HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-14-2016 Early Distribution of Budget Materials PacketPg. 1
Page intentionally left
blank.
Pg. 2
Meeting Date: 6/14/2016
FROM: Katie Lichtig, City Manager
Prepared By: Derek Johnson, Interim Finance & IT Director and Assistant City Manager
Shelly Stanwyck, Parks & Recreation Director
Xenia Bradford, Budget Manager
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF 2016-2017 GANN LIMIT AND 2015-17 FINANCIAL PLAN
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
1. Adopt a resolution (Attachment A) establishing the City’s appropriation limit for 2016-17
in compliance with Article XIII B of the State Constitution, Gann Spending Limitation
Initiative; and
2. Receive and discuss the 2015-17 Financial Plan Supplemental Budget Report, including
Major City Goals and Other Important Objectives progress report and the Five Year
Forecast update; and
3. Adopt resolution (Attachment B) approving the 2015-17 Financial Plan Supplement and
2016-17 Budget.
DISCUSSION
Three actions are requested to be taken by Council with this agenda item.
1. Adopt the 2016-17 Appropriations Limit. The 1st recommended action is to adopt an
appropriations limit (“Limit”) under Article XIII B of the California Constitution as
amended, which the City is required to adopt each year. As a result of the City’s
appropriations subject to the Limit being well below the calculated Limit for 2016-17, no
adjustments are required to be made to the proposed expenditures contained within the
2016-17 Preliminary Budget.
Appropriations Limit $66,451,524
Estimated Appropriations Subject to Limit $49,397,217
Favorable Variance $17,054,306
1
Pg. 3
2. Receive the 2015-17 Financial Plan Supplement. The second action is to receive and
file a report that covers the 2015-2016 Fiscal Year period on progress made on Major
City Goals and Other Important Objectives. This information is contained in Section B
of the 2016-2017 Supplemental Budget.
3. Adopt the 2016-17 Budget. The last action for Council is to adopt the 2016-2017
Budget Supplement. Consistent with the City’s two year approach to the budgetary
process, the 2016-17 Budget presented for formal Council adoption at this time has been
prepared using the 2015-17 Financial Plan as its primary foundation. It also incorporates
the analysis presented to Council as part of the 2015-16 Mid-Year review on February
16, 2016; and other budget changes approved by the Council since the adoption of the
2015-17 Financial Plan. The 2016-2017 Supplemental Budget includes Significant
Operating Program Changes (SOPCs) that require the allocation of one time and ongoing
resources. An overview of these SOPC’s is provided in the City Manager’s Budget
Message with the full details of each SOPC found in Section D of the 2016-2017
Supplemental Budget.
Alternatives
1. It is not recommended that the Council adjust the Gann Limit calculation as the
formula is prescribed by statute and was prepared in accordance with the State
Department of Finance’s guidance. This calculation is audited as part of the
City’s annual financial statements. The City Council can amend the proposed
2016-2017 Budget. Direction should be provided to Staff to amend the budget
within identified revenues to maintain the integrity and positive financial outlook
in the 5-Year Financial Forecast.
2. Not adopt the 2016-2017 Budget or take action on the Gann Limit. This is not
recommended as budget appropriations are required by the City’s Charter and are
necessary to continue to operate the City. Appropriations are subject to the Gann
Limit and hence its adoption is also required.
Attachments:
a - Resolution - Adopting the City's Appropriations Limit for 2016-17
b - Resolution - Approval of the 2015-17 Financial Plan Supplement and 2016-17 Budget
Adoption
c - 2015-17 Financial Plan Supplement Proposed 2016-17 Budget
1
Pg. 4
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _______ (2016 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT
FOR 2016-17
WHEREAS, the voters approved the Gann Spending-Limitation Initiative on November
6, 1979 and Proposition 111 on June 5, 1990, which establish and define annual appropriation
limits on state and local government agencies; and
WHEREAS, regulations require that the governing body of each local agency establish
its appropriations limit and annual adjustment factors by resolution; and
WHEREAS, the required calculations to determine the City’s appropriations limit, and
estimated appropriations subject to limitation for 2016-17, have been performed by the Finance
& Information Technology Department are available for public review.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo hereby adopts the City’s appropriations limit and annual adjustment factors for 2016 -17
as follows:
Appropriations Limit 15-16 $62,534,500
Increase in Non-Residential Assessed Valuation
Due to New Construction
5.63%
Population Factor: County Population Growth 0.60%
Compound Percentage Factor (multiplicative not
additive)
1.063%
Appropriations Limit 2016-17 $66,451,524
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2016.
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
Lee Price, MMC
Interim City Clerk
1
Pg. 5
Resolution No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 2
R ______
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
______________________________
Lee Price, MMC
Interim City Clerk
1
Pg. 6
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _______ (2016 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE 2015-17 FINANCIAL PLAN
SUPPLEMENT, ADOPTING THE 2016-17 BUDGET, AND AMENDING
THE FUND BALANCE AND RESERVE POLICY (C)
WHEREAS, THE Council adopted the 2015-17 Financial Plan on June 23, 2015, which
established comprehensive financial and policy guidelines for fiscal years 2015-16 and 2016-17;
and
WHEREAS, the 2015-17 Financial Plan included appropriations for fiscal year 2015-16;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed proposed changes to the 2015-17 Financial
Plan to be effective for fiscal year 2016-17 after holding noticed public hearings; and
WHEREAS, the 2015-17 Financial Plan includes budget and fiscal policies that provide
direction on Financial Plan Objectives, Financial Report, Budget Administration, General
Revenue Management, User Fee Cost Recovery Goals, Enterprise Fund Fees and Rates, Revenue
Distribution, Investments, Appropriations Limitation, Fund Balance and Reserves, Capital
Improvement Management, Capital Financing and Debt Management, Human Resource
Management, Productivity, and Contracting For Services; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Organizational Efficiency, Effectiveness and Transparency
Initiative Significant Operating Program Change in the 2016-17 Financial Plan Supplement
appropriates fund for the purchase of an Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system to replace
the City’s finance and accounting system and to provide additional functionality to increase
productivity and efficiency of City services; and
WHEREAS, the ERP system will be purchased over three fiscal years as a Software-as-a
Service (SaaS), meaning it does not fall within the definition of a Capital Improvement Project as
defined under budget and fiscal policies which allows for carryover for three years after budget
adoption; and
WHEREAS, amending Fund Balances and Reserves Policy (C) will allow for the
carryover of appropriated funding for the ERP system for the duration of the project; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager submitted the 2015-17 Financial Plan Supplement and
the 2016-17 Financial Plan Supplement to the City Council for their review and consideration at
a duly noticed meeting.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
1. That the above recitals are true and correct.
1
Pg. 7
Resolution No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 2
R ______
2. That the Budget and Fiscal Policy, Fund Balance and Reserve Policy (C), is hereby
amended in its entirety to read as follows “Information Technology (IT) Replacement
Fund. The City will establish an IT Replacement Fund for the General Fun to provide
for the timely replacement of information technology, both hardware and software,
with an individual replacement cost of $25,000 or more. During the 2015-17
Financial Plan period, the City will establish and maintain a minimum fund balance in
this fund equal to $400,000 for the emergency replacement of equipment that is
damaged beyond repair and not covered under the City’s property insurance program.
Interest earnings and the proceeds from the sale of surplus equipment as well as any
related damage and insurance recoveries will be credited to the fund. Funds
appropriated for the Enterprise Resource Planning system in the 2016-17 Financial
Plan Supplement may be carried over for the duration of the project. “
3. That the 2015-17 Financial Plan Supplement and the 2016-17 Financial Plan
Supplement is hereby adopted.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2016.
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
Lee Price, MMC
Interim City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
1
Pg. 8
Resolution No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 3
R ______
______________________________
Lee Price, MMC
Interim City Clerk
1
Pg. 9
Page intentionally left
blank.
1
Pg. 10
Meeting Date: 6/14/2016
FROM: Carrie Mattingly, Utilities Director
Prepared By: Aaron Floyd, Deputy Director Utilities - Water
Brigitte Elke, Utilities Business Manager
SUBJECT: 2016-17 WATER ENTERPRISE FUND REVIEW
RECOMMENDATION
1. Review and accept the Fiscal Year 2016-17 Water Enterprise Fund report; and
2. Conceptually approve the Fiscal Year 2016-17 Water Enterprise Fund budget, with final
action with the adoption of the 2016-17 Financial Plan Supplement; and
3. Approve the transfer of revenue collected for new development meters to the expenditure
account for applicable meter purchases on a quarterly basis.
DISCUSSION
Background
The Water Division is responsible for securing and protecting the community’s surface and
ground water supplies, treating water to meet stringent water quality standards, and safely
distributing it to the community. Distributing recycled water is also an important function of this
division. Maintaining complex infrastructure including a dam, multiple storage tanks, and
pressure zones will soon be assisted by the installation of sophisticated monitoring equipment on
pumps, tanks, and pressure regulating valves that will allow for remote access and control of
these systems. This project is currently underway and will result in a modernization of control
systems that will allow the City to improve the efficiency of operations.
Although rainfall levels were near average in 2016, the prolonged drought has fully engaged the
community in laudable water conservation efforts with water use down almost 20% as compared
to 2013. The Utilities Services team performed hundreds of water audits, administered water
reduction programs, and ensured community member compliance with State and local mandates
along with multiple outreach, engagement, and education activities. Additional funding is
requested to support the continued temporary staffing needed to fulfill the needs of the water
conservation program efforts.
The addition of 2,102 acre feet of water from Lake Nacimiento to the City’s water supply was an
important milestone achieved in 2016. In light of the ongoing drought conditions on the Central
Coast and in order to be prepared to maximize the use of water from Nacimiento, additional
funding is requested to support the energy and staffing requirements for 24/7 water treatment
2
Pg. 11
plant operation. This additional expense is significant and requires the deferral of critical capital
projects identified in the Potable Water Distribution System Operations Master Plan adopted in
January 2016. Reprogramming funds for a capital improvement project to expand the City’s
groundwater program is also requested.
The FY 2016-17 budget approved within the 2015-17 Financial Plan provides the basis for the
review of the Water Enterprise Fund for this report. All assumptions made during the preparation
of the Financial Plan were reviewed and necessary updates and adjustments incorporated.
As outlined in the FY 2016-17 Water Enterprise Fund Analysis, which forecasts the financial
position of the Water Fund through FY 2020-21, the City continues to:
1. Provide adequate water supply for the community; and
2. Fund debt service for the completed Water Treatment Plant improvements and the City’s
share of long-term financing obligations for the Nacimiento water supply; including
operational cost for the full allocation of Nacimiento water; and
3. Manage capital maintenance projects to maintain the community’s water infrastructure
assets; including a groundwater well project; and,
4. Provide recycled water for landscape irrigation and construction water purposes.
FY 2016-17 Water Enterprise Fund Analysis Report
The FY 2016-17 Water Enterprise Fund Financials (Attachment A) include the above-noted
changes, an update to the Fund’s financial position and underlying assumptions, and incorporates
the updated capital improvement plan.
2015-17 Financial Plan Supplement: FY 2016-17 Budget
Revenue Update
Due to the ongoing severe drought conditions, the City Council approved a drought surcharge to
be added to the 2015-16 and 2016-17 rates. The purpose of the drought surcharge is to ensure
adequate revenues are received to effectively run the water utility within fiscal policy
requirements. The basis for the amount of the surcharge was the difference in revenue loss due to
lower water consumption because of the community’s successful efforts to conserve water. With
the surcharge in place, the revenue forecast remains in line with the revenue assumptions
provided during the 2015-17 Financial Plan review.
2
Pg. 12
Revenue Category
Adopted 2016-
17 Budget
2016-17 Budget
Supplement Variance
Water Sales 17,216,708$ $ 17,216,708 0%
Agency Sales 905,000$ 850,000$ -6%
Late Charges 150,000$ 150,000$ 0%
Credit Card Fees (85,000)$ (85,000)$ 0%
Dev. Impact Fees 800,000$ 800,000$ 0%
AB 939 Reimbursement137,700$ 135,000$ -2%
Meter Sales 47,100$ 71,000$ +51%
Other Revenue 75,600$ 150,000$ +98%
Investments 50,000$ 50,000$ 0%
Total 19,297,108$ 19,337,708$ 0.21%
The adopted water service rates in support of the City’s 2015-17 Financial Plan were approved
during a public hearing on June 16, 2015 in accordance with Proposition 218 requirements.
FY 2016-17 Water Rates
Customer Type All Customers 1
Inside the City Rates
Drought Surcharge
1 - 8 Units $6.92/ Unit
$1.10/Unit
9+ Units $8.65/ Unit
$1.37/Unit
Base Fee
Drought Surcharge
$9.98
$0.74
1 1 unit = 100 Cubic Feet = 748 gallons of water
Operating Program Update – Exhibit A.1
The Water Enterprise Fund administers seven operating programs, five of which are on track
with their respective work programs within allocated resources. Two significant operating
program changes are requested: one for the Source of Supply program to account for the increase
in operating cost for the additional water allocation from Lake Nacimiento; and one for
continued temporary staffing in the Utilities Services section conservation program in order to
fulfill the educational components, state-mandated enforcement measures, and other activities
related to the continuation of drought conditions.
2
Pg. 13
Water Operating Programs
Adopted 2016-
17 Budget
2016-17 Budget
Supplement Variance
Water Admin & Engineering 724,561$ 846,858$ 17%
Source of Supply 8,718,966$ 9,771,026$ 12%
Water Treatment Plant 2,505,881$ 2,771,220$ 11%
Water Distribution 1,506,734$ 1,397,945$ -7%
Utilities Services 621,189$ 721,421$ 16%
Total Operating Budget 14,077,331$ 15,508,470$ 10%
Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Amendments – Exhibit A.3
The Water Fund is recommending the addition of a new capital improvement project for an
expanded groundwater program that will coordinate with existing water supplies. The cost for
study and design of a productive wellfield and accompanying centralized wellhead treatment,
and re-construction of an existing well is estimated to cost $1,470,000.
The CIP approved with the 2015-17 Financial Plan adoption for FY 2016-17 was revised in
order to accommodate one new capital project request and to keep the overall 2016-17 budget
within available resources . CIP project phases were paced out over a longer period of time given
the drought’s impact on revenues and workload measures. The table below shows the
recommended realignment of the CIP.
Account Title
FY 2016-17
per 2015-17
FP Adoption
FY 2016-17
Financial
Supplemental
Budget Variance
Water Dist Sys Improv
Pipeline Replacements $1,255,000 $0 ($1,255,000)
Construction Management - Pipeline Repl.$125,000 $0 ($125,000)
Trench Repair $125,000$150,000$25,000
Raise Valve Covers $25,000 $0 ($25,000)
Storage Tank Maintenance $700,000$900,000$200,000
Reservoir Replacement $5,300,000 $0 ($5,300,000)
CIP Request - Groundwater Program $0 $1,470,000$1,470,000
TOTAL $7,530,000$2,520,000($5,010,000)
FISCAL IMPACT
The 2016-17 Financial Plan Supplement work program was established in consideration of
available resources and the Water Fund will be able to fund the water program operation without
changes to the adopted rates.
2
Pg. 14
Attachments:
a - 2016-17 Water Enterprise Fund Analysis
2
Pg. 15
ATTACHMENT 1
FY 2016-17 Water Enterprise Fund
FINANCIAL SECTION
2
Pg. 16
Attachment 1
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. OVERVIEW
II. 2015-17 FINANCIAL PLAN SUPPLEMENT: FY 2016-17 BUDGET
A. Revenue Information
B. Operating Program Data
D. Debt Service Summary
WATER FUND ANALYSIS – FIVE-YEAR FORECAST
A.1. Changes in Financial Position
A.2. Projection Assumptions
A.3. Capital Improvement Plan
2
2
Pg. 17
Attachment 1
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I. OVERVIEW
This report presents the financial condition of the Water Enterprise Fund, based on the 2015-17
Financial Plan Supplement: FY 2016-17 Financial Supplemental Budget and includes revenue
information, operating and debt service data. The data considers regulatory requirements,
infrastructure maintenance, and adopted City financial policies and the fund’s standing
considering the assumptions made for the 2015-7 Financial Plan Supplement.
II. REVENUE DATA
A. Revenue Summary
The Water fund’s projected revenues are summarized in Table A below.
Table A. Revenue Summary
Original Revised Original Revised
BudgetBudget Variance BudgetBudget Variance
Investment & Property Revenue 50,00050,000 - 50,00050,000 0
Water Service Charges 15,224,45015,224,450 - 15,299,97215,299,972 0
Water Base Charges 1,420,8001,420,800 1,916,7361,916,736
Sales to Other Agencies 845,000845,000 - 905,000850,000(55,000)
Development Impact Fees 1,300,0001,500,000200,000 800,000800,000 0
AB 939 Reimbursement 134,300134,300 - 137,700135,000(2,700)
Account Set-up Fees 105,800105,800 - 100,000100,000 0
Connection Charges & Meter Sales 46,00058,65912,659 47,10071,00023,900
Other Revenues 101,700103,0071,307 40,600115,00074,400
Total 19,228,05019,442,016213,96619,297,10819,337,70840,600
2015-16 2016-17
Overall, revenue projections for FY 2016-17 are in alignment with the 2015-17 Financial Plan
with a conservative assumption for development impact fees. Operational income streams remain
as assumed due to the adopted drought surcharge that balances the continued conservation efforts
from the community and ongoing drought conditions. FY 2015-16 revenue projections are based
upon actual revenue collection through March 31, 2016. Beyond FY 2016-17, Water Service
Charges are estimated using projected water service rate changes applied to the previous year’s
projected sales (Exhibit A.2).
3
2
Pg. 18
Attachment 1
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
With the 2015-17 Financial Plan, the City Council adopted rates applicable to both years of the
Financial Plan in accordance with Proposition 218 noticing. In order to keep the fund healthy and
in good financial standing for bond ratings, the Council approved and increase to the base fee
and the introduction of a drought surcharge effective July 1, 2015. The new rates, applicable July
1, 2016 are summarized below which incorporates a further increase to the base fee and the
drought surcharges as the volumetric rates remain the same:
Water Rates Increase
Base Fee 7.63$ 9.98$ 31%
Drought Surcharge 0.37$ 0.74$ 100%
Tier 1 Rate 6.92$ 1 - 8 units 6.92$ 1 - 8 units 0%
Drought Surcharge 0.98$ 1.10$ 12%
Tier 2 Rate 8.65$ 9+ units 8.65$ 9+ units 0%
Drought Surcharge 1.23$ 1.37$ 11%
2015-16 2016-17
79%
10%
4% 4% 3%
2016-17
Water Sales
Base Fee
Sales to
Agencies
Impact Fees
Other
revenue
78%
7%
5%
8% 2%
2015-16
Water
Sales
Base Fee
Sales to
Agencies
Impact
Fees
Other
revenue
Revenue Distribution 2015-16 & 2016-17
4
2
Pg. 19
Attachment 1
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The following table compares the FY 2015-16 and FY 2016-17 monthly cost for residential
customers based upon various usage levels and approved water rates.
Residential Monthly Water Bill Comparison
Consumption 3 units 8 units 12 units 25 units
Water Current $31.70 $71.20 $110.72 $239.16
Water Proposed July 1, 2014 $34.78 $74.88 $114.96 $245.22
Variance $3.08 $3.68 $4.24 $6.06
Cal Poly Rates. FY 2016-17 Sales to Other Agencies (Cal Poly) are projected to decrease based on
current water usage. The percentage of water rate Cal Poly will pay in 2016-17 will increase
from 50% to 51% of applicable rate as defined in the Cal Poly rate agreement adopted in 2012.
The decreased rate is due to the exclusion of cost of the Source of Supply program as Cal Poly
has its own source of supply in Whale Rock. As listed under Operating Program Summary, the
Source of Supply program accounts for approximately 63% of the Water Enterprise Fund
operating program cost.
B. Operating Program Summary
The Water Division Operating Program budgets are summarized in Table B. The summary
reflects the operating program base budget amounts for FY 2016-17. The most significant
change can be seen in the Source of Supply program due to the cost increase for the full
allocation of Nacimiento water supply. A Significant Operating Budget Change request is before
the City Council for approval and incorporated in these assumptions.
Water Operating Programs
Adopted 2016-17
Budget
2016-17 Budget
Supplement Variance
Water Admin & Engineering 724,561$ 846,858$ 17%
Source of Supply 8,718,966$ 9,771,026$ 12%
Water Treatment Plant 2,505,881$ 2,771,220$ 11%
Water Distribution 1,506,734$ 1,397,945$ -7%
Utilities Services 621,189$ 721,421$ 16%
Total Operating Budget 14,077,331$ 15,508,470$ 10%
5
2
Pg. 20
Attachment 1
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
C. Debt Service Summary
The Water fund’s debt service obligations are summarized in Table D below.
The Nacimiento Water Supply Project debt financing is facilitated through the County of San
Luis Obispo, and the City’s share of the debt service costs are accounted for as an operating
expense in the Source of Supply operating program budget. No new debt financing is proposed
in 2016-17.
Water
Admin
Source of
Supply
Water
Treatment
Water
Distribution
Utilities
Services Total
2015-16 $763,963.10 $8,640,298.$2,535,336.$1,437,924.$814,981.00 $14,192,502
2016-17 $846,858.00 $9,771,026.$2,771,220.$1,397,945.$721,421.00 $15,508,470
Variance 110.85%113.09%109.30%97.22%88.52%109.27%
$-
$2,000,000.00
$4,000,000.00
$6,000,000.00
$8,000,000.00
$10,000,000.00
$12,000,000.00
$14,000,000.00
$16,000,000.00
$18,000,000.00
Operating Budgets
Table D. Debt Service Summary
Adopted 2016-17
Budget
2016-17
Supplement
2012 Water Revenue Bonds 572,000.00$ 572,000.00$
2006 Water Revenue Bonds 1,030,948.00$ 1,030,948.00$
State Revolving Fund - Water Reuse 525,457.00$ 525,457.00$
2009 Public Safety Radio System Upgrade 36,801.00$ 36,801.00$
2009 Public Saftey Communication Center 28,586.00$ 28,586.00$
Total Debt Service 2,193,792.00$ 2,193,792.00$
6
2
Pg. 21
Attachment 1
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
EXHIBIT A
FY 2016-17 WATER FUND
FUND ANALYSIS
FIVE-YEAR FORECAST
7
2
Pg. 22
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION - WATER FUND
2015-16 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Mid-Year Current
Budget Budget Projection Projection Projection Projection Projection
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenues 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000
Water Sales
Water Service Charges 15,224,450 15,224,450 15,299,972 16,065,000 16,547,000 17,208,900 17,897,300
Water Base Charges 1,420,800 1,420,800 1,916,736 2,403,072 2,691,000 2,880,000 2,995,200
Sales to Other Agencies 845,000 845,000 850,000 892,500 919,300 956,100 994,300
Late Charges 150,000 150,000 151,050 152,107 153,172 154,244
Credit Card Fees (80,000)(85,000)(85,595)(86,194)(86,798)(87,405)
Development Impact Fees 1,300,000 1,500,000 800,000 809,600 819,300 831,200 843,300
AB 939 Reimbursement 134,300 134,300 135,000 138,800 142,700 147,000 151,400
Account Set-up Fees 105,800 105,800 100,000 100,700 101,400 102,100 102,800
Connection Charges and Meter Sales 46,000 58,659 71,000 71,500 72,000 72,500 73,000
Other Revenues 101,700 33,007 50,000 50,400 50,800 51,200 51,600
Total Revenues 19,228,050 19,442,016 19,337,708 20,647,027 21,459,413 22,365,375 23,225,739
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Public Utilities 14,169,442 14,192,503 15,508,470 15,162,081 15,337,460 15,580,246 15,474,913
General Government 1,797,668 1,797,668 2,038,842 2,348,856 2,443,179 2,162,975 2,204,295
Total Operating Programs 15,967,110 15,990,171 17,547,312 17,510,937 17,780,639 17,743,221 17,679,208
Capital Improvement Plan 6,878,369 6,878,369 2,958,493 7,329,642 2,253,867 4,207,145 3,663,200
Debt Service 2,192,461 2,192,461 2,193,791 2,561,914 2,565,217 2,520,432 2,525,315
Total Expenditures 25,037,940 25,061,001 22,699,596 27,402,493 22,599,723 24,470,798 23,867,723
16,645,250 16,645,250 17,216,708 18,468,072 19,238,000 20,088,900 20,892,500
Other Sources (Uses)
Operating Expenditure Adjustment 34,737 35,431 36,140 36,863
PERS employer rate increase (35,500)(38,300)(39,300)(10,700)
Projected Debt Proceeds 5,000,000
Total Other Sources (Uses)0 0 0 4,999,237 (2,869)(3,160)26,163
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses (5,809,890)(5,618,985)(3,361,888)(1,756,229)(1,143,178)(2,108,583)(615,821)
Working Capital, Beginning of Year 21,857,589 21,857,589 16,238,604 12,876,716 11,120,487 9,977,308 7,868,725
Adj to balance to CAFR
Working Capital, End of Year 16,047,699 16,238,604 12,876,716 11,120,487 9,977,308 7,868,725 7,252,904
Reserve (20% of operating)3,193,400 3,198,000 3,509,500 3,502,200 3,556,100 3,548,600 3,535,800
Rate Stabilization Reserve (10% of sales revenue)900,000 900,000 1,615,000 1,695,800 1,746,600 1,816,500 1,889,200
CJPIA Designated Reserve 131,406 131,406
Unreserved Working Capital 11,822,893 12,009,198 7,752,216 5,922,487 4,674,608 2,503,625 1,827,904
2
Pg. 23
PROJECTION ASSUMPTIONS - WATER FUND
CATEGORIES 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Utilities Service Fees CPI Projections 2.3%0.7%0.7%0.7%0.7%0.7%
Nacimiento Payment for Operating and Maintenance & Reserves $1,854,163 $2,962,738 $2,752,700 $2,820,700 $2,890,400 $2,961,900
Nacimiento Payment for SLO County Debt Service $4,698,580 $4,781,194 $4,779,385 $4,778,440 $4,738,137 $4,741,205
Debt Service - 2012 Water Revenue Bonds $568,600 $572,000 $569,600 $571,600 $567,800 $568,400
Debt Service - 2006 Water Revenue Bonds $1,032,748 $1,030,948 $1,033,548 $1,035,348 $1,030,873 $1,035,293
Debt Service - State Revolving Fund Loan - Water Reuse Project $525,457 $525,457 $525,457 $525,457 $525,457 $525,457
Projected Debt Service - 2021 Water Treatment Plant Upgrade $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Projected Debt Service-Reservoir Replacement $0 $0 $367,909 $367,909 $367,909 $367,909
Debt Service - 2009 Public Safety Radio System Upgrade $37,055 $36,801 $36,841 $36,408 $0 $0
Debt Service - 2009 Public Safety Communications Center $28,600 $28,586 $28,560 $28,496 $28,394 $28,256
Revenue Debt Coverage 122%80%311%130%170%198%
Net Revenues/ Debt Service 0.92 0.47 2.93 1.14 1.52 1.89
Water Service Rate Increase (Volumetric only-does not include base rate
and drought surcharge in 2014-2018)0.0%0.0%5.0%3.0%4.0%4.0%
Tier 1 Drought Surcharge 0.98$ 1.10$ 1.18$ 1.23$
Tier 2 Drought Surcharge 1.23$ 1.37$ 1.48$ 1.54$
Water Base Rate 7.63$ 9.98$ 12.33$ 12.82$ 13.40$ 13.94$
Water Base Fee Drought surcharge 0.37$ 0.74$ 1.11$ 1.15$
2
Pg. 24
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - WATER FUND
PROJECT DETAIL AND PHASING - PUBLIC UTILITIES
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
BUDGET PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED
Water Treatment
Major Facility Maintenance 202,425 170,000 290,000 160,000 160,000
Air Compressor Replacements (design)
Air Compressor Replacements (construction)
Stenner Canyon Raw Waterline Replacement (Study)14,935
Stenner Canyon Raw Waterline Replacement (Design)35,000
Stenner Canyon Raw Waterline Replacement (Const)100,000
Floating Cover Replacements
IT - MP2 Upgrade
Wash Water Tank #2 (Design)15,000
Wash Water Tank #2 (Const)170,000
Reservoir 2 Replacement (Study)65,600
Reservoir 2 Replacement (Design)184,400
Reservoir 2 (Construction)5,000,000
Reservoirt 2 Replacement ( CM)300,000
Reservoir 1 Replacement-design
Fleet Replacement: Compact Pickup
Fleet Replacement: Service Body Truck 59,100
Forebay and Culvert Rehab (Study)20,000
Forebay and Culvert Rehab (Design)80,000
Forebay and Culvert Rehab (Const)
Forebay and Culvert Rehab (Const Mgmt)
Treatment Plant Ozone Generation Upgrade 700,000
SCADA Upgrade with Controllers
Fleet Replacement Forecast
Total 676,460 340,000 5,590,000 160,000 160,000 800,000
Water Distribution
WATER SERVICES
2
Pg. 25
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - WATER FUND
PROJECT DETAIL AND PHASING - PUBLIC UTILITIES
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
BUDGET PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSEDWATER SERVICES
Distribution System Improvements - Pipelines 1,860,000
Mt View, Hill, West, Lincoln, etc.-Design 125,000
Mt View, Hill, West, Lincoln, etc.-Const 1,255,000
Mt View, Hill, West, Lincoln, etc.-Const Mgmt 125,000
Chorro, El Paseo, El Cerrito, etc - Design 125,000
Chorro, El Paseo, El Cerrito, etc - Const 1,258,000
Chorro, El Paseo, El Cerrito, etc - Const Mgmt 125,000
Craig, Christina, Jaycee, etc -Design 135,000
Craig, Christina, Jaycee, etc -Const 1,350,000
Craig, Christina, Jaycee, etc -Const Mgmt 135,000
Patricia, Highland, La Entrada - Design 127,000
Patricia, Highland, La Entrada - Construction 1,270,000
Patricia, Highland, La Entrada - Construction Mgmt 127,000
Serrano Zone Consolidation-(Study & Design)100,000
Serrano Zone Consolidation Phase 1 (Const)1,000,000
Serrano Zone Consolidation Phase 1 (Constr Mgmt)100,000
Serrano Zone Consolidation Phase 2 (Const)1,000,000
Serrano Zone Consolidation Phase 2 (Constr Mgmt)100,000
Trench Repairs 126,330 150,000 180,000 180,000 180,000
Raise Valve Covers 125,765 0 25,000 25,000 25,000
Water Meters and Water Meter Boxes 82,500 82,500 85,000 87,500 90,000
Fire Hydrants and Parts 25,000 25,000 25,000 30,000 30,000
16" Waterline Replacement (Design)
16" Waterline Replacement (Construction)-Phase I
16" Waterline Replacement (Construction)-Phase 2 1,544,847
Fel Mar Pump Station (Design)
Fel Mar Pump Station Const)
Ferrini Zone Consolidation (Design)
Ferrini Zone Consolidation (Const)
Ferrini Zone Consolidation (Const Mgmt)
2
Pg. 26
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - WATER FUND
PROJECT DETAIL AND PHASING - PUBLIC UTILITIES
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
BUDGET PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSEDWATER SERVICES
Slack Tank Consolidation (Design)100,000
Slack Tank Consolidation (Const)
Slack Tank Consolidation (Const Mgmt)
Edna Saddle Water Tank Recoating
Fire Lateral Reimbursement
Tank Maintenance (Study)20,000 75,000
Tank Maintenance (Design)42,500
Tank Maintenance (Construction)600,000 675,000
Tank Maintenance (CM)130,000 70,000
IT - CityWorks Upgrade 30,450
Fleet Replacement: Portable Generators (50% share)152,900
Distribution Pump Station Upgrades
Water Pump Station Analysis 4,096
Fleet replacement: Pickup 28,500
Fleet replacement: Caterpillar Backhoe Loader & Attachments 136,000
Fleet replacement: Portable vacuum pump 112,000
Fleet replacement: Service body truck 110,700
Extended Cab Pickup Truck 34,500 28,500
Fleet Replacement Forecast
Sinsheimer Parking Resurface
Street Reconstruction 2013
Sinsheimer Parking Resurface
Monterey Waterline Replacement (Design)
Monterey Waterline Replacement (Const)27,385
Monterey Waterline Replacement (CM)
2
Pg. 27
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - WATER FUND
PROJECT DETAIL AND PHASING - PUBLIC UTILITIES
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
BUDGET PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSEDWATER SERVICES
Foothill/Chorro PRV Replacement (Design)4,996
Foothill/Chorro PRV Replacement (Const)86,950
Total 4,280,220 1,112,500 1,695,000 2,034,000 3,926,000 2,863,200
Water Customer Service
Fleet replacement: Compact Pickups 57,000
Total 0 0 0 0 57,000 0
Utilities Services
Fleet replacement: Compact Pickup 25,256 25,200
Total 25,256 25,200 0 0 0 0
Administration and Engineering
879 Morro Refurbishment 75,330
Groundwater (Study)70,000
Groundwater (DN)250,000
Groundwater (CN)1,150,000
Fleet replacement: Sedan 33,700
Corporation Yard Security-PW Project
Mobile Equipment Lifts & Safety Stands
Total 75,330 1,470,000 0 33,700 0 0
General assumption for future planning purposes
Total Water Services CIP Requests 5,057,265 2,947,700 7,285,000 2,227,700 4,143,000 3,663,200
Shared Information Technology
Fox Pro Replace
Laserfiche
UB System Upgrade 1,667
City Website Upgrade (4% share)
Water Reuse Automation Impr 53,921
Wirless Net Infrastructure Replacement
Telemetry System Upgrade (Design)70,796
Telemetry System Upgrade - Construction 1,488,369
2
Pg. 28
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - WATER FUND
PROJECT DETAIL AND PHASING - PUBLIC UTILITIES
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
BUDGET PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSEDWATER SERVICES
Virtual Private Network (VPN) Replacement 9,028
Network Firewalls 15,259
Network Security Upgrades
GPS System Replacement
Network Switching Infrastructure Replacement 14,140
Radio Handhelds and Mobile Replacements 24,282
VM Infrastructure 8,945 8,945
Server Operating System 1,848
VoIP 20,360
Finance System Replacement
Document Management System
Tait Radio System 24,282
Office Application Software Replacement 12,400 16,773
UPS Battery Replacement 1,885 1,885
Enterprise Storage Growth
Storage Capacity Upgrade and Replacement
Total Share of Information Technology CIP 1,629,037 10,793 44,642 26,167 64,145 0
Completed Projects 192,067
TOTAL WATER FUND CAPITAL PLAN 6,878,369 2,958,493 7,329,642 2,253,867 4,207,145 3,663,200
2
Pg. 29
Page intentionally left
blank.
2
Pg. 30
Meeting Date: 6/14/2016
FROM: Carrie Mattingly, Utilities Director
Prepared By: Dave Hix, Utilities Deputy Director, Wastewater
Brigitte Elke, Utilities Business Manager
SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 2016-17 SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND REVIEW
RECOMMENDATION
1. Review and accept the Fiscal Year 2016-17 Sewer Enterprise Fund financials; and
2. Conceptually approve the Fiscal Year 2016-17 Sewer Enterprise Fund budget, with final
action with the adoption of the Fiscal Year 2016-17 Financial Plan Supplement.
DISCUSSION
Background
The Wastewater Division is responsible for collecting wastewater from businesses and
residences and transporting it to the Water Resource Recovery Facility where it is treated to high
standards for reuse in the creek system and as an irrigation water source. Additionally, solids
treatment creates and utilizes energy while the biosolids it creates are beneficially reused for
their nutrients. Protection of the entire wastewater system, its staff, and the environment is
provided through the Environmental Programs group in compliance with the federal pretreatment
program. The Water Quality Laboratory team serves the City related to water quality studies,
data, testing, and analyses to ensure appropriate regulatory compliance and operational decision-
making. Operating, maintaining, and installing and/or replacing the hundreds of millions of
dollars of wastewater infrastructure assets is the responsibility of this entire team of
professionals.
Ongoing water conservation has resulted in significant reductions in indoor water use resulting in
decreased wastewater flows to the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF). Designed to treat
5.1 million gallons per day (MGD), the WRRF is currently processing 2.74 MGD for 2015 with
summer flows being as low as 2.15 MGD. Low flows have resulted in some increased
maintenance in the wastewater collection system and challenging treatment situations at the
WRRF.
The WRRF completed its energy efficiency project, a public/private partnership with PG&E, in
December 2015. A component of the project is presently generating about 25% of the facility’s
energy requirements. In January 2016, the project was awarded project of the year in the
environmental class from the American Public Works Association local chapter. Also in
December 2015, the design consultant for the WRRF project was hired and the draft
3
Pg. 31
Environmental Impact Report was released in April 2016 with completion scheduled for early
summer. Design of the WRRF project continues. The wastewater collection system
Infrastructure Renewal Strategy was approved by City Council in January 2016. This strategy
document is a valuable tool that includes an operating model of the collection system, prioritized
capital improvement list, and recommendations such as a strategy to control inflow and
infiltration.
The FY 2016-17 budget approved within the 2015-17 Financial Plan provides the basis for the
review of the Sewer Enterprise Fund for this report. All assumptions made during the preparation
of the Financial Plan were reviewed and necessary updates and adjustments incorporated.
As outlined in the FY 2016-17 Sewer Enterprise Fund Analysis, which forecasts the financial
position of the fund through 2020-21 the City will be able to:
1. Continue to deliver safe and reliable wastewater services to the community within the FY
2016-17 adopted sewer rates; and
2. Maintain its operation in FY 2016-17 within approved budget levels without any
adjustments; and
3. Continue capital improvement projects to maintain the community’s wastewater
infrastructure assets; and
4. Maintain a relatively healthy working capital balance and revenue plan while working to
position the Fund for financing terms needed for the upcoming WRRF project.
FY 2016-17 Sewer Enterprise Fund Analysis Report
The FY 2016-17 Sewer Enterprise Fund analysis report (Attachment A) includes the details of
assumptions used to complete the review, changes in financial position, and an update on major
capital activities.
Revenue Update
Annually, the Utilities Department captures residential water use during December, January, and
February to establish the winter water use average and the sewer cap for the upcoming fiscal
year. Analysis of the use data indicates a further drop in indoor water consumption due to
ongoing extraordinary conservation efforts driven by the severe drought conditions. The Sewer
Fund is expecting a revenue drop of $1.4 million dollars as the average sewer cap will drop from
five to four units. No immediate changes to rates adopted on June 23, 2015 are recommended but
the revenue shortfall will require an adjustment to projected future rate increases in order to
adequately position the fund to support the debt service required for the WRRF project and other
critical capital projects.
3
Pg. 32
Revenue Category
Adopted 2016-
17 Budget
2016-17 Budget
Supplement Variance
Customer Sales 15,668,900$ 14,300,000$ -9%
Agency Sales 942,800$ 875,000$ -7%
Late Charges 150,000$ 150,000$ 0%
Credit Card Fees (80,000)$ (85,000)$ 6%
Dev. Impact Fees 250,000$ 300,000$ 20%
Industrial User Charges 71,100$ 70,000$ -2%
Meter Sales 47,100$ 71,000$ 51%
Other Revenue 146,300$ 202,500$ 38%
Investments 50,000$ 50,000$ 0%
Total 17,246,200$ 15,933,500$ -8%
The adopted sewer rate for 2016-17 reflects a 3% increase, effective July 1, 2016.
Rate Category 2015-16 2016-17
Base Fee $8.32 $8.57
Volume Charge $9.17 $9.44
Increase on average household of 4 units* $45.00 $46.33
Average Increase $1.33
* average based on winter water use cap.
Operating Program Update
The Sewer Enterprise Fund includes seven operating programs, all of which are on track with
their work programs within allocated resources. No increases or changes from the assumptions
made in the 2015-17 Financial Plan for are recommended for FY 2016-17.
Sewer Operating Programs
Adopted 2016-
17 Budget
2016-17 Budget
Supplement Variance
WW Administration 797,829$ 956,406$ 20%
WW Collection 1,232,041$ 1,046,199$ -15%
WW Pretreatment 280,210$ 258,694$ -8%
Water Reclamation Facility3,625,551$ 3,582,761$ -1%
Water Quality Laboratory 750,164$ 775,609$ 3%
Utilities Services 416,841$ 479,174$ 15%
Total Operating Expenditure7,102,636$ 7,098,843$ -0.05%
Capital Improvement Program Update
The recommended program will stay within approved overall funding for the fiscal year. Some
projects identified in the 2015-17 approved capital program for 2016-17 are being rescheduled.
Construction bids are coming in higher and engineer’s estimates have been increased to reflect
this change. The 2015-17 Financial Plan reflected the Foothill Lift Station replacement in 2016-
17. Funding of this facility has been adjusted to reflect new estimates. Below is a list of projects
and changes recommended to the previously approved funding.
3
Pg. 33
Account Title
FY 2016-17
per 2015-17
FP Adoption
FY 2016-17
Financial
Supplemental
Budget Variance
Master Coll Sys Improv
CN-Santa Barbara, Osos, Church, trench &
pipe bursting $630,000 $0 ($630,000)
CM-Santa Barbara, Osos, Church, trench
& pipe bursting $60,000 $0 ($60,000)
Lift Stations
CN-Foothill Lift Station $1,100,000 $1,600,000 $500,000
CM-Foothill Lift Station $125,000 $155,000 $30,000
WRRF Upgrade
Program Mgmt-WRRf Upgrade $1,500,000 $0 ($1,500,000)
CN-WRRF Upgrade $68,032,000 $0 ($68,032,000)
CM-WRRF Upgrade $6,000,000 $0 ($6,000,000)
WRRF Major Maintenance $155,000 $105,000 ($50,000)
TOTAL $77,602,000 $1,860,000 ($75,742,000)
Project Highlights
Energy Efficiency Project
The Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) completed its energy efficiency project, a
public/private partnership with PG&E, in December 2015. A component of the project is
presently generating about 25% of the facility’s energy requirements.
Water Resource Recovery Facility Project & Collection System
In December 2015, the design consultant for the WRRF project was hired and the draft
Environmental Impact Report was released in April 2016 with completion scheduled for early
summer. Design of the overall WRRF Project continues. The wastewater collection system
Infrastructure Renewal Strategy was approved by City Council in January 2016. This strategy
document is a valuable tool that includes an operating model of the collection system, prioritized
capital improvement list, and recommendations such as a strategy to control inflow and
infiltration.
Wastewater Collection
The California/Higuera/Marsh sewer replacement was recently completed. The project replaces
mainlines that are over 100 years old and redirects to the flow that retires two vulnerable clay
lines under the railroad.
3
Pg. 34
FISCAL IMPACT
While a revenue loss of $1.4 million is anticipated and cost estimates for capital projects
increased (requiring the re-programming of certain capital projects), the Sewer Fund will be able
to fund 2016-17 operations without immediate changes to the adopted rates or utilization of the
rate stabilization reserve. However, rate assumptions (Exhibit A) have been adjusted in outer
years to keep the fund healthy into the future.
Attachments:
a - 2016-17 Sewer Enterprise Fund Analysis
3
Pg. 35
ATTACHMENT 1
FY 2016-17 Sewer Enterprise Fund
FINANCIAL SECTION
3
Pg. 36
Attachment 1
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. OVERVIEW
II. 2015-17 FINANCIAL PLAN SUPPLEMENT: FY 2016-17 BUDGET
A. Revenue Summary
B. Operating Programs
D. Debt Service Summary
SEWER FUND ANALYSIS – FIVE-YEAR FORECAST
A.1. Changes in Financial Position
A.2. Projection Assumptions
A.3. Capital Improvement Plan
2
3
Pg. 37
Attachment 1
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I. OVERVIEW
This report presents the financial condition of the Sewer Enterprise Fund, based on the 2015-17
Financial Plan Supplement: FY 2016-17 Financial Supplemental Budget and includes revenue,
operating, and debt service information. The data incorporates regulatory requirements,
infrastructure maintenance, and adopted City financial policies and the fund’s standing
considering the assumptions made for the 2015-7 Financial Plan Supplement.
II. SEWER FUND REVENUE
A. Revenue Summary
The Sewer Fund’s 2016-17 projected revenues are summarized below together with 2015-16
estimates:
Table A. Revenue Summary
Original Revised Original Revised
BudgetBudget Variance BudgetBudget Variance
Investment & Property Revenue 50,00050,000 - 50,00050,000 0
Sewer Service Charges 13,748,14513,748,145 - 14,160,60012,749,800(1,410,800)
Sewer Base Fee 1,464,4001,464,400 1,508,3001,550,20041,900
Sales to Cal Poly 915,300915,300 - 942,800875,000(67,800)
Development Impact Fees 350,000600,000250,000 250,000300,00050,000
Industrial User Charges 69,50069,500 - 71,10070,000(1,100)
Account Set-up Fees 105,800105,800 - 108,200100,000(8,200)
Connection Charges & Meter Sales 46,00046,000 - 47,10071,00023,900
Other Revenues 107,200107,200 - 108,100102,500(5,600)
Total 16,856,34517,106,345250,00017,246,20015,868,500(1,377,700)
2015-16 2016-17
The continued drought conditions and the water conservation efforts by the community are now
effecting indoor water use and the expected sewer fund revenue. The evaluation of the 2015-16
winter cap period revealed a drop from an average of five units used during December, January,
and February to four units. The effects are reflected in the revenue assumption for sewer service
charges with an estimated drop of $1.4 million. The revenue assumptions shown for the five-year
forecast are based on that new base. Assumed rate increases (Exhibit A.2) were adjusted to keep
the fund healthy over the forecast period.
3
3
Pg. 38
Attachment 1
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
REVENUE COMPARISON 2015-16 to 2016-17
With the 2015-17 Financial Plan, the City Council adopted rates applicable to both years of the
Financial Plan in accordance with Proposition 218 noticing. The approved rates approved a
three-percent increase effective July 1, 2015. The new rates, applicable July 1, 2016 are:
Rate Category 2015-16 2016-17
Base Fee $8.32 $8.57
Volume Charge $9.17 $9.44
The following table compares the FY 2015-16 and FY 2016-17 monthly cost for residential
customers based on the average sewer cap for each year and approved sewer service rates.
80%
10%
6% 2% 2%
2016-17
Sewer
Charges
Base Fee
Sales to
Agencies
Impact
Fees
Other
revenue
80%
9%
5% 4%
2% 2015-16
Sewer
Charges
Base Fee
Sales to
Agencies
Impact
Fees
Other
revenue
4
3
Pg. 39
Attachment 1
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Cal Poly Rates: Based on the 2012 agreement between the City and Cal Poly, applicable rates
for Cal Poly are increasing in 2016-17. Cal Poly’s rate is established using a methodology based
on the University previously making capital contributions to the Water Resource Recovery
Facility upgrade projects, as well as collection system-related improvements. The debt related to
these projects has now been retired and the University’s rates will continue to increase until they
reach 100% of the City rate. Effective July 1, 2016, Cal Poly’s rate will go from 94% to 97% of
the City rate. Cal Poly will be paying the full rate by 2017-18. However, based on current usage
patterns, the overall revenue from Cal Poly is expected to decrease due to ongoing conservation
efforts at the university.
B. Operating Program Summary
The Sewer Fund Operating Program budgets are summarized in Table B. The summary reflects
the operating program base budget amounts for FY 2016-17. There are no changes to the
assumed cost from the 2015-17 Financial Plan adoption for the overall budget. However, the
distribution of funding changed between programs with MOU adjustments taking effect within
the individual programs.
Sewer Operating Programs
Adopted 2016-17
Budget
2016-17 Budget
Supplement Variance
WW Administration 797,829$ 956,406$ 20%
WW Collection 1,232,041$ 1,046,199$ -15%
WW Pretreatment 280,210$ 258,694$ -8%
Water Reclamation Facility 3,625,551$ 3,582,761$ -1%
Water Quality Laboratory 750,164$ 775,609$ 3%
Utilities Services 416,841$ 479,174$ 15%
Total Operating Expenditure 7,102,636$ 7,098,843$ -0.05%
Comparison Average Single Family Residential Sewer Customer Monthly Bill
2015-16 2016-17
AWWU SFR “Sewer Cap”: 5-Units 4-Units
Rates Average Bill Rates Average Bill
Base Charge: $8.32 $8.32 $8.57 $8.57
Volume Charge (Sewer Cap x Rate): $9.17/unit $45.85 $9.44/ unit $37.76
Total $54.18 $46.33
5
3
Pg. 40
Attachment 1
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
C. Debt Service Summary
The Sewer Fund’s debt service obligations are summarized in Table D.
As the Water Resource Recovery Facility project is moving through the EIR and design process,
the financial assumptions now place a first debt payment in FY 2017-18.
WW
Admin
WW Pre-
Treatment
WW
Collection WRRF WQL Utilities
Services Total
2015-16 $920,026.$272,150.$1,218,42 $3,672,95 $751,770.$424,092.$7,259,42
2016-17 $956,406.$258,694.$1,046,19 $3,582,76 $775,609.$479,174.$7,098,84
Variance 103.95%95.06%85.86%97.54%103.17%112.99%97.79%
$-
$1,000,000.00
$2,000,000.00
$3,000,000.00
$4,000,000.00
$5,000,000.00
$6,000,000.00
$7,000,000.00
$8,000,000.00
Operating Budgets
Table D. Debt Service Summary
Adopted 2016-17
Budget
2016-17
Supplement
WRRF Energy Efficiency Project 618,544$ 618,544$
Tank Farm Lift Station - Private Placement 184,500$ 184,500$
Tank Farm Lift Station - I-Bank 558,500$ 558,500$
2009 Public Safety Radio System Upgrade41,800$ 41,800$
2009 Public Saftey Communication Center 32,500$ 32,500$
Total Debt Service 1,435,844$ 1,435,844$
6
3
Pg. 41
Attachment 1
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
EXHIBIT A
FY 2016-17 SEWER FUND
FUND ANALYSIS
FIVE-YEAR FORECAST
7
3
Pg. 42
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION - SEWER FUND
2015-16 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Mid-Year Current
Budget Budget Projection Projection Projection Projection Projection
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenues 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000
Service Charges
Customer Sales
Sewer Service Charges 13,748,145 13,748,145 12,749,800 13,103,300 13,496,400 13,901,300 14,318,300
Sewer Base Fee 1,464,400 1,464,400 1,550,200 1,596,700 1,644,600 1,693,900 1,744,700
Sales to Cal Poly 915,300 915,300 875,000 901,300 928,300 956,100 984,800
Late Charges 150,000 150,000 150,000 151,050 152,107 153,172 155,470
Credit Card Fees (80,000)(80,000)(85,000)(85,595)(86,194)(86,798)(88,099)
Development Impact Fees 600,000 600,000 300,000 253,000 256,000 259,700 265,600
Account Set-Up Fees 105,800 105,800 100,000 100,700 101,400 102,100 103,600
Industrial User Charges 69,500 69,500 70,000 70,500 71,000 71,500 72,600
Connection Charges and Meter Sales 46,000 46,000 71,000 71,500 72,000 72,500 73,600
Other Revenue 37,200 37,200 37,500 37,800 38,100 38,400 39,000
Total Revenue 17,106,345 17,106,345 15,868,500 16,250,255 16,723,713 17,211,875 17,719,570
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Public Utilities 7,220,332 7,259,425 7,098,843 7,249,248 7,415,005 7,597,301 7,711,260
General Government 1,576,026 2,069,099 2,081,360 2,392,224 2,487,415 2,208,095 2,293,385
Total Operating Programs 8,796,358 9,328,524 9,180,203 9,641,473 9,902,419 9,805,396 10,004,645
General Carryover
Capital Improvement Plan 19,997,912 20,093,672 4,023,275 78,278,349 3,275,305 1,725,743 2,238,700
Debt Service 1,437,573 1,437,573 1,435,587 6,180,663 6,178,077 6,134,285 6,136,287
Total Expenditures 30,231,843 30,859,769 14,639,065 94,100,485 19,355,801 17,665,424 18,379,632
Other Sources (Uses)
Other Operating Adjustments (109,334) (111,521) (113,751) (116,026)
PERS employer rate increase (18,200)(34,900)(35,800)(9,800)
Proceeds from Debt Financing 74,000,000
Other Sources (Uses)(443,073)
Total Other Sources (Uses)(443,073)0 0 73,872,466 (146,421)(149,551)(125,826)
Revenues and Other Sources Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses (13,568,571)(13,753,424)1,229,435 (3,977,764)(2,778,508)(603,100)(785,888)
Working Capital, Beginning of Year 27,050,422 27,071,809 13,318,385 14,547,820 10,570,056 7,791,548 7,188,448
Working Capital, End of Year 13,481,851 13,318,385 14,547,820 10,570,056 7,791,548 7,188,448 6,402,559
Reserve (20% of operating)1,759,300 1,865,700 1,836,000 1,928,300 1,980,500 1,961,100 2,000,900
Rate Stabilization Reserve (5% of sales)733,200 733,200 681,200 700,200 721,200 742,900 765,200
CJPIA designated Reserve 135,062 135,062
Unreserved Working Capital 10,854,289 10,584,423 12,030,620 7,941,556 5,089,848 4,484,448 3,636,459
3
Pg. 43
PROJECTION ASSUMPTIONS - SEWER FUND
CATEGORIES 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Utilities Service Fees CPI Projections 2.3%0.7%0.7%0.7%0.7%1.5%
Debt Service - 2009 Public Safety Radio System Upgrade $42,033 $41,800 $41,800 $41,300 $0 $0
Debt Service - 2009 Public Safety Communications Center $32,442 $32,500 $32,400 $32,400 $32,300 $32,100
Debt Service - I-Bank Loan for Tank Farm Lift Station $559,328 $558,500 $557,500 $556,600 $555,600 $554,500
Debt Service - Private Placement for Tank Farm Lift Station $185,020 $184,500 $183,700 $182,700 $181,500 $185,000
Debt Service - Water Resource Recovery Facility Upgrade $0 $0 $4,746,900 $4,746,900 $4,746,900 $4,746,900
Debt Service - WRRF Energy Efficiency Project (15 Years)$618,720 $618,544 $618,363 $618,177 $617,985 $617,787
Development Impact Fee Growth Rate 0.50%0.50%0.50%0.50%0.75%0.75%
Working Capital Requirement @ 20% of operating expenditures $1,865,705 $1,836,000 $1,928,300 $1,980,500 $1,961,100 $1,992,700
Debt Service Coverage at 110% of Net Revenues (2)499%445%103%106%117%122%
Sewer Service Rate Increase 4.6%3.0%3.0%3.0%3.0%3.0%
3
Pg. 44
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - SEWER FUND
PROJECT DETAIL AND PHASING - PUBLIC UTILITIES
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Budget PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED
Wastewater Collection
Collection System Improvements 2,310,912
DN-Santa Barbara, Osos, Church, trench & pipe bursting 60,000
CN-Santa Barbara, Osos, Church, trench & pipe bursting 630,000
CM-Santa Barbara, Osos, Church, trench & pipe bursting 60,000
DN-Walnut, Morro, Jeffery, etc trench & pipe bursting 80,000
CN-Walnut, Morro, Jeffery, etc trench & pipe bursting 1,100,000
CM-Walnut, Morro, Jeffery, etc trench & pipe bursting 80,000
DN-Serrano, Bressi, Palomar, etc trench & pipe bursting 50,000
CN-Serrano, Bressi, Palomar, etc trench & pipe bursting 600,000
CM-Serrano, Bressi, Palomar, etc trench & pipe bursting 50,000
DN-Johnson, Buchon, etc trench & pipe bursting 100,000
CN-Johnson, Buchon, etc trench & pipe bursting 1,215,000
CM-Johnson, Buchon, etc trench & pipe bursting 100,000
Inflow/Infiltration Reduction 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000
Raise Manholes 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000
Telemetry System Improvements 100,000
CN-Sewerline Improvement 09-10
CM-Sewerline Improvement 09-10
Collection System Infrastructure Replacement Strategy 456
Marsh/Higuera/California 999,397
Laguna Lift Station
Design
Construction
Construction Management
Calle Joaquin Lift Station
Design 40,761
Construction 2,390,389
Construction Management 295055
Madonna Lift Station
WASTEWATER SERVICES
3
Pg. 45
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - SEWER FUND
PROJECT DETAIL AND PHASING - PUBLIC UTILITIES
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Budget PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSEDWASTEWATER SERVICES
Design 620,454
Construction
Construction Management
Margarita Lift Station
Easement Acquisition 50,000
Design 55,355
Construction 800,000
Construction Management 100,000
Foothill Lift Station
Easement Acquisition 50,000
Design 123,907
Construction 1,600,000
Construction Management 155,000
Buckley Lift Station
Design
Construction
Construction Management
Airport Lift Station
Study 50,000
Design 100,000
Construction 1,400,000
Construction Management 150,000
Silver City Lift Station
Study
Design 100,000
Construction 1,400,000
Construction Management 150,000
Sewerline Repl Rachel 941
Sewerline Repl Stafford 10,287
Marsh St Siphon (PW project)39,978 240,000
3
Pg. 46
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - SEWER FUND
PROJECT DETAIL AND PHASING - PUBLIC UTILITIES
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Budget PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSEDWASTEWATER SERVICES
SY-JENNIFER RR/HIG-MARSH 23,379
DN-SANTA ROSA SWRLINE REPL
CN-SANTA ROSA SWRLINE REPL
CM-Santa Rosa Sewerline Repl
RR Safety Trail Hath/Taft
SCADA Upgrade Integration 23,932
Roadway Sealing 2014
IT - CityWorks 23,454
Fleet Particulate Matter Trap Retrofit
Fleet Replacement: 1/2 Ton Pickup
Fleet Replacement: Hydro-Cleaner 375,000
Fleet Replacement: Portable Generators (50% share)152,900
Equipment Replacement: Generator (50% share)
Fleet Replacement: CCTV Van 169,100
Fleet Replacement: 1 1/2 Ton Service Trucks 144,000
Fleet Replacement: Portable Sewage Pump 36,900
Fleet Replacement: Caterpillar Mini Escavator (pooled)78,000
Total Collection 8,380,658 2,510,900 2,545,000 2,983,000 1,250,000 1,315,000
Water Resource Recovery Facility
Major Maintenance 1,235,735 105,000 - - 875,000
Emergency Dig - Chloride Leak
WRRF Energy Efficiency
Design 1,325
Construction 1,388,503
WRRF Upgrade
Study/Environmental 633,116
Program Management 2,114,481 1,500,000
Design 5,999,918 1,300,000
Construction
3
Pg. 47
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - SEWER FUND
PROJECT DETAIL AND PHASING - PUBLIC UTILITIES
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Budget PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSEDWASTEWATER SERVICES
Infrastructure 20,156,800
Disinfection 13,860,800
Nutrient Removal 19,214,400
Contingency 13,300,000
Flood Control 1,500,000
Construction Management 6,000,000
WRRF Fiber Optic Impr
Digester 2 Cleaning
WRF Sludge Bed
WRRF Cooling Towers
IT - iFix Replacement 250,000
IT - HachWims 30,000
IT - MP2 Replacement 30,000
Telemetry System Improvements
Fleet Replacement: Utility Trucks (3)36,800 57,600
Fleet Replacement: Sedan 33,000
Fleet Replacement: Sedan
Fleet Replacement: 4-Wheel Drive Loader
Fleet Replacement: Pickup Truck w/Flat Bed & Crane 71,500
Fleet Replacement: Top-Kick Dump Truck (pooled)0
Fleet Replacement: Compact Pickup Truck
Fleet Replacement: Decanter Trailer 8,500
Fleet Replacement: Dump Truck
Total WRRF 11,442,879 1,405,000 75,589,600 80,000 310,000 875,000
Total without CIPs under Debt Financing
Pretreatment
Fleet Replacement: Pickup Truck 39,000 25,900
Total Pretreatment 0 0 0 39,000 0 25,900
Distribution
3
Pg. 48
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - SEWER FUND
PROJECT DETAIL AND PHASING - PUBLIC UTILITIES
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Budget PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSEDWASTEWATER SERVICES
Water Meters and boxes 82,500 82,500 85,000 87,500 90,000
Total Pretreatment 82,500 82,500 85,000 87,500 90,000 0
Water Quality Laboratory
Fleet Replacement: Pickup Truck 22,800
Total Quality Laboratory 0 0 0 0 0 22,800
Administration and Engineering
From Creek Decom
Street Reconstruction 2013
EA-UB SYSTEM UPGRADE
Fleet Replacement: Sedan 38,500
879 Morro Refurb 82,722
Shared - Corporation Yard Security
Shared - Corporation Yard Emergency Generator
Shared - Fleet Management & Fueling System Consolidation & Replacement
Corp Yard Security-PW Project
Shared - Mobile Equipment Lifts & Safety Stands
Total Admin 82,722 0 0 38,500 0 0
1,250,000
Total Wastewater Services CIP Requests 19,988,758 3,998,400 78,219,600 3,228,000 1,650,000 2,238,700
Total Wastewater CIP without Debt Financing 8,463,380 2,510,900 2,545,000 3,060,500 1,250,000 1,363,700
Shared Information Technology
Server Operating System 4,260
VOIP 15,789
City Website Upgrade (4% share)
UB System Upgrade 1,667
Network Firewalls 8,918
Finance System Replacement
Virtual Private Network (VPN) Replacement 18,958
3
Pg. 49
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - SEWER FUND
PROJECT DETAIL AND PHASING - PUBLIC UTILITIES
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Budget PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSEDWASTEWATER SERVICES
Network Switching Infrastructure Replacement 27,252
Radio Handhelds and Mobile Replacements 42,960
Tait Radio System 42,960
Document Management System
Google Search Appliance Replacement
Office Application Software Replacement 9,000
VM Infrastructure 20,615 20,615
Enterprise Storage Growth
CA-FOX PRO REPLACE
CA-LASERFICHE
GPS System replacement
UPS Battery Replacement 4,345 4,345
Total Share of Information Technology CIP 15,012 24,875 58,749 47,305 75,743 0
Completed Projects 89,902
TOTAL SEWER FUND CAPITAL PLAN 20,093,672 4,023,275 78,278,349 3,275,305 1,725,743 2,238,700
3
Pg. 50
Meeting Date: 6/14/2016
FROM: Daryl R. Grigsby, Director of Public Works
Prepared By: Timothy Scott Bochum, Deputy Director of Public Works
Gamaliel Anguiano, Transit Manager
Ryan Betz, Administrative Analyst
SUBJECT: 2016-17 TRANSIT ENTERPRISE FUND REVIEW
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Review and accept the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016-17 Transit Enterprise Fund Report
(Attachment A); and
2. Conceptually approve the FY 2016-17 Transit Enterprise Fund budget, with the adoption
of the 2015-17 Financial Plan Supplement; and
3. Approve a four-year contract with First Transit, Inc. to operate and maintain the City’s
Transit system and authorize the Mayor to execute the same; and
4. Authorize the City Manager, or the City Manager’s designee, to execute a one-year
agreement extension with Cal Poly for continuation of the Subsidy Agreement for Free
Fare ridership on SLO Transit; and
5. As part of Short Range Transit Plan consideration (August, 2016), bring forward final
recommendations for service changes and capital improvement investments; and
6. Approve the appropriation of grant money, in the amount of $186, 636, for the upgrade of
the SLO Transit Automatic Vehicle Location system.
DISCUSSION
Background
This report presents a review of the annual Transit Enterprise Fund for the FY 2015-16 and a
forecast for the FY 2016-17. This forecast looks at key issues and trends which could have an
impact on the overall health of the fund. In this regard, staff is pleased to report that the Transit
Fund is balanced and the revised 2016-17 budget is consistent with operating assumptions
adopted in the 2015-17 Financial Plan. The fund is healthy and the assumptions have been
updated based upon changes to State revenue allocations.
The public transit industry depends significantly on State and Federal funding source to provide
service to the public. Fluctuations in the price of motor vehicle fuel over the last two years have
4
Pg. 51
brought both a benefit and detriment for transit operations. On one side, the Fund receives a
benefit in the reduced operating costs; however, this is offset later on the revenue side as transit
funds derived from sales tax on motor vehicle fuel are reduced and the program receives lower
than anticipated revenues
The Transit Fund estimates move forward with caution and conservative estimates. The
projections also include provisions for the new operations contract from FY 2016-17 through FY
2019-20 with three possible additional annual extensions. The Cal Poly agreement assumes a
one year extension of the current agreement in order to consider funding needs of any Short
Range Transit Plan (SRTP) recommendations. Implementation of SRTP recommendations are
anticipated beginning FY 2017-18. The delay from the anticipated FY 2016-17 implementation
is due to the extensive amount of information and analysis for both SLO Transit and RTA. In
addition, the draft recommendations have sweeping changes from current operations and Council
is scheduled to consider those recommendations and approve changes in service in the summer
of 2016.
The FY 2015-16 budget assumed a fare increase beginning in the 2016-17 to coincide with
service changes. That fare increase is now projected for the 2017-18 and will be a subject of
discussion when the SRTP is brought forward. Therefore, the rates will be discussed in the
context of overall service changes.
Below is a summary of the status of the Transit Fund:
a. The Transit Fund is in a solid position for FY 2015-16 and FY 2016-17. No fare
increases are being proposed for FY 2016-17.
b. Federal grant revenue is expected to meet projections for FY 2016-17. State revenues
have been lowered to reflect recent forecasts by SLOCOG. Transportation Development
Act (TDA) funding will be down 6% and State Transportation Assistance (STA) will be
down 17% from estimated revenues in the 2015-17 Financial Plan.
c. Significant working capital exists in the fund to help in annual costs and to address
funding shortfalls as state and federal funding may be lower than anticipated.
d. Options for implementing services proposed in the Short Range Transit Plan will be
presented to the City Council in Fall of FY 2016-17 with a goal of any change in service
for FY 2017-2018.
e. Some service changes from the SRTP have been considered in the five year budget
forecast. However, depending upon final approved service changes, additional revenue
from fare increases or other funding sources may be needed.
The City of San Luis Obispo’s Transit Fund, in its current state, continues to ensure there is a
viable mobility option for local residents and visitors to the area. A wide range of users continue
to receive services, including the: transit-dependent, elderly, disabled, students and commuters.
Attachment A includes a full description of the Transit Fund for FY 2016-17. The remainder of
4
Pg. 52
this report will briefly touch on some of the highlights of the Fund.
Transit Accomplishments in FY 2015-16
The following is a short list of highlights accomplished during FY 2015-16.
1. Ridership - It is projected that the total ridership for SLO Transit will reach near 1.2
million patrons for FY 2015-16, representing a slight increase from last year. This will be
an all-time high for SLO Transit and is likely due to the closure of the parking lots on Cal
Poly for the South Dormitory project.
2. School tripper service – Successfully initiated school tripper services from the
Downtown to SLO High School resulting in access and mobility improvements for
students and faculty. This initiative was in response for additional service and creatively
utilized a vehicle purchased for $1 from another agency and employed marketing at the
high school.
3. Sweeper Service – Implemented additional service along high demand routes,
particularly for high Cal Poly demand, to reduce and eliminate “leave behinds” and
overcrowding.
4. Funding – worked with SLOCOG and other county transit providers to address funding
issues and develop transit objectives for a countywide self-help initiative, if approved for
the fall ballot.
Transit Fund Issues
Table 1: Revenues
Revenue Category
2015-16
Budget
2016-17
Budget
2016-17
Revision Variance
Investment and Property Revenues 5,800$ 5,800$ 5,800$ 0%
From Other Governments
TDA Revenues (LTF)1,326,287$ 1,366,075$ 1,286,625$ -6%
TDA Revenues (STA)253,284$ 193,585$ 159,890$ -17%
Other Grants 15,000$ 15,000$ 175,200$ 1068%
FTA Grants 2,556,492$ 1,424,554$ 1,424,554$ 0%
Service Charges 693,596$ 724,849$ 690,381$ -5%
Other Revenues 4,600$ 4,600$ 4,600$ 0%
TOTAL REVENUES 4,855,059$ 3,734,463$ 3,747,050$ 0.3%
4
Pg. 53
Federal Funding – No Proposed Changes
Staff is forecasting Federal funding to be consistent with prior projections. Federal funding
appropriations have yet to be made by Congress and could be affected by the fall elections.
Federal allocations to SLO Transit are determined each year in coordination with RTA and
SLOCOG. The 2015-16 FTA amounts shown above include $1.25 million in CMAQ funding to
assist with the replacement of three buses which have been ordered and are scheduled to arrive in
April 2017.
State Funding – Marginal decrease
State transit funding (TDA) in the form of the Local Transit Fund (LTF) and State Transit
Assistance (STA), are projected to decrease from what was previously projected. This is due to
continual lower statewide fuel prices utilized for transit funding, as well as lower statewide sales
tax on general goods allocated to transit agencies. Fortunately, the City has built up working
capital from prior years to assist in addressing this reduced amount for next year.
Cal Poly Subsidy Agreement – Recommendation for a one-year extension
The Cal Poly Subsidy agreement plays a considerable role in the generation of local farebox and
the overall health of the Transit Fund. The current four-year subsidy agreement is set to expire
June 30th, 2016. Staff has been working with Cal Poly administration to institute a new
agreement. There are, however, issues that impact the feasibility of a long term contract at this
time. Those issues are:
The closing of the Grand Ave parking lot has caused a significant increase in Cal Poly
ridership on SLO Transit. This has created the need for additional service in order to keep
up with demand and reduced leave behinds.
The SRTP recommendations have taken longer than anticipated.
The Cal Poly Masterplan update is still underway and it is not known if major transit
needs will change.
New policies for incoming freshman and addition of more night classes may have an
effect on transit operations.
4
Pg. 54
The University is assessing the feasibility of its current method of funding the transit
agreement.
Because of these issues, Staff has requested Council authorize the City Manager or her designee
to execute (when negotiations have been completed) a one-year extension with Cal Poly at 3%
for FY 2016-17. This increase is in line with the annual increase for the subsidy agreement over
the last three years. Cal Poly administration is considering this request and negotiations are
continuing. The 3% represents $12,830 in revenue. This amount is included in all fund
assumptions. Should the negotiations conclude other than anticipated staff would return to
Council for further direction.
Table 2: Expenditures
Expense Category
2015-16
Budget
2016-17
Budget
2016-17
Revised Variance
Operating Programs
Transportation 3,436,228$ 3,481,135$ 3,448,368$ -1%
General Government 277,329$ 277,329$ 288,995$ 4%
Total Operating Programs 3,713,557$ 3,758,464$ 3,737,363$ -1%
Capital Improvement Plan Projects2,078,878$ 129,033$ 228,369$ 77%
Expenditure Savings 250,000$
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 5,792,435$ 3,887,497$ 3,965,732$ 2.0%
Overall projected expenditures are in line with those established in the FY 2015-17 Financial
Plan. As discussed below, the Maintenance and Operations contract has been rebid and the
contract costs are slightly lower than anticipated and average out at 3% increase per year over the
four years of the contract. There will be a significant savings in FY 2015-16 ($250,000) due to
the delays in implementing the SRTP. This savings will be used in subsequent years to assist
with any state funding shortfalls discussed in the revenue section above.
Contract for Purchase Transportation Services- First Transit
Staff received approval from Council on December 15th, 2015 to release a Request for Proposal
(RFP) for the operation of a fixed-route public transit system. The contract term would be for a
base four-year contract and the possibility of three one-year extensions. As detailed in
Attachment C, SLO Transit received and evaluated seven proposals. These proposals were
ranked by a committee of local transit professionals and then compiled to the top three firms
based upon meeting the technical objectives of the RFP. These three firms were then interviewed
and ranked according to overall response to the proposal requests, management team members,
and once a final firm was determined, a review of cost proposal to make sure it was consistent
with City revenues and funding.
The City’s RFP process uses several different factors in awarding the vendor that represent the
best value in delivering services to the public. Though the cost of the service is one factor,
4
Pg. 55
others include the quality of service, a history of excellent service, and an understanding of the
specific needs of the City. The final outcome of this lengthy and detailed process is the
recommendation that the SLO Transit system be awarded to First Transit, Inc. First Transit
Inc.’s proposal demonstrated a high level of quality of service, experience in delivering transit
services to its customers and was the lowest cost of the top three technically rated firms. The cost
proposal represents a moderate 4% increase in year one of the contract (the FY 2015-17 plan
projected 7%) and future year increases that result in a four year average increase of 3%. These
costs are within budget estimates of the Financial Plan.
Staff recommends Council approve the Contract for Operations and Maintenance with First
Transit, Inc. for the period of FY 2016-17 through FY 2020-21 (Attachment B)
Table 3: Final – Operations & Maintenance Contract Costs
Summary of totals FY 2016-17ChgFY 2017-18ChgFY 2018-19ChgFY 2019-20Chg
Total Annual Fixed Costs 1,182,270$ 1,186,533$ 1,227,215$ 1,259,205$
Total Annual Variable Hours Costs 978,483$ 1,012,021$ 1,049,459$ 1,084,587$
Total Annual Variable Insurance
Costs 51,355$ 52,376$ 53,414$ 54,478$
Total Annual Cost 2,212,108$ 3.93%2,250,930$ 1.75%2,330,088$ 3.52%2,398,270$ 2.93%
Four Year Avg: 3.03%
Fuel Costs
Fuel prices for the FY 2016-17 have been maintained as anticipated in the Financial Plan but it is
likely at the end of this budget the overall prices will be lower than expected. Industry forecasts
continue predict a return to historic levels. It is, however, difficult to forecast when this will
occur – hence staff take a conservative approach based upon prior market volatility. While this
low fuel price trend does account for some savings it is offset by the decrease in LTF state
assistance funds.
Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP)
The Financial Plan assumed that SRTP recommendations for service changes could occur as
early as July 2016. This will not be the case as the SRTP is still working its way through
advisory bodies of the City and RTA. Staff expects to present the SRTP to the City Council in
August of 2016-17. As a result, the previously approved $250,000 for ongoing potential service
enhancements will not be spent in 2015-16, with a portion assumed to be expended in 2016-
2017. Based upon current draft recommendations by the consultant, and potential sweeping
changes to service delivery, the major SRTP recommended service enhancements are anticipated
not to begin until the 2017-18. Some funding will be necessary to prepare for these service
changes and the revised budget has included $100,000 for these purposes. This issue will be fully
discussed when the Council considers SRTP recommendation and appropriate start dates of
changes in service.
4
Pg. 56
As identified in the 2015-17 Financial Plan, a significant issue for future fiscal years is the major
capital needs of the Transit Fund. Specifically, based upon recommended FTA fleet replacement
guidelines, SLO Transit should replace eight (8) regular buses, one (1) trolley, and the double
deck bus between the years 2019 to 2021. Total replacement costs for these vehicles are almost
$6,000,000, well beyond the ability of the fund to accomplish in such a short period. The
proposed budget continues to forecast for the retirement and replacement of four fixed-route
vehicles and the trolley beginning in FY 2018-19 and FY 2019-20. Additional recommendations
on alternatives of funding vehicle replacements will be brought forward as part of the SRTP.
Table 4: Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
Project Name 2016-17 Budget2016-17 Revised Defference
Bus Stop Shelters and Bench Improvements 92,000$ 36,000$ (56,000)$
Bus Stop Equipment Projects 31,300$ -$ (31,300)$
Transit AVL System (New) -$ 186,636$ 186,636$
VM Infrastructure 4,751$ 4,751$
Server Operating System 982$ 982$
Total CIP Budget 129,033$ 228,369$ 99,336$
SLO Transit Automatic Vehicle Location Upgrade System
Staff recommends the appropriation of grant funding ($155,629 in Proposition 1B and $31,007
in TDA) for the upgrade of the Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) system. The AVL system
enables staff to monitor vehicle location, using Global Positioning Satellite (GPS), in real time.
The current AVL system is no longer supported by the manufacturer which was bought out by
another company (Clever Devices). Without the continual AVL system support, SLO Transit
will eventually lose all functionality to monitor the buses in the field via the AVL system. The
updated system is necessary in order to preserve GPS monitoring. This has a direct impact on the
smartphone application used by thousands in the City, known as the SLO Bus Tracker App. The
Bus Track App is dependent on the existence of an AVL feed. The Prop. 1B funding was
approved by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) at its April 6, 2016 board
meeting. The Prop. 1B grant requires a 20% local match. Staff is requesting the use of TDA fo r
the 20% local match.
FISCAL IMPACT
As shown in the Transit Enterprise Fund Financial Schedule, staff is projecting FY 2015-16 to
end with a working capital balance of $2,137,819 and $1,914,938 in FY 2016-17. Although not
a policy of the fund, this projected balance ensures the Transit Fund has a minimum 20% reserve
policy and allows a cushion for unanticipated changes in operating costs for future years.
4
Pg. 57
Countywide Self Help Initiative
SLOCOG continues to work towards proposing a ½ cent sales tax for transportation purposes in
the November ballot. A component of that initiative will directly assist transit providers in the
county. These funds could assist SLO Transit in meeting new service standards or help with
vehicle replacement as discussed above.
No additional funds for the self-help initiative have been included in the supplemental budget. If
approved by voters, these additional revenues will be brought back as part of the 2017-19
Financial Plan.
Attachments:
a - Transit Fund Analysis 2016
b - SLO Transit & First Transit Inc. Contract
c - 2016 Transit Operations Maintenance Contract Award Recommendation Summary
d - First Transit - SLO Transit Cost Proposal BAFO
4
Pg. 58
Transit Enterprise Fund
slotransit.org
2016-17 Supplemental Budget
Transit Enterprise Fund
2016 Fund Analysis
June 14, 2016
4
Pg. 59
Page 2
2016 Transit Fund
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Contents
I. OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................... 3
II. TRANSIT FUND ISSUES ..................................................................................................... 4
A. Federal Funding................................................................................................................ 4
B. State Funding.................................................................................................................... 4
C. Cal Poly Subsidy Agreement ........................................................................................... 5
D. Contract for Purchase Transportation Services ................................................................ 5
E. Fuel Costs ......................................................................................................................... 6
F. General Government ......................................................................................................... 6
G. Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) .................................................................................... 6
H. Farebox ............................................................................................................................. 7
I. Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) ...................................................................................... 7
III. FISCAL IMPACT ................................................................................................................ 8
IV. EXHIBIT A – Changes in Financial Position ...................................................................... 8
4
Pg. 60
Page 3
2016 Transit Fund Report
I. OVERVIEW
This report presents a review of the annual Transit Enterprise Fund for FY 2015-16 and a
forecast for FY 2016-17. This review looks at key issues and trends which could have an impact
on the overall health of the fund. To this regard, staff is pleased to report that the Transit Fund is
balanced and the revised 2016-17 budget will be consistent with operating assumptions adopted
in the 2015-17 Financial Plan with changes.
In recognition of the transit industry’s dependency on State and Federal funding, the Transit
Fund program is still moving forward with caution and with conservative estimates. Estimates
take into account both the Cal Poly Subsidy agreement and the Operations and Maintenance
Contract. The new costs for the operations contract are accounted for as well as a 3% increase in
the Cal Poly subsidy revenue for the free fare program. Each of these programs were set to
expire at the end of FY 15-16. The new operations contract will be from FY 16-17 through FY
2019-20 with three additional extension years possible. The Cal Poly agreement assumes a one
year extension of the current agreement in order to consider funding needs of any Short Range
Transit Plan recommendations. Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) recommendations are deferred
for a year since Council has yet to consider those recommendations and approve changes in
service. Similarly, the FY 2015-16 budget assumed a fare increase in FY 2016-17; this issue will
be discussed as part of the SRTP and for this budgeting purposes a .25 cents fare increase is
assumed starting in FY 2017-18.
a. The Transit Fund is in a solid position for FY 2015-16 and FY 2016-17. No fare
increases are being proposed at this time.
b. Significant working capital exists in the fund to help in annual cost and address
funding shortfalls as state and federal funding may be lower than anticipated.
c. Federal grant revenue is expected to meet projections for FY 15-16 and FY 16-17,
while State revenues are expected to be lower than projections. TDA funding will
be down by 3% for FY 2016-17 and STA will be down approximately 15%. Staff
is able to shift previously unspent State funding to offset the reduction in revenue.
d. Options for implementing services proposed in the Short Range Transit Plan will
be presented to the City Council in Fall FY 2016-17 with a goal of any change in
service for FY 2017-18.
The City of San Luis Obispo’s Transit Fund, in its current state, continues to ensure there is a
viable mobility option for local residents and visitors to the area. A wide range of users continue
to receive services, including the: transit-dependent, elderly, disabled, students and commuters.
4
Pg. 61
Page 4
This report will briefly touch on some of the accomplishments of the past year, provide information
on Transit Fund revenue sources and expenses, and address overall transportation operations.
II. TRANSIT FUND ISSUES
A. Federal Funding
Federal funding assistance is provided to SLO Transit in the form of FTA 5307 grant funds.
These Federal resources are available to urbanized areas, with a population of 50,000 or more.
The SLO Urbanized area includes populations of Cal Poly, county areas and the prison to reach
the 50,000 population criteria. 5307 funds can be used as operating assistance of transit services
or for capital expenses. The federal share for the funding of any one of these activities is not to
exceed 50 percent of operating expenses or 80 percent of capital expenses of the net project cost.
As part of the 2015-16 Mid-Year Budget Review, federal grant revenue was increased due to the
carryover funding of the replacement of three buses. Staff expects the FTA 5307 amounts in FY
16-17 to meet the original projected amount of $1,424,554 but final amounts are subject to
federal appropriations and negotiations with SLOCOG and RTA.
B. State Funding
State funding assistance is provided to SLO Transit in the form of “TDA” funds. The State’s
Transportation Development Act (TDA) funding is comprised of two sources of funding for
transportation programs. The first, Local Transportation Fund (LTF), is derived from ¼ cent
collected in retail sales taxes. The second, State Transportation Assistance (STA), is derived
from the statewide sales tax on diesel fuel. Both of these funds are distributed to the regions by
the State. The regional agency, SLOCOG, then allocates this amount to each of the seven cities,
the County, SLOCOG, and the Consolidated Transportation Services Agency for the San Luis
Obispo region. LTF funds are apportioned according to population numbers, for: public transit,
street/road improvements and bikeway/pedestrian facilities. STA funds are formula-based and
used for public transit purposes.
New calculation and allocation methodologies recently went into effect for the State Transit
Assistance (STA) program, altering the way distribution of these vital funds was supposed to
work. As a result of these changes implemented by the State Controller’s Office, the pool of
eligible STA recipients has been vastly expanded, resulting in reduced allocations for traditional
STA recipients and again raising questions over the definition of “transit operator” on which the
recipient pool is based. In response to these unanticipated changes, the California Transit
Association asked the Legislature to intercede and compel a temporary halt to these changes
while also working on a more durable solution to resolve ambiguity in law and ensure the rules
are well understood moving forward. In the meantime, this new interpretation and the resulting
reduced funds in STA has nominal consequences in this immediate fiscal year but can create
larger issues in later fiscal years if not addressed by new legislature.
Similarly State transit funding in the form of Local Transit Fund (LTF), has also seen a decrease
for what was previously projected. This is due to continual lower statewide fuel prices from
which the transit support tax is derived. Overall LTF revenues are expected to be $1,286,625 or
3% lower than FY 2015-16 levels. Again, the effect of reduced LTF funds has a modest
consequence in the current fiscal year but could have greater implications to the transit budget in
later fiscal years if downward trends continue.
4
Pg. 62
Page 5
Fortunately, there are two solutions. Lower fuel prices also have a corresponding effect of
resulting in a savings to the fuel cost line item. Also, because fuel prices had been higher in
previous fiscal years, we have held state funding to assist in SRTP implementation and more
state assistance was received, the Transit Fund has a developed a working capital reserve which
can now be reinvested to address current and future transit fund shortfalls. Between the fuel cost
savings and the built up working capital, these amounts will help address the reduced STA and
LTF revenues.
Table 1: Revenues
Revenue Category
2015-16
Budget
2016-17
Budget
2016-17
Revision Variance
Investment and Property Revenues5,800$ 5,800$ 5,800$ 0%
From Other Governments
TDA Revenues (LTF)1,326,287$ 1,366,075$ 1,286,625$ -6%
TDA Revenues (STA)253,284$ 193,585$ 159,890$ -17%
Other Grants 15,000$ 15,000$ 175,200$ 1068%
FTA Grants 2,556,492$ 1,424,554$ 1,424,554$ 0%
Service Charges 693,596$ 724,849$ 690,381$ -5%
Other Revenues 4,600$ 4,600$ 4,600$ 0%
TOTAL REVENUES 4,855,059$ 3,734,463$ 3,747,050$ 0.3%
C. Cal Poly Subsidy Agreement
Cal Poly subsidy plays a considerable roll in the generation of local farebox and the overall
health of the Transit Fund. The current four-year subsidy agreement is set to expire June 30th,
2016. Staff has been working with Cal Poly administration to institute a new agreement
however, there are significant issues that are challenging to a long term contract at this time. For
example, the closing of the Grand Ave parking lot has caused a significant increase Cal Poly
ridership on SLO Transit This has created the need for additional service to be dispatched in
order to keep up with demand and reduce leave behinds. The SRTP recommendations have taken
longer than anticipated and still need Council review and approval. There is also talk of baring
incoming freshmen and sophomores and creation of more night classes which is also anticipated
to have an effect on transit operations. Because of these issues, Staff has requested a one-year
extension with Cal Poly at 3% for fiscal year 2016-17. This increase is in line with the annual
increase for the subsidy agreement over the last 3 years.
D. Contract for Purchase Transportation Services
Staff received approval from Council on December 15th, 2015 to release a Request for Proposal
(RFP) for the operation of a fixed-route public transit system within City limits and California
Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly) campus. The contract term would be for a base four-
year contract and the possibility of three one-year extensions. SLO Transit received and
evaluated seven proposals, interviewed and scored the top three proposing firms and
recommends the SLO Transit system be awarded to First Transit, Inc. First Transit Inc.’s
proposal was the lowest cost of the top three technically rated firms. Cost proposal represents a
moderate 4% reduction in FY 2016-17 than what was originally budgeted and results in a four
year average increase of 3% - within budget estimates of the Financial Plan.
4
Pg. 63
Page 6
Table 2: Negotiated First Transit Best and Final Offer
E. Fuel Costs
Fuel prices for FY 2016-17 have been maintained as anticipated in the financial Plan but it is
likely that we will end lower than expected. Industry forecasts continue predict a return to
historic levels however it is difficult to forecast when this will occur – hence we take a
conservative approach based upon prior market volatility. While this low fuel price trend does
account for some savings it is offset by the decrease in LTF state assistance funds.
F. General Government
The Cost Allocation plan is a method for calculating the support expenses incurred, for time
dedicated to managing Transit related projects. The Cost Allocation Plan, which also affects the
performance of farebox ratio, is considered a Central Service Cost Allocation plan by the Federal
Transit Administration and does not require its review or certification. FY 2016-17 cost
allocation will be slightly above the original 2016-17 adopted amount of $277,300 at $288,995.
G. Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP)
The Financial Plan assumed that SRTP recommendations for service changes could occur as
early as July 2016. This will not be the case as the SRTP is still working its way through
advisory bodies of the City and RTA. Staff expects to present the SRTP to the City Council in
August FY 2016-17. As a result, the previously approved $250,000 for ongoing potential service
enhancements will not be spent in 2015-16 and only a portion in FY 2016-17. Based upon
current draft recommendations by the consultant, and potential sweeping changes to service
delivery, SRTP recommended service enhancements are anticipated not to begin until FY 2017-
18. This issue will be fully discussed when the Council considers SRTP recommendation and
appropriate start dates of changes in service.
A significant issue for future fiscal years is the major capital needs of the Transit Fund.
Specifically, based upon recommended fleet replacement guidelines of FTA, the fleet
replacement schedule calls replacement of eight (8) regular buses, one (1) trolley, and the double
deck bus between the years 2019 to 2021. Total replacement costs for these vehicles is almost
$6,000,000 which is well beyond the ability of the fund to accomplish in such a short period. The
proposed budget continues to forecast for the retirement and replacement of four fixed-route
vehicles and the trolley in 2018 and 2019. Additional recommendations on alternatives of
funding vehicle replacements will be brought forward as part of the SRTP.
Table 3: Expenditures
4
Pg. 64
Page 7
Expense Category
2015-16
Budget
2016-17
Budget
2016-17
Revised Variance
Operating Programs
Transportation 3,436,228$ 3,481,135$ 3,448,368$ -1%
General Government 277,329$ 277,329$ 288,995$ 4%
Total Operating Programs 3,713,557$ 3,758,464$ 3,737,363$ -1%
Capital Improvement Plan Projects2,078,878$ 129,033$ 228,369$ 77%
Expenditure Savings 250,000$
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 5,792,435$ 3,887,497$ 3,965,732$ 2.0%
H. Farebox
State policy requires that annual farebox revenue equals 20% of the operating budget. TDA audit
for FY 2014-2015 showed a farebox ratio of 23%. The FY 2015-16 farebox ratio is projected to
be around 20% requirement with year-end savings – particularly in fuel. Projections for FY
2016-2017 indicate that we may dip below the 20% farebox recovery ratio if all expenses come
in at budget and we do not receive any additional revenue. However, historically, the Transit
Fund has had yearend operating savings that help push the ratio above the 20% minimum.
I. Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
SLO Transit Automatic Vehicle Location Upgrade System
Staff recommends the appropriation of grant funding ($155,629 in Prop 1B and $31,007 in TDA)
for the upgrade of the Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) system. The current AVL system is
no longer supported by the manufacturer which was bought out by another company (Clever
Devices). Without the continual AVL system support, SLO Transit will eventually lose all
functionality to monitor the buses in the field via the AVL system. The updated system is
necessary in order to preserve Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) monitoring which also has a
direct impact on the smartphone application used by thousands in the City, known as the SLO
Bus Tracker App and which is dependent on the existence of an AVL feed in order to provide.
The Prop. 1B funding was approved by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
(SLOCOG) at it’s April 6, 2016 board meeting. The Prop. 1B grant requires a 20% local match.
Staff is requesting the use of TDA for the 20% local match.
Table 4: Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
Project Name 2016-17 Budget2016-17 RevisedDefference
Bust Stop Shelters and Bench Imrovements 92,000$ 36,000$ (56,000)$
Bust Stop Equipment Projects 31,300$ -$ (31,300)$
Transit AVL System (New) -$ 186,636$ (186,636)$
VM Infrastructure 4,751$ 4,751$
Server Operating System 982$ 982$
Total CIP Budget 129,033$ 228,369$ 99,336$
4
Pg. 65
Page 8
III. FISCAL IMPACT
As shown in the Transit Enterprise Fund Financial Schedule, staff is projecting FY 2015-16 to
end with a working capital balance of $2,137,818 and $1,914,936 in FY 2016-17. Although not
a policy of the fund, this projected balance ensures the Transit Fund has a minimum 20% reserve
policy and allows a cushion for unanticipated changes in operating costs for future years.
IV. EXHIBIT A – Changes in Financial Position
2016-17 TRANSIT FUND
FINANCIAL SCHEDULE
Mid-Year
2015-16
Adopted
2016-17
Revised
2016-17
Projected
2017-18
Projected
2018-19
Projected
2019-20
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenues 5,8005,8005,8005,8005,8005,800
From Other Governments
TDA Revenues (LTF)1,326,2871,366,0751,286,6251,312,3571,338,6051,365,377
TDA Revenues (STA)253,284193,585159,890159,890159,890159,890
Other Grants 15,00015,000175,20015,00015,00015,000
FTA Grants 2,556,4921,424,5541,424,5541,445,1622,346,2892,567,008
Service Charges 693,596724,849690,381728,506744,316760,555
Other Revenues 4,6004,6004,6004,6004,6004,600
TOTAL REVENUES:4,855,0593,734,4643,747,0503,671,3164,614,4994,878,230
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Transportation 3,436,2283,481,1353,448,3683,475,1063,697,5223,780,074
General Government 277,329277,329288,995288,995288,995288,995
Total Operating Programs 3,713,5573,758,4643,737,3633,764,1013,986,5174,069,069
Capital Improvement Plan Projects2,078,878129,033228,36989,5461,213,5641,450,673
TOTAL EXPENDITURES:5,792,4353,887,4973,965,7323,853,6475,200,0815,519,742
Other Sources (Uses)
Cashflow adjustment for working capital
Operating Transfers Out
Other (58,081)(76,041)(21,550)
Expenditures Savings 250,000 000
Contingencies (MOA Adjustments)(4,200)
TOTAL OTHER SOURCES:250,000 0(4,200)(58,081)(76,041)(21,550)
Revenues and Other Sources
(Over/Under) (687,377)(153,033)(222,882)(240,412)(661,623)(663,062)
Working Capital, Beginning of Year 2,825,195702,8762,137,8191,914,9381,674,5261,012,902
Working Capital, End of Year Fund
Reserves
2,137,819549,8421,914,9381,674,5261,012,902349,841
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION - TRANSIT FUND
4
Pg. 66
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
CALIFORNIA
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
SLO TRANSIT, CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
This AGREEMENT is made this _______ day of ________, 2016, by and between the CITY OF SAN
LUIS OBISPO a municipal corporation and charter city, hereinafter referred to as “CITY” and
__________________, hereinafter referred to as “CONTRACTOR.”
WITNESSED:
WHEREAS, on ________________, 2015, the City Council authorized the release of a Request for
Proposals (RFP) for the operation and maintenance of specified transportation services; and,
WHEREAS, CONTRACTOR submitted a proposal dated March 9, 2016 in response to the said RFP to
provide such services in the method and manner and for the costs set forth in the proposal, subsequent
clarifications and the "Best and Final Offer" dated May 23, 2016; and,
WHEREAS, CITY has determined that CONTRACTOR has the management and technical
personnel, expertise and other useful assets of sufficient quantity and quality to provide CITY’s
transportation services; and,
WHEREAS, the subject RFP is attached to this agreement as Exhibit B and
CONTRACTOR's proposal including the “Best and Final Offer” is attached as Exhibit C and both are by
this reference made a part of this agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the parties do agree as follows:
1. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT
CITY hereby contracts with CONTRACTOR to operate and maintain specified transportation services
upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth.
2. TERM OF AGREEMENT
a. Term. Subject to the terms and conditions of this agreement, the term of this agreement shall be
from July 1, 2016 through and including June 30, 2020 with three (3) one-year contract
extension options as indicated in Section 2.c.
b. Month-to-Month Extensions. Upon completion of the term of this agreement, including any
option term described below, CITY may, at its sole discretion, extend the term of this agreement
on a month-to-month basis up to a maximum of six (6) months. CITY shall notify
CONTRACTOR of such extensions at least thirty (30) days prior to the termination date of this
agreement. The compensation rates in effect during the last monthly period of the full term of
this agreement or any option terms as applicable shall remain in effect during any such
extensions.
c. Option Terms. CITY, at its sole discretion, may extend this agreement for up to three option
terms of one year each for a maximum contract term, including the initial term, of four years
(through June 30, 2020). If the CITY decides to consider exercising option term years, the price
formulas for the extension years shall be negotiated. If the negotiation price formula are not
4
Pg. 67
advantageous to the CITY, the CITY can have the contract go to back to RFP.
3. SCOPE OF WORK
CONTRACTOR shall provide the transportation services set forth in Exhibit A entitled "Scope of Work"
attached and by this reference made a part of this agreement. Such services shall continue to be provided
by CONTRACTOR until the "Scope of Work" is amended pursuant to the terms and conditions of this
agreement.
4. MAXIMUM OBLIGATION
CITY agrees to pay CONTRACTOR in consideration for its services as described herein.
The maximum cost to be paid by CITY to CONTRACTOR shall not exceed $2,212,108 in Year One;
$2,250,930 in Year Two; $2,330,088 in Year Three; and, $2,398,270 in Year Four based on the services
specified in Exhibit A.
5. PRICE FORMULA
CITY agrees to pay CONTRACTOR for performance of the services set forth in this agreement as
follows:
a. Payment of a fixed hourly rate per vehicle service hour of $30.06 in Year One; $31.09 in
Year Two; $32.25 in Year Three; $33.32 in Year Four. A vehicle service hour is defined as on
vehicle providing passenger service for one hour during the service hours specified herein. A
vehicle service hour shall be deemed to have commenced when a vehicle leaves CITY’s
Transit Center (located at 990 Palm Street) to provide the services required
herein and shall not include any out-of-service vehicle time used for vehicle operator
breaks or lunches. A vehicle service hour shall terminate when a vehicle returns to
CITY Transit Center prior to any cleaning, servicing or fueling of the vehicle. The
hourly rate shall include vehicle operator wages, fringe benefits, indirect labor and all
consumable material costs that can be tracked by vehicle service hour such as vehicle
maintenance parts and supplies including oil.
b. Payment of a fixed monthly rate of $98,047.28 in Year One; $98,393.04 in Year Two;
$101,773.57 in Year Three; and $104,429.54 in Year Four to compensate CONTRACTOR for
all work to be performed under this agreement as defined in Exhibit A, except that which is
included under Paragraph 5(a) and Paragraph 7 of this agreement including, but not limited
to: vehicle operator non-service wages; management, controller and maintenance employee
wages and said employees fringe benefits and indirect labor costs; bus washing and
cleaning supplies; uniforms; report reproduction; office supplies; project telephones; all
other related operational costs; and the contract management fee.
c. Payment of a fixed monthly rate of $4,754.82 in Year One; $4,849.37 in Year Two; $4,945.52
in Year Three; and $5,044.07 in Year Four for the cost incurred in providing all vehicle and
general liability insurance required under this agreement as such insurance is defined in this
agreement. This amount shall be in excess of the fixed monthly rate as defined herein. CITY
reserves the right, however, to alternatively secure all or part of the specified insurance
coverage through other means.
d. Compensation for those items and services provided by CITY and which are specified in
Exhibit A shall not be included in the hourly or monthly rates as defined above. Such
items and services include, but are not limited to diesel fuel and gasoline; tires; radios
including connection fees and service agreements; city owned vehicles; licenses for radios
4
Pg. 68
and vehicles; routine maintenance of radios; major facility furnishings; telephone system,
building security, office copy machine; all major vehicle components which are engines,
transmissions, differentials, and design retrofits; and, office, garage and parking
facilities.
Additionally, CITY shall provide all marketing, tickets, passes, brochures, and related
collateral service materials.
6. EXTRA SERVICES
Special promotional and community services shall be considered extra services and will be provided only
with the authorization of CITY and the mutual consent of the CONTRACTOR. Such services shall be
defined as those non-permanent service hours operated outside of the services identified in Exhibit A.
Extra services shall be considered a change to this agreement as defined herein and shall be in excess of the
maximum price defined in Paragraph 4. The costs for extra services will be determined at a rate per
vehicle service hours of $33.27 in Year One; $33.63 in Year Two; $34.95 in Year Three; and $36.03 in
Year Four and billed separately from the services specified in Exhibit A.
7. GENERAL AND VEHICLES INSURANCE
a. Throughout the term of this Agreement, CONTRACTOR shall procure and maintain a
comprehensive general liability insurance policy providing no less than TEN MILLION
DOLLARS ($10,000,000) per occurrence with a total policy limit of no less than TEN
MILLION DOLLARS ($10,000,000) combined single limit bodily injury and property
damage coverage. Said policy shall include coverage for premises (specifically including
dangerous condition of public property as well as coverage for the facility and
property provided by CITY for CONTRACTOR’s use during the term of this contract), personal
injury, and blanket contractual, but shall not include coverage for vehicle liability and/or
vehicle physical damage insurance (vehicle liability and vehicle damage insurance shall be
provided pursuant to Paragraph (b), below). CONTRACTOR shall name CITY and
each of its member jurisdictions or other parties as required by CITY, including their
officers, employees and agents, as additional insureds on said policy. CONTRACTOR shall
cause such additional insureds to be added to its policy of insurance by way of an
endorsement which endorsement shall be a CG 20 10 11/85 or equivalent additional
insured endorsement. (The ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT) The
ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT shall not be an omnibus endorsement,
but shall specifically and directly name each additional insured. Such ADDITIONAL
INSURED ENDORSEMENT will explicitly include coverage for the additional
insureds for both ongoing and completed operations so long as the liability of an
additional insured arises out of the work of the named insured, or so long as an additional
insured’s liability arises out of the named insured’s performance of this Agreement. The
ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT shall not contain any provisions which
limit or restrict coverage for the additional insureds beyond the extent set forth above.
Any insurance carrier providing insurance called for in this section shall be from a California
admitted carrier and have a minimum rating of A.M. Best Rated A, or better. Any self-insured
retention shall be declared by CONTRACTOR and approved in writing by CITY. With
respect to any self-insured retention, the coverage provided for CITY, its member
jurisdictions, and other parties required by CITY shall be equal and identical to the
coverage of the CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR shall provide written documentation
to CITY that establishes that as to any self-insured retention, the additional insured
parties shall have coverage to the same extent as the CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR
shall provide CITY with the ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENTS required by
this paragraph within thirty (30) days of the Notice of Contract Award and, upon request,
4
Pg. 69
a copy of the entire policy of insurance. Such policy or policies of insurance shall provide
that they may not be cancelled without at least 30 days written notice to CITY.
CONTRACTOR shall provide CITY a copy of the current policy of insurance and all
endorsements, as well as documentation for coverage under any self-insured retention,
within ten (10) days of receiving such a request from CITY).
b. CONTRACTOR shall provide CITY with vehicle liability insurance in the amount of TEN
MILLION DOLLARS ($10,000,000) per occurrence with a total policy limit of TEN
MILLION DOLLARS ($10,000,000) combined single limit for bodily injury and
property damage. Coverage will also include collision and comprehensive physical damage
with a deductible not to exceed TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($10,000). Any deductible
will be the responsibility of CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR shall name CITY and each
of the member jurisdictions, or other parties as required by CITY, including their officers,
employees and agents, as additional insured on said policy and shall furnish CITY with
evidence of insurance within 30 days of the notice of contract award. Such policy or
policies shall provide that they may not be cancelled without at least thirty (30) days
written notice to CITY. CONTRACTOR shall provide CITY a copy of the current policy
of insurance and all endorsements within ten (10) days of receiving such a request from
CITY.
c. In case of damage, destruction or loss of any vehicle or equipment provided by CITY
under the terms of this agreement, CITY agrees that the liability of CONTRACTOR for
said damage or destruction shall be limited to the fair market value of the vehicle or
equipment at the time of loss.
d. During this agreement, CONTRACTOR shall maintain an appropriate Fidelity Bond or
other security acceptable to CITY providing protection up to the amount of FIFTY
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($50,000.00) with respect to any one occurrence of theft or other
dishonest conduct by CONTRACTOR'S employees, officers or agents of CITY funds,
equipment or inventory other than vehicles.
In lieu of a Fidelity Bond, CONTRACTOR may provide CITY with an irrevocable and
absolute Letter of Credit in the form set out in Exhibit D attached hereto and incorporated
herein.
CITY shall be entitled to draw upon the Letter of Credit to compensate it for all losses it
sustains occasioned by the theft or other misconduct of CONTRACTOR’s employees,
officers or agents. CITY’s losses shall include its investigative expenses, including the costs
of its experts and attorneys, in addition to the value of the funds, equipment or property in
question. At the earliest practicable time, and not later than thirty (30) days after discovery
by CITY of the loss, CITY shall give CONTRACTOR written notice of such discovery.
CONTRACTOR shall have thirty (30) days to directly reimburse such loss to CITY. With
appropriate notice, CONTRACTOR shall be provided a reasonable time to investigate the
loss. CONTRACTOR’s responsibility to reimburse CITY for the loss shall be to the full
extent of such loss and shall not be limited to TWENTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS.
CONTRACTOR reserves the right to dispute the value of the loss. In the event that
CONTRACTOR has not reimbursed the loss within said thirty (30) days, CITY may draw
against the Letter of Credit to recover its loss and, as stated above, if the Letter of Credit
is insufficient to fully compensate CITY, CONTRACTOR shall remain obligated to
compensate CITY to the full extent of its loss.
4
Pg. 70
When a loss is alleged to have been caused the theft, fraud or other dishonesty of any
one or more of CONTRACTOR’s employees, officers, or agents, but CITY is unable to
designate the specific person causing such loss, CITY shall have the benefit of the Letter
of Credit provided that the evidence submitted reasonably establishes that the loss was in
fact due to the fraud or dishonesty of one or more such persons.
Presentation of the Letter of Credit shall be required either electronically or not more than fifty
(50) miles from San Luis Obispo, California.
Notice shall be delivered in accordance with Section 25 of this Agreement.
Not less than thirty (30) days after CITY has drawn against the letter of credit,
CONTRACTOR shall deposit funds sufficient to restore the letter of credit to the original
amount thereof.
In lieu of a Fidelity Bond or Letter of Credit, CONTRACTOR may provide CITY
with a cash deposit of FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS which shall be held without
payment of interest by CITY and CITY shall be entitled to draw upon the deposit in the
same manner and for the same purposes as regarding the above described Letter of
Credit. Not less than thirty (30) days after CITY has drawn against the cash deposit,
CONTRACTOR shall restore the cash deposit to the original amount thereof. The cash
deposit shall be held by CITY during the term of the Agreement. Within thirty (30) days
of termination or expiration of the Agreement, CITY shall return the cash deposit to
CONTRACTOR, less any amount used by CITY pursuant to this Agreement.
e. Should, at any time, any of the insurance policies required by this Agreement be
unsatisfactory to CITY, at its sole discretion, CONTRACTOR shall promptly obtain a
new policy, submit the same to CITY. Upon failure of CONTRACTOR to furnish,
deliver or maintain any insurance and endorsements as required by this Agreement, at the
election of CITY, this Agreement may be immediately terminated as provided herein.
Failure of CONTRACTOR to obtain and maintain any required insurance shall not
relieve CONTRACTOR of any liability under this Agreement (and CONTRACTOR
may be answerable to CITY for damages or any other remedy on account of such breach)
nor shall the insurance requirements be construed to conflict with or otherwise limit the
obligations of CONTRACTOR concerning indemnification.
f. All insurance provided by CONTRACTOR shall be primary and any insurance or self-
insurance maintained by CITY and its member jurisdictions shall be excess of
CONTRACTOR's insurance and shall not contribute to it.
g. CONTRACTOR’s failure to provide the insurance required by this section, or
CONTRACTOR’s submission of insurance policies, endorsements and other
documentation (whether or not such documentation is “accepted” by CITY) shall not
waive or satisfy the CONTRACTOR’s obligation to provide CITY with the insurance
required by this Agreement if it has failed to do so. Should CONTRACTOR fail to
provide insurance in the form and amount specified by this Agreement,
CONTRACTOR shall be directly liable to CITY to provide it with both a defense and
indemnity for any losses which CITY incurs to the extent such losses would have been
covered by insurance as is specified in this Agreement. Notwithstanding the above,
CONTRACTOR shall not be required to indemnify CITY from loss or liability to the
extent such loss or liability arises from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of
4
Pg. 71
CITY, its agents, directors and employees, at such time that such sole negligence or
willful misconduct has been finally determined by a court of competent jurisdiction.
h. It shall be a requirement under this Agreement that any available insurance proceeds
broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements as
set forth above and/or limits shall be available to the additional insured. Furthermore, the
requirements for coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits
specified in this Agreement; or (2) the broader coverage and limits of coverage of any
insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured, whichever is greater. The
defense and indemnifications of this Agreement are undertaken in addition to, and shall
not in any way be limited by, the insurance obligations contained in this Agreement. All
deductibles and self- insured retentions (SIR) must be disclosed to CITY for approval and
shall not reduce the limits of the liability. Policies containing any SIR provision shall
provide, or be endorsed to provide, that the SIR may be satisfied by either the named
insured or CITY. CITY reserves the right to obtain a full certified copy of any insurance
policy and endorsement coverage under this Agreement. Failure to exercise this right
shall not constitute a waiver of the right to exercise it later.
8. WORKER’S COMPENSATION
CONTRACTOR certifies that it is aware of the provisions of the Labor Code of the State of California
which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake
self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and it certifies that it will comply with such
provisions and furnish CITY with a Certificate of Insurance before commencing the performance of this
agreement. Furthermore, CONTRACTOR shall indemnify CITY, its officers and employees, for any
claims in law or equity occasioned by failure of CONTRACTOR to comply with this provision or which
arise out of any job related injury, including third party claims against CITY by CONTRACTOR’S or
subcontractor’s employees. The indemnification provisions of this paragraph shall survive the termination
of this agreement or any extensions thereof.
9. INDEMNIFICATION
To the fullest extent allowed by law, CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and hold CITY (and CITY’s
member jurisdictions) and its representative officers, directors, employees and agents free and harmless
from and against any and all claims, suits, liens, demands, damages, injuries, liabilities, losses and
expenses of any kind, including reasonable fees of attorneys and expert witnesses, to the extent they arise
out of or are in any way connected with the performance of this Agreement by CITY, its agents, directors
or employees, or by CONTRACTOR, its agents, directors or employees, whether such claims, liens,
demands, damages, losses or expenses are based upon a contract or upon a claim for personal injury, death
or property damage or upon any other legal or equitable theory whatsoever.
CONTRACTOR agrees, at its own expense and upon written request by CITY, to defend any claim, suit,
action or demand brought against CITY on any injury, loss or liability, actual or alleged, covered herein.
Notwithstanding this defense obligation, CONTRACTOR shall not be required to indemnify CITY from
loss or liability to the extent such loss or liability arises from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of
CITY, its agents, directors and employees, at such time that such sole negligence or willful misconduct has
been finally determined by a court of competent jurisdiction. CONTRACTOR shall provide CITY with a
defense until such determination has been made (i.e. until a court of competent jurisdiction has determined
that the loss or liability arises from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of CITY, CONTRACTOR
shall provide a defense as to such loss or liability). CONTRACTOR’s indemnity obligations survive
termination of this Agreement.
4
Pg. 72
10. PERFORMANCE BOND
The faithful performance by CONTRACTOR of each and every term, condition, and provision of this
agreement is expressly made a condition precedent for the payment of any sums agreed herein to be paid to
CONTRACTOR by CITY. To insure performance, CONTRACTOR shall post with CITY a bond or other
acceptable security in the amount of TWENTY-FIVE PERCENT (25%) of the first year contract price.
Such bond or security shall be subject to the approval of CITY's Attorney and Finance Director and shall
be executed by CONTRACTOR and a surety company licensed to do business as such in the State of
California. The condition of the bond shall be that the CONTRACTOR shall fully and faithfully perform
all conditions and covenants of this agreement or the face amount of such bond shall be forfeited to CITY.
The bond may be a renewable one-year bond, and shall be renewed annually before its expiration date;
provided, however, that such bond must remain in full force and effect from and after the date CITY
makes any demands for payment on the bond until CITY releases such claim. Provision of such bond or
its equivalent is a material covenant of this agreement and CITY shall not approve any security which is
not unconditionally payable to CITY upon CITY demand. CITY reserves the right to rescind the
requirement for a performance bond at any time.
11. INVOICES
a. All hourly costs shall be invoiced to CITY monthly following the service month provided.
Said invoices shall specify the dates of service and the number of vehicle service hours
claimed. Hourly costs shall be directly traceable by dispatcher and/or driver trip sheets and/or
employee time cards, copies of which will be submitted to CITY monthly with each invoice.
b. The monthly fixed rate and insurance rate shall be invoiced monthly following the service
month provided. All reports and submissions required under this agreement shall be
accurately completed and submitted to CITY prior to payment of said monthly rate invoices.
c. Any extra services provided under this agreement shall be invoiced separately following
the provision of such services. Copies of all appropriate passenger and service logs shall be
attached to each extra service invoice prior to payment.
12. PAYMENT
All payments by CITY to CONTRACTOR shall be made in arrears. Payment shall be made by CITY no
more than thirty (30) days from receipt of an invoice. Payment of invoices will be made on a monthly
basis. If CITY disputes any item on an invoice for a reasonable cause, CITY may deduct that disputed item
from the payment, but shall not delay payment for the undisputed portions. The amounts and reasons for
such deletions shall be documented to CONTRACTOR within fifteen (15) working days of the receipt of
the invoice by CITY. Payments shall be by voucher or check payable to and mailed first-class to:
[INSERT CONTRACTOR NAME & MAILING ADDRESS]
13. OPERATING REVENUES
All operating revenues collected by CONTRACTOR are the property of CITY. Operating revenues
include, but are not limited to, all fares and the proceeds from the sale of tickets and passes. Operating
revenues shall be counted and kept separately under appropriate security. Within one working day from
collection, unless otherwise agreed upon, CONTRACTOR shall deposit fares at a banking institution as
directed by CITY. Reports on the revenues collected and deposited shall be provided to CITY on a timely
basis. CITY shall be provided with a written description of CONTRACTOR'S procedures regarding the
collection, counting and controlling of fare revenues. These procedures are subject to CITY's audit and
approval.
14. CONTROL
d. All services to be rendered by CONTRACTOR under this agreement shall be subject to the
4
Pg. 73
control of CITY. CONTRACTOR shall advise CITY of matters of importance and make
recommendations when appropriate; however, final CITY shall rest with CITY.
e. CITY shall not interfere with the management of CONTRACTOR'S normal internal
business affairs and shall not attempt to directly discipline or terminate CONTRACTOR
employees. CITY may advise CONTRACTOR of the performance of any employee having a
negative effect on the service being provided.
15. CONTRACT ASSIGNMENT
This agreement shall not be sold, assigned, transferred, conveyed or encumbered by
CONTRACTOR without the prior written consent of CITY which consent may be withheld in CITY’s
sole and absolute discretion. Any assignment, transfer, conveyance or encumbrance of this agreement
without CITY’s prior written approval shall be null and void. CONTRACTOR shall not sell or otherwise
transfer its interest in this agreement without prior written notification to CITY. Upon receiving such
notification from CONTRACTOR, CITY may, at its sole discretion, decide to exercise its right to
terminate this agreement. Subject to this provision, the agreement shall be binding upon the heirs,
executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the respective parties.
16. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
a. Disputes arising in the performance of this agreement shall be decided in writing by the
Transit Manager. This decision shall be final and conclusive unless within ten (10) days from the
date of receipt of its copy, CONTRACTOR mails or otherwise furnishes a written appeal to the
Transit Manager. In connection with any such appeal, CONTRACTOR shall be afforded an
opportunity to be heard and to offer evidence in support of its position. The decision of the
Transit Manager shall be binding upon the CONTRACTOR and the CONTRACTOR shall abide
be the decision.
b. Unless otherwise directed by CITY, CONTRACTOR shall continue performance under this
agreement while matters in dispute are being resolved.
c. Should either party to this agreement suffer injury or damage to person or property because of any
act or omission of the party or of any of his employees, agents or others for whose acts he is
legally liable, a claim for damages therefore shall be made in writing to such other party within a
reasonable time after the first observance of such injury of damage.
d. Unless this agreement provides otherwise, all claims, counterclaims, disputes and other
matters in question between CITY and CONTRACTOR arising out of or relating to this agreement
or its breach will be decided by arbitration if the parties mutually agree, or in a court of
competent jurisdiction within the State of California.
e. The duties and obligations imposed by this agreement and the rights and remedies available there
under shall be in addition to and not a limitation of any duties, obligations, rights and
remedies otherwise imposed or available by law. No action or failure to act by CITY or
CONTRACTOR shall constitute a waiver of any right or duty afforded any of them under this
agreement, nor shall any such action or failure to act constitute an approval of or acquiescence in
any breach there under, except as may be specifically agreed in writing.
17. RESOLUTION OF FEDERAL PROCUREMENT ISSUES
The Federal Procurement Regulations shall be used where applicable to define, resolve, and settle
procurement issues. Unless otherwise directed by CITY, CONTRACTOR shall continue performance
under this agreement while matters in dispute are being resolved.
4
Pg. 74
18. STOP WORK
CITY may stop work on CITY's transportation system upon forty-eight (48) hours written notice to
CONTRACTOR. CITY shall be liable for all relevant costs incurred prior to the stop-work period and for
restart, if any. When exercising this provision, CITY shall be obligated for the costs of severance for
personnel assigned to CITY's transportation system in accordance with the published policy and
procedures of CONTRACTOR, a copy of which shall be provided to CITY upon request. Additionally, the
cost associated with operations and facilities close down, shall be the obligation of CITY. CONTRACTOR
shall make all reasonable efforts to minimize costs to CITY.
19. TERMINATION FOR DEFAULT
a. All the terms, conditions, and covenants of this agreement are considered material and in the
event CONTRACTOR breaches or defaults in the performance of any such terms, conditions,
or covenants which are to be kept, done or performed by it, CITY shall give CONTRACTOR
ten days written notice either by certified mail or by personal service, describing such breach or
default, and if CONTRACTOR fails, neglects or refuses for a period or more than ten days
thereafter to remedy, or cure such breach or default, then CITY without further notice, may
terminate this agreement. In the event of termination of this agreement as hereinabove
specified, CITY shall have the right to take immediate possession of all equipment and
facilities provided by CITY to CONTRACTOR and of the facilities and equipment supplied
by CONTRACTOR under the provisions of this agreement. In the event CITY does take
possession of CONTRACTOR-supplied facilities and equipment, CONTRACTOR shall be
reimbursed by CITY for the actual cost of the temporary use of said facilities and equipment. If
it is later determined by CITY that CONTRACTOR had an excusable reason for not
performing, such as a strike, fire, or flood, events which are not the fault of or are beyond
the control of CONTRACTOR, CITY, after setting up a new delivery of performance
schedule, may allow CONTRACTOR to continue work, or treat the termination as a
termination for convenience.
b. Bankruptcy: Either (a) the appointment of a receiver to take full possession of all or
substantially all of the assets of CONTRACTOR or (b) a general assignment by
CONTRACTOR for the benefit of creditors, or (c) any action taken by or suffered by
CONTRACTOR under any insolvency or bankruptcy act shall constitute a breach of the
agreement by CONTRACTOR and CITY shall have the option to terminate this
agreement. The parties specifically agree that the selection of CONTRACTOR is based on
factors that render contractor especially suited to perform this agreement, such that the
identity of contractor is central to the obligations in this contract. Accordingly, this contract
is similar to a personal services contract and non-assignable under 11 USC 365 (c).
20. TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE
The performance of work under this agreement may be terminated by CITY in accordance with this clause
in whole, or from time to time in part, whenever the Transit Manager shall determine that such termination
is in the best interest of CITY. Any such termination shall be effected by delivery to CONTRACTOR of a
notice of termination specifying the extent to which performance of work under the agreement is
terminated, and the date upon which such termination becomes effective. After receipt of a notice of
termination, and except as otherwise directed by the Transit Manager, CONTRACTOR shall:
a. Stop work under the agreement on the date and to the extent specified in the notice of
termination;
b. Place no further orders or subcontracts for materials, services, or facilities, except as may be
necessary for completion of such portion of the work under the agreement as is not terminated;
4
Pg. 75
c. Terminate all orders and subcontracts to the extent that they relate to the performance of work
terminated by the notice of termination; assign to CITY in the manner, at the times, and to
the extent directed by the Transit Manager, all of the right, title, and interest of
CONTRACTOR under the orders and subcontracts so terminated, in which case CITY shall
have the right, in its discretion, to settle or pay and or all claims arising out of the termination
of such orders and subcontracts; settle all outstanding liabilities and all claims arising out of
such termination of orders and subcontracts, with the approval or ratification of the Transit
Manager, to the extent he may require, which approval or ratification shall be final for all the
purposes of this clause; transfer title to CITY and deliver in the manner, at the times, and to
the extent, if any, directed by Transit Manager the fabricated or unfabricated parts, work in
process, completed work, supplies, and other material produced as part of, or acquired in
connection with the performance of, the work. terminated, and the completed or partially
completed plans, drawings, information and other property which, if the agreement had been
completed, would have been required to be furnished to CITY; use its best efforts to sell, in
the manner, at the times, to the extent, and at the price(s) directed or authorized by the
Transit Manager, any property of the types referred to above, provided, however, that
CONTRACTOR shall not be required to extend credit to any purchaser, and may acquire any
such property under the conditions prescribed by and at a price(s) approved by the Transit
Manager, and provided further, that the proceeds of any such transfer or disposition shall be
applied in reduction of any payments to be made by CITY to CONTRACTOR under this
agreement or shall otherwise be credited to the price or cost of the work covered by this
Contract or paid in such other manner as the Transit Manager may direct; complete
performance of such part of the work as shall not have been terminated by the notice of
termination; and take such action as may be necessary, or as the Transit Manager may direct,
for the protection or preservation of the property related to this agreement which is in the
possession of CONTRACTOR and in which CITY has or may acquire an interest.
d. CONTRACTOR shall be paid its costs, including contract close-out costs, and profit on
work performed up to the time of termination. CONTRACTOR shall promptly submit its
termination claim to CITY to be paid CONTRACTOR.
21. REMEDIES ON BREACH (WAIVER OF REMEDIES)
The duties and obligations imposed by the agreement and the rights and remedies available hereunder shall
be in addition to and not a limitation of any duties, obligations, rights and remedies otherwise imposed or
available by law. No action or failure to act by CITY or CONTRACTOR shall constitute a waiver of any
right or duty afforded any of them under the agreement, nor shall any such action or failure to act
constitute an approval of or acquiescence in any breach hereunder, except as may be specifically agreed in
writing. In the event that CITY elects to waive its remedies for any breach by CONTRACTOR of any
covenant, term or condition of this agreement, such waiver shall not limit CITY’s remedies for any
succeeding breach of that or of any other term, covenant or condition of this agreement. It is agreed that in
the event of failure by CONTRACTOR to perform the services required by this agreement, in addition to
all other remedies, penalties and damages provided by law, CITY may provide such services, and deduct
the cost of doing so from the amounts due or to become due to the CONTRACTOR. The costs to be
deducted shall be the actual costs to CITY to provide such services.
22. RIGHTS UPON TERMINATION OR EXPIRATION AND WAIVER OF CLAIMS
Upon expiration or earlier termination of this agreement, CITY shall have the right to provide the services
by means of its own employees or pursuant to contract with other carrier(s) or otherwise. CONTRACTOR
agrees to forever waive any claim, of any sort or nature, against CITY based upon CITY's operation, or
contracting for the operation, of the service, or any portion of it. CONTRACTOR shall also waive any
4
Pg. 76
right that it otherwise might have to claim entitlement to benefits afforded to private mass transportation
companies under Section 3(e) of the Federal Transit Act of 1964 (49 USC Sec. 1602(e)), as it now exists or
hereafter may be amended. CONTRACTOR also hereby forever waives any claims of unfair competition
that it otherwise might assert, any rights that otherwise might accrue to it under the above- mentioned
provisions or under any other similar or comparable provisions of the law. Having entered into this
agreement shall not be the sole reason whereby the CONTRACTOR shall be inhibited, penalized, or
disqualified from submitting proposals for subsequent transportation, management, and operation
programs under the jurisdiction of CITY.
23. CHANGES
CITY, without invalidating this agreement may order additions to or deletions from the work to be
performed. Such changes shall be specified to CONTRACTOR in writing. If justified, the "Maximum
Obligation" will be adjusted accordingly. New provisions must be mutually agreeable to both CITY and
CONTRACTOR. A shift of vehicle service hours between services within the maximum value or an
increase or decrease of up to ten percent within the current span of service would not constitute a change as
defined in this agreement, but any such shift or change shall only occur at the direction of CITY.
24. MODIFICATION OF AGREEMENT
This writing constitutes the entire agreement between the parties relative to the subject matter of this
agreement and no modification hereof shall be effective unless and until such modification is evidenced by
a writing signed by both parties to this agreement. There are no understandings, agreements or conditions
with respect to the subject matter of this agreement except those contained in this writing.
25. NOTICES
All notices required to be given with respect to this agreement shall be in writing and mailed first
class, postage prepaid to the persons named below or at such addresses as the parties may file with
each other for such purpose.
Mr. Nick Promponas, SVP
If to CONTRACTOR First Transit, Inc.
7581 S. Willow Drive, Suite 102; Tempe, AZ 85283-5033
Copy To: Mr. Mike Petrucci, General Counsel
First Transit, Inc.
600 Vine Street, Suite 1400, Cincinnati, OH 45202-2400
If to CITY: Transit Manager
City of San Luis Obispo, SLO TRANSIT
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
26. PROPRIETARY RIGHTS
All inventions, improvements, discoveries, proprietary rights, copyrights and patents made by
CONTRACTOR under this agreement shall be made available to CITY with no royalties, charges, or other
costs, but shall be owned by CONTRACTOR. All manuals prepared by CONTRACTOR for use by
CONTRACTOR in other locales shall be made available to CITY at no charge but shall be owned by
CONTRACTOR and shall not be disclosed, or released by CITY without prior written consent of
CONTRACTOR. Reports and manuals prepared by CONTRACTOR under this agreement for specific use
in CITY's system shall become the property of CITY. CONTRACTOR, however, shall have the right to
print and issue copies of these reports. CONTRACTOR may make presentations and releases relating to
the project. Papers and other formal publications shall be approved by CITY prior to release.
27. FORCE MAJEURE
CONTRACTOR shall not be held responsible for losses, failure to perform, or excess costs caused by
4
Pg. 77
events beyond the control of CONTRACTOR. Such events may include, but are not restricted to, the
following: fire, epidemics, earthquake, flood, or other natural disaster; acts of the government; riots,
strikes, war or other civil disorders; or fuel shortages. In every case, CONTRACTOR shall resume
performance at the earliest possible date following the cessation of such unforeseen causes or events.
CONTRACTOR shall be entitled to no compensation for any service, the performance of which is excused
pursuant to this paragraph.
28. INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTS
All information, data, reports, records, maps, survey results as are existing, available, and necessary for
carrying out the work under this agreement, shall be furnished to CONTRACTOR without charge by
CITY, and CITY shall cooperate in every way possible in the carrying out of the work without undue
delay.
29. EMERGENCY PROCEDURES
In the event of a major emergency such as an earthquake, flood, or man-made catastrophe,
CONTRACTOR shall make transportation and communication resources available to the degree possible for
emergency assistance. If the normal line of direct CITY from CITY is intact, CONTRACTOR shall follow
instruction of CITY. If the normal line of direct CITY is broken, and for the period it is broken,
CONTRACTOR shall make best use of transportation resources following to the degree possible the
direction of an organization such as the San Luis Obispo Office of Emergency Services, the police, Red
Cross, or National Guard, which appears to have assumed responsibility within CITY's service area.
Emergency uses of transportation may include evacuation, transportation of injured, and movement of people
to food and shelter. CONTRACTOR shall be reimbursed in accordance with the normal "Price Formula"
and "Payment" or, if the normal method does not cover the types of emergency services involved, then
on the basis of fair, equitable and prompt reimbursement of CONTRACTOR'S actual costs.
Reimbursement for such major emergency services shall be over and above the "Maximum Obligation" of
this contract. Immediately when the emergency condition ceases, CONTRACTOR shall reinstate
normal transportation services.
30. ACCESS TO RECORDS AND REPORTS (AUDIT AND INSPECTION)
a. In accordance with 49 C.F.R. 18.36(i), CONTRACTOR shall permit CITY, the FTA
Administrator, the Comptroller General of the United States, the California State
Controller, and the Sacramento Area Council of Governments or any of their authorized
representatives access to any to books, documents, papers and records of CONTRACTOR
which are directly pertinent to this contract for the purposes of making audits,
examinations, excerpts and transcriptions. Further, CONTRACTOR agrees to permit any of
the foregoing parties to reproduce by any means whatsoever or to copy excerpts and
transcriptions as reasonably needed.
b. CONTRACTOR agrees to maintain all books, records, accounts and reports required under
this contract for a period of not less than three years after the date of termination or
expiration of this contract, except in the event of litigation or settlement of claims arising
from the performance of this contract, in which case CONTRACTOR agrees to maintain
same until CITY, the FTA Administrator, the Comptroller General, or any of their duly
authorized representatives, have disposed of all such litigation, appeals, claims or exceptions
related thereto. Reference 49 CFR 18.39(i)(11).
31. TRANSFER OF TITLE TO EQUIPMENT
All equipment, parts and supplies purchased by CONTRACTOR under this agreement, either as a direct
charge expense or within the defined scope of services, shall become the property of CITY upon either
the payment of the direct charge invoice or the expiration or termination of this agreement for any reason
4
Pg. 78
unless otherwise specified in writing. The applicable depreciation schedule and residual value, if any, of
such items shall be established prior to the execution of this agreement. CONTRACTOR shall maintain a
perpetual inventory of all such equipment and supplies purchased under this and any prior agreement, to
be submitted for review on or before August 31 of each year. CONTRACTOR shall be responsible
for the replacement of any equipment, parts and supplies purchased or provided, either by CITY or
CONTRACTOR, under this agreement that is lost or unreasonably destroyed while under the control
of CONTRACTOR.
32. TRANSPORTATION DATA REPORTING
CONTRACTOR shall report operating and financial data to CITY in accordance with the California Public
Utilities Code, Chapter 4, Section 99243, and California Administrative Code Title 21, Chapter 3, Subchapter
2, as required under California Transportation Development Act, and with Level "R" of the Uniform
Financial Accounting and Reporting Elements as required by the National Transit Database System and the
Federal Transit Act of 1964 as both are amended from time to time.
33. PERMITS AND LICENSES
At its sole cost and expense, CONTRACTOR shall obtain any and all permits, licenses, certificates, or
entitlement to operate as are now or hereafter required by any agency, specifically including, but not
limited to, those that may be required by the California Public Utilities Commission, the California
Highway Patrol, the Department of Motor Vehicles and local jurisdictions, to enable CONTRACTOR to
perform this agreement. Copies of all such entitlements shall be provided to CITY when received by
CONTRACTOR. In the event that any aspect of this agreement requires prior approval by the PUC, the
CONTRACTOR shall submit necessary application forms. Both parties shall appear as necessary and
cooperate in the commission approval process. CITY reserves the right to oppose, support or be neutral
on any such request and on the PUC's ruling thereon. CONTRACTOR covenants to obtain all such
approvals before commencing operations, and to conform to the PUC ruling thereon, at its sole cost and
expense.
34. NON-DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT AND SERVICE
a. In connection with the execution of this agreement, CONTRACTOR shall not discriminate
against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, sex,
age or national origin. CONTRACTOR shall take affirmative action to ensure that applicants
are employed, and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race,
color, religion, sex, age, or national origin or ancestry. Such action shall include, but not be
limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment or
recruitment advertising, layoff or terminations; rates of pay or other forms of compensation;
and, selection for training, including apprenticeship. CONTRACTOR must submit a properly
executed and current Employer Information Report (EEO-1) upon request of CITY.
CONTRACTOR further agrees to insert a similar provision in all subcontracts, except
subcontracts for standard commercial supplies or raw materials.
b. CONTRACTOR shall also comply with the requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964 (P.L. 88-352) and with all applicable regulations, statutes, laws, etc., promulgated
pursuant to the civil rights acts of the state and federal government now in existence or
hereafter enacted. Further, CONTRACTOR shall also comply with the provisions of Section
1735 of the California Labor Code.
c. CONTRACTOR shall not discriminate, nor allow any of its officers, employees, or agents
to discriminate against any passenger or patron because of race, color, sex, age, or national origin
or ancestry.
4
Pg. 79
d. CONTRACTOR shall promptly notify CITY of any discrimination complaints.
CONTRACTOR shall, at its sole cost and expense, conform to any final orders issued by
any State or Federal agency with jurisdiction to correct the CONTRACTOR'S discrimination in
employment and/or service and shall fully save harmless and indemnify CITY in this regard.
35. LABOR PROVISIONS
In accordance with 40 U.S.C. 329 and 29 CFR Part 5, CONTRACTOR hereby certifies compliance with the
following provisions related to the employment of mechanics and laborers under the Contract Work Hours
and Safety Standards Act.
a. Overtime Requirements. No contractor or subcontractor contracting for any part of the contract
work which may require or involve the employment of laborers or mechanics shall require or permit
any such laborer or mechanic in any work week in which he or she is employed on such work to
work in excess of eight hours in any calendar day or in excess of forty hours in such work week
unless such laborer or mechanic receives compensation at a rate not less than one and one-half
times the basic rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of eight hours in any calendar day or in
excess of forty hours in such work week.
b. Violation; Liability for Unpaid Wages; Liquidated Damages. In the event of any violation of the
clause set forth in subparagraph (b)(1) of 29 CFR Section 5.5, contractor and any subcontractor
responsible therefor shall be liable for the unpaid wages. In addition, such contractor and
subcontractor shall be liable to the United States for liquidated damages. Such liquidated damages
shall be computed with respect to each individual laborer or mechanic, including watchmen or
guards, employed in violation of the clause set forth in subparagraph (b)(1) of 29 CFR Section 515
in the sum of $10 for each calendar day on which such individual was required or permitted to work
in excess of eight hours or in excess of the standard work week of forty hours without payment of
the overtime wages required by the clause set forth in subparagraph (b)(1) of 29 CFR Section 5.5.
c. Withholding for Unpaid Wages and Liquidated Damages. CITY shall upon its own action or
upon written request of authorized representative of the Department of Labor withhold or cause to
be withheld, from any monies payable on account of work performed by the contractor or
subcontractor under any such contract or any other Federal contract with the same prime contractor,
or any other federally assisted contract subject to the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards
Act, which is held by the same prime contractor, such sums as may be determined to be necessary
to satisfy any liabilities of such contractor or subcontractor for unpaid wages and liquidated
damages as provided in the clause set forth in subparagraph (b)(2) of 29 CFR Section 5.5.
d. Non-Construction Grants. Contractor or subcontractor shall maintain payrolls and basic payroll
records during the course of the work and shall preserve them for a period of three years from the
completion of the contract for all laborers and mechanics, including guards and watchmen, of each
such employee, social security number, correct classifications, hourly rates of wages paid, daily and
weekly number of hours worked, deductions made, and actual wages paid. Further, the recipient
shall require the contracting Officer to insert in any such contract a clause providing that the records
to be maintained under this paragraph shall be made available by contractor or subcontractor for
inspection, copying, or transcription by authorized representatives of Department of Transportation
(“DOT”) and the Department of Labor and the Contractor or subcontractor will permit such
representatives to interview employees during working hours on the job.
e. Subcontracts. Contractor or subcontractor shall insert in any subcontracts the clauses set forth in
subparagraph (a) through (e) of this paragraph and also a clause requiring the subcontractors to
include these clauses in any lower tier subcontracts. The prime contractor shall be responsible for
4
Pg. 80
compliance by any subcontractor or lower tier subcontractor with the clauses set forth in
subparagraphs (a) through (e) of this paragraph.
f. CONTRACTOR and any subcontractor shall comply with 40 U.S.C. 3701.
36. TRANSIT EMPLOYEE PROTECTIVE AGREEMENTS
a. General Transit Employee Protective Requirements – To the extent that the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) determines that transit operations are involved, CONTRACTOR agrees to
carry out the transit operations work on the underlying contract in compliance with terms and
conditions determined by the U.S. Secretary of Labor to be fair and equitable to protect the interests
of employees employed under this contract and to meet the employee protective requirements of 49
U.S.C. A 5333(b), and U.S. DOL guidelines at 29 C.F.R.-Part 215, and any amendments thereto.
These terms and conditions are identified in the letter of certification from the U.S. DOL to FTA
applicable to the FTA Recipient’s project from which Federal assistance is provided to support
work on the underlying contract. CONTRACTOR agrees to carry out that work in compliance with
the conditions stated in that U.S. DOL letter. The requirements of this subsection (1), however, do
not apply to any contract financed with Federal assistance provided by FTA either for projects for
elderly individuals and individuals with disabilities authorized by 49 U.S.C. § 5310(a)(2), or for
projects for nonurbanized areas authorized by 49 U.S.C. § 5311. Alternative provisions for these
projects are set forth in subsections (b) and (c) of this clause.
b. Transit Employee Protective Requirements for Projects Authorized by 49 U.S.C.§ 5310(a)(2)
for Elderly Individuals and Individuals with Disabilities – If the contract involves transit
operations financed in whole or in part with Federal assistance authorized by 49 U.S.C. §
5310(a)(2), and if the U.S. Secretary of Transportation has determined or determines in the future
that the employee protective requirements of 49 U.S.C. § 5333(b) are necessary or appropriate for
the state and the public body subrecipient for which work is performed on the underlying contract,
CONTRACTOR agrees to carry out the Project in compliance with the terms and conditions
determined by the U.S. Secretary of Labor to meet the requirements of 49 U.S.C. § 5333(b), U.S.
DOL guidelines at 29 C.F.R. Part 215, and any amendments thereto. These terms and conditions are
identified in the U.S. DOL’s letter of certification to FTA, the date of which is set forth Grant
Amendment or Cooperative Agreement with the state. CONTRACTOR agrees to perform transit
operations in connection with the underlying contract in compliance with the conditions stated in
that U.S. DOL letter.
c. Transit Employee Protective Requirements for Projects Authorized by 49 U.S.C.§ 5311 in
Nonurbanized Areas – If the contract involves transit operations financed in whole or in part with
Federal assistance authorized by 49 U.S.C. § 5311, CONTRACTOR agrees to comply with the
terms and conditions of the Special Warranty for the Nonurbanized Area Program agreed to by the
U.S. Secretaries of Transportation and Labor, dated May 31, 1979, and the procedures implemented
by U.S. DOL or any revision thereto.
d. CONTRACTOR also agrees to include any applicable requirements in each subcontract involving
transit operations financed in whole or part with Federal assistance provided by FTA.
37. ACCESS REQUIREMENTS FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
CONTRACTOR agrees to comply with all applicable requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act
of 1990 (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq., Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended,
29 U.S.C. § 794; 49 U.S.C. § 5301(d); and all regulations promulgated to implement the ADA and
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, as may be applicable to CONTRACTOR.
4
Pg. 81
38. CIVIL RIGHTS
During the performance of this contract, CONTRACTOR, for itself, its assignees and successors in interest,
agrees as follows:
a. Nondiscrimination. In accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §
2000d, section 303 of the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 6102, section
202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12132, and Federal transit law at
49 U.S.C. § 5332, CONTRACTOR agrees that it will not discriminate against any employee or
applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, national origin, sex age, or disability. In
addition, CONTRACTOR agrees to comply with applicable Federal implementing regulations and
other implementing requirements FTA may issue.
b. Equal Employment Opportunity. The following equal employment opportunity requirements
apply to the underlying contract:
c. Race, Color, Creed, National Origin, Sex – In accordance with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act,
as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, and Federal transit laws at 49 U.S.C. § 5332, CONTRACTOR
agrees to comply with all applicable equal employment opportunity requirements of U.S.
Department of Labor (U.S. DOL) regulations, “Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs,
Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor,” 41 C.F.R. Parts 60 et seq., (which
implement Executive Order No. 11246, “Equal Employment Opportunity,” as amended by
Executive Order No. 11375, “Amending Executive Order 11246 Relating to Equal Employment
Opportunity,” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e note), and with any applicable Federal statutes, executive orders,
regulations, and Federal policies that may in the future affect construction activities undertaken in
the course of the Project. CONTRACTOR agrees to take affirmative action to ensure that applicants
are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race,
color, creed, national origin, sex, or age. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the
following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising,
layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training,
including apprenticeship. In addition, CONTRACTOR agrees to comply with any implementing
requirements FTA may issue.
d. Age – In accordance with section 4 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as
amended, 29 U.S.C. § 623 and Federal transit law at 49 U.S.C. § 5332, CONTRACTOR agrees to
refrain from discrimination against present and prospective employees for reason of age. In
addition, CONTRACTOR agrees to comply with any implementing requirements FTA may issue.
e. Disabilities – In accordance with section 102 of the Americans with Disabilities Act, as amended,
42 U.S.C. § 12112, CONTRACTOR agrees that it will comply with the requirements of the U.S.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, “Regulations to Implement the Equal Employment
Provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act,” 29 C.F.R. Part 1630, pertaining to employment
of persons with disabilities. In addition, CONTRACTOR agrees to comply with any implementing
requirements FTA may issue.
f. Subcontracts. CONTRACTOR agrees to include these requirements in each subcontract financed
in whole or in part with Federal assistance provided by FTA, modified only if necessary to identify
the affected parties.
g. Employer Information Report. CONTRACTOR must submit a properly executed and current
Employer Information Report (EEO-1) upon request of CITY
4
Pg. 82
39. DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE
e. It is the policy of the U.S. Department of Transportation that Disadvantaged Business Enterprises
(DBE) as defined in 49 CFR Part 26, shall have the maximum opportunity to participate in the
performance of contracts financed in whole or in part with federal funds under this
agreement. Consequently, the DBE requirements of 49 CFR Part 26 applies to this agreement.
f. CONTRACTOR agrees to ensure that Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) as defined in
49 CFR Part 26 have the maximum opportunity to participate in the performance of contracts and
subcontracts financed in whole or in part with federal funds provided under this agreement. In
this regard, CONTRACTOR and subcontractors shall take all necessary and reasonable steps
in accordance with 49 CFR Part 26 to ensure that Disadvantaged Business Enterprises have the
maximum opportunity to compete for and perform contracts. CONTRACTOR and its
subcontractors shall not discriminate on the basis of race, creed, national origin, age or sex in the
award and performance of federal-assisted contracts.
g. CONTRACTOR shall cooperate fully with CITY in meeting any of CITY's commitments and
goals with regard to the maximum utilization of disadvantaged business enterprises.
CONTRACTOR shall keep records of DBE participation in all activities carried out pursuant to
this agreement, and shall report to CITY all such participation and efforts made to
encourage DBE participation as required by CITY. See Appendix H – DBE Goal for the current
established goal.
h. CONTRACTOR shall incorporate the provisions of this paragraph in all applicable subcontracts.
40. DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING
CONTRACTOR agrees to establish and implement a drug and alcohol testing program that complies with
49 CFR Part 655, produce any documentation necessary to establish its compliance with Part 655, and
permit any authorized representative of the United States Department of Transportation or its operating
administrations, the State Oversight Agency of California, or CITY, to inspect the facilities and
records associated with the implementation of the drug and alcohol testing program as required under 49
CFR Part 655 and review the testing process. CONTRACTOR agrees further to certify annually its
compliance with Part 655 and to submit the Management Information System (MIS) reports by March 1
of each year to CITY. To certify compliance, CONTRACTOR shall use the “Substance Abuse
Certifications” in the “Annual List of Certifications and Assurances for Federal Transit Administration
Grants and Cooperative Agreements,” which is published annually in the Federal Register.
41. CHARTER SERVICE OPERATIONS
The CONTRACTOR agrees to comply with 49 U.S.C. 5323(d) and 49 CFR Part 604, and any
amendments thereto that may be issued, which provides that recipients and subrecipients of FTA
assistance are prohibited from providing charter service using federally funded equipment or facilities
if there is at least one private charter operator willing and able to provide the service, except under one
of the exceptions at 49 CFR 604.9. Any charter service provided under one of the exceptions must
be "incidental," i.e., it must not interfere with or detract from the provision of mass transportation.
42. SCHOOL BUS OPERATIONS
CONTRACTOR agrees that neither it nor any subcontractor performing work in connection with this
agreement will engage in school bus operations for the transportation of students or school personnel
exclusively in competition with private school bus operators, except as permitted by 49 U.S.C. § 5323(f) and
FTA regulations , “School Bus Operations,” 49 C.F.R. Part 605, and any amendments thereto that may be
issued. Any applicable school bus agreement required by these regulations is incorporated by reference and
made part of this agreement.
4
Pg. 83
43. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
a. Energy Conservation. CONTRACTOR agrees to comply with the mandatory standards and
policies relating to energy efficiency which are contained in the State energy conservation
plan issued in compliance with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act.
b. Interest of Members of or Delegates to Congress. In accordance with 18 USC, Section 431, no
member of, or delegate to, the Congress of the United States shall be admitted to any share or part
of this agreement or to any benefit arising therefrom.
c. Conflict of Interest. No employee, officer, director or agent of CITY shall participate in the
selection, award or administration of this agreement if a conflict of interest, real or apparent,
would be involved. Such a conflict would arise when the employee, officer or agent, or any
member of his immediate family, or an organization which employs, or is about to employ same,
has a financial or other interest in the firm selected for award. No employee, officer, or agent
of CITY shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this contract or the proceeds thereof during
his tenure or for one year thereafter.
d. Clean Water Act. CONTRACTOR agrees to comply with all applicable standards, orders or
regulations issues pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, 33 U.S.C.
1251 et seq. CONTRACTOR agrees to report each violation to CITY and understands and
agrees that CITY will, in turn, report each violation as required to assure notification to FTA and
the appropriate EPA Regional Office. CONTRACTOR also agrees to include these
requirements in each subcontract exceeding $100,000 financed in whole or in part with Federal
assistance provided by FTA.
e. Clean Air Act. CONTRACTOR agrees to comply with all applicable standards, orders or
regulations issued pursuant to the Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 7401 et seq.
CONTRACTOR agrees to report each violation to CITY and understands and agrees that CITY
will, in turn, report each violation as required to assure notification to FTA and the
appropriate EPA Regional Office. CONTRACTOR also agrees to include this requirement in
each subcontract exceeding $100,000 financed in whole or in part with Federal assistance
provided by FTA.
f. Debarred Bidders. This agreement is a covered transaction for purposes of 49 CFR Part 29. As
such, CONTRACTOR has verified by signed certification that none of its principals, as defined
at 49 CRR 29.995, or affiliates, as defined by 49 CFR 29.905, are excluded or disqualified
at 49 CFR 29.940 and 29.945. CONTRACTOR is required to comply with 49 CFR 29, Subpart
C and must include the requirement to comply with 49CFR 29, Subpart C in any lower tier
covered transaction it enters into.
g. Conflict of Transportation Interests. The CONTRACTOR shall not divert any revenues,
passengers, or other business from CITY's project to any taxi or other transportation operation
of CONTRACTOR without the written approval of CITY.
h. Conflicting Use. The CONTRACTOR shall not use any vehicle, equipment, personnel or other
facilities which are dedicated to CITY for performing services under this agreement for any
use whatsoever other than provided for in this agreement without the prior approval of CITY.
i. Fair Employment and Housing Act. CONTRACTOR shall comply with the requirements of the
California Fair Employment and Housing Act,
4
Pg. 84
j. Working Conditions. It shall be a condition of this agreement, and shall be made a condition of
each subcontract entered into pursuant to this agreement, that the CONTRACTOR or the
subcontractor shall not require any laborer or mechanic employed in connection with the
performance of this agreement to work under working conditions which are unsanitary,
hazardous or dangerous to his health or safety, as determined under the California Occupational
Safety and Health Act of 1973 (Chapter 993, Statutes of 1973).
k. Federal Changes. CONTRACTOR shall at all times comply with all applicable FTA
regulations, policies, procedures and directives, including without limitation those listed
directly or by reference in the Master Agreement between CITY and FTA, as they may be
amended or promulgated from time to time during the term of this contract.
CONTRACTOR’S failure to so comply shall constitute a material breach of this contract.
l. No Obligation By The Federal Government.
1. CITY and CONTRACTOR acknowledge and agree that, notwithstanding any concurrence
by the Federal Government in or approval of the solicitation or award of the underlying
contract, absent the express written consent by the Federal Government, the Federal
Government is not a party to this contract and shall not be subject to any obligations or
liabilities to CITY, CONTRACTOR, or any other party (whether or not a party to that
contract) pertaining to any matter resulting from the underlying contract.
2. CONTRACTOR agrees to include the above clause in each subcontract financed in
whole in part with Federal assistance provided by FTA. It is further agreed that the
clause shall not be modified, except to identify the subcontractor who will be subject to its
provisions.
m. Fly America Requirements. CONTRACTOR agrees to comply with 49 U.S.C. 40118 (the “Fly
America” Act) in accordance with the General Services Administration’s regulations at 41 CFR
Part 301-10, which provide that recipients and subrecipients of Federal funds and their
contractors are required to use U.S. Flag air carriers for U.S. Government-financed international
air travel and transportation of their personal effects or property, to the extent such service is
available, unless travel by foreign air carrier is a matter of necessity, as defined by the Fly
America Act. The Contractor shall submit, if a foreign air carrier was used, an appropriate
certification or memorandum adequately explaining why service by a U.S. flag air carrier was
not available or why it was necessary to use a foreign air carrier and shall, in any event,
provide a certificate of compliance with the Fly America requirements. The Contractor agrees to
include the requirements of this section in all subcontracts that may involve international air
transportation.
n. Recycled Products. CONTRACTOR agrees to comply with all of the requirements of
Section 6002 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended (42 U.S.C.
6962), including but not limited to the regulatory provisions of 40 CFR Part 247, and Executive
Order 12873, as they apply to the procurement of the items designated in Subpart B of 40 CFR
Part 247. CONTRACTOR agrees to include these requirements in every subcontract.
o. Taxes/Licenses. CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for paying any and all Federal, State,
and Local taxes. CONTRACTOR shall also be responsible for securing and paying for any
and all business licenses and taxes that may be required for the operation of services within
the scope of this agreement.
4
Pg. 85
p. Failure to Act. No action or failure to act by either party shall be a waiver of a right or duty
afforded under this agreement, nor shall such action or failure to act constitute a breach of this
agreement, except as specifically agreed to in writing.
q. Conflict of Interests. CONTRACTOR shall not divert any revenues, passengers, or other
business from CITY to any taxi or other transportation operation.
r. Waiver and Non-Waiver. A waiver by one party of a right to a remedy for breach of this
contract by the other party shall not be deemed to waive the right to a remedy for a subsequent
breach by the other party. Both parties, having had the opportunity to consult an attorney
regarding the provisions of this agreement, agree to waive the principle of contract interpretation
that an ambiguity will be construed against the party that drafted the ambiguous provision.
s. Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence in this agreement. CONTRACTOR’S failure to
deliver goods/services on time shall be a material breach of this contract. If CONTRACTOR
fails to deliver goods/services on time, CITY, at its discretion, may procure those
goods/services from another source. If the price paid by CITY for goods/services procured from
another source under this paragraph is higher than the price under this agreement,
CONTRACTOR shall pay CITY the difference between those prices. CITY may deduct that
difference from any amount CITY owes CONTRACTOR.
t. Intelligent Transportation System (ITS). For all ITS property and services, the Contractor
agrees to comply with all applicable standards, orders or regulations issued pursuant to the
National ITS Architecture and Standards to the extent required by 23 U.S.C. Section 517(d) and
23 CFR part 655 and 940.
44. LOBBYING
CONTRACTOR shall comply with 31 U.S.C. 1352, which provides in part that no
appropriated funds may be expended by the recipient of a Federal contract, grant, loan, or
cooperative agreement to pay any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or
employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an
employee of a Member of Congress in connection with any of the following covered Federal
actions: the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of
any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension,
continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or
cooperative agreement. CONTRACTORS who apply or bid for an award of $100,000 or more
shall file the certification required by 49 CFR Part 20, "New Restrictions on Lobbying." Each
tier certifies to the tier above that it will not and has not used Federal appropriated funds to pay
any person or organization for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee
of any agency, a member of Congress, officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a
member of Congress in connection with obtaining any Federal contract, grant or any other
award covered by 31 U.S.C. 1352. Each tier shall also disclose the name of any registrant under
the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 who has made lobbying contacts on its behalf with non-
Federal funds with respect to that Federal contract, grant or award covered by 31 U.S.C. 1352.
Such disclosures are forwarded from tier to tier up to the recipient.”
45. COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL LAWS
CONTRACTOR warrants and covenants that it shall fully and completely comply with all
applicable Federal, State, and Local laws and ordinances, and all lawful orders, rules and
regulations issued by any CITY with jurisdiction in all aspects of its performance of this
4
Pg. 86
agreement. CONTRACTOR shall hold CITY harmless from any claims or charges by reason of the
CONTRACTOR's or any subcontractor's failure to comply with the applicable laws or any
regulations adopted pursuant thereto and shall reimburse CITY for any fines, damages or expenses
of any kind incurred by it by reason of said failure. This paragraph shall survive the termination of
this agreement or any extensions thereof.
46. PROGRAM FRAUD AND FALSE OR FRAUDULENT STATEMENTS OR RELATED
ACTS
a. CONTRACTOR acknowledges that the provisions of the Program Fraud Civic Remedies Act of
1986, as amended, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3801 et seq. and U.S. DOT regulations, “Program Fraud Civil
Remedies”, 49 C.F.R. Part 31, apply to its actions pertaining to this agreement. Upon
execution of the underlying contract, CONTRACTOR certifies or affirms the truthfulness and
accuracy of any statement it has made, it makes, it may make, or causes to be made, pertaining
to the underlying contract or the FTA assisted project for which this contract work is being
performed. In addition to other penalties that may be applicable, CONTRACTOR further
acknowledges that if it makes, or causes to be made, a false, fictitious, or fraudulent claim,
statement, submission, or certification, the Federal Government reserves the right to
impose the penalties of the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986 on CONTRACTOR to
the extent the Federal Government deems appropriate.
b. CONTRACTOR also acknowledges that if it makes, or causes to be made, a false, fictitious, or
fraudulent claim, statement, submission, or certification to the Federal Government under a
contract connected with a project that is financed in whole or in part with Federal assistance
originally awarded by FTA under CITY of 49 U.S.C. § 5307, the Government reserves the right
to impose the penalties of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 and 49 U.S.C. § 5307(n)(l) on CONTRACTOR, to
the extent the Federal Government deems appropriate.
c. CONTRACTOR agrees to include the above two clauses in each subcontract financed in whole
or in part with Federal assistance provided by FTA. It is further agreed that the clauses shall not
be modified, except to identify the subcontractor who will be subject to the provisions.
47. INCORPORATION OF FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION (FTA) TERMS
The preceding provisions include, in part, certain Standard Terms and Conditions required by DOT,
whether or not expressly set forth in the preceding contract provisions. All contractual provisions required
by DOT, as set forth in FTA Circular 4220.1E are hereby incorporated by reference. Anything to the
contrary herein notwithstanding, all FTA mandated terms shall be deemed to control in the event of a
conflict with other provisions contained in this Agreement. CONTRACTOR shall not perform any act,
fail to perform any act, or refuse to comply with any CITY requests, which would cause CITY to be in
violation of the FTA terms and conditions.
48. PRIVACY ACT
The following requirements apply to the CONTRACTOR and its employees that administer any system of
records on behalf of the Federal Government under any contract involving Federal Privacy Act requirements.
CONTRACTOR agrees to comply with, and assures the compliance of its employees with, the information
restrictions and other applicable requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. § 552a. Among other
things, CONTRACTOR agrees to obtain the express consent of the Federal Government before the
CONTRACTOR or its employees operate a system of records on behalf of the Federal Government.
CONTRACTOR understands that the requirements of the Privacy Act, including the civil and criminal
penalties for violation of that Act, apply to those individuals involved, and that failure to comply with the
terms of the Privacy Act may result in termination of the underlying contract. CONTRACTOR also agrees to
4
Pg. 87
include these requirements in each subcontract to administer any system of records on behalf of the Federal
Government financed in whole or in part with Federal assistance provided by FTA.
49. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
a. Neither of the parties hereunder shall be deemed to be the agent, employee, partner, or joint
venture of the other. CONTRACTOR is and should be an independent contractor performing
services under this agreement for the consideration herein set forth.
b. CONTRACTOR'S employees shall at all times be and remain the sole employees of
CONTRACTOR, and CONTRACTOR shall be solely responsible for payment of all employees'
wages and benefits. CONTRACTOR, without any cost or expenses to CITY, shall faithfully
comply with the requirements of all applicable State and Federal enactments with respect to
employer's liability, worker's compensation, unemployment insurance and other forms of
Social Security, and also with respect to withholding of income tax at its source from wages of
said employee and shall indemnify and hold harmless CITY from and against any and all liability,
damages, claims, costs and expenses of whatever nature arising from alleged violation of such
enactments or from any claims of subrogation provided for in such enactment or otherwise.
c. This agreement does not constitute a contract of employment between CITY and CONTRACTOR
or any agents, officers or employees of CONTRACTOR. After the expiration or termination of
this agreement, CONTRACTOR'S successor shall be permitted to hire any CONTRACTOR
employees previously employed on this program. At that time, in hiring a CONTRACTOR
employee or a former CONTRACTOR employee, CITY shall ensure and require that such
employment process fairly treat former CONTRACTOR employees as members of the general
public with no discrimination, no waiver of job advertising, no consideration of employee's
seniority with CONTRACTOR and no other privilege different from that accorded to members
of the general public.
50. TRANSITION TO FUTURE OPERATOR
Up to and for a minimum of thirty (30) days following the effective date of termination or expiration of
this agreement, CONTRACTOR shall provide to either CITY or any future operator selected by
CITY, CONTRACTOR'S full cooperation in the transition to the successor operator. This shall
include, at a minimum, consultation regarding labor and management issues (including a delineation
of wages and benefits by employee category), access to non-confidential personnel files and
maintenance records. CONTRACTOR shall provide its best professional effort to assure a smooth
transition from CONTRACTOR'S services to those provided by the new operator and shall cooperate fully
with CITY and the new operator to this end.
51. SEVERABILITY
If any provision of this agreement is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall have no effect on the validity of the remaining provisions of this
agreement and such remaining provisions shall continue to remain in full force and effect.
52. PRECEDENCE OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
The total agreement between the parties consists of the documents specified in this paragraph. In the
event of a conflict or ambiguity arising between said documents, or any term or condition therein, the
document having precedence shall be determined as follows:
a. Any supplemental agreements executed after the date of this agreement.
b. This agreement and attachments thereto, including Exhibit A (Scope of Work).
4
Pg. 88
c. Exhibits B (RFP) and C (CONTRACTOR’S proposal including any “Best & Final Offer”) to this
agreement.
53. ADDITIONAL TERMS
In the case of dispute the prevailing party in any action between the parties to this agreement, brought to
enforce the terms of this agreement, may recover from the other party its reasonable costs and attorneys’
fees in connection with such an action.
The validity in whole or in part of any provision of this agreement shall not affect the validity of other
provisions. CITY's failure to insist in any one or more instances upon the performance of any term or terms
of this agreement shall not be construed as a waiver or relinquishment of CITY's right to such performance
or to future performance of such a term or terms, and CONTRACTOR'S obligations in respect thereto
shall continue in full force and effect. Time shall be of the essence. Changes hereto shall not be binding
upon CITY except when specifically confirmed in writing by CITY.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed by and
through their respective officers thereunto duly authorized on the date written below their signatures.
ATTEST: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
__________________________ By:_________________________
Lee Price, MMC Mayor Jan Marx
Interim City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONTRACTOR:
First Transit Inc.
By: __________________________
J. Christine Dietrick Nick Promponas
City Attorney Its: Senior Vice President
4
Pg. 89
City of San Luis Obispo, Public Works, 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3218, 805.781.7200, slocity.org
From: Daryl Grigsby, Director of Public Works
Prepared By: Gamaliel Anguiano, Transit Manager
SUBJECT: 2016 Award of SLO Transit Operations & Maintenance Contract Process - Summary
RECOMMENDATION
Award a four-year base contract, with the option of three individual one-year extensions, to First
Transit Inc. for the Operations & Maintenance of the SLO Transit Public Fixed-Route System to be
effective July 1st, 2016 through June 30th, 2020.
Background
The City of San Luis Obispo operates a fixed-route public transit system within City limits and
California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly) campus. Vehicle operations and vehicle
maintenance are provided under contract by a third party vendor since 1996 and has had various
vendors/contractors to perform these duties since then. The current contract was awarded to First
Transit Inc. on June 6th, 2006. That contract term called for a base three-year contract and the
possibility of seven one-year extensions. All one-year extension options were approved by Council
and are now exhausted. The contract termination date is set for June 30th, 2016.
RFP Process
Staff received approval from Council on December 15th, 2015 to release a Request for Proposal
(RFP) for the continual acquisition of these services from a qualified and responsible vendor.
Ensuing, staff made notice of the RFP on the City’s website, local periodicals, trade publications and
e-bid board. An overview and tour of the transit system was given at the preproposal conference
held on January 27th, 2016 and whereby 20-25 individuals from various firms attended. February
5th marked the deadline for submitting questions for clarification and soon after, on February 19th,
and addendum was posted addressing the questions and comments that came in. March 9th
marked the deadline for proposals to be delivered.
SLO Transit received a total of seven proposals from various firms, including: MV Transportation,
National Express, Silverado, Storer Transit Systems, First Transit Inc., Roadrunner and Transdev. As
specified in the RFP, proposals were scored based on “best-in-value” as defined by the Federal
Transit Administration (FTA), whereby the ability to meet technical merit was scored before
consideration of costs by the Evaluation Committee. The inter-disciplinary Evaluation Committee
consisted of two City staff persons, a representative from the San Luis Obispo Council of
Governments (SLOCOG), a representative from CalPoly staff and a member of the Mass
Transportation Committee (MTC) as an observer to the process.
The Evaluation team scored all submitted proposals independently. The combine technical
evaluation scores then defined the top three firms. Only these firm’s Cost Proposals were opened
up to determine if they were within competitive range of each other. If one of these proposals had
been significantly out of range (above) with the other two, it would have been disqualified as not
being applicable for a “best-in-value” determination. A consideration was also given to the fourth
4
Pg. 90
place scored proposal to see if it was statistically indistinguishable (within a few points) from the
third place scored proposal. However, there was a clear demarcation between the third place
scored proposal and the fourth; and all three top scored proposals were within competitive range
of each other.
Table 1: RFP Proposal Evaluation Scores
The top three scored proposing firm were invited to continue on in the evaluation process.
Interviews with corporate organization representatives and the proposed management team
(General Manager, Maintenance Manager and Operations/Safety Manger) were held on April 5th.
Another round of evaluations and scoring was given based on the interview and qualifications of
both the firm and proposed management team by a second evaluation team relevant to monitoring
day-to-day operations.
Table 2: Group Interview Scores
4
Pg. 91
The results of the extensive RFP and Evaluation Committee(s) scoring process suggests that the
contract for the operations & maintenance of the SLO Transit system should be again awarded to
First Transit Inc. Not only did First Transit Inc. score the highest in both the technical and interview
evaluations, but they also had the lowest proposed cost of three top scoring vendors, representing
a true “best-in-value” ranking. Staff therefore entered into negotiation with First Transit in order to
receive First Transit’s Best and Final Offer.
The contract term would be for a base four-year contract and the possibility of three one-year
extensions, as approved by Council.
Table 3: Cost Proposal Comparison Analysis
4
Pg. 92
FISCAL IMPACT
First Transit Inc.’s initial proposal was already the lowest proposed cost of the top three technically
rated firms. This remains true even after netting out “Start-Up Cost” and extra “Tech” line items
the non-incumbent proposers included.
Table 5: Cost Analysis Net of Extra Costs
Furthermore, Federal Transit Administration allows for service purchasers to enter into “Best and
Final” cost negotiations. By shifting some proposed costs from “Variable Rates” to “Fixed Rates,
staff was able to achieve over a $26,000 savings over the life of the contract. First Transit’s “Best
and Final offer” cost proposal represents a modest 3% increase from the current contract and
lower than originally anticipated.
Table 6: First Transit 2016 Original Cost Proposal
Table 7: Negotiated First Transit Best and Final Offer
4
Pg. 93
First Transit, Inc.
600 Vine Street, Suite 1400
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Phone: 513-241-2200
Fax: 513-684-8852 May 2, 2016
Gamaliel Anguiano sent by email to GAnguiano@slocity.org
Transit Manager
City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Re: Adjustments – Pricing Submittal for Request for Proposal (RFP) Specification - 91433;
Operation and Maintenance of Fixed Route, Public Transit Services
Dear Mr. Anguiano,
Please find in the attached file our pricing with the adjustments we discussed at our meeting
last Friday. We moved the Road Supervisor wage and benefits costs from the variable cost
lines to fixed costs thus reducing the variable rate to $30.06 in year one.
Additionally, we reexamined our total annual miles and adjusted the deadhead portion which
had a positive effect on our liability insurance and maintenance costs. The revised price pages
also reflect these adjustments.
Equally important, we have revisited our efforts to positively impact driver retention. Above all
else, we have always stressed providing a respectful workplace and paying attention to the
details that impacts each employee’s workday. We are revisiting internal communications
among our operating staff to ensure that every day, employees are greeted when they come
to work and then thanked for a job well done.
We are re-evaluating our recruiting efforts and plan to utilize our expanded corporate
recruiting team to assist with job fairs in San Luis Obispo. Other efforts will include the
following:
Our General Manager Al Rusco is taking a training seminar to boost our
“onboarding experience” that in part is geared towards creating a stronger
commitment among new employees about working for SLO Transit.
Offering a $500.00 hiring bonus to trainees.
Offering a $500.00 hiring bonus to existing hourly staff for their efforts.
Our General Manager has reached out to our region recruitment expert and
requested a review of our local processes including tracking where each applicant
has heard about the open positions.
4
Pg. 94
2
We will institute a more formal exit interview program to better track why people
leave.
We will add a “catch them doing right” program and give operators small
rewards like $5.00 - $10.00 dollar gift cards when we see them doing well in the
field.
We will concentrate on delivering a positive message to our employees, even when
the information must include corrective action.
The net incentives that we earn through excellent service for the City will be
distributed to the hourly employees either as cash rewards and/or fun gifts or
events.
First Transit is committed to continually improving the service that we provide to the City of
San Luis Obispo. We want to continue to work with the City on route changes that will improve
service for our passengers and help reduce some of the on-the-job stress for our employees.
And, we will remain committed to providing the safest possible service and will do so in a
professional and efficient manner.
Thank you for this opportunity.
Sincerely,
Jim Rude
Director of Business Development
First Transit, Inc.
913 915-1061 (cell)
913 871-1255 (fax)
Jim.rude@firstgroup.com
Cc: Don Swain
4
Pg. 95
Budget Elements Year Year Year Year
One Two Three Four
Office Expenses:
Site Manager Wages 82,150$ 83,793$ 85,469$ 87,178$
Site Manager Benefits 24,495$ 25,450$ 26,448$ 27,490$
Operations Supervisor Wages 222,599$ 226,711$ 230,900$ 235,166$ Ops Mgr, Admin Clerk
Operations Supervisor Benefits 66,166$ 68,698$ 71,343$ 74,107$ & Dispatchers
Road Supervisor Wages 101,858$ 103,691$ 105,558$ 107,458$
Road Supervisor Benefits 33,964$ 35,236$ 36,562$ 37,945$
Non-Revenue Vehicles $22,672 $24,000 $25,357 $26,095
Insurance:
Materials and Supplies $5,233 $5,233 $5,233 $5,245 Computer/Shop Capital
Telecommunications 16,888$ 17,310$ 17,743$ 18,186$
Other (Vehicle Liability Ins):$51,355 $52,376 $53,414 $54,478
$5,703 $5,817 $5,932 $6,051
$33,719 $34,562 $35,426 $36,312
6,800$ 6,970$ 7,144$ 7,323$
Subtotal 673,603$ 689,848$ 706,530$ 723,034$
Operating Expenses:
Trainer Wages
Trainer Benefits
Driver Wages 719,522$ 742,546$ 768,649$ 792,410$
Driver Benefits $227,873 $237,610 $248,148 $258,699
Physical/Drug Tests $3,888 $3,985 $4,085 $4,187
Materials & Supplies
Uniforms $14,556 $14,920 $15,293 $15,675
Other (Identify):
$12,644 $12,960 $13,284 $13,616
Subtotal 978,483$ 1,012,021$ 1,049,459$ 1,084,587$
Maintenance Expenses:
Maintenance Manager Wages 69,958$ 71,357$ 72,784$ 74,240$
Maintenance Manager Benefits 20,960$ 21,775$ 22,626$ 23,515$
Mechanic Wages 87,315$ 88,887$ 90,487$ 92,115$
Mechanic Benefits 27,350$ 28,336$ 29,363$ 30,433$
Other Maintenance Labor 49,285$ 50,172$ 51,075$ 51,994$
Other Maintenance Benefits 9,964$ 10,228$ 10,500$ 10,781$
Maintenance parts & Supplies $107,731 $87,321 $100,047 $104,821
ATTACHMENT 3
SLO TRANSIT PROPOSAL COST FORM
General Liability Insurance
Facility Utilities & Expenses
Office Supplies
Safety/Recruiting
4
Pg. 96
Cleaning Supplies $2,811 $2,867 $2,922 $2,978
Lubricants & Fluids $5,124 $5,124 $5,123 $5,122
Materials & Supplies
Other (Identify):
$14,694 $15,061 $15,437 $15,823
Subtotal 395,191$ 381,127$ 400,364$ 411,824$
Other Expenses:
Start Up Costs -$ -$ -$ -$
Performance Bond 3,051$ 3,181$ 3,376$ 3,561$
Corporate Overhead & Support $88,484 $90,037 $93,204 $95,931
Management Fee $55,303 $56,273 $58,252 $59,957
Other (Identify)
16,368$ 16,777$ 17,196$ 17,626$
$1,625 $1,666 $1,707 $1,750
Subtotal 164,831$ 167,934$ 173,735$ 178,825$
Operating & Maintenance Expense 1,373,674$ 1,393,147$ 1,449,823$ 1,496,411$
Revenue Vehicle Insurance Expense 673,603$ 689,848$ 706,530$ 723,034$
Monthly Fee (Fixed Costs)98,522.52$ 98,877.76$ 102,267.94$ 104,933.78$
Vehicles Service Hour Rate (Variable Costs)30.06$ 31.09$ 32.25$ 33.32$
Insurance Rate Per Revenue Vehicles 251.74$ 256.74$ 261.83$ 267.05$ Per Rev Veh / Per Mos
offer shall remain in effect for 90 days from the date set for opening proposals unless withdrawn pursuant to the conditions of the subject RFP.
Name of Proposing Firm:
Signature: Date:
Person Authorized to Bind Proposing Firm
Signer's Name:
Title:
First Transit, Inc.
Environmental Charges
Payroll/IT Services
Travel
The above budget breakdown and the other attached materials represent an offer to do work as described in this proposal. It is understood that this
May 2, 2016
Bradley Thomas
President
4
Pg. 97
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
Office Expenses Subtotal 553,904$ 567,580$ 581,637$ 595,439$
Insurance / Other Subtotal (Less Auto Liability)$68,344 $69,892 $71,479 $73,117
Maintenance Expense Subtotal 395,191$ 381,127$ 400,364$ 411,824$
Other Expenses Subtotal 164,831$ 167,934$ 173,735$ 178,825$
1,182,270$ 1,186,533$ 1,227,215$ 1,259,205$
12 12 12 12
98,522.52$ 98,877.76$ 102,267.94$ 104,933.78$
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
Operating Expenses Subtotal 978,483$ 1,012,021$ 1,049,459$ 1,084,587$
978,483$ 1,012,021$ 1,049,459$ 1,084,587$
32,546 32,546 32,546 32,546
30.06$ 31.09$ 32.25$ 33.32$
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
Vehicle Liability Insurance Subtotal $51,355 $52,376 $53,414 $54,478
51,355$ 52,376$ 53,414$ 54,478$
17 17 17 17
3,020.88$ 3,080.93$ 3,141.99$ 3,204.58$
12 12 12 12
251.74$ 256.74$ 261.83$ 267.05$
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
Total Annual Fixed Costs 1,182,270$ 1,186,533$ 1,227,215$ 1,259,205$
Total Annual Variable Hours Costs 978,483$ 1,012,021$ 1,049,459$ 1,084,587$
Total Annual Variable Ins Costs 51,355$ 52,376$ 53,414$ 54,478$
2,212,108$ 2,250,930$ 2,330,088$ 2,398,270$
# of Vehicles
Explanation of Cost Elements from SLO Transit Cost Proposal Form
FIXED COSTS
# of Months
TOTAL FIXED COSTS
Cost Per Month
VARIABLE COSTS - HOURS
TOTAL VARIABLE COSTS HOURS
Vehicle Service Hours
Cost Per Vehicle Service Hour
VARIABLE COSTS - VEHICLE INS
TOTAL VARIABLE COSTS VEH INS
Cost Per Vehicle - Annual Liability Ins
# of Months
Cost Per Vehicle Per Month
Total Annual Fixed and Variable
SUMMARY OF TOTALS
4
Pg. 98
Meeting Date: 6/14/2016
FROM: Daryl Grigsby, Director of Public Works
Prepared By: Timothy Bochum, Deputy Director of Public Works
Alexander Fuchs, Parking Services Supervisor
Ryan Betz, Administrative Analyst
SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 2016-17 PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND REVIEW
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Review and discuss the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016-17 Parking Fund Review (Attachment A); and
2. Conceptually approve the FY 2016-17 Parking Enterprise Fund budget, with final action with
the adoption of the FY 2016-17 Financial Plan Supplement; and
3. Adopt a Resolution approving an increase in Fines and Forfeitures for miscellaneous
violations.
DISCUSSION
Background
This report presents a review of the annual Parking Enterprise Fund for Fiscal Year (FY) 2015-
16 and a forecast for the FY 2016-2017 Supplemental Financial Budget. This review looks at key
issues and trends which could have an impact on the overall health of the fund. In this regard,
staff is pleased to report that the Parking Fund is balanced and the revised FY 2016-17
Supplemental Financial Budget is consistent with the operating assumptions adopted in the 2015-
17 Financial Plan with minor adjustments discussed below.
Consistent with previously adopted policies, the long-term forecast of the Parking Fund
continues to assume a 10% system-wide rate, fines and forfeiture adjustment every three years.
The forecast shows these will be necessary in FY 2018-19 and again in FY 2020-21 to fund
anticipated expenses, capital projects, and debt service obligations. Minor fine adjustments are
recommended in FY 2016-17 to increase fines for the overtime parking violations, no permit in
lot violations, 72-hour violations, and nighttime parking of large vehicles violations.
The Palm-Nipomo parking structure is programed to begin construction during FY 2017-18. The
anticipated costs for the Palm-Nipomo parking structure were developed several years ago, and
staff will be working with a consultant to update the cost and project timeline. A parking
structure rehabilitation and assessment study, including anticipated costs to replace outdated
structure equipment, is anticipated to be completed in FY 2016-17.
5
Pg. 99
This review highlights a healthy fund that is able to support both current and anticipated
expenses, capital projects, and debt service obligations while maintaining the minimum 20%
reserve level in working capital in accordance with the City Financial Management policies.
As outlined in the FY 2016-17 Parking Fund Analysis (Attachment A), which forecasts the
financial position of the Parking Fund through FY 2019-20, the City is able to:
1. Provide parking services and access for the Downtown businesses, visitors and patrons;
and
2. Provide parking services and enforcement for residential parking permit district; and
3. Fund debt service for the completed parking structures as well as long-term financing
obligations for the Palm-Nipomo parking structure; and
4. Meet bond covenants and debt ratios to maintain a strong bond rating; and
5. Meet Enterprise Fund reserves as set by City policy; and
6. Continue capital maintenance projects to maintain assets and provide high quality
services; and
7. Promote revitalization and reinvestment in our Downtown by accommodating public-
private partnerships with the Garden Street Terraces and Chinatown projects.
Parking Fund Accomplishments in FY 2015-16
Although the Fund Review is focused on financial and budgetary information, it is important to
look at the accomplishments that have occurred during this past fiscal year. The following is a
list of some of the highlights that Parking Services has accomplished in FY 2015-16.
1. Worked with project applicants, property and business owners and the public to begin
construction of the Garden Street Terraces project and Phase II of the Chinatown project.
2. Successfully relocated existing credit card meters from surface parking lots 2, 3, and 11;
increased the parking meter rate from $1.25 to $1.50 at these locations; and increased
rates in the parking structures hourly rate from $0.75 per hour to $1.00 per hour.
3. Hired a new Parking Services Supervisor as approved in the 2015-17 Financial Plan and
recommended in the Parking Organizational Study (2014).
4. Conducted a Palm-Nipomo Parking Structure update for Council in January 2016 and
reactivated the project for environmental and design.
Summary of Operating Programs
There have been minimal revisions to the Parking Fund expenses for FY 2016-17.
5
Pg. 100
1. Consistent with the General Fund assumptions, Parking Staffing, Contract Services, and
Other Operating expenses assume an increase of 3% in 2017-18, 3.25% in 2018-19, and
3.5% in 2019-20 for anticipated changes in Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), Cost of
Living Adjustments (COLA), and minimum wage.
2. Operating expenses for Palm-Nipomo are programmed beginning in FY 2018-19 but
could be delayed depending upon the start of construction of the structure.
3. The amount budgeted for General Government decreased by $26,984.
Table 1: Expenditures
Expense Category
2015-16
Budget
2016-17
Budget
2016-17
Revised Variance
Operating Programs
Transportation 2,328,330$ 2,188,099$ 2,188,099$ 0%
General Government 711,587$ 711,587$ 684,603$ -4%
Total Operating Programs 3,039,917$ 2,899,686$ 2,872,702$ -1%
Capital Improvement Plan Projects1,952,970$ 50,798$ 50,798$ 0%
Debt Service 970,817$ 969,389$ 969,400$ 0%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 5,963,704$ 3,919,873$ 3,892,900$ -1%
Capital Improvement Program
Below is the summary of the anticipated 2016-17 Financial Plan capital project budget
projections for the Parking Services Enterprise Fund.
1. New Parking Structure. To be conservative, the Palm-Nipomo parking structure is
projected for July 2017; the earliest date at which construction could begin. Debt
financing will be used to fund a significant portion of the project. The current project
construction estimate is $23.6 million with $17.45 million in debt financing.
2. Parking Structure Equipment Retrofit. Although not programed into the Fund
Analysis (Attachment A), staff anticipates the need for additional funding for replacing
outdated parking structure equipment. This project was originally estimated as a retrofit
to the existing equipment. Unfortunately, the manufacturer is now out of business and a
retrofit is not possible. Instead, a full replacement of the parking structure’s control
system is needed. The project is currently funded at $113,000, however a review of the
equipment replacement costs is projected to exceed that amount. Though a final amount
is not yet known, staff will be combining this assessment of what equipment fits the
structures best with the Parking Structure Assessment and Rehabilitation Study project,
funded at $135,000. This is anticipated to begin in FY 2016-17. Staff will ask the
consultant to recommend equipment retrofits for existing structures as well as equipment
for the new Palm-Nipomo parking structure. We anticipate having this product as a first
item of work for the consultant and expect to come to Council at the FY 2016-17 Mid-
Year with recommendations for any additional funding.
5
Pg. 101
3. New Parking Demand and Supply Model. Staff anticipates a return to Council in FY
2016-17 with a request for use of Parking Fund monies to pursue the development of a
Downtown parking demand and supply model. This project is not shown in the Fund
Analysis because a total cost for the project is not yet known. This project would result in
a tool similar to the City’s traffic model. It would help forecast the parking and access
needs for the Downtown area, analyze issues such as extending the Parking In-Lieu fee
program east of Santa Rosa Street, assist in developing appropriate pricing strategies for
parking, and assess individual development projects for adequacy in parking supply.
Development of a portion of this model was anticipated to be completed as part of a joint
effort with the project proposal for the old Shell station site. However, that particular
project is no longer being pursued by the applicant and the need for better tools to help
staff analyze parking scenarios still exists. In addition, it became apparent during the in-
depth parking study associated with the Palm/Nipomo Structure that such a tool would
save hours of staff time and yield accurate information easily and quickly to help policy
makers and the community comprehensively understand Downtown parking dynamics.
None of the aforementioned projects are included or assumed in this budget review, they
are all subject to future Council review and action that will be requested at a later date.
Revenues
Overall, Parking Fund revenues are healthy as the economy continues to improve. Revenues
have largely stabilized since the installation of the credit card capable meters and enforcement of
Sunday parking implemented three years ago. However, the last half of FY 2015-16 has seen the
closures of Lots 2, 3 and 11 and significant changes in parking locations habits (and revenue) are
expected.
Table 2: Revenues
Revenue Category
2015-16
Budget
2016-17
Budget
2016-17
Revision Variance
Service Charges
Parking Meter Collections
Lots 174,200166,200166,200
Streets 1,523,8001,606,2001,539,100 -4%
Parking Structure Collections 1,044,2001,183,7001,054,700-11%
Long-Term Parking Revenues 430,600434,900434,900
Lease Revenues 480,500482,900500,500 4%
Parking In-Lieu Fees 2,787,53020,20020,200
Other Service Charges 100 100 100
Total Service Charges 6,440,9303,894,2003,715,700-5%
Investment and Property Revenues 28,30045,50048,200 6%
Fines and Forfeitures 663,200673,000669,900
Other Revenues 0
TOTAL REVENUES 7,132,4304,612,7004,433,800-4%
5
Pg. 102
Revenues in the structures as well as on-street meters are anticipated to continue to increase due
to this relocated demand as a result of the lot closures. Table 3 below shows Parking Fund
revenue trends with actuals for the previous three years, the budgeted amount for the two
financial plan years, and revised amounts for FY 2016-2017. Significant Parking In-Lieu fees
were collected in FY 2015-16 due to the construction of Chinatown and the Garden Street
Terraces projects. These fees, although shown as revenues, are one-time only and are to be used
for the development or maintenance of parking that satisfies the demand requirements of new
development projects within the Parking In-Lieu fee area.
Table 3: Parking Fund Revenue Trends
(1) Loss of Public Parking Lots 2, 3, and 11 to construction projects
(2) Garden Street Terraces project loan repayment and rent payment
(4) Parking In-Lieu fees for Garden Street Terraces, Granada Hotel & Bistro, and phase 2 of the Chinatown project
Fines and Forfeitures are not anticipated to change to significantly over the next fiscal year.
There is a recommendation included with this Fund review to increase the fine amounts for the
following violations:
1. 72-Hour violation from $23 to $33
2. Nighttime parking of large vehicles (oversized vehicle) violation from $23 to $33
3. Overtime parking violation from $38 to $43
4. No permit in lot violation from $33 to $38
At this time, the fiscal impact for these fine amount changes will be minimal. An analysis of
citations from January 2015 to December 2015 shows the increase in fine amounts will generate
approximately $6,000 in additional revenue. Table 4 below compares the current parking
violation fine amounts with other municipalities in the area.
5
Pg. 103
Table 4: Parking Violation Fine Amount Comparison
SLO CitySLO City Cuesta Arroyo Paso
CurrentProposedCal PolyCollegeGrandeRobles
10.36.050 USE OF STREETS FOR STORAGE
OF VEHICLES PROHIBITED $23$33 $58
10.36.150 NIGHTTIME PARKING OF LARGE
VEHICLES $23$33
10.36.235 RESTRICTED PARKING - NO
PERMIT LOT $33$38$40$39
10.40.010OVERTIME PARKING $38$43$35$68$53$33
VIOLATIONCODE
Overall, it is anticipated that Parking Fund revenues will continue to steadily grow as the
economy improves from the recession. Consistent with previous adopted policies, Revenue
projections assume a conservative 1% annual growth and a major 10% increase in revenues is
assumed in FY 2018-19 and every 3 years thereafter for periodic rate enhancements.
FISCAL IMPACT
As shown in the Parking Enterprise Fund Financial Analysis (Attachment A), staff is projecting
an end of year working capital of $9,643,354 in FY 2015-16 and $9,673,056 in FY 2016-2017.
The 2016 Parking Fund Analysis includes the key assumptions used in preparing Fund
projections. Consistent with the analysis presented to the Council in this report and in the 2015-
2017 Financial Plan, there are sufficient funds to support operations, capital projects, and debt
service needs of the Parking Fund.
Attachments:
a - 2016-17 Supplement Parking Fund Analysis
b - Resolution Approving an Increase in Fine Amounts
5
Pg. 104
Parking Enterprise Fund
2016-17 Financial Plan Supplement
Parking Enterprise Fund
2016 Fund Analysis
5
Pg. 105
2016 Parking Fund Analysis
Page 2
June 14, 2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................... 3
II. 2015-17 FINANCIAL PLAN ................................................................................................. 3
a. Summary of Operating Programs ........................................................................................ 3
b. Capital Improvement Program ............................................................................................. 4
c. Revenues .............................................................................................................................. 5
d. Debt Service ......................................................................................................................... 5
III. ASSUMPTIONS ..................................................................................................................... 6
1. General Assumptions ........................................................................................................... 6
2. Parking Lots ......................................................................................................................... 6
3. Street Parking ....................................................................................................................... 6
4. Parking Structures ................................................................................................................ 6
5. Long Term Parking .............................................................................................................. 6
6. Parking Leases ..................................................................................................................... 7
7. Parking In-Lieu .................................................................................................................... 7
8. Investment Earnings............................................................................................................. 7
9. Parking Fines ....................................................................................................................... 7
10. Transportation & General Government Expenses ........................................................... 7
11. Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Expenses ...................................................................... 8
12. Debt Service ..................................................................................................................... 8
IV. EXHIBIT A – 2015-17 Changes in Financial Position .......................................................... 9
5
Pg. 106
2016 Parking Fund Analysis
Page 3
2016 Parking Fund Report
I. OVERVIEW
This report presents a review of the annual Parking Enterprise Fund for the FY 2015-16 and a
forecast for FY 2016-17. This review looks at key issues and trends which could have an impact
on the overall health of the fund. To this regard, staff is pleased to report that the Parking Fund is
balanced and the revised 2016-17 budget will be consistent with the operating assumptions
adopted in the 2015-17 Financial Plan with some minor adjustments.
As previously assumed in the long-term forecast of the Parking Fund, system parking rate, fines
and forfeiture adjustments will be necessary in FY 2018-19 and again in FY 2020-21 to fund
anticipated expenses, capital projects, and debt service obligations. Minor fine adjustments are
recommended in the FY 2016-17 primarily to increase fines for the 72-hour violations and
overnight large trailer violations. The Palm-Nipomo parking structure is programed to begin
construction during the 2017-18 fiscal year to show the future fiscal impacts on the Parking
Fund.
This review highlights a healthy fund in its ability to support both current and anticipated
expenses, capital projects, and debt service obligations while maintaining the minimum 20%
reserve level in working capital in accordance with the City Financial Management policies.
II. 2015-17 FINANCIAL PLAN
1. Summary of Operating Programs
Below is the summary of the revised 2015-17 Financial Plan operating budget projections
for the Parking Services Enterprise Fund. Operating expenses for Palm-Nipomo is
programed to begin during FY 2018-19 but could be delayed depending upon construction
start date or delays during construction.
5
Pg. 107
2016 Parking Fund Analysis
Page 4
2015-162016-172016-172017-182018-192019-2020
BudgetBudgetRevisedProjectedProjectedProjected
Staffing 1,309,824$ 1,310,591$ 1,268,891$ 1,349,909$ 1,393,781$ 1,478,627
Contract Services 670,100$ 683,750$ 683,750$ 704,263$ 727,151$ 771,416
Other Operating Expenses 223,271$ 235,458$ 235,458$ 242,522$ 250,404$ 266,425
CalJPIA Retrospective Work Comp
CalJPIA Retrospective Alloc. Lib.35,028$
Cost Assumptions for Class/Comp 11,220$
Palm-Nipomo Expenses 197,570$ 202,887$
Total Parking Services2,203,1952,229,7992,188,0992,296,6942,371,3362,516,468
2. Capital Improvement Program
Below is the summary of the revised 2015-17 Financial Plan capital project budget
projections for the Parking Services Enterprise Fund. The Palm-Nipomo Parking Structure is
projected for July 2017; the earliest date at which construction could occur. Debt financing will
be used to fund a significant portion of the project.
Parking Capital Program 2015-162016-172016-172017-182018-192019-20
BudgetBudgetRevisedProjectedProjectedProjected
Fleet Replacement: 2 Go-4s 34,000$
Fleet Replacement: Utility Vehicle 27,100$ 27,100$
Fleet Replacement: Pickup Trucks 29,500$ 31,500$
Palm Nipomo Construction 23,600,000$
Parking Structure Assessment 66,667$ 10,000$ 10,000$
Marsh Street Parking Garage Circ.
Improve.78,000$
IT MS Office Replacement 4,909$
IT Radio Replacement 10,100$
IT Storage Capacity Upgrade 5,600$
IT UPS Battery Replacement 646$
IT VM Infrastructure 3,065$ 3,065$ 3,065$
IT Vehicle License Plate
Recognition 135,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$
IT VoIP 6,233$ 646$
IT Radio Handhleds 9,339$
IT Tait Radio System 633$ 633$ 9,339$
IT Firewall Replacement 4,069$
IT Network Swith Replacement 4,955$
IT Finance System Replacement 62,500$
Carryover from Previous Years
Palm-Nipomo Land acquistion and
Environmental 227,117$
Palm-Nipomo Design 1,067,873$
Parking Structure Equipment
Upgrades 113,000$
Other Carryover projects 544,980$
Total Parking Capital Program 2,233,283$ 50,798$ 50,798$ 23,641,272$ 83,485$ 120,998$
5
Pg. 108
2016 Parking Fund Analysis
Page 5
Although not shown in the table above, staff anticipates the need for additional funding
for the upgrade of the parking structure equipment project currently funded at $113,000.
A final amount is not yet known. Staff will be combining this with the Parking Garages
Assessment and Rehabilitation Study project that will being in FY 2016-17 and will ask
the consultant to recommend equipment retrofits for existing structures as well as the new
Palm-Nipomo parking structure.
3. Revenues
It is anticipated that Parking Fund revenues will continue to steadily grow as the
economy improves from the Great Recession. Consistent with previous adopted policies,
Revenue projections assume a conservative 1% annual growth and a major 10% increase
in revenues is assumed in 2018-19 and every 3 years thereafter for periodic rate
enhancements.
Anticipating revenue changes for the closures of Lots 2, 3, and 11 have been forecast
however, revenue changes due to public redistribution from these closures may be off
depending where people choose to park after closures.
2015-162016-172016-172017-182018-192019-2020
RevisedBudgetRevisedProjectionProjectionProjection
Revenues
Service Charges
Parking Meter Collections
Lots 174,200 166,200 166,200 155,400 170,900 172,600
Streets 1,523,800 1,606,200 1,539,100 1,554,500 1,709,900 1,727,000
Parking Structure Collections1,044,200 1,183,700 1,054,700 1,065,200 1,171,700 1,276,000
Long-Term Parking Revenues430,600 434,900 434,900 439,300 483,200 488,000
Lease Revenues 480,500 482,900 500,500 502,900 531,800 534,500
Parking In-Lieu Fees 2,787,530 20,200 20,200 20,400 22,400 22,600
Other Service Charges 100 100 100 100 100 100
Total Service Charges 6,440,930 3,894,200 3,715,700 3,737,800 4,090,000 4,220,800
Investment and Property Revenues 28,300 45,500 48,200 54,900 21,000 15,800
Fines and Forfeitures 663,200 673,000 669,900 666,600 733,300 740,600
Other Revenues
Total Revenues7,132,430 4,612,700 4,433,800 4,459,300 4,844,300 4,977,200
4. Debt Service
Debt Service for the Palm-Nipomo Parking Structure is scheduled to begin in FY 2017-
18. Annual payments for Palm-Nipomo are estimated to average $1.4 million depending
upon final debt financing terms. The next debt service to be retired is for the Marsh Street
Parking Structure expansion, which will occur in August 2031.
5
Pg. 109
2016 Parking Fund Analysis
Page 6
Parking Debt Service 2015-162016-172016-172017-182018-192019-20
RevisedBudgetRevisedProjectedProjectedProjected
Marsh Expansion until Aug 2031 420,578$ 419,729$ 419,729$ 418,856$ 417,955$ 417,027$
919 Palm until Jun 2036 540,439$ 539,899$ 539,899$ 538,755$ 539,803$ 540,275$
Palm-Nipomo until Jun 2047 1,086,023$ 1,452,112$ 1,450,684$
Dispatch Ctr Upgrade until Jun 2039 9,800$ 9,800$ 9,800$ 9,800$ 9,700$ 4,200$
970,817$ 969,428$ 969,428$ 2,053,434$ 2,419,570$ 2,412,187$
III. ASSUMPTIONS
The following assumptions have been programed into the long-term forecast of the Parking
Fund.
1. General Assumptions
a. Minimum working capital reserve should equal at least 20% of the total Operating
Program expenditures according to the City's fiscal policy and Standard and
Poor's rating criteria. Based upon this policy, the minimum reserve level should
be approximately $575,000. The year-end working capital greatly exceeds the
minimum reserve policy levels.
b. Consistent with previously adopted policies, Parking Fund Revenue sources
assume a conservative 1% annual growth and a 10% increase every three years
for periodic rate adjustments.
2. Parking Lots
a. Parking revenues and expenses from Lot 14 will cease due to the construction of
the Palm-Nipomo parking structure in FY 2017-18.
3. Street Parking
a. No major changes in Street Parking assumptions have been programed.
4. Parking Structures
a. It is anticipated that some of the drivers that would have parked in Lot 14 will
instead park in garages due to the loss of lot parking spaces. Due to the first hour
free in garages, it is anticipated that only 50% of the revenues formerly tied to Lot
14 will be retained through garage parking fees.
b. A study will be conducted in FY 2016-17 to determine condition of the parking
structures and make recommendations for new annual maintenance plans to
extend the useful life of each structure and minimize emergency repair needs.
5. Long-Term Parking
a. There was an increase in 10-Hour Parking Meter Permit sales in FY 2015-16 due
to the establishment of a Residential Parking Permit District near the downtown
5
Pg. 110
2016 Parking Fund Analysis
Page 7
area and the recent closure of three public parking lots downtown. Future
increases in 10-Hour Parking Meter Permit sales are limited by the total number
of permits available throughout a given fiscal year.
6. Parking Leases
a. Section 16 of the Memorandum of Agreement between the City of San Luis
Obispo and Garden Street SLO Partners, L.P. states that the Parking Fund will
loan the developer $500,000, assumed in 2016-17. In the same year, the developer
will begin repayment to the City Parking Fund by paying approximately $36,000
per year for 30 years with the option of a balloon payment buyout at the end of 10
years.
b. Section 6 of the Memorandum of Agreement between the City of San Luis
Obispo and Garden Street SLO Partners, L.P. states that the Developer will an
annual rent equal to the annual net revenue from the operation of surface parking
lot 2. The fund review projects this amount at $204,379 however final annual
amount has yet to be determined and it may be more or less depending upon time
of calculation. The annual base rent shall be increased on the first day of every
third fiscal year by the amount of increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for
the period of three (3) years immediately preceding but in no event shall the
increase be less than two percent (2%) nor more than four percent (4%) per year,
for a cumulative total increase of not less than six percent (6%) and not more than
twelve percent (12%) in any three year period.
7. Parking In-Lieu
a. No Parking In-Lieu fee assumptions have been programed.
8. Investment Earnings
a. Assumes projected interest earnings of 0.5% annually.
9. Parking Fines
a. Transfer of parking fines to the Police Department is approximately $105,400 for
FY 2016-17.
b. State and County surcharges of $13 per paid parking citation is added then
deducted from fine revenues.
c. A total 1% decrease in fine revenues due to the loss of Lot 14 for the construction
of Palm-Nipomo parking structure in FY 2017-18.
10. Transportation & General Government Expenses
a. Transportation operating expenses attributed to Parking Lot 14 will decrease by
$7,400 in FY 2017-18 and thereafter.
b. Parking Staff, Contract Services, and Other Operating expenses assume an
increase of 3% in FY 2017-18, 3.25% in 2018-19, and 3.5% in 2019-20 for
5
Pg. 111
2016 Parking Fund Analysis
Page 8
anticipated changes in Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), Cost of Living
Adjustments (COLA), and minimum wage.
c. General Government expenses decreased by $26,984 in FY 2016-17 due to the
results of the FY 2014-15 Cost Allocation Plan.
d. General Government assumes no annual increase.
11. Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Expenses
a. The Palm Nipomo parking structure construction is estimated at $23.6 million in
FY 2017-18. There will be a $6,000,000 contribution from working capital and
$17,600,000 proceeds from debt financing or Bond Issuance. Final amounts will
be determined as the project construction documents move forward in the City
process.
b. Assumes Finance and Information Technology capital projects that have
associated Parking Fund support will occur in the projected years.
c. A vehicle license plate recognition pilot program ($135,000) will occur as a
carryover project in FY 2016-17 to determine if the technology can improve
operational costs and enhance enforcement in the Downtown and residential
neighborhoods.
12. Debt Service
a. Assumes a 30-year level debt service, net proceeds of $17,600,000 and bond
issuance on July 1, 2018. Interest payment and principal payment is due
beginning in FY 2017-18, estimated at $1.4 million annually.
5
Pg. 112
2016 Parking Fund Analysis
Page 9
IV. EXHIBIT A – 2015-17 Changes in Financial Position
2015-17 PARKING FUND
FINANCIAL SCHEDULES
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION - PARKING FUND BUDGET
Mid-YearAdoptedRevised ProjectedProjectedProjected
2015-162016-172016-172017-182018-192019-20
Revenues
Service Charges
Parking Meter Collections
Lots 174,200 166,200 166,200 155,400 170,900 172,600
Streets 1,523,800 1,606,200 1,539,100 1,554,500 1,709,900 1,727,000
Parking Structure Collections1,044,200 1,183,700 1,054,700 1,065,200 1,171,700 1,276,000
Long-Term Parking Revenues430,600 434,900 434,900 439,300 483,200 488,000
Lease Revenues 480,500 482,900 500,500 502,900 531,800 534,500
Parking In-Lieu Fees 2,787,530 20,200 20,200 20,400 22,400 22,600
Other Service Charges 100 100 100 100 100 100
Total Service Charges 6,440,930 3,894,200 3,715,700 3,737,800 4,090,000 4,220,800
Investment and Property Revenues 28,300 45,500 48,200 54,900 21,000 15,500
Fines and Forfeitures 663,200 673,000 669,900 666,600 733,300 740,600
Other Revenues
Total Revenues7,132,430 4,612,700 4,433,800 4,459,300 4,844,300 4,976,900
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Transportation 2,328,330 2,188,099 2,188,099 2,296,693 2,574,833 2,663,305
General Government 711,587 711,587 684,603 684,603 684,603 684,603
Total Operating Programs 3,039,917 2,899,686 2,872,702 2,981,296 3,259,436 3,347,908
Capital Improvement Plan Projects 1,952,970 50,798 50,798 23,641,272 83,485 120,998
Debt Service 970,817 969,389 969,400 2,053,434 2,419,570 2,412,187
Total Expenditures5,963,704 3,919,873 3,892,900 28,676,002 5,762,491 5,881,093
Other Sources (Uses)
Cashflow adjustment for working capital
Operating Transfers In
Operating Transfers Out (151,011)(186,930)(43,100)
Proceeds from Debt Financing 17,600,000
Other 38,071
GST Loan per Council Approval (500,000)
(11,198)
Total Other Sources
(Uses)38,071 - (511,198) 17,448,989(186,930)(43,100)
Revenues and Other Sources; Over (Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses 1,206,797 692,827 29,702 (6,767,713) (1,105,121) (947,293)
Working Capital, Beginning of Year 8,436,557 10,279,336 9,643,354 10,972,163 4,204,450 3,099,329
Working Capital, End of Year 9,643,354 10,972,163 9,673,056 4,204,450 3,099,329 2,152,036
5
Pg. 113
RESOLUTION NO. (2016 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN INCREASE IN PARKING CITATION FINES
WHEREAS, State law provides, in Vehicle Code Section 40203.5, that cities establish the
amount of parking penalties, fees, and surcharges; and
WHEREAS, State law authorizes the City to recover administrative fees, parking penalties,
fees and collection costs related to civil debt collection, late payment penalties, and other related
charges; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to provide secure and user friendly parking for all users of the
parking structures; and
WHEREAS, the parking program needs to continue to be self-sufficient for its financial
commitments; and
WHEREAS, the Council considered the staff report and held a public meeting on the proposed
changes to the parking citation fine amounts.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as
follows:
SECTION 1. Effective July 1, 2016, the City of San Luis Obispo Penalty Schedule is hereby
amended as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Upon motion of ___________________, seconded by_____________________ and
on the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this ____ day of ___________, 2016.
_______________________
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Lee Price, MMC
Interim City Clerk
5
Pg. 114
Resolution No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 2
R ______
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of
San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
____________________________________
Lee Price, MMC
Interim City Clerk
5
Pg. 115
Resolution No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 3
R ______
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PENALTY SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 7/1/2016
CODE & SECTION DESCRIPTION PENALTY
SLMC 10.12.050 INTERFERENCE WITH POLICE/AUTHORIZED OFFICER 93
SLMC 10.14.030 OBEDIENCE TO TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES 58
SLMC 10.14.090 UNAUTHORIZED PAINTING ON CURBS 58
SLMC 10.34.020 OVERNIGHT CAMPING (10pm - 6 am) 100
SLMC 10.36.020 STOPPING OR STANDING IN PARKWAYS PROHIBITED 33
SLMC 10.36.030 STOP/STAND/PARK IN VIOLATION OF CHAPTER 33
SLMC 10.36.040 NO PARKING ZONE - PROHIBITED PARKING - Also Taxi Zone (d) 53
SLMC 10.36.050 USE OF STREETS FOR STORAGE OF VEHICLES PROHIBITED 33
SLMC 10.36.070 REPAIRING OR GREASING VEHICLE ON PUBLIC STREET 23
SLMC 10.36.080 WASHING OR POLISHING VEHICLES 23
SLMC 10.36.090 PARKING ADJACENT TO SCHOOLS 23
SLMC 10.36.100 PARKING PROHIBITED ON NARROW STREETS 23
SLMC 10.36.110 PARKING ON GRADES 23
SLMC 10.36.120 UNLAWFUL PARKING - PEDDLERS, VENDORS 23
SLMC 10.36.130 EMERGENCY PARKING SIGNS 23
SLMC 10.36.140 LARGE/COMMERCIAL VEHICLE PARKING NEAR INTERSECTION 23
SLMC 10.36.150 NIGHTTIME PARKING OF LARGE VEHICLES 33
SLMC 10.36.160 NIGHTTIME PARKING OF VEH W/OPERATING AIR/REFRIGERATION 23
SLMC 10.36.200 PARKING IN A RESIDENTIAL PERMIT PARKING AREA 38
SLMC 10.36.230 PERMITS - DISPLAY OF PERMITS 28
SLMC 10.36.235 NO PERMIT LOT 38
SLMC 10.40.010 TIMED PARKING 10 MINUTES TO 10 HOURS (Overtime Parking) 43
SLMC 10.40.020 BACKING INTO PARKING SPACE PROHIBITED 28
SLMC 10.40.040 PARKING PARALLEL ON ONE-WAY STREETS 21
SLMC 10.40.050 DIAGONAL PARKING 21
SLMC 10.40.060 PARKING SPACE MARKINGS 33
SLMC 10.40.070 NO STOPPING ZONE 21
SLMC 10.40.080 ALL NIGHT PARKING PROHIBITED (3-5am) 38
SLMC 10.44.020 CURB MARKING TO INDICATE NO STOPPING/PARKING REGS. 23
SLMC 10.44.030 EFFECT OF PERMISSION TO LOAD/UNLOAD IN YELLOW ZONE 53
SLMC 10.44.040 EFFECT OF PERMISSION TO LOAD/UNLOAD IN WHITE ZONE 33
SLMC 10.44.050 STANDING IN ANY ALLEY 33
SLMC 10.44.070 DISABLED PARKING 338
SLMC 10.48.010 CERTAIN VEHICLES PROHIBITED IN CENTRAL DISTRICT 58
SLMC 10.48.020 ADVERTISING VEHICLES 33
SLMC 10.48.030 ANIMAL DRAWN VEHICLES 33
SLMC 10.48.040 TRUCK ROUTES 88
SLMC 10.48.050 COMM. VEHICLES PROHIBITED FROM USING CERTAIN STREETS 88
5
Pg. 116
Resolution No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 4
R ______
SLMC 10.48.060 MAX. GROSS WT. LIMITS OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN STREETS 88
SLMC 10.52.040 PARKING METERS - OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES 23
SLMC 10.52.050 UNLAWFUL TO PARK AFTER METER TIME HAS EXPIRED 33
SLMC 10.52.060 UNLAWFUL TO EXTEND TIME BEYOND LIMIT 15
SLMC 10.52.070 IMPROPER USE OF METER 15
SLMC 10.52.080 PARKING METERS/STANDARDS - PROPER USE 15
SLMC 10.52.110 MOTORCYCLE SPACES 15
CVC 5204(a)* CURRENT TAB IMPROPERLY ATTACHED *25
CVC 21113(a) VEHICLE OR ANIMAL ON PUBLIC GROUNDS-MOVING 116
CVC 21113(b) VEHICLE OR ANIMAL ON PUBLIC GROUNDS-PARKING 33
CVC 21113 (c) DRIVEWAYS, PATHS, PARKING FACILITIES ON GROUNDS 33
CVC 22500.1 STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: FIRE LANE 116
CVC 22500(a) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: WITHIN INTERSECTION 33
CVC 22500(b) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: ON A CROSSWALK 33
CVC 22500(c) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: BETWEEN SAFETY ZONE 33
CVC 22500(d) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: W/IN 15' FIREHOUSE ENTRANCE 33
CVC 22500(e) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: PUBLIC/PRIVATE DRIVEWAY 33
CVC 22500(f) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: ON SIDEWALK 33
CVC 22500(g) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: ALONG/OPPOSITE OBSTRUCT 33
CVC 22500(h) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: ON ROADWAY SIDE OF VEHICLE 33
CVC 22500(i) IMPROPER PARKING IN BUS ZONE 263
CVC 22500(j) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: IN TUBE OR TUNNEL 33
CVC 22500(k) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: UPON BRIDGE EXCEPT AUTH 33
CVC 22500(l) IMPROPER PARKING IN WHEELCHAIR ACCESS 263
CVC 22502(a) CURB PARKING 33
CVC 22502(b) PARKING OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC 33
CVC 22502(c) CURB PARKING - WHEELS MORE THAN 18 INCHES FROM CURB 33
CVC 22504(a) UNINCORPORATED AREA PARKING 33
5
Pg. 117
Page intentionally left
blank.
5
Pg. 118