AZ 7433 02 February Packet For Posting 2

User Manual: AZ 7433

Open the PDF directly: View PDF PDF.
Page Count: 153 [warning: Documents this large are best viewed by clicking the View PDF Link!]

VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433
MEETINGS OF THE
Board of Directors
Valley Metro RPTA METRO Light Rail
MEETING DATE
February 21, 2013
MEETING DATE
February 21, 2013
T
IME
12:45 p.m.
T
IME
2:00 p.m.
LOCATION
Valley Metro RPTA
Lake Powell Conference Room
101 N. 1st Avenue, 10th Floor
Phoenix
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433
February 13, 2013
TO: Members of the Valley Metro RPTA and METRO Light Rail
Boards of Directors
FROM: Steve Banta
Chief Executive Officer
RE: February 21, 2013 Packet Notes
Attached is the February 21, 2013 agendas and supporting information for the Valley
Metro RPTA and METRO Light Rail Boards of Directors meetings.
These meetings can be attended via teleconference. Please contact the receptionist at
602-262-7433 for the call-in information.
If you have any questions regarding the information in this packet, please let me know.
Parking is available onsite and parking can be accessed via the entrance on Adams
Street. Parking validation will be available at the meeting. Transit tickets are also
available to those who attend the meeting using transit. If you need detailed directions,
please contact the receptionist at 602-262-7433.
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 602-262-7433
February 13, 2013
Board of Directors
Thursday, February 21, 2013
Lake Powell Conference Room
101 N. 1st Avenue, 10th Floor
12:45 p.m.
For those participating by telephone, please mute your phone when not speaking.
Members please make sure your microphone is turned on when speaking and turned off
when you are not speaking.
Action
Recommended
1. Public Comment
A 15-minute opportunity will be provided to members of the public
at the beginning of the meeting to address the Board on all
agenda items. The Chair may recognize members of the public
during the meeting at his/her discretion. Up to three minutes will
be provided per speaker or a total of 15 minutes total for all
speakers.
1. For information
2. Minutes
Minutes from the January 24, 2013 Board meeting are presented
for approval.
2. For action
3. Chief Executive Officer’s Report
Steve Banta, Chief Executive Officer (CEO) will brief the Board on
current issues.
3. For information
4. APTA President and CEO Presentation
Steve Banta, CEO, will introduce Michael Melaniphy, President &
CEO of the American Public Transportation Association (APTA),
who will provide a briefing to the Board on the state of public
transportation in the United States.
4. For information
2
CONSENT AGENDA
5A. FY 2013 Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) Amendment
with Maricopa County Defining Conditions for the Provision
of Public Transportation
Staff will request that the Board of Directors authorize the CEO to
execute an amendment to the existing IGA between Maricopa
County and the RPTA.
5A. For action
5B. Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance
Coverage Renewal
Staff will request that the Board of Directors authorize the CEO to
renew the workers’ compensation and employer’s liability
insurance coverage for a one year period with SCF Western
Insurance Company for estimated annual premium of $185,696.
5B. For action
5C. Authorization to Issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for
Vanpool Services
Staff will request that the Board of Directors authorize the CEO to
issue a RFP for a Valley Metro Vanpool service contractor.
5C. For action
5D. Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Phoenix for
Federal Transit Administration Pass-Through Grant AZ-05-
0204
Staff will request that the Board of Directors authorize the CEO to
enter into an intergovernmental agreement with City of Phoenix to
allow Valley Metro to be reimbursed for eligible activities.
5D. For action
5E. FY 2011/12 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
(CAFR) and Single Audit Act Reporting Package
Staff will request that the Metro Board of Directors accept the
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and Single Audit Act
Reporting Package for the period ended June 30, 2012.
5E. For action
3
REGULAR AGENDA
6. RPTA Fiscal Year 2013 Mid-Year Budget Adjustment
Steve Banta, CEO, will introduce John McCormack, Chief
Financial Officer, who will provide the Mid-Year Budget
Adjustment update to the Valley Metro RPTA Operating and
Capital Budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 and request that the
TMC forward to the Board of Directors for approval.
6. For action
7. Future Board Agenda Items Request and Report on Current
Events
Chair Aames will request future Board agenda items from
members and members may provide a report on current events.
7. For information
and discussion
8. Next Meeting
The next meeting of the Board is scheduled for Thursday, March
21, 2013 at 12:45 p.m.
8. For information
Qualified sign language interpreters are available with 72 hours notice. Materials in alternative
formats (large print, audiocassette, or computer diskette) are available upon request. For further
information, please call Valley Metro at 602-262-7433 or TTY at 602-251-2039.
To attend this meeting via teleconference, contact the receptionist at 602-262-7433 for the dial-in-
information.
The supporting information for this agenda can be found on our web site at www.valleymetro.org
1
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433
DATE AGENDA ITEM 1
February 13, 2013
SUBJECT
Public Comment
PURPOSE
An opportunity for general public comment on issues related to Valley Metro RPTA. Up
to three (3) minutes or a total of 15 minutes for all speakers, will be provided.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
None
COST AND BUDGET
None
COMMITTEE PROCESS
None
RECOMMENDATION
For information only
CONTACT
Steve Banta
Chief Executive Officer
602-262-7433
sbanta@valleymetro.org
ATTACHMENTS
None
2
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433
DATE AGENDA ITEM 2
February 13, 2013
Minutes of the
Valley Metro RPTA
Board of Directors
Thursday, January 24, 2013
12:45 p.m.
Meeting Participants
Vice Mayor Ron Aames, City of Peoria, Chair
Councilmember Dennis Kavanaugh for Councilmember Scott Somers, City of Mesa,
Vice Chair (phone)
Councilmember Trinity Donovan, City of Chandler, Treasurer (phone)
Councilmember Shana Ellis, City of Tempe
Councilmember Jim McDonald, City of Avondale (via phone)
Councilmember Eric Orsborn, Town of Buckeye
Mayor Lana Mook, City of El Mirage (via phone)
Vice Mayor Jenn Daniels, Town of Gilbert (via phone)
Vice Mayor Kathie Farr, City of Tolleson
Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox, Maricopa County
Councilmember Bob Littlefield, City of Scottsdale
Mayor Sharon Wolcott, City of Surprise (via phone)
Councilmember Sam Crissman, Town of Wickenburg
Not Present
Mayor Greg Stanton, City of Phoenix
Councilmember Gary Sherwood, City of Glendale
Councilmember Joe Pizzillo, City of Goodyear
Chair Aames called the meeting to order at 12:47 p.m.
Chair Aames said I'd like to convene the RPTA Board Meeting for Thursday, January
24, 2013, and I welcome the members who are here and on the phone.
I would like to welcome specifically a new member, Sam Crissman from the town of
Wickenburg. It's great to have you here, Sam. And then we got someone sitting in,
Dennis Kavanaugh, for City of Mesa for Scott Somers. And the other people we have on
the phone: Trinity Donovan, City of Chandler, Lana Mook from the City of El Mirage
and Jim McDonald from the City of Avondale.
We have more than a quorum. We're getting started a little late. Some people had
some difficulty with the rain.
2
I have a number of public comment cards. Most of them are for agenda Item 6. I'm
going to have those people come up when we get to agenda Item 6, but I have some
others that are general and one that's on another item and I do those at the start. So
we will begin that way.
The first person who wants to speak generally is Howard May. Would you come up,
Howard, and tell us the city where you live.
Mr. May said good afternoon. Members of the board, I was living in the City of Phoenix.
I now live in Glendale to be closer to my church. The item I want to present to you today
is you guys are having problems with fare revenue. And I know one of the reasons why.
You have fareboxes that are not processing your day passes properly. When you drop
them in, it goes up, it goes down, it goes up, it goes down, and it stamps. That is a
problem for someone like myself. I know the farebox pretty well. However, there are
two instances I know of, one, where I was on a bus where the farebox was not printing
properly and so I witnessed a driver handwrite the date on them. And a friend of mine
was on a Glendale route where that happened last week. I don't know if he reported it
or not. But that's one item.
The other item is a question to you, and I'll let you figure that one out, is how are you
going to stop people from sneaking on the light rail when you guys are not doing audits
and not paying. Thank you.
Chair Aames said thank you, Mr. May. And our CEO is going to take note of that. The
next person is Blue Crowley, you want to speak generally and you have 4B. Could you
address both of those in your time period, please.
Mr. Crowley said yes. I found it fascinating and I thought helpful that when I pointed out
some mistakes on the bus map I watched staff write them down. I thought it would be
interesting that the new bus book has the exact same map with the exact same
problem. So I don't know, maybe I was delusional when I saw the staff taking those
things down.
I also had stopped in to tell Mr. Banta, hey, when you told me that our transit system
runs at 13 miles an hour, I was stupid because I didn't ask a lawyer question. I didn't
look in the bus book and find that the 20 miles in the system is covered in an hour.
So if those rail are doing 13, our on-time performance is way knocked out and the
documents I have doesn't show that, so I don't know why the man would say something
like that that it runs at 13 miles an hour because all I was doing was extrapolating this is
what you're saying it cost, I'm trying to find out how many miles you're covering.
So for him to say 13, I don't know. But then I looked for it in the minutes, that
dissertation or exchange, and found it wasn't in there, which also then tweaked my
interest when I had stopped by and said, sir, you need to amend those and show what
the reality is. He said he didn't care and to bring it on.
3
I'm not in a fight with you, sir. You're working for me. You are needing to get the job
done. If you can't do that, you can join Mr. Bourey and Mr. Edwards and a couple other
people who don't get the job done and think that theirs is above and beyond.
I'd also like to point out on the bus map, we'll just make a line at 67th Avenue. And if
you make that line from 67th Avenue, it goes all the way to the Pinal County line.
Everything west of there has what? No north-south service. So we have two-thirds of
the county with nothing. Now there is one route that does run kind of north-south in
Mary's district, the one that goes to Ajo, but when I look for the rural route that should be
in Wickenburg that should have started the Wickenburg connector going from
Wickenburg to Aguila back to Wickenburg and down and running to where it could have
connected with the Surprise express. But instead you had the bus getting there at eight
o'clock in the morning and getting back to Phoenix by 10:00 a.m.
So you need to re-establish that route. You need to start looking at the other part of the
county because how many of those people are paying the taxes? Oh, yeah, all of them.
Now do I get 30 more seconds for 4B?
Chair Aames said no.
Mr. Crowley said because all they had was me for three minutes on public comment.
Chair Aames said you get one minute here.
Mr. Crowley said all right. All I need is 30 seconds on that. With 4B, I find that the trip
reduction program and your awarding the contracts and saying like how good we're
doing, I look back at your awards ceremony. You had it where you couldn't have got
there on alternative transportation. That's real smart. That's trip reduction. Thank you.
Chair Aames said the next speaker is AJ Poore and you live in Glendale.
Mr. Poore said good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. My name is AJ. I am a city bus
operator. Regardless of what city I live in, I live here in the Valley. My paychecks come
from all my passengers. If you cut my paycheck in half by giving this award to a
company that's underbid so much, you're not affecting just me; you're affecting
everybody that I shop with Bashas', Circle Ks. And it's like I understand budget cuts.
Hell, I'm doing a budget cut with my family. And it's getting to the point where I can't go
to Wal-Mart and buy food for the whole week because I've got my other bills I've got to
pay.
And then you said that you're going to cut our wages, you're going to drop -- this
company is going to drop our paychecks from 40 hours down to 28 hours with no
benefits. How do you expect us to live?
4
We live here in the Valley. This is the greatest valley in the world. And all the other
cities and states are going to be looking at what's happening here and we're going to be
a mockery.
Please, I implore you, look over this what First Transit has been trying to shove down
your throat and, please, think of us operators, the cleaners, the mechanics. They
deserve a decent wage and a decent living. I thank you very much.
Chair Aames said thank you, Mr. Poore.
2. Minutes
Now I will move on with the meeting. And the next item is the minutes. These are the
minutes from the December 13, 2012 Board meeting. And I request a motion and a
second to approve these minutes, although if anyone has any comments before that,
please speak up.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORSBORN, SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER DANIELS AND UNANIMOULSY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE
MINUTES FROM DECEMBER 13, 2012.
3. Chief Executive Officer’s Report
Chair Aames said next we have a report from our Chief Executive Officer. I believe he's
going to speak just a little bit and then later we'll come back to that, but he wants to
make an important comment.
Mr. Banta said Mr. Chairman; thank you, and members of the board. I'd like to
introduce Marvin Rochelle one of our transit advocates. Jeff Rosen passed away at the
end of December, and Marvin wanted to take a moment of silence and say a couple of
words on behalf of Jeff Rosen.
Mr. Rochelle said if you will all bow your heads in respect, I will make a very simple
prayer for Jeff. Jeff was only 54 years of age. He spent 54 years in wheelchairs. Jeff
was one of the hardest workers I have seen in a long time here in the Phoenix area
working to help visually impaired and disabled people. May he rest in peace. Amen.
Mr. Banta said thank you, Marvin.
Mr. Chairman, in the interest of time, I will forego my CEO report to the end of the
meeting and would suggest we move into the consent agenda items.
Chair Aames said okay. The next item, there are two items, two consent agenda items,
and Mr. Banta is going to talk about these later, but if anyone wants to discuss consent
agenda Item A, they can do that now or make comments about it.
5
And consent agenda Item 4B, anyone want to discuss those? Does anyone want to
take either of these consent agenda items off the agenda that would be for discussion
also? No.
So seeing that there's no discussion nor no one wants to remove any of the consent
agenda items, I would entertain a motion to accept them.
IT WAS MOVED BY SUPERVISOR WILCOX, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
ORSBORN AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT
AGENDA.
5. Federal Legislative Update
Chair Aames said the next is Federal Legislative Agenda. I think, Mr. Banta, you would
like to delay that until after.
Mr. Banta said Mr. Chairman, if I could on the regular agenda if we could move to Item
No. 6 in the interest of time and then we will come back to Item No. 5 afterwards. I
would like to introduce that subject with your permission.
Chair Aames said okay. We will do that. We will come back to certainly No. 5, and you
will give us a little briefing on the consent agenda as well so we hear some of the
highlights of those.
6. Contract Award for a Fixed Route Contractor Unifying Valley Metro and City of
Tempe Services
Chair Aames said Item No. 6, this is the Contract Award for Fixed Route Contractor
Unifying Valley Metro and City of Tempe Services. And we will allow public comments
on this, but first I'm going to call on Mr. Banta to provide background information.
Mr. Banta said thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. As an update to the
December meeting that we had, we did receive a second protest from Veolia on
12/27/2012. We have reported this matter also to the City of Phoenix, the FTA recipient
for the Valley, and also the FTA.
We, Valley Metro staff, have performed a thorough analysis of the grounds for the
protest. I issued a final decision on the protest on January 8, 2013. I have denied the
protest a second time and no appeal to my decision a second time has been advanced
to the FTA.
We have also received confirmation from our contractor First Transit. A lot of issues
that you heard previously in the December board meeting about 13(c) compliance,
wages and salaries, benefits, contractual requirements, all of those have been
6
committed to us in writing. You have a copy of the letter that will be respected and
honored by the contractor that we're recommending today for approval - First Transit.
With that bit of information, I would like to introduce Jyme Sue McLaren who is going to
go through a little more detailed presentation as to our reasons for advancing this for
your approval. Thank you.
Ms. McLaren said thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Aames, and members of the
Valley Metro RPTA Board of Directors.
As Steve stated, we're here today to receive approval to award a contract to First
Transit for the unified service within the City of Tempe and the RPTA service in the East
Valley.
Just to give you an overview of what we're going to cover today, for the benefit of those
board members who may not have been here last month, we're going to touch briefly
what you heard last month on our procurement process.
We're also going to give you a comparison between the proposals that our panel has
reviewed. And then we will turn it over for questions from the Board.
Some time ago, the city of Tempe and the RPTA recognized that there was a potential
opportunity for savings with the expiration of two service contracts for the East Valley,
one with the RPTA and the other with the City of Tempe.
A team of staff evaluated the opportunities presented to them and determined that a
single RFP would be an opportunity to evaluate the potential for saving money for the
East Valley services.
We began this process in October 2011. In June of this year we actually issued the
RFP and through September and October the proposals were evaluated.
In November, the city of Tempe actually endorsed the staff recommendation to award
the contract to First Transit and subsequent to that, the Transit Management Committee
at their November meeting also endorsed to move forward with the award of the
contract. So we're here today to seek board approval for that action.
Now to get into the procurement process, our RFP actually asked our proposers to
provide us with three scenarios: what the proposal would look like if it was just an
RPTA service, a city of Tempe service, and then an opportunity to combine both of
those into one management team with one service provider.
In each of the service proposals, we did ask for a three-year contract term and then an
additional seven years beyond to make it a full 10-year contract.
7
We received three proposals. And the three proposals that we received were: First
Transit, National Express Group, and Veolia Transportation.
The evaluation panel consisted of several of our member cities: The cities of Tempe,
Scottsdale, Mesa, the RPTA staff, and a representative from the Regional Transit
District in Denver, Colorado.
The evaluation criterion that was used to evaluate the proposals was five categories.
The categories were: a comprehensive operations plan, the management team's
experience and expertise, continuous improvement, which continuous improvement is
really a performance-based management of the contract; employee development, and
then the last category, of course, is price.
Initial reviews of the proposals concluded that the unified approach really did achieve
lower operating costs. It achieved a reduction in deadhead miles. Those are the miles
that a bus takes to get from the maintenance facility to the beginning of their route when
they're not actually picking up passengers. And it also received several economies of
scale, which are listed up here.
Therefore, the status-quo proposals that we received at that time were not advanced for
further consideration. At that time the only proposals that were advanced were the
unified service proposals.
Now to take a look at the scoring points for all three proposals, this table really indicates
the initial screening for those three proposals for the unified approach.
As a result of the scoring, National was deemed not within a competitive range and
therefore not invited back for an oral interview or an opportunity to present a best and
final offer. And then in looking at the final evaluation points, after the conclusion of the
oral interviews and the best and final offers were presented, this scoring resulted in First
Transit receiving the highest points in two categories: the operations plan, as well as
the price category.
Those two categories are the highest percentage points awarded through the review
and evaluation. That is 70 percent of the total points evaluated.
And just to take a look at how these proposals stacked up against one another, this
graph really shows First Transit's ability to recognize where they might achieve
efficiencies between a status quo and a unified service contract.
And really what it shows is, the delta between First Transit's status quo and the unified,
they recognized a $12 million savings by combining those two service contracts into
one, while the Veolia proposal, as you can see, resulted in a $7 million difference.
8
Prior to the issuing of our RFP, we did obtain an independent cost estimate. And this
cost estimate was really to provide us with a general realm of reasonability for our
proposals during the evaluation process.
As you can see from this chart, First Transit's proposal, which is the middle proposal,
the light purple, and Veolia's is the dark purple, and the gray bar is our independent cost
estimate.
As you can see First Transit's proposal really closed -- it tracked very closely with our
independent cost estimate for both -- this is the first three years of the contract and
these are the next seven and this is the total of all three or both of those.
And First Transit's really did track closely with our independent cost estimate.
Veolia's was slightly higher for the first three years of the base contract. And then
somewhat significantly higher in the seven years out.
Just to give you an understanding for how we have viewed utilization of these facilities
and how they might actually save us money in our service operations, the red or the
yellow area indicates primarily our service area. We actually go further north into the
city of Scottsdale and a little bit further west, but this is generally our service area.
And as you can see, we're talking about two maintenance facilities under this contract:
one in the East Valley, which is the RPTA maintenance facility, that facility is at the 202
freeway and Greenfield Road, and then one in central Tempe.
And really what you can see is that by optimizing where your services are delivered and
where those facilities are located would help you achieve a reduction in those deadhead
miles for the fleet in which you operate.
Now in looking at how our contractors actually viewed this, First Transit's proposal we
believe was able to capture these efficiencies we believed could be realized in the
contract proposal.
If you look, Veolia's proposal reassigned a total of 25 buses from the Mesa facility to the
city of Tempe facility, which is more centrally located in the service area, while Veolia's
proposal reassigned a total of sixty vehicles.
So we really have the bulk of our fleet in the First Transit proposal being in the central
location of our service area. And I should point out that really what that does, that is a
benefit to our contractor. Clearly, they save money by not having that and those costs
are passed on to us, but it also puts less miles on the vehicle and less miles on our
vehicles really mean an extended life for our fleet as well. So there's benefit to us as
well and we also save cost on fuel.
9
I did want to just bring to the Board's attention that any successful bidder on our
proposal would have to adhere to performance and safety standards that we have
established.
As you can see, we have a lot of performance and safety standards. I would just bring
to your attention, because the question was raised at the previous board meeting, that
we do have standards for preventable accidents, maintenance failures, and deferred
maintenance, which really lead to the overall safety of our fleet. And we monitor these
performance standards regularly with our contractor.
When comparing the two proposals in the area of vehicle maintenance, I think there's
just a couple points worth mentioning. The RFP did indicate that the proposers needed
to be within an 18-month period of a successful bid to receive -- achieve a ASE blue
seal maintenance certification. And really what that is, is an industry standard of
excellence for vehicle maintainers.
When looking at First Transit and Veolia's proposal, First Transit indicated that they
have received that level of achievement at fifty-eight facilities throughout the United
States, while Veolia did not indicate that they had received that certification.
Air-conditioning maintenance, as you would imagine, is a priority for our fleet. Our fleet
manufacturers -- our fleet air-conditioning systems are Thermo King.
One of the advantages that the panel saw for the First Transit proposal was there was a
commitment to house on site a full-time Thermo King technician to provide the
maintenance for our air-conditioning systems. And Veolia did not have a relationship
with someone mentioned in the proposals for Thermo King.
And then if you look at the next three categories, really the number of mechanics
between the two they pair up pretty even, as well as the budget that each proposer was
establishing for parts and inventory and then incentivizing their team to receive technical
certification. They're all pretty consistent with one another.
And then at the last board meeting, there was questions raised about the staffing plans,
so we wanted to provide the Board with a comparison between First Transit's and
Veolia's staffing plans. And when you look at the two, First Transit's proposal has a
total of 58 FTEs, this number right down here, 58 FTEs identified as a delta less in their
proposal.
And really, the largest number is the twenty-three vehicle operators, which is a 4
percent reduction. And this indicates where the cost savings can be achieved through
efficiencies in their operating plan.
10
And then questions raised specifically by the Board, just to summarize, our contract cost
savings of $5 million dollars, there were questions at the previous meeting where is that
$5 million dollars coming from.
It's really a routing and schedule efficiencies that the First Transit proposal has
achieved. That's a reduction in deadhead miles, as well as salary savings. They do
have staffing efficiencies. They have less management, as well as administrative staff,
and there are fewer vehicle miles, which really reduce the routine preventive
maintenance. The less miles you put on the vehicles, the less maintenance that has to
take place. So those were generally the areas where the cost savings were identified.
The issue of compliance with 13(c) was raised. I think it's important to recognize that as
a recipient for federal funds, we are required to ensure that any contract we issue is
also in compliance with 13(c).
First Transit, as Mr. Banta previously stated, has committed to us that they will fully
comply with 13(c). They will honor labor, wages, and benefits that are currently in
collective bargaining agreements. They will honor seniority levels in those agreements,
and they will also offer comparable, if not better, health care plans for their work team.
And in summary, First Transit's proposal really determined to be the most advantageous
in realizing cost savings associated with the service unification and they chose to pass
those cost savings on to us.
I think it's worth noting that the three-year pricing for the base term of the contract is
between 9 and 10 percent below the cost that we're paying today for the comparable
service.
So we are here today to seek board approval to execute a contract for the RPTA and
city of Tempe bus operations and maintenance with First Transit for a total amount for
the three-year period of $150,885,082. And we are also seeking board authorization to
execute a change order for a contingency in the amount of $12.5 million. That
contingency is to allow the agency an opportunity to add additional service where needs
arise.
Now if the Board chooses to move forward with this contract today, we are prepared to
initiate the service contract on July 1st of this year.
I think it's worth noting that the contract also includes a pricing option for those next
seven years of the contract. A decision to exercise those options will be made during
the first three years of the base contract. And we will be returning to the Board for your
approval to execute that additional seven-year term beyond the three base years.
I believe that concludes my presentation. We have several staff members, as well as
myself, and Mr. Banta to answer any questions that the board may have at this time.
11
Chair Aames said are there any questions or points of discussion from the board?
Supervisor Wilcox said I have a couple and thank you for all of the information you
provided us. I got the information and went through it. A couple of things I wanted to
ask. The routes were reduced -- were reassigned sixty bus routes by First Transit and
25 by Veolia in the contracts they put in.
On the contracts that First Transit came up with, what does that do to customer service?
You know, I am trying to visualize the route that maybe goes from the Capitol to
downtown, and by combining routes that will go a longer route. What does that do to
customer times?
Ms. McLaren said the reassignment of the fleet really optimized the amount of time that
the bus has to take to and from the beginning of its route. So it allows the bus fleet to
move to a Tempe location, for example, on a route that might be better served by that
facility. That's really the optimizing of the fleet.
Mr. Banta said the current route structure is not changing. It's the start and stop points
of that bus for that day of service. We're not recommending at this point in time or
talking about eliminating any service in a certain corridor as being more efficient in how
we service maintenance the buses.
Supervisor Wilcox said I realize that. I guess the question is if you have a longer route,
obviously the bus isn't going to turn around and come back on the route as fast, so does
that affect the times typically the customers will get on the buses? Does it lengthen the
time?
Mr. Banta said no.
Supervisor Wilcox said and on the independent consultant, when they came up with the
figure, were either Veolia or First Transit privy to that figure?
Ms. McLaren said the independent cost estimate was made available to our proposers
after the proposals were received by us, so I think it was November of this year, so they
had already submitted their proposals before the independent cost estimate was made
available to them.
Supervisor Wilcox said the labor portion, which I was real concerned with, I understand
from a First Transit letter that came in and was sent to us by your staff, that the
collective bargaining agreement is going to be honored?
Ms. McLaren said that is correct.
Supervisor Wilcox said how many people will First Transit have to lay off? Did that
come up, or are they committing to keeping all our bus drivers?
12
Ms. McLaren said well, it's not -- we leave the responsibility of the staffing plan to the
contractor or the proposer. So they will have to work within how many staff they have
available. It's a very fluid number. Between now and the time in which they take over
the service, there could be -- we could be down several employees due to people
leaving and not replacing those positions.
So we believe the number is very small and that they will work toward -- they have
expressed to us that they will work toward, through an attrition process, to retain as
many employees as they can without incurring additional layoffs.
Supervisor Wilcox said my understanding also is that First Transit is committing to
seniority?
Ms. McLaren said yes, that's part of the 13(c).
Supervisor Wilcox said okay. The collective bargaining agreement that they're agreeing
to, that's already in place?
Ms. McLaren said there is one collective bargaining agreement in place for the City of
Tempe's service. The City of Mesa's collective bargaining agreement expired a year
ago in July, and we understand that they are negotiating.
Mr. Banta said I believe the deal terms were reached, but I don't know that it's been
ratified by membership. Because we're not involved in those negotiations, that is a
matter between Veolia and the ATU at this point.
Supervisor Wilcox said I guess the question is if that is close to ratification, is that the
contract that First Transit will honor?
Mr. Banta said yes.
Supervisor Wilcox said okay. The new one, let's say if there's a vote within a week or
something.
Mr. Banta said yes.
Supervisor Wilcox said okay. I think that's all the questions I had right now. I know
there's speakers that might bring up more questions.
Chair Aames said does anyone else on the Board want to say anything or ask a
question?
Okay, with that then we will go to public comments, and we have quite a few of them.
The first person is John Hoeft, and I have you down as living in Dallas, Texas.
13
Chair Aames said okay. And I'm going to give everyone like a minute and a half to two
minutes because we have so many that want to speak.
Mr. Hoeft said I'll have to talk fast. Mr. Chairman, members of the board, my name is
John Hoeft, I'm general counsel of Veolia's transit division. I reside in Dallas, Texas.
We would like to thank the staff for making available the material that, we believe, was
needed by the board and the public. Some of those documents were only received this
morning.
You should not award the contract to First Transit, because First's price is unreasonably
low, unrealistically low based on labor cost assumptions that aren't achievable.
First Transit asserts it will hold wages and benefits at their current level. But achieve
reductions in labor costs through reducing deadhead miles and deadhead hours. Miles
translate to hours.
First Transit's proposal reduces deadhead hours by 3,863 more hours than Veolia's
proposal. That's per year. The cost of an hour of deadhead is about $50. So that
accounts for a reduction of about $190,000 per year.
Now contrast that to the $3.5-million-reduction or shortfall in wages and benefits. I don't
have time within two minutes, obviously, to give you the detail, but that was presented in
our protest, and we can go over it if you wish.
The process was not equal or fair either, because First Transit requested the option to
re-price after the Mesa contract was negotiated. We requested the option to re-price, if
necessary, because the impact of the Affordable Care Act. First Transit maintains
they're request was granted, ours was denied.
Awarding a contract based on irresponsible pricing will result in an underfunded contract
operated by a substitute general manager with a dissatisfied workforce.
If the Board decides to award this contract now, it would be prudent for you to delay,
however, because you delayed one time and we got the additional information we
needed. It would be prudent to delay.
Chair Aames said you can take another minute. Because I didn't mention it until you got
up there.
Mr. Hoeft said it would be prudent for you now to take another minute -- or another
month. Sorry. I'll take the minute -- so that staff can prepare and present you with a
side-by-side analysis of the pricing.
14
If you decide to award the contract now, you must hold First Transit to its pricing. They
may have a right to be wrong, but they don't have a right to be wrong and be made
whole. And they don't have a right to be wrong and put it on the backs of labor.
We appreciate the opportunity to present our views and respectfully request that you
examine the costs to be assured that this contract can be performed without harm to
service, quality, or labor piece. And we're available to provide whatever assistance you
may require. Thank you.
Chair Aames said thank you. The next speaker is Maria Salas. Is that Maria? Maria
Salas from Apache Junction.
Ms. Salas said I'm a bus driver. We cannot talk about lower cost compromising the
safety on the buses. We already know that less money will mean poor maintenance on
the vehicles. It will mean less money for repairs.
We cannot talk about low cost if we compromise or I would say jeopardize the workers'
rights and workers' jobs. We already know that less money may bring probably layoffs,
time cuts, benefit cuts. And lastly we already know that workers' rights are human
rights.
Let's not forget about the people who are the ones we are here for, the passengers. We
already know that we are not the best run city running public transportation, but let's
please don't make it worse.
I mean, the people rely a lot on the buses. They ride the buses because they need to.
Some of them they cannot afford a car. Some of them they can't drive for any reason,
but just don't forget about them because they are the ones who vote for you to be here.
Thank you.
Chair Aames said thank you. The next speaker is Blue Crowley.
Mr. Crowley said I'd like to point out that this week, when it comes to safety and
maintenance, I went and got on a First Transit bus. And the way I was able to get on
that First Transit bus is, you know, that strap I have on my bike usually, I had to strap
my bike down because it was broken in one of the sections. Now it was a bike rack for
two bicycles, but both were broken, so I asked the gentleman from First Transit what
level of ineptitude do you have when you put your buses out?
Another example of this is I have been on First Transit buses with broken windows, not
acceptable. What I want you to do is when it comes to deadhead, I don't want such a
thing to exist. When the bus leaves the yard, whatever road it's on, passengers,
because we pay that fifty bucks already. And start functioning the system within itself.
15
Whenever I'm at a bus stop and I see a bus going by and it says not in service, I'm
paying for the fuel, I'm paying for the maintenance, I'm paying for the operator. The
only thing that I'm paying most for is not being able to use that bus.
So I hope that you will reconsider. I believe that both of the companies need to be able
to show in totality what they're going to be doing, but I just know that with Veolia's union
workers there's a standard that wasn't there when First Transit did get an upgrade
because of, what, those union members. Thank you.
Chair Aames said thank you. The next speaker is Leo Villalobas. And you live in
Phoenix; correct?
Mr. Villalobas said yes, sir. Hello, board of directors. I am not familiar with all of the
proceedings, but I am just here in support of First Transit and to assist in any
environmental questions that there may be, as well as the proposed environmental
director for the Tempe and Mesa contract. Thank you.
Chair Aames said thank you. The next speaker is James Washington. And you live in
Buckeye; right?
Mr. Washington said my family's voting citizens for Tempe, everybody, okay, all right,
we've already seen this before. History repeating itself. You've seen this with MV.
That is one of the reasons why I wished that we could be public servants. That's our
work.
Now we're disgusted that every five years that we have to go through this. I've seen
that you have experts, you have professionals, but I didn't see any operator input to
your stages in ways that you got there. The only thing I seen was salary cuts. We've
seen that.
I'm not here to bash First Transit. I'm not here to bash Veolia. I'm here for justice. And
with a $4.5-million deficit from the current contract, that's not justice. That's coming off
my family, your economy, and all these innocent people that work there.
Now if First was an even playing field, we wouldn't have to be here, so I ask you all to
reconsider. Reconsider because if not, there's going to be some political labor turmoil in
this future. And we've seen this with MV. They told you they could run it. They had to
give it right back. So take that into consideration. Thank you, Board.
Chair Aames said thank you. Next speaker is Brad Thomas.
Mr. Thomas said I am from Cincinnati, Mr. Chairman, and thank you. Mr. Chairman,
and members of the board, my name is Brad Thomas. I'm the president of First Transit.
Thank you for allowing me the time to speak today. It is truly an honor to be the
16
recommended contractor for this work, and I will be brief.
I'd like to get right to the point and allow any concerns that you make that may have
been voiced today; the savings demonstrated in First Transit's proposal will not come on
the back of the employees.
The wage and benefit levels of the union at the time First Transit submitted its proposal
will be honored. There will be no reduction in wages and benefits.
Our demonstrating savings come from a reduction in deadhead miles and overall route
efficiencies. That came about when the RPTA combined the services, not a reduction
in wages and benefits.
First Transit is one of the largest and most experienced public transit operators in the
United States. And we put that experience to work for the RPTA by developing
efficiencies that will both improve service and save the RPTA and the tax payers a
significant savings it sought when consolidating these services.
I'd like to remind you that First Transit's proposal varies from the RPTA's in the
independent cost estimate by only 3 percent, further evidencing the reasonableness of
our bid.
We've had labor peace in the Valley with the ATU for more than six years, a fact that we
are very proud of.
Our response to the RFP was not conditional, and we are ready to sign the contract
today and be in preparations to run the service. Thank you for your time.
Chair Aames said thank you. The next speaker is Nick Promponas, from Chandler; is
that right?
Mr. Promponas said Mr. Chairman, members of the board, my name is Nick
Promponas. I serve as the senior vice president of First Transit's western U.S. and
Alberta, Canada, operations, with our regional office located here locally here in Tempe.
We relocated our office from Los Angeles to Tempe in 2004 to demonstrate our
commitment to this community. As a company, we felt that the metro Phoenix area had
made a significant commitment to improving the air quality and to mitigate congestion
by enhancing the community's public transportation options through Proposition 400.
We have worked hard for the past five years to earn the city of Phoenix's trust through
our contract with the transit department operating bus service from the west transit
facility.
Having a local operation is proving to be extremely beneficial for First Transit and our
experience will serve as a benefit for the RPTA.
17
We understand the community. We have the industry knowledge and operational
expertise to deliver an efficient and quality service to the community.
The RFP that you issued offered a blank slate for companies to design the most
efficient way to operate the services from both Mesa and Tempe. We designed a
system that minimized deadhead by shifting sixty buses from Mesa to Tempe, as you've
already heard.
Our cost savings are predicated on this strategy. Having said that, we were able to
eliminate duplication of coverage, primarily from overhead positions, in all 58 positions
as you saw earlier in the presentation. Eleven full-time equivalent positions of that 58
are operators and maintenance workers. We expect that these reductions will occur
through attrition as opposed to any direct impact on existing employees. This has been
our experience in prior contracts and, quite frankly, we see no difference here. That's
all I have to say. Thank you very much. We're looking forward to working with you.
Chair Aames said thank you. The next speaker is Tom Secrest, and you're from
Cincinnati also; right?
Mr. Secrest said Mr. Chairman, members of the board, thank you for giving me the
opportunity to speak to you today. My name is Tom Secrest. I'm the vice president of
labor relations for First Transit. I'd like to take this time to address any concerns that
have been raised about First Transit's overall labor relations philosophy or relationship
with organized labor.
First, I'll let you know that First Transit abides by a self-imposed freedom of association
policy whereby all employees are free to join or not join a union without any influence
whatsoever from management. This policy is unique in our industry.
This culture is supported by the fact that over 50,000 of our employees in the United
States are represented by trade unions. We have over six hundred labor agreements in
the United States with more than thirty different trade unions, including the
Amalgamated Transit Union and the operating industry.
First Transit, in fact, has over thirty individual labor agreements with ATU locals
nationally. And our sister company, Greyhound, has a national agreement with the
Amalgamated Transit Union.
Upon invitation from the ATU, I serve as employer trustee on the ATU's national 401K
plan. As an organization we pride ourselves on our relationships with trade unions,
including the ATU.
Locally First Transit has maintained a contract with Local 1433 for six years without any
work stoppages. We're very proud of that.
18
As you've heard from president Brad Thomas, in operating this contract, we'll preserve
all wages and benefits of the existing labor agreements and we would expect to do
nothing else.
In closing, I'd like to commit to you and to the Board that we would not adopt a strategy
on this contract that would damage our existing relationships with the ATU or any trade
union nationally. We have too much at stake to jeopardize it on this contract. Thank
you.
Chair Aames said thank you. The next speaker is Edward Michael Lemons, and you're
from right here, Phoenix; right?
Mr. Lemons said chairman, members of the board, my name is Edward Lemons and I'm
a role supervisor, supervisor of operations for west Phoenix operations facility.
I live in west Phoenix, which is also known as District 5. And I am in support of the
RPTA Tempe-Mesa contract being awarded to First Transit.
In an effort to conserve time, I would like to speak on behalf of these employees that are
sitting here with me today. Whether we are a veteran operator of 25 years like Audrey,
or a supervisor like me, or Michael, a mechanic like Gus, or a parts manager like Chuck,
or operators like Thelma and Brenda, we enjoy our jobs. We love our jobs.
First Transit is a different type of company. They care about their employees, customer
service, and professionalism, safety. I say it again safety, including training that is
provided at all levels throughout the community and the commitment to grow and evolve
to better serve the community are the top of our motivators.
Today you will have and today you will hear negative remarks about the company from
outsiders telling you that First Transit is a bad practice and they treat their employees
poorly and therefore they shouldn't have the contract.
Well, I'm here to tell you as a current First Transit employee, that I love my job. I plan to
continue my employment with First Transit for the long run. I started as an operator and
I'm now a supervisor. Isn't that the type of company that you want in your community?
We are professional, loyal, and we are encouraged to give the riders the best
experience possible. Thank you for your time.
Chair Aames said thank you. The next speaker is Anna Maria McArthur.
Ms. McArthur said I'm executive director of About Care. About Care is located in
Chandler and we serve the homebound elderly and disabled in Chandler and Gilbert.
We're a small nonprofit and the primary focus we do is transportation for medical
appointments. The majority of our clients are elderly women that are economically
disadvantaged and we provide door-through-door services.
19
Our typical clients, we have 350 clients, are elderly and disabled. They have no one in
their lives. Their families don't live here. They're very poor, they're shuttered in, so we
need community support.
First Transit provides us that community support. They have been a loyal community
partner with us for the last five years since I've been there. And we couldn't exist
without community's support.
So I'm in here recommending First Transit, not only for the services that you want to
provide but also for the community. So thank you very much.
Chair Aames said thank you. Next speaker is Andrew Federhar.
Mr. Federhar said I'm an attorney with Fennemore Craig a Phoenix law firm. I'm here
today to speak on behalf of First Transit. I want to talk about a couple of issues, a
couple of which has been raised today directly, and a couple of which has been raised
indirectly.
You heard today comments about how First Transit's documents were just reviewed this
morning, just received this morning, and so Veolia asked you to postpone a decision.
The documents were received this morning because they just picked them up today.
They were offered the documents more than two weeks ago and chose not to pick them
up and not to examine them. Their lack of diligence should not be a reason for you to
delay today's decision.
You heard also this morning from a gentleman speaking on behalf of his position as a
driver talking about becoming a public servant and that that was the overall goal and
direction of the union.
We've heard a lot of that in the last month since the last time we were in front of you and
the agenda being having bus drivers become public servants.
That wasn't the policy decision that the RPTA put into place. That wasn't the course
and direction you chose. You chose to seek involvement of the private sector and that
is not the issue that you have before you today.
What's missing in today's discussion is an examination, not just of what First Transit and
Veolia have proposed to you, but what you're doing today. When you look at what
you're spending today for two systems that have admitted inefficiencies to them, you're
spending between $53 and $54 million to run two separate systems.
Under Veolia's proposal to you, their cost actually goes up over the status quo by about
$50,000 a year. Doing away with deadhead miles, improving efficiencies, and their cost
went up.
20
Our cost at First Transit, by contrast, goes down about $5 million dollars a year because
of the inefficiencies that are going to be eliminated. And as you sit here today as a
public agency making those decisions, I've sat in your chair. I was the chairman of the
State Transportation Board through the 1980s and early '90s. I've had to make the
decisions that you're faced with today as well.
Public dollars, $5 million dollars a year to go to rewarding inefficiency and higher cost is
not in the public's best interest. You've had a terrific process. You've had a
professional staff. And you've had an outside independent consultant confirm for you
the result that you now have before you today.
I urge you to take advantage of the opportunity to save money and improve service, an
opportunity you rarely see. I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you.
Chair Aames said thank you. The next speaker is Bob Bean. And you live in Phoenix;
right?
Mr. Bean said I do. Mr. Chairman, board members, Mr. Banta, my name is Bob Bean. I
do live in Phoenix. I'm the president business agent of the ATU. And my agenda has
changed since I was here last month. I've been listening to what's been said today and
over the last month since we were last here.
I've had a chance to look at both proposals. And what I'm hearing today, I don't buy for
one minute. They're contracting out service workers, which on the Mesa property is
represented by ATU; on the Tempe property they're in the process of being organized
by the operating engineers. That's a major 13(c) violation whether they want to agree to
it or not.
Mr. Thomas sent a letter out saying that there's been a great relationship with the ATU
for the last six years with no labor disputes. There hasn't been any labor disputes, but
we recently signed a contract with them a year ago. They don't even live up to the new
contract that we signed with them. So there is no great relationship with the ATU in
here with the ATU in Phoenix no matter what they want to tell you.
First Transit's got the Yuma property. The average wage for a Yuma bus driver is
$11.34 an hour. They have to work six days a week to maybe make 36 hours. They
can't afford medical, and especially with the new nationwide medical they want to roll
out, which makes it even worse for them, the majority of the Yuma operators have to go
to Mexico to get medical service.
They want to honor the existing CBAs, well, I believe, Mary Rose brought up the subject
that we're taking a new contract to vote tomorrow on the Mesa property for ratification,
hopefully. So how can they honor something they've never seen. I mean, that is a
crock no matter how you want to spin it.
21
I would urge that you postpone this another thirty days. Let us bring the contract back.
If it's ratified tomorrow, let the board members see the new contract, see the new
agreement, see the new numbers that First Transit is saying they're going to live up to
blindly, because I don't buy that. I wasn't born yesterday.
Another issue, hear these people here talk about what a good company First Transit is.
Their handbook is a handbook from hell. It was written by a dictator, and it's nothing
more than an employee recycling program. And the promise that they're going to raffle
off a car every year, that's just comical in my eyes. And on the slide it said that Thermo
King was only with First Transit. Just to enlighten everybody, Thermo King is on site
with Veolia. Thanks for your time.
Chair Aames said thank you. The next speaker is Michael Cornelius.
Mr. Cornelius said I live in the City of Phoenix. As much as I want to say ditto to that, I'll
just point out a few things as the union's chief negotiator on the contract, so I can
answer a little bit more specific questions.
Number one -- well, actually I'll just take it, as I said, a few times before, I don't care if
you give the contract to First Transit. I don't care if you give it to Veolia. You will find
nothing but the best in the valley. We really do have good workers and that's who we're
here to fight for is the workers.
And Supervisor Wilcox asked, I thought, a brilliant question that was that kind of -- I
don't think anybody caught it. And she asked about seniority being protected.
Currently there are two separate seniority rosters. And when you combine the two
properties, how do you account for combining those two seniority lists. If you can't
answer that question, that's a 13(c) issue, because either there's workers here and
there's attorneys here, and there's labor here, but I need answers to the questions.
It's my understanding that 13(c) requires bargaining. That's what we're going to do is
bargain. And I want to know how are we going to work the seniority issue out between
merging the two different properties. I think that's a perfectly legitimate question.
We do have a contract ratification vote tomorrow in Mesa. There's no guarantee as to
whether or not that's going to pass. If it doesn't pass, then we'll take a strike vote and
we'll go forward from there.
Certainly as you all are very well aware, we don't have a great relationship with Veolia.
We don't have a great relationship with First Transit. And I just arbitrated a case where
they fired a 72-year old woman where they said that she stole a bus pass and she
didn't. Then two weeks later this company that cares about labor called the police and
wanted her arrested but failed to prove their case.
22
This great company who cares about labor when we tried to organize the mechanics, it
was a fight. They threw us off the property. So, you know, this whole freedom of
association stuff that is all bull.
Veolia is no good company either. They have their problems. We want to be public
sector workers. And I understand the attorney said that, you know, hey, that's not the
issue, but it is the issue.
You know, the last time I checked, the unions were here to fight for the workers, not for
the companies, not for the Veolia's -- especially these foreign companies that are
always fighting over these contracts.
They are both out in Las Vegas. I don't know if you guys know that. Neither one of
them are there. It's because of these kinds of public battles, but the people who always
suffer are the workers, the people who have to go to work and drive the community.
So I need an answer to my question on the issue of how are we going to negotiate with
the Amalgamated Transit Union international office on the impacts of that 13(c)?
Because when you have a seniority roster at the Tempe property and a seniority roster
at the Mesa property, how do you combine those and not violate the 13(c) agreement
when the 13(c) agreement, among other things, protects seniority.
So if I'm number one in Mesa, what happens to my seniority if I go to Tempe? Do I go
to the bottom? Am I now number two?
I really think that it's a good idea that you guys hold off on this. We do have a contract
vote tomorrow. I think it's very important to know whether or not that contract passes. If
it does pass, then, obviously, Veolia and First Transit -- I don't have a problem giving
First Transit a copy of the labor agreement so they can review it and cost it out and
determine whether or not that contract meets their funding expectations, I have no
problem with that.
But I really think that you need to give me time to work with my workers to figure out
whether or not there's going to be an impact on their rights and their ability to work.
Both companies have their good and bad. Thank you.
Chair Aames said okay. Thank you. Next speaker is Frank Zuckerbrow. And you live
in Glendale; right?
Mr. Zuckerbrow said yes, I do. Good afternoon, everybody, and thank you for giving me
an opportunity to speak. I've been with Phoenix Transit back on Watkins Road days
when people then called me Frank, they called me TICO man because everything was
TICO concerning the bus, even the time was TICO time when they would announce it.
23
And I think that we've really progressed a long way; whereas when I started, the last
bus of the night used to leave downtown terminal at 6:15. It went to 7:15 -- Audrey
would remember -- 8:15, 9:15, and like, you know, we progressed very, very much so.
But we talk about efficiencies, and I think that Mary Rose said about customer service.
You know, right now there's a new policy that was instituted, which is called the closed-
door loop, that may be saving like a million some-odd dollars or the companies are
losing a million dollars and what happens is, is that if you're doing a 186 on Union Hills
and if the bus is terminating over on 51st Avenue and yet the bus is going to continue
deadheading to 59th Avenue, how do you tell the people that they got to get off the bus
because you're on a closed-door loop. I mean, that's happening over and over and
over.
And I see that my light is going to come on. I want to just talk about pullout times over
at First Transit. We have a special meeting right now in order to save money to having
four people share cards because they didn't want to have to buy cards for the new bid
that starts January 28th.
What happens is, is that, and this is an actual scenario, that an operator may check in at
1:10 in the afternoon. That's the time that they start their time. They're going to have to
go out in the yard, they're going to share a card with three other people, and to go over -
- and I'm going to call it Westridge Mall, Desert Sky Mall, exactly 10 minutes later when
they get there, that bus is already due and ready to leave.
That is creating a concern because First Transit keeps on talking about safety, and how
could that be safety when you don't even have a chance to walk around the bus to look
at it, to examine it, to even speak to the other operators to find out whether or not
there's any kind of conditions, you know, relative to safety.
I had a bunch of things but I see my light is flashing, so thank you for giving me the
opportunity to speak.
Chair Aames said thank you for bringing that up. The next speaker is David Lefland.
Mr. Lefland said I live in Mesa. First, I'd like to thank the Board for allowing us to speak
here today. We had a lot of talk about safety and we've heard a lot about how their
buses are being kept up. I hope that the Board had a chance to look at both company's
safety record, maintenance record before awarding this contract.
The second thing I want to bring up is the American dream, the dream all of us out here,
the workers and the operators, how are we going to, you know, survive. The company
wants to cut 4 percent of drivers and operators that they listed up there, but in the
second breath, they say, well, we're going to keep as many as we can.
24
Are you going to keep us, or you going to let us go? Are you going to make us part-time
so that you don't have to pay benefits and wages and everything else?
I mean, it's just a fact that this company cannot do it. We have somewhat great
relationship with Veolia, the company has not degraded us, has not tried to take away
our salary or our benefits. We have a contract coming up tomorrow. So we just want to
make sure that we're protected.
In closing here today I'd like to let you know that why fix something that's not broken.
You want to change contractors, I mean, what benefit besides your $5 million are you
going to do with that money.
I mean, what it boils down to is, worse-case scenario, we're going to end up like New
York City against Mayor Bloomberg here. And in return it's going to be against
Mr. Banta there because he's so high on the horse about getting this contract pushed
through. What is he getting? What are these employees getting that came up here and
said, you know, had said First Transit is such a good company.
Okay. I mean, that's the most important thing. We have almost, I'd say about fifteen
hundred employees. What's going to happen with them? I mean, it's a give or take
about the fifteen hundred, but what's going to happen to them?
Are we going to go back into a recession, people won't be able to buy from their local
stores, the groceries, not being able to travel with their families, take that into
consideration.
I mean, I'm sure you guys have great jobs, great salaries coming in, and that's your
right. You've worked hard for whatever you earn, what about us that are working hard
to take care of this Valley. This Valley means a lot to us and it means a lot to the fact
that we work for a good company. We work for a company that cares about us and is
willing to work with us. Thank you.
Chair Aames said thank you. The next speaker is Pete Flores. And you're from Mesa;
right?
Mr. Flores said yes and I'm here today to speak to you once again about my concern
regarding First contract's RFP proposal. My concern is mainly for the employees, you
know. Are you absolutely sure without a shadow of a doubt that you guys are not going
to mess with our wages, benefits, and everything like that? You know, that's my main
concern is for the employees. Okay.
I'm the executive board officer at the Mesa yard, you know. I'm speaking for them for
the ones that couldn't come today that are driving the buses right now as we speak to
get people back and forth either to the store or to their job wherever it may be.
25
Safety is my main concern. When you start cutting moneys and stuff like that, it affects
the fleet, you know. So once you start affecting the fleet, where are you going to come
up with the parts to pay -- I mean, to pay for the parts to fix these buses, you know.
I don't know all -- everything about what the RFP says, but it seems to me like there's
going to be cutbacks in the whole general area. So think about what you guys are
voting on again and you know, if need be, if you have to push it another thirty days to
take your time to really analyze the numbers, do so, please, because it's going to affect
everybody. Thank you.
Chair Aames said thank you. The next speaker is Bishop Winston. Donnell Winston.
Mr. Winston said I live in Mesa. I'm here today not to talk about First Transit or Veolia.
My concern is that we have not came together as a unit, because one thing is the union
has disagreements about how this is going to take place.
The next thing we have talked about is safety. We have talked about the budget. We
talked about salaries. We're talking about how the cost containment. We understand
that their economy of this state is going down and what we're looking for is more
productivity.
And to get the productivity, we have not come together as a unit to come to a settled
agreement. We have ups and downs on who's going to take it, why they should take it,
and how we're saving money.
But the most concern we're not looking at as far as the employees and how it's going to
affect them and it affects the economy for our different stores and things that we used to
do.
So I'm asking you if you could hold off with your decision and come together with the
union and with these different, First Transit and Veolia, we can come to a settlement
agreement. Thank you.
Chair Aames said thank you. Next speaker is David Bodney.
Mr. Bodney said he lives in Phoenix. I'm with the law firm of Steptoe and Johnson and I
represent Veolia. I very much appreciate this opportunity to be heard. I hadn't
anticipated speaking this afternoon. But I wanted to correct one piece of the record for
you because I think it's important to your decision today.
One of the speakers, an attorney for First Transit, said that the reason documents had
not been made available was because of a lack of diligence on the part of Veolia for not
reviewing them sooner. I must correct the record and make a couple of points that I
think are important to your decision.
26
We have been trying to get public records since November 19 last year, and we had
been trying up until yesterday to inspect a good many of these records.
It was not until yesterday at 10:30 in the morning when staff was able to produce for me
a wall-size cabinet probably five feet tall, and a box of records and said you can review
them. This was the soonest opportunity that we had and I asked to have a copy of
records produced for us about this deep by the end of the day.
I received them at 9:30. Suffice it to say we haven't reviewed them all, but we're trying
as best we can, but we didn't get them until today. It's not for a lack of asking.
We are still asking for and have asked for, the evaluation committee's scoring sheets
and notes that would tell us just exactly how those numbers were arrived. Those
haven't been produced to this day.
We've asked for e-mails. We received e-mails for John Medwin who used to work here
at RPTA but no others.
So I would just emphasize the point, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, we
have had cooperation with respect finally to the production of these bids. We finally got
to see those this month and we've reviewed some of those documents.
I think it was correct of this board to wait another month before making a decision.
Based on what we've seen and what we've not yet seen still, I think it makes sense to
kick the tires and explore the numbers so that a mistake isn't made that, we submit, is
the responsible thing to do. Thank you very much.
Chair Aames said we have some others that want to be on the record, but did not want
to speak, and, Pat, you have those names and if you would read them into the record
and indicate if their support or not for one of the parties.
Ms. Dillon said the following people are in support of approving First Transit. Chuck
Geary, Gustano Rubalcara, Audrey Favors, Thelma Hanley, and Michael Dunklin
support of First Transit.
Chair Aames said thank you. And they've indicated where they live, the city; right?
Okay. You have that. Okay. Very good. Is there anyone on the Board who would like
to comment?
Supervisor Wilcox said I think it was really good we heard from everybody. There's a
couple of questions I'd like to discuss with Mr. Banta. I would ask that we go into E-
session for just a few minutes. I need some reassurances on some of the points that
were brought up and some clarification, and perhaps we could do it in E-session.
27
Chair Aames said are you making a motion to go into E-session?
IT WAS MOVED BY SUPERVISOR WILCOX, SECONDED BY MAYOR FARR AND
UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO ENTER INTO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION.
The Board adjourned to E-session at 2:10 p.m.
The Board reconvened after E-session at 2:35 p.m.
Chair Aames said we are back in session. And is Mr. Brad Thomas here? If you don't
mind, sir, I would like you to come up, because there's been some questions, as you
have heard, and comments about your intentions with this contract, and you sent a
letter that details all of those. If you could go through some of those for the record here
of what First Transit intends, if they get this contract.
Mr. Thomas said our letter, I stand by our letter of January 21st. Obviously everything
that's in here, all the points, First Transit will preserve the rights and privileges and
benefits in the collective bargaining agreement in place at the time of its best and final
offer. First Transit will meet whatever Section 13(c) requirements apply.
Chair Aames said and that would be when you -- the contract that's in place when you
start July 1, I would think; right?
Mr. Thomas said the collective bargaining agreements that were in place when we
submitted our bid.
Chair Aames said not when you start the contract? Because I understand there's some
bargaining going on right now.
Mr. Thomas said Mr. Chairman, your RFP said if there was a material change in
condition between the time that RPTA issued the RFP and the time that a contract was
executed, you would allow the successful proposer to approach you and ask for a
modification.
So if there have been material changes, then that would be the grounds upon which we
would come and talk to RPTA. If they are nonmaterial changes, then there is no need
to.
Chair Aames said okay. Could you continue then?
Mr. Thomas said second point, our response was not conditional. We've said that --
and I reaffirm that -- I stand by everything that we said today. Our experience and
expertise will bring the cost savings that we've discussed today.
28
We will do that through the elimination of duplicative services, duplicative positions, and
also a reduction in miles and hours. Our proposal achieves the cost savings that the
RPTA sought and they put together when they put out its RFP. We stand by that. We
tried to be as clear as possible today. We've tried to make everyone comfortable. I
reaffirm everything that was in this letter. I reaffirm everything that we've said today. I'll
answer any other questions.
Chair Aames said we don't want to have questions. This is public comment. We just
wanted to hear you reconfirm these.
Mr. Thomas said I do.
Chair Aames said and this is the letter of January 21st, '13, that you sent to actually
directly to me.
Mr. Thomas said yes, sir.
Chair Aames said and so we can put that letter in the record and that you confirm those
points in that letter.
Mr. Thomas said yes, I do.
Chair Aames said thank you very much. Is there any further discussion from anyone on
the Board about this?
Supervisor Wilcox said I had one question. The question is seniority and the question
of complying with 13(c) agreement. I understand that 13(c) agreement is something
that has to be complied with. So I would assume that should this vote take place today,
First Transit will comply with that and deal with the issue of seniority through that.
Chair Aames said we're not asking him at this point, but that's what is indicated in the
letter.
Mr. Banta said my understanding is absolutely correct.
Chair Aames said and he's confirmed that.
Supervisor Wilcox said Mr. Banta, there's been a lot of concern mainly because of
employees, customer service, and safety. I understand in the information you gave us
from that First Transit provided showed that the overall cost was obtained through
deficiencies in unification and also combining routes and not having dead-end routes,
which saved tremendous amounts of money.
The concern of employees, I think have been addressed in the commitment to the
collective bargaining agreements, and my understanding, and I didn't quite hear that if
29
somebody could confirm it, is that should Mesa contract that will be voted on shortly
come into being that will be adhered to also; is that correct?
Mr. Banta said that is my understanding as First Transit states in their letter as long as
there are no major material changes. And we don't anticipate there to be major material
changes. But we aren't the ones sitting at the table negotiating. It is Veolia and ATU.
And I would suggest that we move forward and recognize the fact that First Transit has
committed to 13(c) compliance. They've committed to the collective bargaining
agreements that are currently in place today. I don't expect the new collective
bargaining agreement to be that different than the ones that are in place today. And
they've made a commitment, verbally and in testimony today, that said as they
transition, they will utilize the function of attrition in transitioning employees to less
numbers in certain classifications, which is the human way in which to transition.
Supervisor Wilcox said so should the seniority question come up, that would be worked
out with the combination of both workforces and a discussion with them.
Mr. Banta said I believe because First Transit is committing and is required by law to
comply with 13(c) that will be collectively bargained with the ATU upon ratification.
Supervisor Wilcox said Mr. Banta, what do we have in our contract that assures us
should this go forward that all those things will be done.
Mr. Banta well, I can ask Mr. Ladino to answer the legalities, but all of our contracts
have to be federally compliant. And to be federally compliant, we have to recognize the
labor agreements that are currently in place; we have to recognize 13(c) requirements;
we have to make sure that we don't displace people needlessly.
And Mr. Ladino could potentially answer some of the other questions.
Supervisor Wilcox said maybe he could elaborate because July 1st comes, whoever
gets the contract starts. And what benchmarks do we have to assure us that everything
is going to take place that has been committed to.
Mr. Banta said according to our documents, we're going to have a transition period.
The minute we're able to award a contract, Veolia, First Transit, and ATU will start
discussions on this transition together, would be my hope.
One of our first meetings that we have, if we move this forward for approval today,
would be to sit down with Veolia senior staff and First Transit senior staff and start
talking about how we make this transition smooth, which is why we need the amount of
time that we have between now and July 1st to make sure this transition is as smooth
as possible and not affect needlessly.
30
Supervisor Wilcox said depending on how this vote goes, I know as a board member, I
would like being kept updated on a monthly basis how everything is going. And you
know my concern had always been that the cost savings cannot be on the workers
back, cannot be on the customer service, or safety. And I know a lot of material has
been provided to us. We've all taken a lot of time to analyze that, but I just want to be
assured through a monthly report that all of these things, should this move forward, take
place.
Mr. Banta said I would be happy to make that report to you, Supervisor Wilcox.
Chair Aames said does anyone else want to speak? Okay. Is there a motion to accept
this contract?
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER LITTLEFIELD, SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER ORSBORN AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE
CONTRACT AWARD TO FIRST TRANSIT.
5. Federal Legislative Report
Chair Aames said the next item is the Federal Legislative Update.
Mr. Banta said Mr. Chairman, I have our federal lobbyist Tim Lovain from Washington
D.C. Here to give an update on the federal landscape.
It's clearly up to you if you want this presentation. He came in town to do that to bring
you up to date on what's happening back in Washington. I do recognize the lateness of
the day and respect the board members' time. I will also forego my CEO report and
present that to you next month. It's up to you if you want a presentation.
Mr. Lovain said Tim Lovain, Denny Miller Associates. Happy to represent Valley Metro
there on federal issues for about the last nine years.
The big picture I will skip over it quickly because we passed the fiscal cliff and we're
now into the fiscal mountain range of multiple deadlines. The sequestration kicks in
March 1. The continuing resolution expires March 27.
It appears that Congress is now in the process of extending the debt ceiling until May
18, so we have several deadlines looming in this context.
The impact on transportation, the sequestration will result in an 8.2 percent reduction in
discretionary and domestic spending, a little bit higher in defense discretionary
spending. All transit formula funds are exempt as are highway formula funds, but the
new starts funds are impacted by this sequestration.
31
It's quite possible the sequestration will take effect at least in the short term and then
perhaps get revisited as part of our grander budget deal, but there could be, at least, a
slowdown in federal spending as of March 1.
We have a new authorization bill, MAP-21, as you may know, that was approved last
year and provides very small increase to transit funding. It shifts more on the transit
program to formula. Very limited discretionary dollars.
The urbanized area formula is the biggest -- there was a new state of good repair
program. And for new starts it authorized levels slightly below fiscal '12 funding, but you
do have a new public transportation safety program on the books. This affects really on
rail.
The planning provisions in MAP-21 require that the transit officials be represented
behind MPO boards. And there's a lot of emphasis on performance measures. And,
unfortunately, public art is no longer eligible funds for federal funding.
Mr. Farry said Mr. Chairman, one of the results of MAP-21 that affects us here locally is
the formulas are based on Census 2010. As a result of the census in 2010, you can
see there that the urbanized -- number of urbanized areas in the country changed.
If you look at the far right, you can see that the urbanized areas over a million people
went up by four and you can see the corresponding numbers of increases to the other
urbanized areas.
That results in -- if we could go to the next slide, please -- that results in formula
apportionments that will change. So you can see on this slide in FY2012 what our
formula apportionments were for both the Phoenix-Mesa urbanized area, as well as the
Avondale-Goodyear urbanized area.
You can see in FY13 how that changed. Actually, the Avondale-Goodyear urbanized
area goes up. The Phoenix-Mesa goes down a little bit, but the overall total is actually a
decrease of $5.2 million on an annual basis. So what we'll see going forward is that
much of a decrease in our federal formula funding.
So what we will do and provide you information so that when you go back to
Washington, is to communicate to our federal delegation what the importance of that
federal investment is for transit in this region.
Right now we have either programmed or are spending dollars in these categories at
these amounts on buses, bus facilities, on project development, that $4.7 million
amount used to be a -- there were federal dollars eligible for that funding. That does not
exist anymore.
And then you can see the major projects, essentially that central Mesa extension for
32
which we have a project construction grant agreement and a commitment for $75 million
from the federal government. We still have $19.5 million of that to be spent or to come
our way from the federal government.
Supervisor Wilcox said is there anything put aside for the central route that
Congressman Pastor has been talking about?
Mr. Farry said the south central route is not in the new starts program as of yet. That's
something that would have to be worked on going forward. As many of you probably
know, the congressman was just named the ranking minority member of the
Transportation Appropriation Subcommittee that, as Tim would tell you, that puts him in
a great position to help that corridor out. And, Tim, do you have anything to add to that?
Mr. Lovain said I understand that you said as part of the new starts program, there's
going to be less federal investment in the early stages of planning, so once a project is
well advanced, then becomes the possibility for federal funding, so it isn't anything
against this project in particular, it just needs to get further advanced in its planning
before we can start pursuing federal funds.
Supervisor Wilcox said we're going back with NACO, the National Association of
Counties and all the cities are going back to the League. Are you going to provide us
then sheets like this so that we can?
Mr. Farry said that's exactly where we want to get to. When is the NACO Conference?
Supervisor Wilcox said NACO is March 1st to 7th. And I think League's is either right
after it or right before it.
Mr. Farry said at the end of my presentation I'm going to talk about materials that you'll
be able to get.
When we go back, we want to from this region, we want to support obviously the
maximum amount of transit funding given the current threats to funding that are out
there, we want to -- we will also monitor internally MAP-21 implementation, the
guidance, and the guidelines that come out from that.
There will be some grant opportunities, discretionary grant opportunities. And when the
Federal Transit Administration lets us know about those, we'll look at those to be sure
we're taking advantage where we can.
John mentioned that the tax part of the sequestration took place on January 1st. There
were two key elements to that tax package. One was it created a tax parody between
the parking benefit and the transit user benefit, so now as of now, every individual that
uses transit gets a tax benefit of $240 a year, the same as they do for their parking
benefit. That goes back into 2012 and goes through the end of 2013.
33
The other tax provision that was included in that was the alternative fuels tax credit.
That is real money to this region. It's about three to five million dollars a year that we
benefit from that, the transit systems in the region do. That's a big one. That's also
extended through 2013.
We'd like to, when we go back and talk to our delegation members, we'd like to see
those permanently extended so we can manage our books better and determine how to
best use that money.
Mr. Lovain said and MAP-21, unfortunately, is very short bill, two-year bill, so a year
from September it expires, and then we'll have to do this all over again. So we're going
to see hearings this year and then a reauthorization next year. And the critical issue,
once again, will be funding. Because they financed MAP-21 with some smoke and
mirrors and looking in debt's door for pieces of funding, so now the question is how do
we fund surface transportation for the long term.
The slide about highway trust fund, that shows you what the general fund transfers that
have been provided over quite a few years now how they've been able to keep things
going, but that's what it looks like for gas tax.
But if you're just depending on current gas tax revenues, and the year balance shortfalls
will be in the highway trust fund after 2012. So hopefully they'll be people who can get
serious about long-term funding for federal surface transportation.
Mr. Farry said our communication strategy when we go back will be to generally talk
about the benefits of public transportation in this region, the fact that we provide
seventy-one million boardings in 2012, our average weekday boardings are about
235,000. We provide mobility for everyone.
The economic development components of public transportation is important message
to send for every one dollar invested in transit, it's about a four dollar benefit in
economic returns. That's a number developed by APTA. For our light rail project, that
number is $1.4 billion invested in our light rail system provided about $7 billion in
economic development returns.
We also want to talk about the fact that transit reduces energy consumption and
greenhouse gases.
Tim talked about these dates, these are the key dates that he talked about. The
congressional city's conferences is also at the beginning of March, so what we will be
doing is providing you information as soon as the next board meeting, but certainly
before you go to give you the information that you need to carry back there.
34
We're going to recreate folders like this with basic information about what our system is
about, as well as what our federal priorities are and what projects we have. And we
hope you take those back there and talk to our delegation about what our needs are.
That being said there's also -- next slide, please. We have established each year
RPTA, Valley Metro hosts a congressional staff luncheon. It's both for those people that
are attending the NLC conference back there, as well as there's American Public
Transportation Association conference at the same time.
We invite congressional delegation and staff to come and hear about what successes
we've had with transit here in the region, as well as to communicate to you and to the
staff what our wishes are from the federal government. That's going to be on March
11th. We'll be sending out a "save the date" on that soon.
If I could just briefly, there are some state issues out there that as you probably well
know, there are bills being introduced at the legislature. There are three that are really
critical to us right now, especially the third one that you see up there, the HB2119. It
was introduced by Representative Alan. And it has to do with subsidized transit
ridership.
Basically the legislation says that if it's a publicly funded, publicly subsidized transit fare,
in other words, if you provide some subsidy to your employees to ride transit, that those
should not be included in ridership counts.
We don't know exactly what that means. We're trying to determine what that means.
We would obviously have to report all ridership to the federal government. They require
that. But we are investigating that with the sponsor of the bill as well as with the
committees of jurisdiction. So we'll have more on that as we go forward.
The other two bills are really related to political subdivision entities. We don't believe
we're -- we believe that RPTA is a political subdivision, not a political subdivision entity,
so we don't believe that those apply to us, but our friends at MAG, it does affect our
friends at MAG and so we're watching those very closely.
Mr. Banta said Mr. Chairman, that concludes our report and we would be open for any
questions.
Chair Aames said does anyone have any questions? Okay. With that then, does
anyone have any future agenda items they would like the board to consider? Seeing
none, the meeting is adjourned. Our next meeting is on February 21st.
With no further discussion the meeting adjourned at 2:58 p.m.
3
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433
DATE AGENDA ITEM 3
February 13, 2013
SUBJECT
Chief Executive Officer’s Report
PURPOSE
To provide Board members with informational updates on current events.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
None
COST AND BUDGET
None
COMMITTEE PROCESS
None
RECOMMENDATION
For information only
CONTACT
Steve Banta
Chief Executive Officer
602-262-7433
sbanta@valleymetro.org
ATTACHMENTS
None
4
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433
DATE AGENDA ITEM 4
February 13, 2013
SUBJECT
APTA President and CEO Presentation
PURPOSE
Michael Melaniphy, President & CEO of the American Public Transportation Association
(APTA), will provide a briefing to the Board on the state of public transportation in the
United States.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
None
COST AND BUDGET
None
COMMITTEE PROCESS
None
RECOMMENDATION
For information only
CONTACT
Steve Banta
Chief Executive Officer
602-262-7433
sbanta@valleymetro.org
ATTACHMENTS
None
5
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 602-262-7433
DATE AGENDA ITEM 5A
February 13, 2013
SUBJECT
FY 2013 Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) Amendment with Maricopa County
Defining Conditions for the Provision of Public Transportation
PURPOSE
To request Board authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute an IGA
amendment with Maricopa County that defines the terms and conditions for the
Provision of Public Transportation.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
As approved by the Board of Directors at its June 16, 2011 meeting, RPTA entered into
an IGA with Maricopa County to administer public transportation services on behalf of
the County effective July 1, 2011. Maricopa County transferred $604,779 of Local
Transportation Assistance Funds to RPTA to provide these services. On behalf of the
County, RPTA administers a taxi cab program for seniors and ADA-certified residents in
unincorporated Maricopa County. RPTA uses Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-
Public Transportation Funds, allocated by the RPTA Board, as the matching source of
funds. RPTA and Maricopa County desire to amend the existing IGA to define the terms
and conditions governing the provisions in providing public transportation services to
residents of unincorporated Maricopa County.
This IGA amendment replaces Section III “Work Statement” of the original IGA to
introduce the prioritization of fund uses for specific client populations and to add the
ADA Platinum Pass as a new mobility option that is eligible for funding. The
amendment clarifies that the funds are to be used to benefit unincorporated Maricopa
County residents. Finally, it brings efficiencies to the reporting requirements included in
the IGA.
COST AND BUDGET
RPTA will provide public transportation services on behalf of Maricopa County using
existing and future Local Transportation Assistance Funds (LTAF), Americans with
Disabilities Act-Public Transportation Funds (ADA-PTF), and Federal Grant Funds that
are allocated to Maricopa County, when applicable. The use of available Federal Grant
Funds will be strictly monitored and limited to activities and expenses which are eligible
under the programs providing those funds.
The IGA with Maricopa County for which this amendment is proposed has a total term
of two years which began on July 1, 2011 and ends on June 30, 2013. This
amendment has no financial impact.
2
COMMITTEE PROCESS
RTAG, January 22, 2013 for information
TMC, February 6, 2013 approved
Board of Directors, February 21, 2013 for action
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Board of Directors authorize the CEO to execute an
amendment to the existing IGA between Maricopa County and the RPTA.
CONTACT
Carol Ketcherside
Director, Administration and Organizational Development
602-523-6040
cketcherside@valleymetro.org
ATTACHMENTS
A copy of the IGA amendment referenced in this memorandum is available upon
request.
DATE AGENDA ITEM 5B
February 13, 2013
SUBJECT
Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance Coverage Renewal
PURPOSE
Valley Metro currently purchases workers’ compensation and employer’s liability
insurance to cover work-related injuries to all RPTA employees. The current insurance
policy will expire on March 1, 2013. Coverage is required by statute.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
The workers’ compensation and employer’s liability insurance has been covered by
SCF Western (a subsidiary of SCF Arizona) for more than 12 years. Past attempts to
market this coverage to other carriers have produced no viable results.
This year our insurance broker, A.J. Gallagher, requested quotes on Valley Metro’s
behalf from both SCF Western and The Hartford. The Hartford declined to quote due to
the class of business and its inability to compete with SCF Western. SCF Western
quoted a price to renew the coverage. They have been a trusted partner with Valley
Metro for more than 12 years.
COST AND BUDGET
The following premium indication was provided by SCF Western Insurance Company:
Line of Coverage
Policy Limit
Expiring
Premium
Renewal
Premium
Workers’
Compensation /
Employer’s Liability
Statutory /
$1,000,000
$ 153,010
(unaudited)
$185,696*
(estimated)
* Nationwide, workers’ compensation insurance market increases are estimated
to go up by as much as 40% for all U.S. companies. This is a 21% increase.
Allocation of this cost to be attributed to the METRO budget will be based on actual
payroll allocations between the RPTA and the METRO budgets.
The annual premium is subject to a payroll audit at the end of the policy period which
runs March 1, 2013 through March 1, 2014. If the audited payroll differs from the
estimated payroll, there will be a premium adjustment.
2
COMMITTEE ACTION
RTAG - January 22, 2013 for information
TMC – February 6, 2013 approved
Board – February 21, 2013 for action
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Board of Directors authorize the CEO to renew the workers’
compensation and employer’s liability insurance coverage for a one year period with
SCF Western Insurance Company for an estimated annual premium of $185,696.
CONTACT
Carol Ketcherside
Director of Administration and Organizational Development
602-523-6040
cketcherside@valleymetro.org
ATTACHMENTS
None
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433
DATE AGENDA ITEM 5C
February 13, 2013
SUBJECT
Authorization to Issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for Vanpool Services
PURPOSE
To request Board authorization to issue a RFP for a vanpool service contractor. The
current contract expires December 31, 2013.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
On January 1, 2004, Valley Metro entered into a contract for vanpool services with
Vanpool Services Incorporated (VPSI), now doing business as vRide. The contract is a
10-year, fixed term agreement that expires December 31, 2013.
Vanpooling is a convenient, stress-free, environmentally-friendly alternative to driving
alone to work. A group of six to 15 people who live and work near each other form the
group. One person volunteers to serve as the driver. Riders pay a monthly fare that
covers fuel, vehicle maintenance and insurance. Interest in the program has grown by
11 percent in 2012.
Today, 3,300 Valley residents commute daily via Valley Metro’s vanpool program with
an average commute distance of more than 35 miles one way, taking literally thousands
of vehicles off our roads during rush hour traffic. The more than 380 vanpools typically
travel to and from locations where fixed-route bus and light rail are not as available.
Valley Metro owns all vanpool vans and maintains and disposes of vehicles according
to Federal Transit Administration (FTA) regulations.
Staff is seeking Board authorization to issue a FTA-compliant RFP for a vanpool service
contractor. The contract term will be for 10 years with “not-to-exceed pricing”
established for each contract year of the 10 year term. The “not-to-exceed price” is
determined by projected service levels each year.
It is critical for the solicitation to begin in early 2013 so as to secure the next contractor
and operating agreement by January 1, 2014.
The recommended contractor shall be required to offer the following services: provision
of staff to administer and market the program; vehicle insurance and indemnification;
vehicle maintenance; invoicing riders; report filing with the National Transit Database;
monthly reporting; website updates; conducting formation meetings and driver
orientations; conducting MVD checks; and more.
2
The RFP will be based upon the calendar year 2012 service level to provide proposers
a basis for proposal development. Staff projects that, pending Board authorization in
February 2013, the solicitation and award process will be complete by July 2013. This
timeline will allow the successful contractor six months to mobilize and transition, if
needed.
COST AND BUDGET
In FY12, the current vanpool contractor was paid $552,000 for administrative services.
Operating costs were almost entirely paid (99%) by rider fares. The proposed new
contract will be a 10-year term contract with allowable annual adjustments that must be
based upon substantiated cost justification and approved by RPTA management. All
adjustments will be reflected in the annual RPTA budget.
COMMITTEE PROCESS
RTAG January 22, 2013 for information
TMC February 6, 2013 approved
Board February 21, 2013 for action
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Board of Directors authorize the CEO to issue a RFP for a
Valley Metro vanpool service contractor.
CONTACT
Hillary Foose
Director, Communication & Marketing
602-322-4468
hfoose@valleymetro.org
ATTACHMENTS
None
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433
DATE AGENDA ITEM 5D
February 13, 2013
SUBJECT
Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Phoenix for Federal Transit
Administration Pass-Through Grant AZ-05-0204
PURPOSE
To request Board authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to enter into an
intergovernmental agreement with City of Phoenix to allow Valley Metro to be
reimbursed for eligible activities.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
Valley Metro is being provided federal funds through the Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) in grant AZ-05-0204 for preventive maintenance in the amount of $117,745, of
which the federal share is $94,196 and the local share is $23,549. These funds are
provided by FTA through the Section 5309 – Fixed Guideway Modernization formula
program.
The City of Phoenix is the designated recipient for all FTA grant funds for the region.
Valley Metro undertakes projects approved for FTA grant funding, then submits
requests to Phoenix for reimbursement of actual expenses incurred. Phoenix then
executes a drawdown of funds from FTA to pass-through the reimbursement to Valley
Metro.
The pass-through IGA is required in order for Phoenix to reimburse Valley Metro for
eligible expenses.
COST AND BUDGET
The preventive maintenance expenses are in the approved budget. The grant funds will
offset expenses, reducing the net cost to the Public Transportation Fund and member
agency budgets.
COMMITTEE PROCESS
RTAG January 22, 2013 for information
TMC February 6, 2013 approved
Board February 21, 2013 for action
2
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Board of Directors authorize the CEO to enter into an
intergovernmental agreement with the City of Phoenix for grant AZ-05-0204.
CONTACT
Paul Hodgins
Manager, Revenue Generation and Financial Planning
602-262-7433
phodgins@valleymetro.org
ATTACHMENTS
None
DATE AGENDA ITEM 5E
February 13, 2013
SUBJECT
FY 2011/12 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and Single Audit Act
Reporting Package
PURPOSE
To request that the Board of Directors accept the Comprehensive Annual Financial
Report and Single Audit Act Reporting Package for the period ended June 30, 2012.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
Heinfeld, Meech & Co., P.C., Certified Public Accountants, has completed the FY
2011/12 RPTA audits. Completion of the June 30, 2012, financial statement and Single
Audit Act audits indicates Valley Metro’s compliance with both state and federal
statutory audit requirements as well as adherence to Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles in financial reporting. Preparation of a Comprehensive Annual Financial
Report demonstrates Valley Metro’s commitment to the highest standard of financial
reporting for a governmental entity. The accompanying report is submitted for review
and acceptance.
In planning and performing the audit of the financial statements, Heinfeld, Meech & Co.,
P.C. considered RPTA’s internal controls in order to determine auditing procedures for
the purpose of expressing opinions on the financial statements and not to provide an
opinion on internal controls.
During the course of the audit there were no findings. Valley Metro’s Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report for Fiscal Year 2012 received an unqualified opinion and the
receipt of the GFOA Certificate of Excellence for the Fiscal Year 2011 CAFR
demonstrates the commitment to the highest standard of financial reporting for a
government entity. Attached you will find a copy of the Auditor’s reports and
Management Discussion and Analysis section of the CAFR.
COST AND BUDGET
None
COMMITTEE ACTION
Financial Working Group – February 2013
Regional Transit Advisory Group – January 22, 2013 for information
Transit Management Committee – February 6, 2013 approved
Valley Metro Board – February 21, 2013 for action
2
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Board of Directors accept the FY 2011/12 Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report and Single Audit Act Reporting Package.
CONTACT
John McCormack
Chief Financial Officer
jmccormack@valleymetro.org
602-262-7433
ATTACHMENTS
Independent Auditor’s Report
FY 2011/12 Management’s Discussion and Analysis
Single Audit Act Reporting Package
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
6
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433
DATE AGENDA ITEM 6
February 13, 2013
SUBJECT
RPTA Fiscal Year 2013 Mid-Year Budget Adjustment
PURPOSE
To request that the Board of Directors authorize the Mid-Year Budget Adjustment
update to the Valley Metro RPTA Operating and Capital Budget for Fiscal Year (FY)
2013.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
In May 2012, the Transportation Management Committee (TMC) recommended and the
Board approved the FY2013 Operating and Capital Budget. The cost factors used to
develop the budget have changed and adjustments are warranted to update the
expenditures planned for the remainder of the fiscal year. The major changes include:
RPTA FY13 Mid-Year Budget Adjustments
Board Approval Budget
Description Amount
Sep12, Agenda 4J,
2015 - RPTA Fixed Route
Service (Veolia)
Pilot Program - East Mesa Seasonal
Service. Funded by Mesa.
365,000$
Nov12, Agenda 4G
2015 - RPTA Fixed Route
Service (Veolia)
Route 96, 112, and 542 changes in the
City of Chandler. Funded by
Chandler.
97,600$
2015 - RPTA Fixed Route
Service (Veolia)
Recognize additional PM Funding. 3,600,000$
2015 - RPTA Fixed Route
Service (Veolia)
Recognize IRS Fuel Tax Credit
Funding.
1,300,000$
2015 - RPTA Fixed Route
Service (Veolia)
Actual fuel and contractor costs have
trended below original FY13
assumptions. Actual Fare Revenue
higher than budgeted.
(2,541,328)$
Nov12, Agenda 4G
2017 - RPTA Fixed Route
Service (ValuTrans)
Extension of service for Route 251
with ValuTrans. Funded by Gila River
Indian Community.
131,000$
2
The above changes have been incorporated into the Mid-Year Budget Adjustments
presented within the Cost and Budget portion of this Agenda Item.
COST AND BUDGET
Changes proposed are as follows:
Revenue Changes:
• Decrease PTF funding by $2.201M
• Decrease Transit Service Agreement funding by $869,000
• Increase Federal Grant Funding by $3.958M
• Increase RARF funding by $87,000
• Increase IRS Fuel Tax Credit to $1.3M
• Decrease Undesignated Fund Balance by $3.015M
RPTA FY13 Mid-Year Budget Adjustments
Board Approval Budget
Description Amount
2017 - RPTA Fixed Route
Service (ValuTrans)
Recognize additional PM Funding. 217,000$
2017 - RPTA Fixed Route
Service (ValuTrans)
Increased service levels and related
costs. Funded by Member Cities.
62,800$
2030 - East Valley Dial-a-
Ride
Increased service levels and related
costs. Funded by PTF.
200,000$
Sep12, Agenda 4D 2046 - Other ADA
City of Goodyear reimbursement of
eligible ADA expenses incurred by
the city. Funded by PTF.
20,580$
Sep12, Agenda 4G
2048 - Valley Metro
Mobility Services
Dial-a-Ride Service throughout the
City of Surprise. Funded by the City
of Surprise.
300,000$
2048 - Valley Metro
Mobility Services
Increased service levels and related
costs. Funded by Member Cities and
FTA 5317.
332,777$
Nov12, Agenda 4J
3353 - Bus Operations
Planning
Project Definition Study for
Scottsdale/Rural LINK. Funded by
RARF.
86,976$
Dec12, Agenda 4C
3353 - Bus Operations
Planning
Transit Planning Study for the Town
of Queen Creek. Funded by Queen
Creek.
145,000$
Dec12, Agenda 4D
3353 - Bus Operations
Planning
Transit Planning Study for the Town
of Fountain Hills. Funded by
Fountain Hills.
60,000$
3
Expenditure Changes:
• Increase Lead Agency PTF disbursement by $21,000
• Reduce Transit Service Contracts by $1.243M
• Increase Capital Outlay by $191,000
• Increase Consultants and Contracts by $292,000
Valley Metro
Regional Public Transportation Authority
FY 2012/13 Revised Operating & Capital Budget
Comparison to FY 2012/13 Adopted Budget
(In thousands)
2012/13 2012/13 Amount
Revised Adopted Increase/
Budget Budget (Decrease)
Sources of funds
Revenues:
Public transportation funds (PTF) 112,399
$ 114,600 $(2,201)
Transit service agreements 15,790 16,659 (869)
Federal grants 36,904 32,946 3,958
VMR staff & administration reimbursement 14,028
14,028 -
Regional area road funds (RARF) 4,605 4,518 87
Interest & other revenues 2,494 1,194 1,300
Local participation 536 536 -
State & local grants 641 641 -
Total revenues 187,397 185,122 2,275
Bond proceeds 70,000 70,000
-
Carryforwards & reserves 18,973 21,988 (3,015)
Total revenues & other sources of funds $276,370 $ 277,110 $ (740)
Uses of funds by category
Expenses:
Lead agency PTF disbursements $69,269 $ 69,248 $21
Transit service contracts 52,837 54,080 (1,243)
Capital outlay 35,086 34,895 191
Salary & fringe benefits 22,960 22,960 -
Bond principal & interest expense 10,741 10,741 -
Consultants & contracts 3,786 3,494 292
Contingency 2,066 2,066 -
Rent & facility costs 2,813 2,813
-
Advertising 427 427 -
Transit book, outreach mat. & online serv. 573 573 -
Insurance & risk management 257 257 -
Safety & security 284 284 -
Lead agency RARF disbursements 500 500 -
Other administrative costs 1,771
1,772 (1)
Lead agency bond disbursement 22,500 22,500 -
Total expenses 225,870 226,610 (740)
Carryforwards & contributions to reserves 50,500 50,500 -
Total expenses & other uses of funds $276,370 $ 277,110 $ (740)
4
Valley Metro
Regional Public Transportation Authority
Comparative Operating and Capital Budget Summary by Project
Proj. 2012/13 2012/13
No. Project Description Revised Adopted Change
Operating Projects
1005 Finance and Administration Support $428,584 428,584 -
1020 Administrative Capital Outlay 415,000 415,000 -
2005 Operations Administration 950,000 950,000 -
2006 Safety and Security 475,000 475,000 -
2010 Phoenix Fixed Route 5,574,926 5,574,926 -
2012 Fare Vending Machine Service and Maint. 247,700 247,700 -
2015 RPTA Fixed Route Service (Veolia) 25,801,890 27,880,618 (2,078,728)
2017 RPTA Fixed Route Service (ValuTrans) 3,324,603 3,130,803 193,800
2018 Avondale Circulator - - -
2026 Tempe Fixed Route 11,822,837 11,822,837 -
2027 Ajo / Gila Bend Connector 809,601 809,601 -
2029 Wickenburg Connector - - -
2030 East Valley Dial-a-Ride 6,268,790 6,068,790 200,000
2040 Sun Cities Area Transit - - -
2046 Other ADA 16,827,170 16,806,590 20,580
2047 Alternative Transportation Program 1,432,417 1,432,417 -
2048 Valley Metro Mobility Services 1,326,985 694,208 632,777
2050 Regional Vanpool Service 847,163 847,163 -
3205 Regional Rideshare 594,000 594,000 -
3215 Trip Reduction Program/Clean Air Campaign 250,000 250,000 -
3220 Trip Reduction Program/Expansion 370,000 370,000 -
3255 Bike Safety - - -
3260 Safe Routes - - -
3265 Regional Bike Ped, Safety Education 140,934 140,934 -
3275 Statewide Bicycle/Pedestrian Education 315,217 315,217 -
3305 Planning Administration 144,053 144,053 -
3310 Long Range Planning 74,820 74,820 -
3315 Short Range Planning 304,219 304,219 -
3330 Transit Modeling 37,122 37,122 -
3335 Transit Research and Survey 143,563 143,563 -
3345 Capital Planning 275,749 275,749 -
3353 Bus Operations Planning 843,883 551,907 291,976
3354 Capital Management Program Consultant 50,696 50,696 -
3359 Transit Life Cycle Program 283,868 283,868 -
3405 Misc. Public Transportation Fund - - -
4000 Valley Metro Rail 14,527,959 14,527,959 -
5005 Chief Executive Officer's Department 1,130,639 1,130,639 -
6005 Regional Services Administration 419,096 419,096 -
(Continued) (Continued)
5
COMMITTEE PROCESS
Financial Working Group – January 22, 2013 for information
RTAG – January 22, 2013 for information
Transit Management Committee – February 6, 2013 approved
Board of Directors – February 21, 2013 for action
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve the Mid-Year Budget Adjustment
update to the Valley Metro RPTA Operating and Capital Budget for Fiscal Year (FY)
2013.
Proj. 2012/13 2012/13
No. Project Description Revised Adopted Change
Operating Projects (continued)
6015 Regional Ridership Reporting 125,206 125,206 -
6020 Community Outreach 402,470 402,470 -
6025 Regional Marketing 2,324,224 2,324,224 -
6035 Regional Call Center 3,737,802 3,737,802 -
6040 Regional ADA Compliance 1,590,882 1,590,882 -
Total Operating Projects 104,639,068 105,378,663 (739,595)
Capital Projects
4000 Valley Metro Rail 66,688,513 66,688,513 -
7000 Public Transportation Debt Service 61,241,318 61,241,318 -
9010 Standard Bus - Replacement 20,641,940 20,641,940 -
9020 Express/BRT - Replacement 12,240,000 12,240,000 -
9021 Express/BRT - Expansion - - -
9030 Rural Fleet - Replacement 174,770 174,770 -
9031 Rural Fleet - Expansion 397,800 397,800 -
9040 Paratransit Fleet - Replacement 680,095 680,095 -
9041 Paratransit Fleet - Expansion 19,319 19,319 -
9050 Vanpool Fleet - Replacement 2,840,049 2,840,049 -
9051 Vanpool Fleet - Expansion 350,000 350,000 -
9090 Fleet - Other 1,753,944 1,753,944 -
9110 O/M Facilities - Bus/Paratransit 350,000 350,000 -
9211 Transit Centers (6-Bay) 305,948 305,948 -
9213 Pass. Facilities - Bus Stop Pass. Amenities 1,699,239 1,699,239 -
9220 Pass. Facilities - Park & Rides 1,501,052 1,501,052 -
9390 Vehicle Management/Communications 550,000 550,000 -
9391 Fare Collection Systems 55,000 55,000 -
9420 Dedicated BRT Right-of-Way and Impr. 241,959 241,959 -
Total Capital Projects 171,730,946 171,730,946 -
Total Operating & Capital Projects
$
276,370,014 277,109,609 (739,595)
6
CONTACT
John P. McCormack
Chief Financial Officer
602-495-8239
jmccormack@valleymetro.org
ATTACHMENTS
None
7
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433
DATE AGENDA ITEM 7
February 13, 2013
SUBJECT
Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events
PURPOSE
Chair Aames will request future agenda items from members and members may
provide a report on current events.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
None
COST AND BUDGET
None
COMMITTEE PRCESS
None
RECOMMENDATION
For information only
CONTACT
Steve Banta
Chief Executive Officer
602-262-7433
sbanta@valleymetro.org
ATTACHMENTS
None
8
9
10
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433
February 13, 2013
Board of Directors
Thursday, February 21, 2013
Lake Powell Conference Room
101 N. 1st Avenue, 10th Floor
2:00 p.m.
For those participating by telephone, please mute your phone when not speaking.
Members please make sure your microphone is turned on when speaking and turned off
when you are not speaking.
Action Recommended
1. Public Comment
A 15-minute opportunity will be provided to members of the
public at the beginning of the meeting to address the Board
on all agenda items. The Chair may recognize members of
the public during the meeting at his/her discretion.
1. For information
2. Minutes
Minutes from the January 24, 2013 Board meeting are
presented for approval.
2. For action
3. Chief Executive Officer’s Report
Steve Banta, Chief Executive Officer, will brief the Board on
current issues.
3. For information
2
CONSENT AGENDA
4A. Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of
Phoenix for Federal Transit Administration Pass-
Through Grant AZ-05-0204
Staff will request that the Board of Directors authorize the
Chief Executive Officer to enter into an intergovernmental
agreement with City of Phoenix to allow Valley Metro to be
reimbursed for eligible activities.
4A. For action
4B. Valley Metro Rail, Inc., Fiscal Year 2012
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and Single
Audit Act Report
Staff will request that the Board of Directors accept the
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and Single Audit
Act Report for the period ended June 30, 2012.
4B. For action
REGULAR AGENDA
5. METRO Fiscal Year 2013 Mid-Year Budget
Adjustment
Steve Banta, CEO, will introduce John McCormack, Chief
Financial Officer, who will provide the Mid-Year Budget
Adjustment update to the Valley Metro Rail Operating and
Capital Budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 and request that
the RMC forward to the Board of Directors for approval.
5. For action
6. Central Mesa Light Rail Extension Project Update
Steve Banta, Chief Executive Officer, will introduce Rick
Brown, Director, Design and Construction, who will provide
the Board with an informational update on the project
progress and financial status.
6. For information
3
7. Future Board Agenda Items Request and Report on
Current Events
Chair Stanton will request future Board agenda items from
members and members may provide a report on current
events.
7. For information and
discussion
8. Next Meeting
The next meeting of the Board is scheduled for Thursday,
March 21, 2013 at 2:00 p.m.
8. For information
Qualified sign language interpreters are available with 72 hours notice. Materials in
alternative formats (large print, audiocassette, or computer diskette) are available upon
request. For further information, please call Valley Metro at 602-262-7433 or TTY at
602-251-2039.
To attend this meeting via teleconference, contact the receptionist at 602-262-7433 for the
dial-in-information. The supporting information for this agenda can be found on our web site
at www.valleymetro.org
1
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433
DATE AGENDA ITEM 1
February 13, 2013
SUBJECT
Public Comment
PURPOSE
A 15-minute opportunity will be provided to members of the public at the beginning of
the meeting to address the Board on all agenda items. The Chair may recognize
members of the public during the meeting at his/her discretion.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
None
COST AND BUDGET
None
COMMITTEE PROCESS
None
RECOMMENDATION
For information only
CONTACT
Steve Banta
Chief Executive Officer
602-262-7433
sbanta@valleymetro.org
ATTACHMENTS
None
2
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 602-262-7433
February 13, 2013 AGENDA ITEM 2
Minutes of the
METRO
Board of Directors
Thursday, January 24, 2013
2:00 p.m.
Meeting Participants
Councilmember Michael Johnson for Mayor Greg Stanton, City of Phoenix, Chair
Councilmember Shana Ellis, City of Tempe, Vice Chair (via phone)
Dan Cook for Councilmember Rick Heumann, City of Chandler
Jamsheed Mehta, City of Glendale
Councilmember Dennis Kavanaugh, City of Mesa (via phone)
Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 3:07 p.m.
Chair Johnson said I'm going to go ahead and call the meeting to order noting that
Councilmember Shana Ellis is actually on the phone along with Councilman Dennis
Kavanaugh, they are both on the phone.
1. Public Comment
Chair Johnson said the first thing on the agenda is going to be public comment. Those
who are commenting, I have two cards here for public comment. I have one card by
Penny Hamilton Posedly, so if you would just go to the podium now.
Ms. Posedly said I'm a resident of Phoenix. I got here on the light rail. I'm an architect,
worked on the light rail system, and also I'm the board chair for Valley Center of the
Deaf, one of the almost thirty organizations serving people with disabilities that are
housed in the Disability Empowerment Center.
I was very pleased by the enthusiasm of the mayor and council of Phoenix to get this
thing moving and get a stop put up there and also some discussion at a church -- and I
don't know anything about that part. But the staff was extremely concerned and said
three times, but we've never done this before. We've never put a new station in the line
of existing track.
And you've got people here in the city, not necessarily government people, but the folks
that put in the tracks the first time, the engineers, the architects, they can run a study for
you lickety-split and figure out how to put that in. We don't have to stop while our staff
learns all the things that are available in the general community knowledge base in
2
order to do this.
So I would encourage you to go with the pattern that you originally stated of six months
from December to get your feasibility study, price dollar amount on one or two stations,
and let's just do it.
Chair Johnson said thank you. Blue.
Mr. Crowley said what it is, one is public comment, the 4B I can cover that also since it
is for consent. I look at that 16th Street stop and I look a half mile down the road,
there's a 12th Street stop. What's wrong with that 12th Street stop, and are you going
to fix the problems at 12th Street and 16th as in where is the bus that goes to the 12th
Street stop? It stops at Van Buren. We need to get to the 12th Street bus connecting,
and we need the 16th Street bus to have an interrelationship with the bus system.
With you people being -- this is now general on public comment -- with this Board and
others stating that the heavy rail eventually should be done in fifty years, I think that's
wrong.
I look at the members of the Board and all three of you have, what, going through your
communities, heavy rail. I know its last century technology, but it does move people
down the road and we're not looking at it sufficiently.
I'd also like it taken out of this committee's hands and put into the hands of the county.
Because, unfortunately, good men that you are, each of you has an agenda for the city
you represent, which then doesn't cause you to represent the region in the way that it's
necessitated.
When I look at the equation for Glendale and the passage of Prop 400, that original
alignment was to have the rail going into Metrocenter where we had a transit center.
Instead, Glendale was played out of position and we're still not going across that
freeway. Now I know the AC-DC is there. Why aren't we putting it in that hole and only
during floods not run the rail there, you know. There are ways that it can be done and
achieved.
I need you to look at it more than myopically as you have done already. It's not
Phoenix. It's not Glendale. It's not Chandler or Goodyear. It's the whole region. Get
back and use that 18th century technology, the heavy rail that's there. It connects
almost every single one of the segments of our community from Aguila all the way to
Rittenhouse Road going through Queen Creek.
So with that I'll give you back 30 seconds and wait to speak to you again when you get
to Item 6.
3
2. Minutes
Chair Johnson said that now takes us to Item No. 2, which is the minutes. We need a
motion to approve the minutes from December 13th, 2012 Board meeting.
IT WAS MOVED BY JAMSHEED MEHTA, SECONDED BY DAN COOK AND
UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM DECEMBER 13,
2012.
3. Chief Executive Officer’s Report
Chair Johnson said that takes us to Item 3, Chief Executive Officer's report.
Mr. Banta said Mr. Chairman, members of the board, I would like to take a moment and
remember Mr. Jeff Rosen. Jeff Rosen passed away last month. Jeff was an avid
attendee at all of our board meetings, challenging myself and our staff to do better for
persons with disabilities on a day-to day-basis. I do know that he also spent a lot of
time over at Phoenix City Hall. We will miss Jeff. But we appreciate all his contributions
as it relates to how we advance transit and opportunities for mobility impaired here in
the Valley.
Chair Johnson said l would like to take a quick moment of silence for Jeff. I think that
would be appropriate for the time that he committed here throughout the city for those
who he represented in his public service.
Mr. Banta said Mr. Chairman, in the interest of time, I will forego the rest of my CEO
report and allow you to move into the consent agenda.
4. Consent Agenda
If there are no questions, then we'll go into the consent agenda. We need a motion for
approval of the consent agenda, which is Item 4A, METRO Safety and Security Audit
Program Contract Extension. And 4B, Light Rail Transit Station Feasibility Study and
the Phoenix Funding Agreement.
IT WAS MOVED BY JAMSHEED MEHTA, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
ELLIS AND UNANIMOULSY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
5. Federal Legislative Agenda
Chair Johnson said we will move on to the regular agenda item which is Item 5, our
Federal Legislative Agenda.
4
Mr. Banta said Mr. Chairman and members of the board, I'd like to transition to Item No.
6. It is an action item. Item No. 5 is information only. And Item No. 7 is information
only and that way our participants on the phone can move forward and we can have the
presentations here in the office if that's to your pleasure.
Chair Johnson said I just need a board -- a motion by a board member to take Item No.
6 out of order.
IT WAS MOVED BY DAN COOK, SECONDED BY JAMSHEED MEHTA AND
UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO TAKE ITEM 6 OUT OR ORDER.
6. Consultant Contract Amendment for the Planning, Conceptual Engineering and
Environmental Studies for the I-10 West and Glendale High Capacity/Light Rail
Transit Corridors
Chair Johnson we're now going to take Item No. 6. This is the only action item that we
have remaining at this point in time. Mr. Crowley, I see you do have a card on Item No.
6, so I'll allow you to speak at this time.
Mr. Crowley said it looks like you are going to try to get into Glendale with that, but I
also note that where you're putting your stop up there at Rose Mofford instead of it
connecting there, you're saying northern down to Bethany.
I also then look at your briefing packet, and it says: The Regional Transportation Plan
for the metropolitan area extends high capacity light rail transit system to fifty-seven
miles by 2032.
That's amazing, Mr. Banta. What are you doing '20 to '32 with no money? How is that
going to do that? Because there is no funding after 2026.
Chair Johnson said sir, I'm only going to ask you though, if you do have a question to
address that question to the Board.
Mr. Crowley said I'm addressing the action that you're proposing to take that when
you're expressing it that high capacity system to be 57 miles by 2032 and there is no
money, no plan past 2026, how is this being accomplished and done?
Because if you are able to do that kind of funding and project it to that point, why aren't
we doing the same for the bus and getting it to the -- pass 67th Avenue, because there
are no north-south buses -- you weren't here for the bus part.
There are no north-south buses west of 67th Avenue. 67th Avenue is the eastern
border of Maricopa County running from Lake Pleasant all the way to Pinal County.
5
Chair Johnson said I understand that.
Mr. Crowley said so if you can be doing rail until '32 with no money there, no dedicated
funding, how is that possible and if it is possible, then why aren't you also doing the
same for the bus.
Chair Johnson said the only response that I can give you to that is that this Board here
is the Valley Metro Board. We can't direct, dictate, or say what the RPTA Board -- .
Mr. Crowley said I understand that. That's why you have a chairman that works us
both; right? Because both the committees can't communicate, no, that's not the way it's
supposed to be.
Chair Johnson said you're asking a question that this board cannot answer, so what I'm
saying is that that would be better directed when you are at the RPTA Board meeting
and that can be directed at that board meeting so those members could do that. Now
we know that those studies and those plans are done year out. But you're asking how
can one for Valley Metro be done compared to RPTA. And all I'm saying is that I hear
what you're saying.
Mr. Crowley said it's the same pot of money you take from. And when you take from
that same pot, both sides are supposed to be able to communicate and I don't need the
bus to be the stepchild as it always has been. And when I've asked this gentleman in
the past who are you serving, which master. And according to you he can't
communicate with you about the other part of his existence.
Chair Johnson said no, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm simply saying to you, is that
we have an agenda item here that's dealing with Valley Metro.
Mr. Crowley said I'm saying where's the bus connection -- when you build this station,
are you making it bus sensitive to where they can get the bus there.
Chair Johnson said but what I'm saying to you is that some of the questions that you're
asking are dealing directly with RPTA. And those things have to be addressed there.
This board does not have the authority.
Mr. Crowley said construction of the station is you though; right? Are you making it bus
sensitive?
Chair Johnson said I think all our stations, depending on how they are, are bus
sensitive.
6
Mr. Crowley said the 12th Street doesn't have the bus going there. There is no bus to
the 12th Street station.
Chair Johnson said okay. I see. Is there any more questions? Okay. Now we do have
an item. We are on Item No. 6, Consultant Contract Amendment for the Planning,
Conceptual Engineering and Environmental Studies for the I-10 West and Glendale
High Capacity Light Rail Transit Corridors.
Mr. Banta said Mr. Chairman, members of the board, I'd ask your authorization for me to
amend a contract with URS, our planning and support services contractor, to study from
a project planning conceptual engineering and environmental studies for the I-10 West
and Glendale high capacity light rail transit corridor in the amount not to exceed $1.3
million dollars and to also authorize a contingency not to exceed $130,000 for that
study, which is equal to 10 percent. That studied corridor will go from Camelback Road
to Northern west to the 101.
And in that study, I will guarantee you, we will ensure that the correct rubber tire service
interfaces with our planned station platforms.
Mr. Chairman, I ask for your permission, or we could have a detailed presentation. Your
choice.
Chair Johnson said it's up to the board. Do you need a presentation, or can we get a
motion?
IT WAS MOVED BY JAMSHEED MEHTA, SECONDED BY DAN COOK AND
UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO RECOMMEND THE APPROVAL OF URS
CORPORATION FOR THIS PARTICULAR CONTRACT.
5. Federal Legislative Agenda
Chair Johnson said that takes us to our next information item back to our Federal
Legislative Agenda, Item No. 5, Mr. Banta.
Mr. Banta said Mr. Chairman, members of the board, the individuals on the phone can
move on. This is for information only. I'd like to introduce John Farry and Mr. Tim
Lovain. Mr. Lovain is our federal lobbyist from Denny Miller Associates gives us an
update on what's happening back in DC and some of our funding priorities here in the
Valley.
Mr. Lovain said let me begin by saying it's a pleasure for me to be here and to represent
Valley Metro for the federal government. I've been doing it for about nine years. It's
been good times and some good successes and we will try to be brief in the interest of
time.
7
The big picture, as you know, involves the fiscal cliff that we survived on January 1st
that dealt largely with taxes, personal taxes, tax rates, and postponed the automatic
spending cuts called sequestration for two months.
So we are now encountering what some people call the fiscal mountain range of
multiple deadlines coming up.
The first sequestration is now to be triggered on March 1. This would result in cuts of
about 8.2 percent in domestic accounts like new starts. It does not affect formula funds.
Transit formula funds and highway formula funds are exempt, but new starts, because it
comes from the general fund would be subject to this. And if nothing is done, that
sequestration will kick in on March 1 and it will result in an 8.2 percent reduction in fiscal
'13 funding overall.
I think most people expected if sequestration happens, it will be a gradual thing. A lot of
agencies will slow down their spending, but then eventually, perhaps as part of a budget
deal, the whole question of sequestration might be revisited. But that's the first thing
that's going to happen if nothing else is done on March 1.
Then on March 17th, the current continuing resolution expires. The continuing
resolution funds all discretionary spending of the federal government. It basically
continues funding at last year's levels. If that goes through March 27th, if nothing is
done, then that expires, and that's a traditional, good old-fashioned government
shutdown like we've seen several times before starting in the Clinton administration
where nonessential employees stay home and so forth. So that happens on March 27th
if nothing is done.
The third trigger is the debt ceiling. The House this week passed a revision to not
enforce the debt ceiling until May 18th, and the Senate is likely to approve that provision
next week, but that will be looming as well, the debt ceiling.
So all of those things are out there and bringing a lot of uncertainty about federal
funding including funding for transit.
Meanwhile on the authorization side, MAP-21 was passed this last summer. It provided
for a small increase in funding over current levels. It pushed the bulk of highway and
transit spending into formula programs, very few -- little in the way of discretionary
spending.
For transit, the largest program continues to be the urbanized area formula program.
We also have a new state of good repair program.
8
On new starts, the authorization level is actually slightly below fiscal 2012 levels,
although Congress can go over that and has in this case.
It also has a new public transportation safety program that will be focused initially on rail
safety first. There's also a provision that requires MPOs to include transit officials on all
MPO boards.
There's a lot of focus on performance measures. And, unfortunately, public art is no
longer eligible for new starts funding.
The new starts level, as I mentioned, is slightly less than fiscal '12, but it will be -- the
current idea is for fiscal '13 are in the range of two to 2.1 billion.
There's a streamlined new starts process, which is welcome. Hopefully, new starts
decisions will be made more easily. And the evaluation criteria have been changed to
emphasize things like economic development and land use, which is welcome.
In addition, there's more flexibility given to bus rapid transit projects. There are two
different definitions of BRT, one for new starts, one for small starts. We also have a
new program called core capacity for the old subway systems.
We have -- something we've sought for a long time is to restore what once existed, the
program of interrelated projects, where a project sponsor can take a series of projects
and say here's a whole system of projects, some of which we'll pay for ourselves and
some of which we'd like federal participation, and you can use maybe that -- self-funded
projects as a soft match for others, and so that is now a part of the authorization as well
if all that gets implemented.
Mr. Farry said for instance, related to that, the northwest extension that just started
construction that's going up from Bethany Home up to Dunlap is going to be an entirely
locally funded project. That could be a candidate and we will make the argument that it
should be a candidate for a local match for a program of projects that would be
developed.
Mr. Lovain said we do have a couple new discretionary programs that come small, but
one is on project delivery and the other is on transit oriented development. And we'll
certainly look at those programs to see if they can be of benefit to Valley Metro.
Mr. Farry said Mr. Chairman, members of the board, what we'll do, what we'd like to do
and you to do when you go back to visit The Hill, is to talk about the importance of that
federal investment in transit funding that exists here in the region.
In the coming year, these are either programmed funds or funds that we could use, and
we will ask you then to go back and talk to them about the importance of transit funding.
9
What we're going to do is provide you, provide board members before the National
League of Cities and actually -- if you could go to the final slide here, the last slide --
when you go back to the National League of Cities and we're back there for APTA we
have scheduled, as we usually do, the congressional staff luncheon for March 11, 2013.
We will be providing either at that event or beforehand folders that basically layout what
our agenda is and the importance of communicating transit funding for this region. And
if there are cuts that we should maintain our level of transit funding as well as other
issues, and those will be developed for your information and to talk to your delegation
members about.
Chair Johnson said that's a report for information. Any questions? If there are no
questions, we will move on to our next item, which will be Item No. 7, Central Mesa
Light Rail Extension Project Update.
7. Central Mesa Light Rail Extension Project Update
Mr. Banta said Mr. Chairman, members of the board, in the interest of time, we can
forego this operational update presentation if you choose or we could go through it. The
Councilmember from Mesa is no longer with us, so it's up to you if you want to see the
presentation, or we can do it next month.
Chair Johnson said Next month is fine. So if someone would just make a motion to
continue Item No. 7, the Central Mesa Light Rail Extension Project, to the next meeting
of the METRO Board.
IT WAS MOVED BY JAMSHEED MEHTA, SECONDED BY DAN COOK AND
UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE FEBRUARY BOARD
MEETING.
8. Future Agenda Items and Request and Reports of Current Event
Chair Johnson said if there's no future agenda items, then our next meeting of the board
is scheduled for Thursday, February 21st, 2013, at 2:00 p.m. Everyone can put that
their calendar.
With no more agenda items, I now adjourn the meeting at 3:32 p.m.
3
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433
DATE AGENDA ITEM 3
February 13, 2013
SUBJECT
Chief Executive Officer Report
PURPOSE
Steve Banta, Chief Executive Officer, will brief the Board on current issues.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
None
COST AND BUDGET
None
COMMITTEE PROCESS
None
RECOMMENDATION
For information only
CONTACT
Steve Banta
Chief Executive Officer
602-262-7433
sbanta@valleymetro.org
ATTACHMENTS
None
4
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 602-262-7433
DATE AGENDA ITEM 4
February 13, 2013
SUBJECT
Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Phoenix for Federal Transit
Administration Pass-Through Grant AZ-05-0204
PURPOSE
To request Board authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to enter into an
intergovernmental agreement with City of Phoenix to allow Valley Metro to be
reimbursed for eligible activities.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
Valley Metro is being provided federal funds through the Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) in grant AZ-05-0204 for preventive maintenance in the amount of $1,098,031, of
which the federal share is $878,425 and the local share is $219,606. These funds are
provided by FTA through the Section 5309 – Fixed Guideway Modernization formula
program.
The City of Phoenix is the designated recipient for all FTA grant funds for the region.
Valley Metro undertakes projects approved for FTA grant funding, then submits
requests to Phoenix for reimbursement of actual expenses incurred. Phoenix then
executes a drawdown of funds from FTA to pass-through the reimbursement to Valley
Metro.
The pass-through IGA is required in order for Phoenix to reimburse Valley Metro for
eligible expenses.
COST AND BUDGET
The preventive maintenance expenses are in the approved budget. The grant funds will
offset expenses, reducing the net cost to the member agency budgets.
COMMITTEE PROCESS
RTAG January 22, 2013 for information
RMC February 6, 2013 for approved
Board of Directors February 21, 2013 for action
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Board of Directors authorize the CEO to enter into an
intergovernmental agreement with the City of Phoenix for grant AZ-05-0204.
2
CONTACT
Paul Hodgins
Manager, Revenue Generation and Financial Planning
602-262-7433
phodgins@valleymetro.org
ATTACHMENTS
None
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 602-262-7433
DATE AGENDA ITEM 4B
February 13, 2013
SUBJECT
METRO Fiscal Year 2013 Mid-Year Budget Adjustment
PURPOSE
To request that the Board of Directors authorize the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to
update to the Valley Metro Rail Operating and Capital Budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2013.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
In May 2012, the Rail Management Committee (RMC) recommended and the Board
approved the FY2013 Operating and Capital Budget. The cost factors used to develop
the budget have changed and adjustments are warranted to update the expenditures
planned for the remainder of the fiscal year. The major changes include:
The above changes have been incorporated into the Mid-Year Budget Adjustments
presented within the Cost and Budget portion of this Agenda Item.
COST AND BUDGET
Changes proposed are as follows:
Revenue Changes:
• Increase Member City Contributions by $460,000
o City of Mesa $400,000 funding is pending City Council approval
Board Approval Budget
Description Increase Amt Funding Source
Future Project
Development
Gilbert Road Bridging
Documents - Pending City
Council Approval
400,000
$
City of Mesa
Jan13, Agenda 4B
Future Project
Development
Station Feasibility Study 60,000$ City of Phoenix
Northwest
Extension
Project Costs in FY2013
higher than budget based
on the updated schedule
of expenditures by year.
8,323,000$
Phx NW
Extension
Advance, to be
reimbursed by
PTF
Central Mesa
Extension
Project Costs in FY2013
higher than budget based
on the updated schedule
of expenditures by year.
1,837,347
$
56% Fed 5309
44% PTF
2
• Increase City of Phoenix NW Extension Advance by $8.3M
• Increase PTF Bond Revenue (Local Match)
Expenditure Changes:
• Increase the Operating Budget by $0.460M for Future Project Development
• Increase the Capital Budget by $10.160M (NW Extension $8.323M, CME
$1.837M)
Sources of Funds
($,000)
FY 2013
Amended
FY 2013
Adopted
Change
Operating Activities:
Fare Revenue 11,256 11,256 -
Advertising Revenue 500 500 -
Federal 5307 PM 783 783 -
Federal FG PM - - -
Federal 5339 1,044 1,044 -
Federal CMAQ - - -
Member Cities 25,379 24,919 460
MAG / RPTA (RARF) 1,382 1,382 -
PTF Sales Tax Revenue 6,569 6,569 -
46,913 46,453 460
Capital Projects:
FTA - Section 5309 23,629 22,600 1,029
Federal CMAQ 21,659 21,659 -
TIGGER Federal Grant 2,700 2,700 -
TIGGER Private Match 3,300 3,300 -
Member Cities 33,089 24,766 8,323
PTF Bond Revenue 19,461 18,653 808
PTF Sales Tax Revenue 28,059 28,059 -
131,897 121,737 10,160
Total Sources of Funds 178,810 168,190 10,620
3
COMMITTEE PROCESS
Financial Working Group – January 22, 2013 for information
RTAG – January 22, 2013 for information
RMC – February 6, 2013 approved
Board of Directors – February 21, 2013 for action
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the
CEO to update to the Valley Metro Rail Operating and Capital Budget for Fiscal Year
(FY) 2013.
CONTACT
John P. McCormack
Chief Financial Officer
602-495-8239
jmccormack@valleymetro.org
ATTACHMENTS
None
Uses of Funds
($,000)
FY 2013
Amended
FY 2013
Adopted
Change
Operating Activities:
Revenue Operations 35,293 35,293
-
Future Project Development 10,610 10,150 460
Agency Operating Budget 1,010
1,010 -
46,913 46,453 460
Capital Projects:
20-Mile METRO Initial Segment 2,550
2,550 -
Northwest Extension 37,003 28,680 8,323
Non-Prior Rights Utilities Relocations 10,813
10,813
-
Other Capital Projects:
Central Mesa Extension 51,425 49,588 1,837
Tempe Streetcar Extension 13,324
13,324
-
CNPAs - Mesa Extension 2,526 2,526
-
Systemwide Improvements 8,892
8,892 -
Subtotal Capital before Debt Service 126,533 116,373 10,160
Capital Project Debt Service:
Debt Service - Interest 2,594 2,594 -
Debt Service - Principal 2,771 2,771
-
Total Uses of Funds 178,811
168,190 10,620
5
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433
DATE AGENDA ITEM 5
February 13, 2013
SUBJECT
Valley Metro Rail, Inc., Fiscal Year 2012 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and
Single Audit Act Report
PURPOSE
The Rail Management Committee (RMC) is being requested to recommend that the
METRO Board (Board) accept the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and Single
Audit Act Report for the period ended June 30, 2012.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
In October 2002, the cities of Glendale, Mesa, Phoenix, and Tempe formed Valley
Metro Rail, Inc. (METRO), an Arizona public nonprofit corporation. METRO is
responsible for the planning, designing, construction, and operation of the Light Rail
Transit (LRT) System in the region. The fiscal year ended June 30, 2012 is the ninth full
year of operation as a separate entity.
The By-Laws of the Corporation require an annual audit to be performed of the financial
records by a certified public accountant. In addition, all recipients of federal grant funds
are required to have an audit performed in compliance with the Single Audit Act
provisions. The reports contained in the attached Comprehensive Annual Financial
Report meet these requirements for the period ended June 30, 2012. All reports are
prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.
METRO is required to have an independent audit of expenditures of federal awards
received (Single Audit) directly from federal agencies or passed through by other
governmental entities during the period. The standards governing Single Audit
engagements require the independent auditor to report not only on the fair presentation
of the financial statements, but also on the internal control over compliance and other
matters having a direct and material impact on major programs, with special emphasis
on internal controls and compliance requirements involving the administration of major
federal awards.
Heinfeld, Meech & Co., P.C. has completed the METRO audits for the period ended
June 30, 2012. Completion of the June 30, 2012 financial statement and Single Audit
Act audits produced no findings.
METRO’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for Fiscal Year 2012 received an
unqualified opinion and the receipt of the GFOA Certificate of Excellence for the Fiscal
Year 2011 CAFR demonstrates the commitment to the highest standard of financial
reporting for a government entity. Attached you will find a copy of the Auditor’s reports
and Management Discussion and Analysis section of the CAFR.
2
COST AND BUDGET
None
COMMITTEE PROCESS
RTAG - January 22, 2013 for information
RMC - February 6, 2013 approved
Board of Directors - February 21, 2013 for action
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Board accept the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
and Single Audit Act Report for the period ended June 30, 2012.
CONTACT
John P. McCormack
Chief Financial Officer
602-262-7433
jmccormack@valleymetro.org
ATTACHMENTS
Auditors Opinion –CAFR Fiscal Year 2012
Management Discussion and Analysis –CAFR Fiscal Year 2012
Auditors Opinion –Single Act Audit Reports Fiscal Year 2012
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
6
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433
DATE AGENDA ITEM 6
February 13, 2013
SUBJECT
Central Mesa Light Rail Extension Project Update
PURPOSE
To provide an informational update of project progress and the financial status of the
Central Mesa LRT Extension Project.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
Following the March 2012 approval of the Valley Transit Constructors (VTC) design-
build contract, staff committed to providing the Board a quarterly project update of
project progress. This report is the second quarterly report on project progress through
November 2012.
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) awarded a Project Construction Grant
Agreement (PCGA) on October 12, 2012. The PCGA gives METRO the authority to
proceed with construction of all facilities on the project.
The forecasted Project Budget is $199,010,443. Through November 2012, $18,884,654
has been expended equaling 9.5% of the Project Budget. The Project Budget includes
$15,574,277 of allocated contingency and $16,913,496 of unallocated contingency or
Project Reserve. To date, $348,226.00 of the allocated contingency has been
committed.
GENERAL ADMINISTRATION
VTC has moved all construction staff into the VTC field office.
VTC has leased private commercial property at Main Street and Lesueur for staging
purposes.
REAL ESTATE
Offers have been made on 90% of the necessary parcels for the project. The City of
Mesa (COM) has requested an additional appraisal on all park-and-ride parcel
acquisitions due to a significant difference in appraised value of adjacent properties. All
but one of the re-appraisals has been completed and offers have been made to two of
the five property owners. The remaining re-appraisal will be completed in early
December and sent to FTA for approval prior to making any offer. COM has not yet
approved discussions with the remaining two property owners.
2
DESIGN STATUS
A total of 19 categories have been identified for design packages. In total, VTC’s design
scope of work is approximately 70% complete. Design Task Force meetings are being
held on a bi-weekly basis to discuss and resolve design issues.
Potholing investigations necessary to complete the utility designs are complete.
Other key design developments:
• Artwork concepts for all stations have been approved by METRO and the COM,
with the exception of Center Street which was just recently approved by the
Regional Rail Arts Committee, pending review by the COM City Manager
• METRO has requested pricing from VTC for 10 Concurrent Non-Project Activities
• During the month of November, VTC submitted 75% design for site layouts for
the traction power sub-stations and signal building sites.
CONSTRUCTION STATUS
• Completed the installation of sanitary sewer manholes at Robson and Center
Streets
• Installed 5511’ of cured-in-place pipe in existing sanitary sewer line from Dobson
to east of Alma School Road
• Installed 250’ of sanitary sewer line and 3 manholes from Date Street to 250’
east of Date Street
• Completed the installation of all offset storm drain manholes
• Began Boring 416’ new street light conduits between Stuart and Pew Streets
• Installed 2325’ of new water main on the south side of Main Street from
Sycamore to Rogers Road
SCHEDULE
The Project Master Schedule Substantial Completion Date is November 2015 with the
Revenue Service Completion Date of March 31, 2016.
3
COST AND BUDGET (through November 2012)
Description Project Budget Expenditures
To
Date
Forecast Cost
to Complete
Forecast
At
Completion
Program Management &
Administration
$10,559,933
$5,385,428
$5,174,505
$10,559,933
Program Management
Consultant
$8,994,749
$2,163,447
$6,831,302
$8,994,749
City Administration
$3,200,000
$498,973
$2,701,027
$3,200,000
Right of Way Acquisition
$12,956,462
$1,893,284
$11,063,178
$12,956,462
PE/FEIS Engineering
$5,389,049
$5,389,049
$0
$5,389,049
Engineering
$2,576,397
$2,576,397
$0
$2,576,397
Facilities
$87,358,710
$630,504
$86,728,206
$87,358,710
Systems
$25,605,000
$265,073
$25,339,927
$25,605,000
Testing & Startup
$500,000
$0
$500,000
$500,000
Art Program
$1,174,370
$82,500
$1,091,870
$1,174,370
Allocated Contingency
$15,574,277
$348,226
$15,226,051
$15,574,277
Unallocated Contingency
$16,913,496
$0
$16,913,496
$16,913,496
Financing Costs
$8,208,000
$0
$8,208,000
$8,208,000
Total Project:
$199,010,443
$18,884,654
$180,125,789
$199,010,443
COMMITTEE ACTION
RTAG December 18, 2012 for information
RMC January 9, 2013 for information
Board of Directors, January 24, 2013 for information
RECOMMENDATION
For information only
CONTACT
Rick Brown
Chief Engineer
602-744-5556
rbrown@valleymetro.org
ATTACHMENTS
None
7
VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 602-262-7433
DATE AGENDA ITEM 7
February 13, 2013
SUBJECT
Future Board Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events
PURPOSE
Chair Stanton will request future Board agenda items from members and members may
provide a report on current events.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
None
COST AND BUDGET
None
COMMITTEE PROCESS
None
RECOMMENDATION
For information only
CONTACT
Steve Banta
Chief Executive Officer
602-262-7433
sbanta@valleymetro.org
ATTACHMENTS
None
8
9
10

Navigation menu