See the following section for a reconciliation of budget versus generally accepted accounting principles.
Budgetary Basis Differences As discussed in Note 2, the accompanying basic fmancial statements have been prepared on the accrual basis of accounting in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP). The following is a summary of the differences between GAAP and budgetary basis: • Perspective differences resulting from the Corporation and the Paratransit operations not budgeted. • Capital outlay presented represents capital outlay funded by the District's operations and this is reported as an outflow of budgetary resources but is not considered an expense for fmancial reporting purposes. • Depreciation on capital assets funded by District operations is not budgeted, as it is not an outflow of budgetary resources. The effect of these differences between budgetary and GAAP accounting on the June 30, 20 13basic fmancial statements of the District's budgeted fund is as follows (in thousands): Increase in net position on GAAP basis Perspective difference Increase in net position on the budgetary basis
57 329
$51,546 1,046 $52,592
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT NOTES TO OTIIER SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION FOR TilE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013
Schedule of Revenues and Expense by Service Area As discussed in note 1 to the fmancial statements, the District's basic fmancial statements include the fmancial activities of the District's Special Transit Service Districts No. 1 and No.2. The amounts recorded in this schedule do not reflect paratransit activity and activity of the AC Transit Financing Corporation. The District's revenues between these Special Transit Service Districts are allocated based predominantly either on estimated actual revenues, farebox revenue allocations or on a ratio that uses service hours and service miles in Special Transit Service Districts No. 1 and No. 2. The District's expenses between these Special Transit Districts are allocated based predominantly either on operator wages or on a ratio that uses service hours and service miles in both Special Transit Service Districts No. 1 and No.2.
58
330
Report No: Meeting Date:
09-171a December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Amend Buck Consultants Contract for Actuarial Services
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Consider authorizing the General Manager to execute a contract amendment with Buck Consultants LLC for Actuarial Services to increase the not to exceed funding amount to $712,164. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On June 24, 2009, the Board of Directors approved a five (5) year contract with Buck Consultants, LLC for Actuarial Services. The contract expires June 30, 2014. The contract has a total not to exceed amount for the 5 year period of $562,164. The following chart shows contract expenditures. ~
Fiscal Years
Staff Pro·ected Use
FY 2009-2010
$106,9SO
$116,142
FY 2010-2011
$109,624
$93,733
FY 2011-2012
$112,364
$109,624
FY 2012-2013
$11S,173
$266,948*
FY 2013-2014
$118,053
$0
*This number mcludes an 1nvo1ce rece1ved from Buck Consultants, LLC for $71,075 on July 18, 2013 for servsces rendered m FY 2012-13. The invoice was paid during the year-end close.
As a result of request for analysis related to the District's development of a second Tier pension plan for new employees, and concurrently the Governor's pension reform bill AB340, the current contract with Buck Consultants, LLC has exhausted available authorized funding before it expires on June 30, 2014. As shown in the chart the District incurred more than twice as much as staff had projected in expenses in FY 2012-13. Staff is requesting an increase of authorized funding of $150,000 to the total not to exceed contracted amount. The new total not to exceed contract amount will be $712,164. This will allow for all annual actuarial services to be delivered in 2013-14 and have potential available authorization to provide other actuarial services. This contract will not be extended and will expire June 30, 2014.
331
Report No. 09-171a Page 2 of 3 BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report. Annual Actuarial Services are included in the adopted budget for FY 2013-14. For FY 2013-14 the District has an approved budget of $100,000 for Actuarial Services. If the District's Actuarial Services needs exceeds $100,000; a budget adjustment will be made which may or may not increase the District's total operating budget.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
The District's required annual actuarial services include the following: • • • • •
A review of the Actuarial Cost Letter for the District's sponsored Pension Plan. Presentations to the Board on actuarial issues. An actuarial analysis of the District's annual Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) for both the ATU Local192 Benefit Trust and the Retiree Benefits Non-Trust Plan. Actuarial Studies for General Liability, Workers Compensation and Health and Dental Liability. All other actuarial related consulting services, including support during labor negotiations.
Due to the increased activity around the development of the District's second Tier Pension Plan and on-going analysis related to the Governor's Pension Reform Bill AB340, the District incurred higher than anticipated actuarial expenses in FY 2012-13. As a result of the heightened activity in FY 2012-13, there is not enough authorized funding available in the existing contract to provide the District with needed actuarial services for FY 2013-14. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
Amending the Buck Consultant Contract will allow all requested Actuarial Services for FY 201314 to be delivered. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
Staff finds no practical alternatives to the course of action recommended in this report. During this Fiscal Year, staff will seek authorization from the Board to solicit a new contract for Actuarial Services beginning July 1, 2014. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES:
GM Memo 09-171, June 2009 Consideration of Award of a Five (5) Year Contract to Buck Consultants, LLC for Actuarial Services for the district. ATTACHMENTS: 1:
Contract No. 2009-1077
2:
GM Memo 09-171
332
Report No. 09-171a Page 3 of 3
Department Head Approval:
Lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer
Reviewed by:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel
Prepared by:
Lewis G. Clinton, Jr., Chief Financial Officer
333
This page intentionally blank
334
SA 09-171 A ATT.1
CONTRACT NO.
AC TRANSIT DISTRICT PURCHASING DEPARTMENT
2009~1077
ACTUARIAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE TERM JULY 01, 2009 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2014 CONTRACT THIS CONTRACT is made and entered into this 1"1 day of July 2009, by and between the ALAMEDA CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT (hereinafter "District"), a special transit district established pursuant to California Public Utilities Code, Section 24501 et seq., and Buck Consultants, LLC., 1801 Century Park East, Suite 500, Los Angeles, California 90067 (hereinafter "Contractor"). THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1.
SCOPE OF WORK Contractor shall furnish the District all materials and services in full accordance with Request For Proposal No. 2009-1077 prepared and issued by the District entitled ACTUARIAL CONSULTING SERVICES dated May 07, 2009.
2.
COMPONENT PARTS This Contract consist of the following documents, each of which is on file with the District, and is incorporated into and made a part of this Contract by reference: A. B. C. D.
3.
This Contract Request for Proposal No. 2009-1077 Addendum #1 dated May 22, 2009 Submitted Fee Schedule
PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE Services under this Contract shall commence upon execution of the Contract by the Parties and continue for a five (5) year period through June 30, 2014, unless extended by the parties. Contractor shall not be held liable for delays resulting from problems of scheduling on the part of the District.
4.
CONTRACT PRICE The District agrees to pay the Contractor hourly rates in accordance with their submitted Fee Schedule (ranging between $200.00 and $400.00 per hour), with a not-to-exceed (NTE) contract budgeted amount in accordance with contractor's submitted five (5) year proposal, for a total contract value of Five Hundred Sixty Two Thousand One Hundred Sixty Four Dollars and Zero Cents ($562,164.00), for services performed in accordance with this Contract, with a cost breakdown as follows: · Total Price Year 1
$106,950.00
Total Price Year 2
$109,624.00
Page 1 of4
335
CONTRACT NO. 2009-1077
AC TRANSIT DISTRICT PURCHASING DEPARTMENT
ACTUARIAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE TERM JULy 01 I 2009 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2014 CONTRACT Total Price Year3
$112,364.00
Total Price Year4
$115,173.00
Total Price Year 5
$118,053.00
Total Contract Price for the Five (5) Yeas
$562,164.00
The District and the Contractor must mutually agree upon any adjustments in payment. Invoices for services performed shall be submitted monthly by the Contractor to AC Transit Accounts Payable, P.O. Box 28507, Oakland, California. 94604. Please reference the Request For Proposal Number and Purchase Order Number on all invoices. 5.
COST REPORTING The Contractor shall notify the Project Manager and Contract Specialist in writing whenever it has reason to believe that the total allocable costs have reached 75% of the of the total yearly contract budgeted amount. Additionally, the Contractor shall notify the District immediately if the projected costs of performance of additional requested tasks would cause the budgeted yearly contract amount to be exceeded. The Contractor is not authorized to exceed the yearly budgeted contract amount unless or until a contract modification has been issued, which increases the price.
6.
NOTICES Any notice which may be required under this Contract shall be in writing, shall be effective when received, and shall be given by personal service or by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, to the addresses set forth below or to such other addresses which may be specified in writing by the parties to this Agreement.
7.
DISTRICT:
CONTRACTOR
Procurement and M11terials Director 106261nternational Blvd. Oakland, .California 94603
Buck Consultants, LLC 1801 Century Park East, Ste. 500 los Angeles, California 90067
ATTORNEY'S FEES In the event that it becomes necessary for either party to bring a lawsuit to enforce any of the provisions of the Contract, the parties agree that the court Page 2of4
336
'-~
'
CONTRACT NO. 2009-1077
AC TRANSIT DISTRICT PURCHASING DEPARTMENT
ACTUARIAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE TERM JULY 01. 2009 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2014 CONTRACT having jurisdiction over such dispute shall have the authority to determine and fix reasonable attorney's fees lobe paid to the prevailing party. 8.
SEVERABILITY If any provision of this Contracl is declared void or unenforceable, such provision shall be deemed severed from this agreement, which shall otherwise remain in · full force and effect.
9.
BINDING EFFECT All of the terms, provisions, and conditions of the Contract hereunder, shall be binding upon and inure lhe parties hereto and their respective successors, assigns, and legal representalives.
10.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST By signing this Contract, the Contractor 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. The Contractor further covenants that in the performance of this agreement, no person having any such interest shall be employed by the Contractor, and that the Contractor receives no commissions or other payments from parties other than the District as a result of work performed hereunder. Failure to comply with this provision serves as a basis for termination for default and the collection of any damages.
11.
ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Contract 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 Contract, 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 Contract 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. ·
REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
Page 3 of4
337
'
'
CONTRACT NO. AC TRANSIT DISTRICT 2009-1077 PURCHASING DEPARTMENT ACTUARIAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE TERM JULy 01 2009 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2014 CONTRACT I
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Contract on the dates set forth below. ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT:
BUCK CONSULTANTS, LLC
.#2
RickFernaZ General Manager
Harold Loeb Principal
Approved as to Form:
Page4of4
338
Date
SR 09-171 A ATT.2
AC TRANSIT DISTRICT Board of Directors
GM Memo No. 09-171
Executive Summary
Meeting Date: June 24, 2009
Committees:
0 0 0
Planning Committee External Affairs Committee Rider Complaint Committee
~
Board of Directors SUBJECT:
Finance and Audit Committee Operations Committee Paratransit Committee
Financing Corporation
0 0 0 0
Consideration of Award of a Five (5) Year Contract to Buck Consultants, LLC for Actuarial Services for the District.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
0
Information Only
0
Briefing Item
~ Recommended Motion
Approve the award of a five (5) year contract to Buck Consultants, LLC for Actuarial services to the District. Ejscal Impact: Five-year total: $562,164 $106,950.00 $109,624.00 $112,364.00 $115,173.00 $118,053.00
for for for for for
FY FY FY FY FY
BOARD ACTION:
09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14
Approved as Recommended [xl Approved with Modification(s) [ I
Other
[I
Chief Financial Officer Lewis Clinton presented the staff report. Director Harper inquired about actuarial services with regard to the pension fund and commented on the technical evaluation of the proposals. Discussion ensued regarding the rating and weights given to the technical evaluation and pricing. Director Harper advised that he was voting no on the basis that a 25% weight for price was not enough, further noting that Buck Consultants was the current actuary. Vice President Peeples commented on the notion of awarding contracts based on low bid and the poor quality that could result from a low bid decision.
MOTION: ORTIZ/PEEPLES to award a five (5) year contract to Buck Consultants, LLP for actuarial services (6-1-0-0). Ayes: Noes: Abstain: Absent:
Director Ortiz, Vice President Peeples, Directors Wallace, Harper, Davis, Young, President Fernandez- 6 Director Harper- 1 None-0 None-0 The above order was passed on: June 24, 2009. Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary By ······················································
339
GM Memo No. 09-171 Meeting Date: June 24, 2009 Page 2 of2 BackgroyndiPjscyssjon:
On May 7, 2009, the District issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for actuarial consulting services for the District. The scope of services included preparation of sick leave and actuarial valuations, experience analyses, and related consulting services, including support during labor negotiations. This contract will enable the District to meet the requirements of Board Policy No. 310, which specifies that the District will have performed an actuarial evaluation of the Retirement Fund every two (2) years and an experience analysis of the assumptions used in the last actuarial valuation every four (4) years. In addition to the placement of formal advertising in the Oakland Tribune, the RFP was posted to the District's web site and notification sent to vendors who were registered with the District in this category. The vendors were contacted to determine if they were small local vendors (SLBEs) and three (3) were identified as SLBEs. None of the three (3) SLBEs Furthermore, none of the vendors proposing identified any submitted proposals. subcontracting opportunities. Three (3) proposals were submitted by the following vendors: Buck Consultants, Bartel Associates and Milliman. A technical evaluation panel consisting of three (3) district managers evaluated the three (3) proposals as follows:
1. 2. 3.
59.67 54.67 53.67
Buck Consultants Milliman Bartel Associates
After completing a price analysis, technical ratings and cost ratings were combined, resulting in the overall total scores shown below: 1. 2. 3.
94.65 93.67 87.67
Buck Consultants Bartel Associates Milliman
Based on the combined technical and cost ratings, staff recommends award to Buck Consultants. Buck Consultants is very knowledgeable about District operations, and is currently providing consulting services to the District under Contract 2003-718, which expires June 30, 2009. prjor Relevant Board Actjons/Policjes: Board Policy No. 350 par. VI (d) requires Board approval of specific contracts prior to award, regardless of cost. Board Policy 310 Actuarial Valuations for Retirement Fund. Attachments: None Approved by: Reviewed by:
Prepared by: Date Prepared:
Rick Fernandez, General Manager Kenneth C. Scheidig General Counsel Lewis Clinton, Chief Financial Officer Charlie Kalb, Materials and Procurement Director Brian K. Jackson, Contract Specialist June 15, 2009
340
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-306 December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Adoption of Amendments to Board Policy 350- Procurement Policy
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider recommending adoption of amendments to Board Policy 350- Procurement Policy. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In accordance with Board Policy No. 302, "the Board of Directors shall review each fiscal policy of the District once every two years with the exception of the investment policy which shall be reviewed annually". Board Policy No. 350- Procurement Policy was last reviewed in 2011. Proposed revisions to Policy 350 were reviewed with the Board during its retreat held on October 30, 2013, and feedback was obtained with respect to revisions to the existing policy. In its current form Policy 350 restates a limited number of federal and state procurement requirements. Staff's objective with respect the proposed policy revision is to have Policy 350 be a stronger policy document that provides guidance to staff on the overall District policies related to procurement rather than a restatement of certain procurement requirements. The key initiatives in the revised policy are to clearly identify the purpose of the policy, provide definitions for commonly used procurement terms, outline the District's key goals related to procurement, enhance reporting requirements, and clearly outline the roles of the General Manager and the Board of Directors in the procurement process. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no budgetary or fiscal impact associated with this report.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
Board Policy No. 302 requires a periodic review of the District's fiscal policies. Board Policy No. 350 - Procurement Policy was last reviewed in 2011. The timing of the review process was fortuitous as the District hired a new Director of Procurement in December 2012, who has had 341
Report No. 13-306 Page 2 of 4 an opportunity to be closely involved with this review and revision process, which has been undertaken with an eye to developing a policy that provides clear direction to the procurement staff with respect to the Board's policy in this area. District procurements are governed by both federal and State rules. The federal rules are much more extensive than the state rules, running in the hundreds of pages. The District's compliance with these procurement rules is determined by periodic audits. In its current form Policy 350, in large measure, restates a limited number of federal and state requirements. In reviewing the policy pursuant to the policy review mandate, staff was of the opinion that referencing only a handful of federal or state procurement requirements was of limited value in a District policy document. On that basis, staff proposed to create a policy document that provides clearer policy direction to procurement staff. To begin with, and consistent with other Board Policies, a statement of purpose was added to Policy 350, which is primarily that District procurements will be conducted in accordance with federal and state requirements and that the General Manager will ensure that such requirements are followed. A list of definitions of key procurement terms was also included to provide greater clarity and to assist the Board of Directors, District management/staff, and the public in becoming more familiar with procurement terms used in the policy and in discussions involving procurement issues. A section outlining the District's procurement goals was included in the policy. The revised Policy 350 clearly identifies five key District procurement goals: •
Buy American made goods
•
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) participation in procurements
•
Small Business Enterprise (SBE) and Small Local Business Enterprise (SLBE) participation in procurements
•
Transparency and fairness in procurements
•
Efficient and cost effective procurements
The revised Policy 350 outlines the roles and responsibilities of the General Manager and the Board of Directors in procurement matters. Following input from the Board of Directors at its October 30, 2013 retreat, a demarcation of responsibility was included in the policy with respect to procurements over and under $100,000 in value. The General Manager is authorized to approve solicitations of goods and service approved in the District's budget - including any related extensions thereto -that are not reserved for 342
Report No. 13-306 Page 3 of 4 approval by the Board of Directors. This permits the General Manager to ensure that the day to day operations of the District are not affected by any delays in routine procurement matters, such as the purchase of fuel on a weekly basis. In addition, the policy limits the General Manager's authority to $100,000 for any unbudgeted procurement. Since a smaller procurement can nonetheless be of particular importance, the revised Policy provides discretion to the General Manger to bring any contract he/she deems to be of "significant importance" to The Board for approval. Historically the involvement of the Board of Directors in the procurement process was limited to specific types of contracts. Following the Board's direction to take a different approach, the revised policy creates a general rule that any contract valued over $100,000 per contract year, and any extensions thereto, be brought to the Board of Directors for approval. The revised policy does retain a limited number of specified procurements that must be brought to the Board of Directors, irrespective of the value or inclusion in the District's budgets. Recognizing that the process of bringing items to the Board of Directors for approval can delay the procurement process, certain exceptions to this general requirement are included in the revised policy. These exceptions include purchases of routine items such as fuel and parts for the District's revenue fleet, emergency procurements where the "health, welfare, or safety" of employees or the public is at risk, and procurements required to avoid violations of laws or incurring fines. In addition, an exception was included in the revised Policy that permits the Board of Directors to approve in advance certain procurements in excess of $100,000 in value in connection with the approval of the District's operating and/or capital budgets. This approval process requires that these specific procurements be brought to the attention of the Board of Directors during the budget approval process and that the Board of Directors unambiguously authorize these procurements at that time. This should alleviate the concern that certain procurements are currently approved in the budgeting process but in a way that the Board of Directors may not fully appreciate what specific procurements are included in a budget line item. The revised policy also includes an enhanced reporting feature, which requires a quarterly report to the Board of Directors of all procurements between $50,000 and $100,000 approved by the General Manager. This is intended to provide additional transparency to the procurement process.
343
Report No. 13-306 Page 4 of 4 ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
The advantage of adopting the revise and comports with the direction of the Board policy is that it provides clearer direction to District staff related to the procurement process. There are no identifiable disadvantages to adopting the revised policy. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
The alternative to updating the current policy is to leave the policy unchanged during this period review cycle. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES:
N/A ATIACHMENTS: 1: Proposed revised Board Policy 350- Procurement Policy
Department Head Approval:
Tom Prescott, Chief Performance Officer
Reviewed by:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel Lewis G. Clinton, Chief Financial Officer Tom Prescott, Chief Performance Officer
Prepared by:
344
SR No. 13-306 Attachment 1
Policy No. 350
AC Transit BOARD POLICY
Category: FINANCIAL MATTERS
PROCUREMENT POLICY
I.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this policy is to ensure that the District's procurement activities are conducted in accordance with the applicable sections of the California Public Contract Code and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Circular(s). This Policy incorporates applicable legal and District policy requirements and sets forth the guidelines for meeting these requirements. The General Manager shall establish administrative procedures to ensure proper review and budgetary monitoring for all procurement activities. II.
DEFINITIONS
Best Value: means the overall combination of quality, price, and other elements of a proposal that when considered together, in response to the requirements described in the solicitation documents, provides the greatest overall benefit to the District. In a qualitative evaluation, a best value evaluation may necessitate award to other than the firm who receives the most points. For example, a best value award may be based on determining the firm with the lowest cost per qualitative point. If a best value approach is utilized, that approach shall be specifically stated in the solicitation. Cardinal Change: means a major deviation from the original purpose of the work or the intended method of achievement, or a revision of contract work so extensive, significant, or cumulative that, in effect, the contractor is required to perform very different work from that described in the original contract. (FTA Circular 4220.1 F, Ch. 1.5.c.) Goods: means the purchase of materials, supplies and equipment, including rolling stock. Independent Cost Estimate (ICE): means the cost or price analysis performed by the requesting department in connection with every procurement action, including contract modifications. Ideally, the ICE should be prepared prior to issuance of solicitation(s). At the very latest, it needs to be prepared and in possession of the Purchasing staff prior to receipt of financial bids or proposals. Invitation For Bid (IFBl: means a procurement done by sealed bid. At a designated time and location, all bids will be opened in a public forum and the apparent low bidder, pending thorough staff review, disclosed. This is appropriate when: (1) precise specifications are available; (2) adequate sources are available; (3) fixed price contract; (4) evaluation is price determinative; (5) negotiations are prohibited using this approach, Page 1 of 1
Adopted: Amended:
345
4/92 8/92, 8/95, 10/97, 5/99, 9/00, 8/06, 11/07, 6/09, 12/09, 2/10, 6/11,12/13
although clarifications are acceptable based submitted. (FTA Circular4220.1F, Ch. VI, 3.c.1)
solely
on
information
already
Micro-Purchase: means purchases of $2,500 or less (California Public Contract Code § 20211) Request For Proposals IRFPl: means a formal competitive procurement method that is appropriate when: (1) performance or functional specifications are utilized; (2) there are uncertain number of sources; (3) price alone is not determinative, or deemed to be a secondary factor in consideration of award; and (4) discussions with potential vendors is expected. (FTA Circular 4220.1 F, Ch. VI. 3.d.1.) Request For Qualifications: (a.k.a. Brooks Act Procurement, 40 U.S.C. §§ 1101-1104) means a formal procurement method for procurements of $2,000 or more which are limited to professional architectural/engineering (AlE) services, and are also for program management, construction management, feasibility studies, preliminary engineering, design, architectural, engineering, surveying and mapping related services. The nature of the work to be performed and its relationship to construction, not the nature of the prospective contractor, determine whether qualifications-based procurement procedures may be used as described above. (FTA Circular 4220.1 F, Ch. Vl.3.f.) Request For Quotes
Ill.
POLICY GOALS
A.
Page 2 of 2
Buy American Goods: Resolution 09-051 adopted by the Board of Directors on October 14, 2009, requires that "the District employ its best efforts to procure goods manufactured in America". The District's Buy American Goods requirement is implemented under this Policy in a manner intended to mirror the federal Buy America rule (49 CFR 661) and is applicable to the following types of procurements: 1.
Negotiated procurements of goods over $100,000 under California Public Contract Code sections 20216 and 20217 and to procurements of goods over $100,000 where a Best Value procurement process is utilized; when possible, the documentation of "Best Efforts" by the bidder to offer goods manufactured in America will be included as an evaluation criterion.
2.
The Procurement Department will engage in outreach efforts to the maximum extent practical, to ensure that vendors of U.S. made goods are
Adopted: Amended:
346
4/92 8/92,8/95,10/97,5/99,9/00,8/06, 11/07, 6/09,12/09,2/10,6/11,12/13
informed of bidding opportunities and encouraged to participate in District procurements. 3.
The Buy American Goods requirement shall not apply to the following procurements •
Procurements that are federally funded, as they are governed by FTA's Buy America requirements; purchases from the State of California Multiple Award Schedule (CMAS); purchases from the Strategic Source Initiative; intergovernmental contracts; and other procurements where the District is not the lead agency and cannot exercise control over the content of the solicitation.
B.
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Participation: The District shall administer its Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program in accordance with the Department of Transportation's (DOT) Federal Transit Administration (FTA) regulations found at 49 CFR Part 26 and as authorized by Board Policy 326, Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Policy. Formal advertisements shall explicitly state the District's commitment to using DBE's; DBE outreach shall be carried out in each federally funded procurement and whenever practicable, procurement strategies shall be implemented, pursuant to applicable laws and regulations, that provide maximum opportunities for DBEs to participate in the District's DOT-assisted procurements.
C.
Small and Small Local Business Enterprise Participation: The DOT's FTA Small Business Enterprise (SBE) regulations and provisions will apply to all DOTassisted procurements. A list of qualified Small Businesses, if available from the California Unified Certification Program (CUCP), the District's vendor data base, and/or the Alameda County Small, Local and Emerging Business Program data base shall be prepared and such firms notified via email upon the release of a formal solicitation. The use of small business enterprise goals, set-asides, or in the case of nonfederally funded procurements, bid discounts shall be applied on a case-by-case basis and supported by an availability analysis or other reasonable means for warranting such actions. (Reference Board Policy 351 Small and Small Local Business Enterprise Policy for additional guidance.)
IV.
D.
Transparency and Fairness: District procurements shall be conducted in a manner that is open, transparent and fair and equitable to all parties.
E.
Efficient and Cost Effective: District procurements shall be conducted in an efficient and cost effective manner.
PROCUREMENT STANDARDS
Procurement Standards have been developed to ensure that all federally and nonfederally funded procurements meet the minimum basic requirements outlined in Exhibit A of this policy for the following types of procurements:
Page 3 of 3
Adopted: Amended:
347
4/92 8/92, 8/95, 10/97, 5/99, 9/00, 8/06, 11/07, 6/09, 12/09,2/10,6/11,12/13
•
Materials, Supplies and Equipment
•
Professional Services
•
Construction Services (including repairs or remodeling of District facilities)
•
Architectural and Engineering Services
A.
B.
Page 4 of 4
Negotiated Procurement of Rolling Stock and Other Technology 1.
Notwithstanding the Procurement Standards outlined in Exhibit A of this Policy, the procurement of computers, data processing equipment, telecommunications equipment, fare collection equipment, radio and microwave equipment, and other related electronic equipment and apparatus used in transit operations and specialized transit equipment including buses may be made using competitive negotiations in accordance with California Public Contract Code Sections 20216 and 20217. As applicable and allowable, at least one of the qualified sources should be a DBE or SLBE.
2.
As an FTA grant recipient, the District will require and include 49 CFR Part 26 procedures in all federally funded contract actions.
3.
The Board of Directors may direct the purchase by competitive negotiation upon a finding by two-thirds vote of all members of the Board that the purchase of the above-described items by competitive sealed bid does not constitute a method of procurement adequate for the District's needs.
4.
Procurement under this section will be by formal advertisement requesting proposals and shall strictly adhere to any established DBE, SBE and/or SLBE participation goals.
Procurement by Non-Competitive Proposals (Sole Source) 1.
Sole Source procurement is a procurement action utilized when the goods or services are available from only one source for a required proprietary need of the District, or for compatibility purposes, or for reasons of continuity with previous delivered services or products. A Sole Source procurement is accomplished through solicitation or acceptance of a proposal from a single source. A contract amendment or change order that is not within the scope of the original contract is considered a Sole Source procurement.
2.
Notwithstanding Public Contract a Sole Source contract shall be least three (3) business days; SBEs, SLBE's and DBE's. In
Adopted: Amended:
348
Code Section 20213, the intent to award published on the District's website for at providing an opportunity for review by the event an expression of interest is
4/92 8/92, 8/95, 10/97, 5/99, 9/00, 8/06, 11/07, 6/09,12/09,2/10,6/11,12/13
received from firms with the requisite capabilities, the sole source status must be reassessed and consideration given to compete the project. 3.
4.
V.
Sole Source procurement is a limited exception to the procurement process and may be used only where the award of a contract is infeasible or impracticable under competitive procedures and at least one of the following circumstances applies, supported by written justification and documentation: a.
the item is available only from a single source, and there is no comparable or "as equal" available;
b.
there exists a public exigency or emergency as defined by Public Contracts Code Section 20213 (not including delays in planning or in initiating the procurement) which will not permit the delay accompanying competitive solicitation; or
c.
the procurement is FTA funded, and Sole Source procurement is authorized under FTA Third Party Contracting Guidelines (FTA C. 4220 1F), and/or the use of a specific firm is contained within a grant.
In the appropriate case, where supported by case law or statutory authority, the Procurement and Materials Director may recommend to the General Manager the authorization of exception to the competitive bidding requirements provided for in this Policy.
AUTHORITY OF THE GENERAL MANAGER
A.
With the exception of the items identified in Section VI of this policy (Board of Directors Approval) the General Manager has the authority to approve all formal solicitations and the award of any contract where the services, materials, or supplies are specifically demarcated the approved annual District Operating or Capital Budget. For unbudgeted amounts, the General Manager's authority shall not exceed $100,000.
B.
The General Manager, at his or her discretion, may forward any contract within his or her authority outlined above that he or she deems to be of significant importance to the Board of Directors for action.
C.
The General Manager has the authority to execute contract extensions that are tied to options that have been previously addressed in the solicitation, provided that such extension(s) is/are within the General Manager's authority and subject to all of the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. 4.
Page 5 of 5
there is a continued need for the services performed under the contract; sufficient funds are available; the contractor's performance has been satisfactory; and the General Manager, Director of Procurement, Chief Financial Officer and the respective Executive Staff member agree that the contract Adopted: Amended:
349
4/92 8/92,8/95. 10/97. 5/99,9/00,8/06, 11/07, 6/09, 12/09, 2/10.6/11,12/13
extension or the exercise of an option to extend the contract is in the best operational and financial interest of the District. D.
VI.
The General Manager has the authority to enter into agreements including, but not limited to, agreements for professional, technical, architectural, engineering, construction, and construction management services; agreements for repair or remodeling of District facilities; and lease or license agreements for District use of real property, facilities, equipment and software, provided that the General Manager or his or her designee first determines that the work or subject matter of the agreement cannot satisfactorily be performed by District officers or personnel.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS APPROVAL
A.
Award of Contracts Except as indicated below, the Board of Directors shall approve the award of any contract where the anticipated cost is $100,000 or more per contract year. The following items are exempted from Board approval: •
any procurements/contracts included in the District's Operating and/or Capital Budget that are specifically brought to the attention of, and approved by, the Board of Directors in conjunction with its adoption of the District's Operating and/or Capital budget;
•
fuel and/or parts for revenue vehicles exceeding $100,000 either in aggregate or individually that impact delivery of service.
•
emergency procurements to avoid impacts to the health, welfare, or safety of an employee or the public;* or
•
any procurement action taken to prevent a violation of law or a fine by another political jurisdiction.* [* Any procurement of this nature will come to the Board for ratification at the earliest possible date.]
B.
Solicitation of Contracts The Board of Directors shall approve all formal solicitation of any contract where: 1. the services are not included in the approved annual District Operating or Capital Budget and the anticipated cost is $100,000 or more per contract year; 2. the solicitation is for the following professional services regardless of cost or inclusion in the approved District Annual Operating or Capital Budget: • audit services
Page 6 of 6
Adopted: Amended:
350
4/92 8/92, 8/95, 10/97, 5/99, 9/00, 8/06, 11/07, 6/09, 12/09, 2/10,6/11,12/13
•
legal services related to Board Officers
3. the purchase of rolling stock which requires a public hearing pursuant to 1 Vehicle Code Section 35554(d)(1) C.
Contract Amendments: The Board of Directors shall approve all amendments to Board-approved contracts in excess of 15% of the original contract amount per contract year, or any cardinal change in the terms and conditions of the original contract as defined by this policy. In the case of capital improvement or construction contracts, the Board of Directors shall approve all amendments to Board-approved contracts whose cumulative total exceeds 15% of the original contract amount, or $75,000, whichever is greater.
VII.
VIII.
D.
Contract Assignments: The Board of Directors shall approve the assignment of any contract that was originally approved by the Board.
E.
Contract Extensions: The Board of Directors shall approve contract extensions that are tied to options in Board approved contracts that have been previously addressed in the solicitation, regardless of cost or inclusion in the annual District Operating or Capital Budget
REPORTING A.
The Board of Directors shall review on a quarterly basis the status of all contracts over $100,000 awarded by the District. The report shall identify the purpose of the contract and the funding source for each contract.
B.
The Board of Directors shall review on a quarterly basis the status of all contracts approved by the General Manager between $50,000 and $100,000. The report shall include an explanation of the purpose of the contract and the funding source for each contract.
FACSIMILE SIGNATURES The use of facsimile signatures on purchase orders faxed or emailed directly from the District's automated purchasing system to vendors is authorized if the purchase order is within the delegated signature authority of the buyer.
IX.
PERIODIC REVIEW
1
Until January 1, 2015, a public hearing is required for the purchase of any bus procured through a solicitation process that began on or after January 1, 2013, if the procured bus represents a new fleet class. A public hearing is not required for the procurement of a bus that is of the same or lesser weight than the bus it is replacing. (See Board Policy 163, Public Hearing Processes for the Board of Directors.)
Page 7 of 7
Adopted: Amended:
351
4/92 8/92, 8/95, 10/97,5/99,9/00,8/06, 11/07, 6/09, 12/09, 2/10,6/11,12/13
This policy shall be reviewed and amended as necessary every two years pursuant to Board Policy 302 unless earlier review becomes necessary.
Page 8 of 8
Adopted: Amended:
352
4/92 8/92. 8/95. 10/97. 5/99. 9/00. 8/06. 11/07, 6/09. 12/09. 2/10. 6/11 '12/13
APPENDIX A TO BOARD POLICY 350 PROCUREMENT STANDARDS
0-$2,500
$3,000 OR LESS
$2,500to $100,000
$100,0000R MORE
BASIS FOR AWARD
SECURED BY
Purchase Order
One informal quote. No need to obtain competitive quotations.
There should be use of DBE's and SLBE's.
Determine and document that the price is fair and reasonable and how this determination was derived.
$3,000TO $100,000
Informal. To the extent practicable, obtain price or rate quotations that permit prices and terms to be compared from an adequate number of qualified sources {3 is acceptable).
At least one of the qualified sources should be a DBE or SLBE.
Lowest price and determine and document that price is fair and reasonable.
$100,0000R MORE
Formal Advertisement: Invitation For Bids (IFB) or Request For Proposals {RFP). Sealed bids.
Formal advertisements shall explicitly state the District's commitment to using DBE's and SLBE's in all procurements. A list of qualified DBE's and SLBEs shall be prepared prior to the release of a formal solicitation and the solicitation shall be transmitted electronically by e-mail or facsimile to each DBE and SLBE listed in the California Unified Certification Program Directory and the District's Vendor Registration System well in advance of the bid opening date.
IFB: Lowest responsive, responsible bidder. RFP: Lowest responsive, responsible proposer or Best Value as defined by Board Policy 350. The PMD to determine if Best Value is appropriate.
BASIS FOR AWARD
Purchase or Written Contract (Determined by PMD)
Written contract required
SECURED BY
REQUIREMENTS One informal quote. No need to obtain competitive quotations.
There should be use of DBE's and SLBE's.
Determine and document that the price is fair and reasonable and how this determination was derived.
$3,000TO $100,000
Informal. To the extent practicable, obtain price or rate quotations that permit prices and terms to be compared from an adequate number of qualified sources (3 is acceptable).
At least one of the qualified sources should be a DBE or SLBE.
Award to lowest price. Must determine and document that price is fair and reasonable.
$100,0000R MORE
Formal Advertisement: Invitation For Bids {IFB) or Request For Proposals {RFP).
The formal advertisement for the solicitation shall explicitly state the District's commitment to using DBE's and SLBE's in all procurements. A list of qualified DBE's and SLBEs shall be prepared prior to the release of a formal solicitation and the solicitation shall be transmitted electronically by e-mail or facsimile to each DBE and SLBE listed in the California Unified Certification Program Directory and the District's Vendor Registration System well in advance of the bid opening date.
IFB: Low est responsive, responsible bidder. RFP: Award to proposer whose proposal is deemed most advantageous to the District with cost as a consideration. In evaluating the
$10,000 OR LESS
$3,000 OR LESS
$10,000TO $100,000
Purchase or Written Contract (Determined by PM Purchase or Written Contract (Determined by PMD) (/)
;:o
$100,000 OR MORE
353
relative merit of the proposals submitted, cost shall be given equal weight to the highest technical criterion.
Written contract Required
z 9 (..)
w
0 Ol
m X
;!. Cj
;::;: )>
APPENDIX A TO BOARD POLICY 350 PROCUREMENT STANDARDS
Under $10,000
One informal quote. No need to obtain competitive quotations.
There should be use ofDBE's and SLBE's.
Determine and document that the price is fair and reasonable and how this determination was derived.
Purchase Order or Written Contract {Determined by PMD)
$10,000 OR MORE
Formal Advertisement: Invitation For Bids {IFB).
The formal advertisement for the solicitation shall explicitly state the District's commitment to using DBE's and SLBE's in all procurements. A list of qualified DBE's and SLBEs shall be prepared prior to the release of a formal solicitation and the solicitation shall be transmitted electronically by e-mail or facsimile to each DBE and SLBE listed in the California Unified Certification Program Directory and the District's Vendor Registration System well in advance of the bid opening date.
Award to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder.
Written contract Required
PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS
DBE/SLBE
BASIS FOR AWARD
SECURED BY
$3,000 OR LESS
One informal quote. No need to obtain competitive quotations.
There should be use ofDBE's and SLBE's.
Award to lowest price. Determine and document that the price is fair and reasonable and how this determination was derived.
Purchase Order
$3,000 TO $100,000
Informal. Obtain price or rate quotations that permit prices and terms to be compared from an adequate number of qualified sources (3 is acceptable).
At least one of the qualified sources should be a DBE or SBE.
Award to lowest price. Must determine and document that price is fair and reasonable.
Purchase Order or Written Contract (Determined by PMD}
$100,000 OR MORE
Formal Advertisement: Invitation For Bids {IFB) or Request For Proposals (RFP).
The formal advertisement for the solicitation shall explicitly state the District's commitmentto using DBE's and SLBE's in all procurements. A list of qualified DBE's and SLBEs shall be prepared prior to the release of a formal solicitation and the solicitation shall be transmitted electronically by e-mail or facsimile to each DBE and SLBE listed in the California Unified Certification Program Directory and the District's Vendor Registration System well in advance of the bid opening date.
IFB: Lowest responsive, responsible bidder. RFP: Award to proposer whose proposal is deemed most advantageous to the District with cost as a consideration. In evaluating the relative merit of the proposals submitted, cost shall be given equal weight to the highest technical criterion.
Written contract Required
FEDERALY FUNDED
354
(f)
;o
z
9
APPENDIX A TO BOARD POLICY 350 PROCUREMENT STANDARDS
Under $100,000
Qualifications Based -Informal solicitation from an adequate number of qualified sources (3 is acceptable)
At least one of the quafified sources should be a DBE or SBE (SLBE if no federal funding).
Qualifications Based- Formal RFQ
The formal advertisement for the solicitation shall explicitly state the District's commitment to using DBE's and SLBE's in all procurements. A list of qualified DBE's and SLBEs shall be prepared prior to the release of a formal solicitation and the solicitation shall be transmitted electronically by e-mail or facsimile to each DBE and SLBE listed in the California Unified Certification Program Directory and the District's Vendor Registration System well in advance of the bid opening date.
Negotiations conducted with the most qualified offeror. Only after failing to agree on a fair and reasonable price with the most qualified offeror may negotiations with successive offerors in descending order may be conducted until contract award can be made.
Purchase Order or Written Contract (Determined by PMD) Written contract Required
(J)
::0
z 9 .....
"'w 0
Ol
m X
:::r
g )>
355
This page intentionally blank
356
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-307 December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Approving amendment to contract with BEST Contracting Services, Inc.
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
'.
Consider approving the fifth amendment to the contract with Best Contracting Services, Inc. for work associated with the General Office Chiller/Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Replacement Project and authorize the General Manager to take further action necessary to fully closeout the Best contract, including execution of any related laws or release. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As part of the HVAC renovation project at the District's General Office unforeseen damage to the roof was discovered following the removal of the older HVAC equipment and prior to the installation of the new equipment. It was determined that repairs to the roof should be done prior to installation of the new equipment because once installed the new equipment would prevent the required roof repairs at a later date. Rather than stop the HVAC project pending the solicitation, award, and completion of the roof repair work, a change order was made in the contract with Best to do this necessary work. This change order is included in the fifth contract amendment. This amendment, in conjunction with the prior four amendments, crosses the 15% threshold requiring Board approval. Although the five amendments to the Best contract total 18% of the original contract amount of $3.233 million, the amount spent on the construction phase of the HVAC project is only $261 thousand more than the construction budget for the project, and the whole project was completed without a requirement for additional funding. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no budgetary impact as a result of this action.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
The G.O. Building HVAC Renovation Project (Project No. 2010-1090) was undertaken to replace the aging and outdated 25-year old General Office cooling equipment. The budget for the construction phase of the project was $3.2 million, plus a 10% contingency. The HVAC project was approved in conjunction with the District's capital budgets and put out for bid in August of 2010. Five competitive bids were received. The contract was awarded to Best Contracting Services Inc. ("Best") of Hayward as the low bidder on September 1, 2010. As 357
Report No. 13-307 Page 2 of 4 the project had been approved as part of the District's capital budget, the contract award was not brought before the Board of Directors for approval. The original contract was for one year (i.e. August 31, 2011 expiration). However, this time frame proved to be unrealistic because the project was beset by a number of delays, some of which were discussed in an August 17, 2011, Project Status Report presented to the Board of Directors (GM Memo No. 11-178). As part of the second amendment the contract was extended until April 30, 2012. However work continued beyond the expiration date and the contractor's last day of work on the project was April15, 2013. Following completion of the work on the project the District and the contractor engaged in negotiations to resolve the outstanding change order claims, which are included in the fourth and fifth amendments to the contract. These negotiations concluded on September 30, 2013. The amendment to the Best contract before you for consideration at this time is the fifth amendment to the contract. The cumulative total of the four prior amendments did not exceed 15% of the original contract amount and therefore additional Board action was not required. However, this final amendment, in conjunction with the previous four amendments, now exceeds the 15% threshold by approximately $99,000. Prior Contract Amendments By way of background, the first amendment in the amount of $115,183 was signed off by the Interim General Manager on September 19, 2011. This amendment covered additional contract costs for the impact of existing conditions that differed from the plans and specifications: (1) wire and conductor length information in the bid documents did not match existing conditions, (2) sanitary sewer lines had to be rerouted and plumbing connections resolved to match existing conditions, and (3) water proof coating that had to be added to equipment pads. The second amendment in the amount of $47,180 was signed off by the Interim General Manager on February 28, 2012. This amendment covered additional contract costs for unforeseen and latent conditions: (1) modifications to pipe stanchions, (2) structural support adjustments at Parking Level 4, (3) chilled water piping modifications, and (4) fire and smoke dampers that were added to correct an existing deficiency. The third amendment in the amount of $21,584 was signed off by the General Manager on April 23, 2012. This amendment was made at the District's request to correct an unsafe electrical condition and covered additional contract costs for electrical modifications to the basement switchgear and uninterrupted power supply (UPS) interlock. The fourth amendment in the amount of $278,106 was finalized on September 30, 2013, following lengthy negotiations with Best. The contractor demanded $607,404 for the work at issue but ultimately the parties agreed to the amount indicated above. This amendment was necessitated by unforeseen conditions as well as the lack of plan and specification information in the early stages of the project. The plans lacked sufficient detail regarding duct work tie-ins. In addition, as-built drawings for the fire alarm panel were missing which caused delays as the layout of the existing fire control system had to be identified. Further, unforeseen electrical
358
Report No. 13-307 Page 3 of 4 wiring problems surfaced that required the replacement of existing substandard aluminum conductors and the rectification of a highly unsafe condition in the UPS. Fifth Contract Amendment The fifth contract amendment that is before the Board of Directors for approval relates to the repairs to the General Office roof. As explained below, this work is being treated as a separate amendment to the contract as it involved a significant change to the original contract and was funded through a separate source than the other aspects of the HVAC project. The project design called for the installation of large, heavy air handlers on the General Office roof, together with associated pipes, fittings, electrical gear, and duct installation work, as well as minor roof repairs and limited coatings. GM Memo .11-178 explained that when the roof was being prepared to receive the new air handler units multiple surface cracks and delamination of roof coating from the concrete roof surface were discovered. Moisture intrusion at cracks and drain interceptors also had caused corrosion damage to metal decking and some structural steel attachment point. This damage was unforeseen during the planning phases of the project because the roof area in question was covered by the old coatings and a cooling tower unit. It was determined at that time that the roof repairs could not be delayed until a future date because once the new equipment was installed there would be insufficient clearance under the new air handling units to allow a contractor to make the necessary repairs to the roof. As a result a decision was made to repair the roof before installing the new air handlers and while there was still access to the damaged portions of the roof. A revised specification for the roof repairs was developed. The work included stripping the coating off the lower roof deck and installing a new roof coating and sheet metal flashings and copings as well as repairing known leaks before they became inaccessible. This work had to be done during off hours and weekends due to work noise and fume issues. The new roof coatings are expected to survive for the life of the new air handling units. As indicated in GM Memo 11-178, the project team, working with the Finance Department, arranged for funds in the amount of approximately $129,000 to be set aside for the roof repairs from the General Office Weatherization Project Fund (Project 1860). Staff believed that the required roofing work fell comfortably within the scope of the weatherization project. A decision was made to move forward with the existing contractor, Best, by way of a change order rather than stopping the HVAC project pending the solicitation, award, and completion of the roof repairs through a separate competitive bidding process, which would have taken several months to complete. The decision to proceed in this manner was approved by the project team, executive level staff, finance, and the Interim General Manager. However, the requirement for the roof repairs further delayed the project. The roofing work began in July 2011 and was completed in December 2011, following which the work on installing the air handling equipment could begin.
359
Report No. 13-307 Page 4 of 4 Although the contractor finished the roofing work in December 2011, the parties did not settle on a price for that work until September 30, 2013. The contractor originally demanded $196,175 for performing the roofing work. Following several months of negotiations with the contractor a price of $122,300 was agreed upon for the work, a reduction of $73,875 from Best's original demand and within the amount set aside by the District for this work. Although this final amendment to the Best contract pushes the total amendments over the 15% threshold, staff believes that the decision to proceed with the roof work was prudent given the extensive damage to the roof discovered during the HVAC project. In terms of the overall HVAC project, even with the construction portion coming in at $3.8 million (or $261k more than the projected cost including contingencies), no new funding is required to close out the Best contract as funds were set aside in 2011 for this purpose as noted in the previous GM Memo. Ideally this issue would have come to the Board for approval at an earlier date but the negotiations related to the price to be paid for this amendment, and the fourth amendment, continued for several months and were not completed until September 30'h. Without an agreed upon price for these amendments it was uncertain as to whether the 15% threshold would be crossed and if so by how much. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
The approval of this final amendment will close out the Best contract. Failure to approve this amendment will mean that the contractor performed work for which it has not been paid, in which case it will likely seek redress against the District. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
No other alternatives were analyzed as part of this report. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES:
GM Memo 11-178 August 17, 2011
ATIACHMENTS: 1: HVAC Project Change Order Log 2: GM Memo No. 11-178 Department Head Approval:
Tom Prescott, Chief Performance Officer
Reviewed by:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel Lewis G. Clinton, Chief Financial Officer Tom Prescott, Chief Performance Officer
Prepared by:
360
CCO LOG FOR ACTRANSIT- HVAC PROJECT GO BUILDING COST
F1NAUZEO
I
~==~COQ~I~=~=~~==~~~~ISSt:~JE~~£=~~=~fSU~B~M~IT£~D~~AM~O~U~NTt~Amendll1 CAIIlf ilff. ; Alifil
~
10CI,4&5A
CXX)jt
t-:==g
1-
tEST
STORM DRAIN
!AD3"
· ~ fi1 ~ fi1
;o1.
,931
t==~~==t====j~~~~~~=====tt:]:.2S~~=~~~K111=Is PLANTER REPtA
o\TP4 rAT ROOF 1.10 ~
FlOORD: DltOI'IHG STORM 0 . ATJI:
;TANCHION ~.STORM
DRAIN P6c&l SPRINICLER I
~
•
L3; 30~
35.041.00 2.172.00 L432.00 931.00 7.95LOO .465.00
1
Toto I
!.70 Amendll2 jAmendll3 jAmendll4 AmendiiS !Base
I EXECUTED IRLEOFOR
i6037.2 • ,
:
6938 i
lnoverdid
Void
_
.
2258.87
·:numbers
lbvmlstlkal
IEXtdmc
Void
AM•2 6E 000.00
9909
IAPPROVED /EXfCUTED ; S/7.6/11 CCO R2 REVISED fR3l
66000 14000
13 Oiiiio.iiO
ToOO-
000.00
000.00 AJin $ 7,200.00 AM•1
Camm""ts I PARTIAl I EXECUTU
3 37 23
IEXECUTED
1000
938 0
1465 6569 never did
IEXECUTED IEXECUTED IREVIEW
2054
~ IFLEVB.9
ll .oca.oo I S U.SO ).00 1: ,621.00
AM•
.., ).00
s.oo ).00
1A .3S l-1.3
13.000.00
5000 13000
3000· -
AHU.CH-L Clf.21SOViTORS
EMCORCffi
---~ 9000=- lSOOO 9a:i3.s. .530.00
ACVALVES ll4.71NSTAIJ
12.712.66
CTFlOOR IJJWI.Eo\X
2.241.21 4.!190.00 89,914.00 2.$13.90 22.fi01.00 U70.00
DSIGNi
cc )1132 cc )1133
c 01134
r LOUVER SCIIaH POSTS SAIFEREX DISPlACE IN P6
0 lnd inBost ·13749.45:overpoid
25373.45
L989.20 6.959.59 1,9fiO.DO
21 .313.39
1$.!163.00
7a:ooo:oo
1870 1989 j
:000:00
· -- ~· 19fi01
.960.00 1l .000.00
c
uoool
.976.00 .000.00 .352.42
. -·- - - - - - - - ,4:=. 97:.:: 6! 3000
msi42j
24 :uo:oo
41.07U3
~ • - 4.000.00 1,000.00
IAPPROIIEO FOR EXECUTlON
ICURREN" IEXECUTEC I EXECUTED APPROVED FOR ElCECUTlON IAPPROYm FOR EXECUTION IAPPROVm FOR EXECUTION IAPPROV1i I JUECUTED IAPPROVI: I FOR EXEcunON !APPROVE I FOR EXEcunON IAPPROV: :AND EXECUTED
22500
i:i7iiOO L989.00
14;9if.OO
.417.n
- - 786o0" 2500
22.SOO.DO
1.'.917.
.202.11
2200 4390.72
2.500.00
,174.7.$
~~769.70
11000
23iiilOO
AMi2
,976.28 11 ,492.16 ~ :0.00
!$963
u:ooo:oo
IcuRRENT
-- -
-=24'"'1.::;:; 10 ·- -
14987
- - O:incl fn ~se
IAPPROV I FOR ElCEcunON IAPPROV I AND EXECUTED IAPPROV I AND EXECUTED IAPPROV I AND EXEC TEO !APPROVE FOR EXECUTlON !APPROVED AND EXECUTED
rruamo
liN liN liN
(/)
;:o
z
~ ~
APPROVED FOR EXECUT10N
(...)
<-> 0
fiOOO ? CXXll CXXll I»Sl
,GII..SO .764.36 1336.43
.111&00
-.,J
1088 ?
•10 INSTAll. ·10 INSTAll.
4.500.00
10CiiiOil
··:..
~ Qi 0 :J
3
<11
::J 11/ 1512013 :::
361
CCO LOG FOR ACTRANSIT- HVAC PROJECT GO BUILDING Total
rAI
INI EX£CUT'Eil EX£CIJTED EXECIJTED EX£CIJTED EXECIJTED EX£CIJTED EXECIJTED
0
0 0
829 4435 1 0
CCOI66 CCf5iiii
~ COiiiNGAfBALCONIES
2.6&7.95 l3.SOO.OO
2687 12000 2600
3.200.00
CCOIQI
TRAHSIT
0 ?
'NEGC
o"Never dld
iNEGO
~
2914 . 6" COVEBASE& ~MECHROOM CCOII74 CCOI75
2754 188,100 ·23000 25000' ?
UFE SAFET · BEST CREDIT FOR DEMO EMI :ott""""iOR UFE SAFTE SIM~
:38028 .
5,CIOO.OO
5000 ·7000
(7,000.00)
ci:xllr79-
.
·lSOOO ~incl. in b.ue
' Rft
_:188,100
_J
CCXl1181 CCXlll82
·1,200.
IIMtiYd chilled _,alae 111n on roof
-
-
·6,000 1 -1,200, ·500 ·500 ·500 ·2000 ? ·2500_?
o_?
iO..Diicat• (J)
:::0
hr@] orALS ~-====~=~~g~~S~~:f~~~~~=:::t~TI s7as !!s.•~ -~~ - •z PJ~m~'lii~l57 ~-1 1s,183.oo t o $115,183 : INotes:MI· :
I-!
47180.17 $47, 180
l· 17,453 [
21584.82 122300 278106.47 521.584 5122,300 11i6 . 53.233,100
527~:
0
z
?
~
(.,.)
(., 0
.....
~ Iii n :;;,-
3
(1)
::I
2
11/1512013 :
362
SR NO. 13-307 Attachment 2
AC TRANSIT DISTRICT Board of Directors
GM Memo No.11·178 Meeting Date: August 17, 2011
Committees: Operations Committee External Affairs Committee Board of Directors
~
Planning Committee Finance and Audit Committee Financing Corporation
D
D
0 0
0
SUBJECT: Consider Receiving Status Report on the General Office Chiller/Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Replacement Project RECOMMENDED ACTION:
~ Briefing Item
D Recommended Motion
Receive report. Budgetarv/Fiscallmpact: The project is funded by multiple sources as follows: Amount: Source: 575,000 2006 STIP 1,593,896 20.08 5307 1,434,782 FY2008 Surface Transportation Program 798,398 District Match 4,402,076 Contracts to 368,767 87,625 3,556,410 129,000 30,000 35,000 4,206,802
Date Design and Construction Administration City of Oakland Permits Construction Contracts Contract Amendment for Waterproofing Construction Testing HVAC Commissioning
Projected Savings 21,138 PG&E incentive Rebate (one time) 16,434 Projected annual cost savings Background/Discussion: This project replaces the 25-year old General Office building cooling equipment with new environmentally sustainable and energy efficient units. Included are two chilled water plants, circulation pumps, cooling tower, air handler and associated duct work. The design conforms to current California Regulations (Title 24), maximizes energy efficiency and rebates received from PG&E. In September 2010, the Invitation For Bid (IFB 2010-1090) for construction was formally issued by the Purchasing Department. The District received five competitive bids. A Rev. 2111 363
SR NO. 13-307 Attachment 2
GM Memo No. 11-178 Meeting Date: August 17, 2011 Page2 of2 Hayward construction company, Best Contracting Services Inc., was awarded the contract in late December 2010. Although construction is underway and 95% of the materials are readily available, longer than expected lead times for major components and a longer I wetter than expected rainy season have delayed the project by about 18 work weeks. In the next few weeks, a second crane lift for new air handlers will be accomplished (mid/late August), a partial building power outage is planned for a weekend in early September to install circuit breakers and associated electrical cables. Pipefrtting, electrical gear installation, and duct installation are ongoing and are scheduled to be complete by November. While preparing the GO roof for the new equipment, it was discovered that the roof had multiple leaks and was failing. The District applied funding from the GO Weatherization project (project ID 1860) to replace the roof and associated flashing, coping and the unused, leaky planter boxes on the top deck of the parking garage. The project is currently scheduled to complete before the calendar year end. The only remaining procurement action, aside from any change orders required by the discovery of unexpected conditions, is the award of a contract for commissioning services. This contract will secure an independent assessment of the system's function. Additional benefits include removal of the existing chillers in the penthouse mechanical room. This older equipment uses R-11 refrigerant which has a high ozone depleting factor. Ail materials used on this project are top quality and manufactured to last. For example; the cooling tower, because it Is subjected to heavy corrosion was upgraded and constructed of stainless steel materials. The new control system platform is designed to be non-proprietary so that future building and energy efficiency projects such as the hot water boller replacement or the floor fanpowered boxes can be upgraded and programmed to operate on the District's network. Project Staff intends to review optional third party software packages which analyze building HVAC load trends and outdoor conditions to make temperature, chilled water flow, and static pressure corrections optimizing the performance of the new system. Prior Relevant Board Actions/Policies: None Attachments: None Approved by: Prepared by: Date Prepared:
Mary V. King, Interim General Manager Dennis Butler, Director of Capital Projects Craig Michals, Sr. Project Manager August5,2011
364
Report No: Meeting Date:
13-303 December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Application for Cycle V New Freedom Grant Funds
ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider the adoption of Resolution No. 13-049 authorizing the General Manager, or his designee, to file and execute applications with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for Cycle V Federal Transportation Administration (FTA) Section 5317 New Freedom Funds EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The District is applying for approximately $300,000 in federal Cycle V FTA Section 5317 New Freedom grant funds for the 211 Marketing for Coordinated Paratransit Services project. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
If the District is successful in securing the grant there is a 20% matching requirement for these funds, which the District will seek from a variety of local sources.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
The New Freedom formula grant program as authorized by the Federal Transportation Legislation, Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act-A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), provides funding for capital and operating expenses for public transportation services and capital improvements that go beyond those required by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) and are designated for individuals with disabilities seeking integration into the work force and full participation in society. New Freedom funds are apportioned to urbanized areas using the disabled population formula established by the federal government. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is the designated recipient of the large urbanized area funds, and Caltrans is the designated recipient for the small urbanized area funds. On September 25, 2013, MTC issued a draft call for projects for Cycle V FTA Section 5317 New Freedom Funds. The deadline for applications is January 3, 2014. MTC will be prioritizing projects that have an emphasis on mobility management solutions to provide more coordination amongst paratransit service providers.
365
Report No. 13-303 Page 2 of 2
The District is eligible for the San Francisco-Oakland Urbanized Area funds. available is $1,062,707.
The amount
In partnership with Eden Information and Referral (Eden I & R), the District will be requesting approximately $300,000 to market the upgraded 211 system and website. The target of the marketing campaign will be to seniors and individuals with a disability and groups that represent these populations. The campaign will include media, ads on buses, and promotion in key venues. It will also include training for Eden I & R staff and possible equipment purchases/upgrades for the 211 facility to accommodate higher call and web service volume. The District recently completed the Paratransit Mobility Resources Inventory project, which included the development of an independent database of paratransit services throughout the service area to be housed and maintained by the East Bay Paratransit broker. Project partners determined that updating, expanding and improving the existing Alameda County 211 phone system and website is the best use of resources to house the inventory and provide the paratransit riding public access to the entire host of paratransit services in the county. The 211 system is a toll free service, similar to 411 (information), which provides free and confidential health and social service information and referrals to Alameda County residents. The system and phone staff are available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Eden I & R, a nonprofit, manages the system and website for the existing Alameda County 211 system. The upgraded website is expected to be operational by December 2013. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
Staff cannot identify any disadvantages to approving this staff report and resolution. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
The District could choose to apply for the funds for purposes other than the proposed project. PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES:
None ATTACHMENTS: 1: Resolution 13-049
Department Head Approval:
Tom Prescott, Chief Performance Officer
Reviewed by:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel Lewis G. Clinton, Chief Financial Officer
Prepared by:
Ben Stupka, Senior Capital Planning Specialist
366
SR 13-303 Attachment 1 ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 13-049 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO FILE AND EXECUTE APPLICATIONS WITH THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FOR CYCLE V FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATION SECTION 5317 NEW FREEDOM FUNDS WHEREAS, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) New Freedom Program is authorized under the provisions set forth in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), enacted on August 10, 2005, as codified at 49 U.S.C. 5317; and WHEREAS, the Secretary of the Federal Department of Transportation (DOT) may make grants to recipients for new public transportation services and public transportation alternatives beyond those required by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.), that assist individuals with disabilities with transportation to and from jobs and employment support services; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), is the designated recipient for the Bay Area's large urbanized area funds, and is responsible for selecting projects eligible for New Freedom funds, pursuant to FTA Circular C 9045.1, the "New Freedom Program Guidance and Application Instructions"; and WHEREAS, the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (District) is an eligible recipient of San Francisco-Oakland Urbanized Area FTA Section 5317 New Freedom, funds; and WHEREAS, the District certifies that the project and purpose for which funds are being requested is in compliance with the requirements of 49 U.S.C. Section 5317 and FTA Circular C 9045.1; and WHEREAS, Staff Report 13-303 lists the District's projects for submittal to the MTC for New Freedom funding; and WHEREAS, the District will provide sufficient matching funds from non-Federal sources for each of the submitted proposals which equal or exceed 20% of the total project costs; and WHEREAS, there is no pending or threatened litigation which might in any way adversely affect the ability of the District to deliver the proposed projects for which funds are being requested; and WHEREAS, there is no legal impediment to the District making the funding request; NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District does resolve as follows:
Resolution No. 13-049
Page 1 367
o/2
SR 13-303 Attachment 1
Section 1.
Authorizes the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District and its agents to apply for New Freedom Funds for the projects outlined in the attached Staff Report and agrees to comply with the provisions of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's New Freedom Cycle IV Program Guidelines.
Section 2. The General Manager, or his designee, is hereby delegated the authority to make non-substantive changes or minor amendments to the application as deemed appropriate. Section 3.
This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage by four affirmative votes of the Board of Directors. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of December 2013
Greg Harper, President Attest:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary I, Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary for the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors held on the 11th day of December, 2013 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
Approved as to Form and Content:
David A. Wolf, General Counsel
Resolution No. 13-049
Poge2of2 368
13-264
Report No:
T.AW'IVS/T
Meeting Date:
December 11, 2013
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
STAFF REPORT TO:
Finance and Audit Committee AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM:
David J. Armijo, General Manager
SUBJECT:
Real Property Leases
BRIEFING ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Consider receiving a status report for District owned real property leased to others. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The District has eight properties that are leased to others. Together, these properties account for more than $350,000 in lease revenue annually. A recent review of the property files revealed that seven lease agreements were out of compliance; staff anticipates updating these by December 31, 2013. Compliance issues include lack of insurance or inadequate coverage, and improper use of the property. Additionally, four properties were delinquent in lease payments; staff is working with the lessees to correct this situation. BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
Staff has collected over $30,000 in delinquent rents and is working with tenants to establish consistent payment patterns. With regular on-time payment of contract rent the expected annual rent revenue is roughly $350,000.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
The District's real estate portfolio consists of approximately 25 parcels in six cities that together comprise over 3,000,000 square feet of land. Only three parcels are leased to others, 901-999 66th Avenue in Oakland, 37650 Sycamore, 6750 and 6758 Clark Street in Newark, and 3850 San Pablo in Emeryville. The 66th Avenue parcel was acquired by AC Transit in July 2008. The District inherited seven existing leases with the purchase. Two of the original tenants, American Fumigation and Bay Area lntermodal, continue to occupy the property. In 2010, the District entered into lease agreements with two additional tenants, lronman and Shipping International. As of October 2013, there are four tenants occupying the 66th Avenue property. The maximum monthly rent revenue generated from the leases is $22,525.
369
Report No. 13-264 Page 2 of 3 Formerly Division 6, the Newark property became inactive in the mid-1980's after a new bus operations yard was constructed in Hayward and Division 6 was relocated. The property remained vacant and deteriorating until the mid-1990's when it was leased to a private individual, who refurbished it and sublet portions of the building and property to various tenants. In 2004, the primary lease was terminated and the property returned to the District's management. In 2005, the District entered into negotiations to sell the property but the transaction was not consummated. The property is currently undergoing environmental remediation. As of October 2013, there are three tenants occupying this property; Lorusso Trucking, Checkmark Compactor, and Miles & Sons. The maximum monthly rent revenue generated from the leases is $6,000. The property located at 2850 San Pablo is a 75-year ground lease dated November 1997, between AC Transit and Avalon Senior Housing, L.P. The property is improved with a 67 unit low income senior apartment complex, together with parking facilities and other related appurtenances. The average annual rent revenue generated from this lease is approximately $15,000. A record keeping system has been established that includes a separate file for each lessee. The files include a parcel diary, proof of insurance, owner contact information, copies of letters, and other tenant correspondence. Going forward, these tenant records and/or files will be maintained and kept current. Insurance and Cash Handling Practices All tenants are required to obtain and keep in force a Commercial General Liability policy of insurance in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and an annual aggregate of not less than $2,000,000, naming the District as an additional insured. A tracking system has been established to flag the expiration date of individual policies which also serves as a prompt for staff to verify continuous coverage, and to update the documentation in property files. In August 2013, tenants were instructed to send future rent payments directly to Treasury where checks can be deposited within one business day. Real Property rent checks are distinguished from other receivables by the property location written in the memo section of their checks. This new procedure will cause checks to be deposited sooner, it will shorten the time period for staff to follow up on late or missed payments, and lessen the possibility of misplaced or lost checks. Staff is working on inputting all leases into PeopleSoft where payment history and critical lease terms can be monitored and tracked. Preliminary efforts to establish the database are underway and staff anticipates having the lease tracking system in place by December 2014. In the interim, staff will continue to work together to monitor and track payments as they are received. Rent Delinquencies Staff is establishing a process to improve the consistency of rent payment processing and 370
Report No. 13-264 Page 3 of 3 monitoring. Finance has performed an account search covering a four year period; beginning with the inception of the PeopleSoft system in July 2009 through September 2013. Legal staff has provided historical information, including past correspondences and letters. If necessary, tenants will be asked to provide cancelled checks and/or other documentation. To date, the delinquencies have been reduced by more than $30,000. Staff will continue to work together and reconcile each tenant account until all delinquencies are resolved. The leases also address the percentage of operating expenses that will be charged to the tenants. Tenants will be billed their share of expenses after staff calculates the total operating expenses for each site. Property Condition The District's Real Estate Manager will inspect the properties once per week for several months. The inspections are intended to familiarize the Real Estate Manager with the properties, to establish a relationship with the tenants and to address any issues that are identified. After tenant issues are stabilized, property inspections will be reduced to a standard once per month visit, or as required. Both properties are fenced, and improved with buildings that appear to be in good condition. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: This report does not recommend an action. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS: This report is provided to inform the Board of activities of the status of District owned real property leased to others. There are no alternatives associated with this report.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTIONS/POLICIES: None. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Property Management Lease Inventory
Department Head Approval:
Dennis W. Butler, Chief Planning & Development Officer
Reviewed by:
Lewis G. Clinton Jr., Chief Financial Officer David A. Wolf, General Counsel Sue Lee, Treasury Manager
Prepared by:
Hallie Llamas, Real Estate Manager
371
This page intentionally blank
372
REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES
The District Secretary will report on the recommendations made by the Committees, including those items referred to the Consent Calendar Addenda.
PLEASE REFER TO THE COMMITTEE SECTIONS OF THIS BINDER FOR STAFF REPORTS 375
This page intentionally blank
376
AGENDA PLANNING/ STANDING COMMITTEE PENDING LISTS
AC TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Monthly •
legislative Report [Updates on State, Federal, Regional and local legislation, including Measure Band the APTA Reauthorization process 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 provide comments and recommendations pertaining to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Reform. [Requested by Director Peeples- 10/24/12] Submission of request to hold a future California Transit Association conference in Oakland. [Requested by Director Williams -11/14/12] long-range strategy to obtain better information as to why people choose not to ride the bus. [Requested by President Harper- 5/22/13]
February
•
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 1) the future of revenues from federal funding sources and how the sequester, continuing resolution, and the lack of a federal budget impact the federal money the District expects to receive (such as 5307 funds); and 2) a decision timeline on what we need to know and when and how it will impact future planning activities like the Short-Range Transit Plan. [Requested by President Harper10/23/13] Follow-up report from the Internal Audit Department regarding the costs associated with legal services provided by outside counsel. The report to provide 1) an analysis of what the outside firms were used for, 2) what kind of work was being sent out to these firms, 3) whether that was a good idea or not, and 4) whether the historical balance between what went to outside counsel and what was handled by inside counsel had changed drastically under the prior general counsel or was the same [Requested by Director Peeples - 12/12/12; Retained in Committee - 10/23/13] (Report 13268).
March
•
Informational report on post-employment benefit plans. [Requested by President Harper -11/13/13] 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]
April •
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]
Agenda Planning
Page 1 of 4
December 11, 2013
377
AGENDA PLANNING/ STANDING COMMITTEE PENDING LISTS
AC TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Finance and Audit Committee, Cont. Monthly Report on Investments Fiscal Policies (Review one per month) Quarterly Reports (Nov. Feb. May. Aug) • Board/Officer Travel/Meeting Expense • Employee Out-of-State Travel • Surplus/Obsolete Materials • Financial Performance/Quarterly Budget Update • Update on DBE Goal • 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)
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Januarv • Report on Worker's Compensation that encompasses the following: 1) the policy concerning settlement authority and how it got to the point where staff was settling cases; 2) the operational measures in place to prevent workplace injuries; and 3) who is in charge of following-up to ensure people return to work. [Requested by Director Ortiz 10/9/13] Report on the reopening of Division 3. [Requested by Director Wallace -12/12/12, 8/28/13]] Report on ways to enhance operator safety. [Requested by Director Ortiz 7/31/13] March Report on the efforts that should be made to recruit, retain, and promote women at all levels of the organization. [Requested by Director Young 10/9/13] April Report on technology infrastructure (i.e. CAD/AVL system). [Requested by President Harper 5/22/13]- Future Board Retreat
Page2of4
Agenda Planning December 11, 2013
378
AGENDA PLANNING/ STANDING COMMITIEE PENDING LISTS
AC TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Operations Committee, Cont. Quarterly Reports !Nov. Feb. May. Aug! Operations Performance Report (Combination of On-Time Performance and Service Cancellations and Outlates Reports) Clipper Outreach efforts Semi Annual Reports (Feb/Aug) • Customer Service Call Center 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)
PLANNING COMMITTEE November • Development of a policy to officially require regular ridership surveys every four or five years. [Requested by Director Peeples- 6/24/09) Will go to the Board with the on-board survey award. January • Report regarding the Major Corridor Study (BRT on MacArthur) [Requested by Director Peeples 6/27/12) March Report on AC Transit's attitude toward shuttles. [Requested by Director Harper- 5/9/12) Quarterly Reports !Nov. Feb. May. Aug! Bus Rapid Transit Project MTC Sustainability Process Transbay Transit Center Project Page3of4
Agenda Planning December 11, 2013 379
AGENDA PLANNING/ STANDING COMMITIEE PENDING LISTS
AC TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Planning Committee, Cont. •
Update on District Involvement in External Planning Processes. ·:· Lake Merritt Area Plan [Requested by Director Peeples- 3/9/11] ·:· Oak to 9'h Street project and details of the commitments made by and to Signature Properties [Requested by Director Peeples- 3/25/06]
Annual Reports Update on CARB (Jun) Update on Service and Operations Special District 2 (Oct) 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] Pending Not Scheduled Amendments to Board Policy 550 - Service Standards and Design. [Requested by the Board 12/17/08] 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] • Report Due Upon Conclusion of the Tri-Valley Transit Study: Report on how to better serve lower density diffuse communities and increase the use of public/private shuttles, including: •:• General Purpose Demand Rapid Transit [Requested by Director Davis -1/28/09] + Trends regarding the use of private shuttles, carpools, van pools and taxis to serve the public and how it has changed over time [Requested by Director Davis- 2/9/11] • 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]
Agenda Planning
Page 4 of 4
December 11, 2013
380
