HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-06-10 - AGENDA REPORTS - TRANSIT SERVICES CONTR (2)Agenda Item:
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
AGENDA REPORT
NEW BUSINESS City Manager Approval:
Item to be presented by:
Jeff O'Keefe
/ �0
DATE: June 10, 2008
SUBJECT: AWARD CONTRACT TO MV TRANSPORTATION FOR THE
MANAGEMENT, OPERATIONS, AND MAINTENANCE OF
TRANSIT SERVICES
DEPARTMENT: Administrative Services
RECOMMENDATION
City Council:
1. Award a three-year contract for the Management, Operation, and Maintenance of Transit
Services to MV Transportation, in a total amount not to exceed $48,809,787;
$15,800,501 for FY 08-09; $16,170,543 for FY 09-10; and $16,383,743 for FY 10-11.
2. Authorize the City Manager or designee to modify the award in the event other issues of
impossibility of performance arise, execute up to seven (7) annual renewal options not to
exceed $16,383,743 each, plus Producer Price Index (PPI) adjustments for fuel and
Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustments for all other contract elements, contingent upon
the appropriation of funds by the City Council in the annual budget for such Fiscal Year
and execute all documents, subject to City Attorney approval.
BACKGROUND
The City Council first awarded a contract for the operation and maintenance of transit service to
ATC in 1996. On June 26, 2001, ATC successfully competed for award of a second five-year
contract. In August 2006, the City extended the ATC contract for another two years and during
this two year period, ATC was bought out by Veolia Transportation, Inc. Veolia's contract with
the City expires on August 5, 2008.
AP°°o [gyp
On January 20, 2008, the City of Santa Clarita released a Request For Proposals (RFP)
PS -07-08-34 for the Management, Operations and Maintenance of Transit Services. Responses
were due to the City on March 20, 2008. The City recieved three proposals.
The first proposal was from First Transit, Inc. First Transit, Inc. is a business unit of FirstGroup
America, the U.S. Bases North American Operating Unit of FirstGroup plc (First Group) a
United Kingdom -based transportation company. Their North American Corporate offices are
based in Cincinnati, Ohio.
The second proposal was from Veolia Transportation, Inc. Veolia Transportation is a subsidiary
of Veolia Environment based out of France. Their North American Corporate offices are based
in Oakbrook, Illinois.
The third proposal was from MV Transportation Inc. MV Transportation is the largest privately
held passenger transportation contracting firm in the United States. Their corporate headquarters
are in Fairfield, California.
The evaluations panel consisted of staff from the City Manager's office, Community
Development and Planning, Purchasing, an external professional transportation member, Public
Works, and Transit. The Transit manager facilitated the process but did not formally sit on the
evaluations panel.
The evaluations process was conducted in four phases, and ratings were assigned to each phase.
The first phase included a review of technical proposals; the second phase included a
presentation and formal interview of each vendor. The third phase included a review of the cost
proposals and assignment of pre -defined points associated to each cost proposal. After the third
phase the evaluations panel reviewed the ratings and rankings of each proposal and elected to
extend an invitation to the top two firms, (Veolia Transportation and MV Transportation), to
submit "Best and Final Offers." First Transit was eliminated from the process at this point
because they were so far behind in points after the technical responses, interviews, and costs
were submitted. The pre -defined points were based on a pre -determined mathematical equation
to ensure points could not be manipulated based on submittals.
Prior to best and final offers being submitted, the evaluations panel rankings were:
Company Location Bid Amount Total Score
MV Transportation Fairfield, CA $52,901,953 800.45
Veolia Transportation Paris, France $56,606,912 753.83
First Transit Cincinnati, OH $63,646,418 650.58
The intent of the best and finals offer process was to drive down the cost of the original vendors
cost submittals. Prior to the best and final offers being presented, MV's first year transportation
cost proposal was approximately 13.37% greater than existing transit costs, and Veolia's proposal
was approximately 19.44% greater than existing costs. These decreased to 12.00%, or ($505,351
reduction), and 18.74% ($710,460 reduction) respectively, after Best and Final offers were
submitted. Costs include proposed start-up costs for each vendor.
The final three-year cost proposal from MV was $52,396,602 and $55,896,452 from Veolia; a
difference of $3,499,850.
Although MV's proposal is $3,499,850 less than Veolia's, it includes significantly increased
staffing levels. MV proposes to increase the number of bus operators from the current 131 to
146. In addition, MV is proposing to increase the maintenance staffing levels by 10 employees,
increasing it from the current 23 to 33 employees. Also, MV is proposing three (3) Customer
Service Ambassadors to be positioned at the Soledad and Newhall metrolink stations, as well as
the McBean Regional Transit Center to offer assistance to customers during peak hour service.
Each of the proposers were required to submit a minimum of five client references. Staff
contacted all client references and the reviews for both vendors were satisfactory.
Based on the review, procurement process, and the recommendations of the evaluations panel,
staff recommends MV Transportation be awarded a three year contract to provide the
Management, Operation and Maintenance of Transit Services for the City of Santa Clarita. This
recommendation is based on MV Transportation ranking first in all four phases of the evaluation
process. The evaluations panel scored MV Transportation first in the technical proposal process,
first in the presentation and interview process, first in the cost proposal component, and
ultimately first in the overall composite rankings.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Other action as determined by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT '
The costs associated with the award of this contract have been anticipated by staff and the Transit
Financial Forecast projects that adequate monies in the Transit Fund will be available for the
duration of this proposed contract. It is important to note for the City Council that the City's
Transit Operations does not require any financial support from the General Fund.
ATTACHMENTS
Cost Proposals
Evaluations Rankings
Technical Evaluation Criteria
C
.O
L
Q.
'O
.N
C
ca
L
H
L
0
a
LL
'C
O
ca
W
iv
N
O
CL
0
L
a
W
CL
a
C
O (D
d 00 00
6 N
M 1-:
69 —
0 Ef)
O O
O N
Ln Ln
L6 LO
O N
U U
C C
N
N
00
00
N
'a
O
Ln
—
EA
69
N
(D
I�t
V
C
CF)
0')
It
Cl)
OD
O
V
.c4
L6
cyi
Lv
CL
04
00
m
i.
M
N
Cl)
00
(0
N
C4
0
cli
�
O
E
L
1<1
m
U
01
W
N
'a
LOr
Lo
Ln
N
C
C
O
LC
a
E
Lv
N
04
00
N
Cl)
00
(0
N
C4
L6
cli
�
O
yLO
a)
a
t
c
O
d
(n
3
a
O
O
t
c
c
_
Ln
c
Ln
�
d �
M
v
0
o
U
rn m
c
c
a
u
w
:.c
::
4.;
1 o.
O.
0
aNi
ami
ayi
s «.
o
0
0
0
0- E
-a
r
r
N -0
0
J
c
N
M.4
Lf
U O
0
0
0
N
N
CM O
N
0
00 m
N
c0
N
0 co 0
M a
1n
r- L
a
LO
0
� o U
coo o�S
N
3
c
N
cC
N
0
C.
O
a
s
a�
O
_N
a)
c
C.
C N
O C
O
ca
W �
h d
O. C t9
E0. a
V w c
v
LO
LO
U')
0
U
0
0
a
0
o
LU
0
0
(D
It
00
N
LO
(D
(D
LO
d
U
(n
V)
0
V)
0
m
U')
(f)
N
m
(1G
N
C6
N
m
V)
m
O
(D
(D
(D
X)
V)
N
(D
00
LO
M
(D
00
X)
O
V)
N
06
to
N
o0
Ln
Ln
M
(f)
N
d'
N
N
O
co
O
00
r
LO
E
�
Q
(D
(D
(D
(D
(D
(D
(D
(D
(D
(D
(D
o
M
LL
N
N
C_
C_
O
O
a
a
0
H
N
O
a
0
F-
0
s
N
c
�o
a
0
y
(cv
0
v
a
s
0
o0
c
CL
�
!
�
>
a
O
C
V
c
(D
c
.
.O
c
to
c
`
(D
U
V
c
i0
c
G
0
a)
c
O
U
m
••
d
c
O
>
w
c
c
m
a
•�
t
(tea
U
0
Q-
0
(D
O
a 0
a
LLy
a
>
aCD
w
..
a
c
c
cn
d
a)
>.
o
a
w
c
(D
>
o
c
d
r
u
0
C.
o
cn
w
a�
cn
�°
cn
c
0
N
c
f-
o
3
Z
c
0
0
0
N
N
CM O
N
0
00 m
N
c0
N
0 co 0
M a
1n
r- L
a
LO
0
� o U
coo o�S
N
3
c
N
cC
N
0
C.
O
a
s
a�
O
_N
a)
c
C.
C N
O C
O
ca
W �
h d
O. C t9
E0. a
V w c
v
LO
LO
U')
0
U
0
0
a
E
LL
ii
O
c
a�
.N
Q
W
c
.0
a
0
0
Z
N
7
C
C
N
°
c
�
ca
N
O
N
C
r+
t
y
E
o
v
d
C.
o
O
c
O
N
0
Mo
y
aci�
N
c v
'C fa
c °
C. 0
C
ci
fl.
E
C
E
C7 O
V
v
U- aO
°
d
CL
o o
,� w.
°- c d
;� °�'
C 0 4)
c d
E
N N
N N
V V w
C C
` C
'
w M ma
C
"a C
7
° A
N o
cc
O
cyan
++
v
O m
NE`°
N C
�Ua
o -
c
�
(D��
0)�
C.
daw
mv
a
Eck
c'cy
E
a)
6. L V
Cc
d
E
v°)i
�
y -W
t`v
ai
.... `
d N
c
N !0
F >
y
N
C. d
A
CN
N
Q Q=
C 0-0 d
p
R d
"cc
o3
cmc
C. C is 0
c. 0
°
CL
��°
N
o
m
N aa)
Cc�..
�a
0do°
L E
U C
c
N N
Fa 75-d1
C N
C m
a a) C
N p O
N E
O m
C P�
C
L- L-
cm
0
t0
V
t E 0
O V �C
C C v
o
>°
V
C m
f0
c
C
C
vl
c3 a)
0Ci
n°o
00 o°-
m.0
Ndc
C CL .!=
o°E.c
=
w . C -O
�w°c
C a1 -0
C VC
V > O
N G1 = C'
4)i°-xa'
d °- •-
r
vE
° c
C
Q.
N
°
aoc;
d t
vv°ia�
N 0 C
c
y
O r
ca
C
V C N
° w m
(/1 N 0.
O O
y N d d
c ami m E
0C1 =
C O
V
t) d
O, D
d
C> p
O
y N d C
0
C.
M L
w O
N N V C.
C Z
C Ca C C
c N a�
rC�.
C N N
Oa° aEi m
0)
ww
�� E
c
Q,aa a'
m E•-
` o a�
O
C
0. N C
:t>'
a j
� o c o
O C V
V m m C'
C L a) 3
OL tm d •'
C '0
O a1 ''
C s N
H O L O
C C
V
C.
C y C �'
C Q Q
fa d d
—1.
m
_C .
C. 5.
O s m
a) c
O o
c M N r O
N
a) C. O C
0) C. .0 O.
O
*,,
is "- N ,, 7
c o o�
V V -O
v c c
C
�'a y
x n� N
N
a4- y°
w >+ O
a� ° y
4- to r-
o; °
a.c
- - Lp
V 0 a7._
(D
C._
0
_o_ Q
=w=
IC
>
y 7 7>
0(:Yo
x �C O
"W W J
t 7 d a1
0000
0E1 E C
�0 oQ
R p 3 0
2 oma L-
C 7� N
> 7 y 7
oC�
O0
iECJQ0
�aU
L6
0
U)
c
'o
a
u
6.
o
E
O
C
O
N
>
vi
C
Y
O
m
C
!9
'O
y
a.i
N
OO
O
E
a
aD
c .•
E v>
>
� �
v
. c
c �
CD
d m
a
E o
(D
c.
a
-
�
w a
c
R y
C
-C
o
CL
u N 0
w
C
N
'p
C y C
to%- d
0.0 y
+�.
(/1
E O
N
O a.
U cr
o
o
L
a
o
c
CL
c
c�
�oaD
c
d
> w ca
a4)E
.,
r_ (D N
W
o
y
m
41 O
cam °
N f6
a2
!9 E3
N
n
O O'p
O u
'a
CL V
0 - O
CL
V
C t0
V+_�+
cw!a
0
CL
p
c ca
o
E
»-'♦'y°'
�
v,
v oai
cv
d
0�i
ui i
N
L6