HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/07/1992, C-4 - CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING THE DRAFT AGREEMENT AND REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) TO PROVIDE TRANSIT SERVICE FOR SLO TRANSIT FOR FISCAL YEARS 1992-93 THROUGH 1994-95.IIIoNIIIVIIIIiiIIi�IIUIi� f MEETING DAT
Ip�u�� c� o san ��.�s osispo - �-
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER:_
FROM: Ken Hampian, Assistant City Administrative Officer/No
Prepared by: Harry Watson, Transit Managerfw
SUBJECT: Consideration of approving the draft agreement and
request for proposals (RFP) to provide transit service for SLO
Transit for Fiscal Years 1992 -93 through 1994 -95.
CAO RECOMMENDATION: Approve, and authorize the CAO to distribute
a request for proposals (RFP) and proposed new contract for SLO
Transit service for Fiscal Years 1992 -93 through 1994 -95.
BACKGROUND:
SLO Transit is in the last year of its current contract with
Laidlaw Transit, Inc. for the operation and maintenance of our
transit fleet. The current contract was initiated 10 years ago on
a five year basis with CalCoast Charter. Laidlaw Transit, Inc.
bought out CalCoast Charter in the second five year option of the
original contract and has been operating the system for four years.
The RFP "Package"
The RFP package contains a Service Agreement, the Request for
Proposals, a Scope of Work, Service Options, a Performance
Incentive Program, and finally the Questionnaire /Contractor's
Proposal. The package is a compulation of several RFP /Agreement
documents that staff believes are among the best in effect with
transit operations in the State of California. RFP and Agreement
documents were made available to staff by other operators in
Central and Northern California, by the California Transit
Association, and by the Federal Urban Mass Transportation
Administration. Elements of many of those RFP's and Agreements
have been folded into a document package that should serve SLO well
through both the three year contract period (and for the optional
two year extension contained in the agreement package, should the
City choose to exercise that option). The proposed package has
been reviewed and revised by a subcommittee of the City's Mass
Transportation Committee (made up of Chairman James Forrer, Vice
Chairman Karl Hovanitz, Ken McCracken and Dr. Walter Rice).
The Service Agreement deals with the legal requirements of
operating a transit system in the 90's and spells out specific
requirements to be met by both the vendor and the City. It
includes all current Risk Management requirements of the City.
The Request for Proposal section gives the City flexibility in
negotiating specifics of the service level, spells out requirements
of the various staffing levels to be supplied and minimum training
and reporting requirements. The timetable and methodology to be
used by the City in vendor selection is described,
C-
4111MIQ city Of San, JS OBISPO
01 1 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Page 2
The Scope of Work section spells out the level of service to be
provided consistent with the existing system and through the
expansion programmed in the recently approved Short Range Transit
Plan. It deals with potential new technology being introduced into
the system in the way of emission controls and alternate fuels.
City requirements set forth address: All facilities and equipment
for both the City and vendor; vehicle maintenance; parts and
supplies; and reporting for the City, State and Federal government.
Additional information requirements include employee
qualifications, training, uniforms, work rules, fare handling, any
future Federal drug testing requirements and accident procedures.
The. Performance Incentives section lists a set of performance
incentives and penalties. Low levels of maintenance roadcalls,
preventable accidents and high on -time performance result in an
additional one cent per mile each. Uniform infractions, running
ahead of schedule, missed safety meetings, dirty buses, failure of
maintenance inspections, non - functioning wheelchair lifts and
missed runs result in penalties ranging from $10.00 to $125.00 per
infraction.
The Service Options section allows for the vendor to offer
additional services not specifically called for in the RFP section.
This allows the City to avail itself of programs and services
currently being offered other transit systems that we may not now
be aware of or which we would like to take advantage of
occasionally. Examples could be mobility training for the
disabled, vendor conducted service club presentations, etc. This
section is also where potential fleet expansion costs are
addressed.
The Service Questionnaire section will provide insight into how the
potential vendors will deal with the many facets of operating our
transit service. Typical of the issues dealt with in the
questionnaire are: examples of implementation schedule, a
chronology of the firm's experience by service, fleet type and
contract size, site manager profile, maintenance supervisor
profile, state required reporting history and three year income
history. Litigation and credit questions and Federal directive
questions are asked. Several equipment and maintenance procedure
questions are asked.
Extensive questions on personnel, wages, training, benefits,
existing employees, shift coverage and information services are
included. With the City's urbanization designation, very extensive
reporting requirements are attached to the Federal dollars so
several reporting questions are asked.
C -4 -=Z
1I141� city Of San 1wiS OBISpO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Page 3
An expanded "options" section is contained in the questionnaire so
we can explore the firm's attitudes on alternate fueled buses,
fleet expansion and service hours expansion. Finally, we ask who
the principals of the firm are and deal with proposal bonds.
Time Table
Our tentative time table for the RFP process is to issue the RFP
in January 1992 with proposals to be received by the City in March
1992. This timetable allows for a pre - proposal question submission
and response period, an evaluation of proposals, Mass
Transportation Committee review, and a vendor interview/ negotiation
period. A detailed outline and schedule for the process is
provided in the RFP document.
Award of the contract by Council is scheduled to take place 45 days
prior to expiration of our current contract on June 30, 1992. The
45 day timeframe would allow a new vendor adequate time for the
smooth transition of service for SLO Transit on July 1, 1992.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The results of the RFP process are unknown at this time, but a
recent awarding of the contract for the San Luis Obispo Regional
Transit Authority (SLORTA) service resulted in a rate per mile that
is 15% above our existing rate per mile of $1.90. It should be
noted that the Regional contract does not include the cost of
diesel fuel, nor does it include the cost of insurance coverage for
the operation. Both of those items are provided by SLORTA. It
should also be noted that our RFP will include the City supplying
the maintenance and storage facilities as compared to the Regional
operator being required to supply those facilities.
CONCURRENCE:
A subcommittee of the Mass Transportation Committee was formed
August 14 to review the RFP and scope of work. They reviewed the
documents and met with staff, and many of their recommendations are
incorporated into this RFP package.
NOTE: The Agreement and RFP package are available for review in
the City Council reading file and in the City Clerk's Office.
HW:bw
rfp. rpt
c -jY