HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2002 0717 CC REG ITEM 10DITEM 109DO
A, Appr -oVeb 54off-
recomr,vie-n60110r) ._
City of Moorpark Cv� 30 i&! _ K
AGENDA REPORT''' - --
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: John Brand, Senior Management Analyst
DATE: June 27, 2002 (Meeting of July 17, 2002)
SUBJECT: Consider Award of Agreement to Antelope Valley
Bus /Coach USA to Operate and Maintain Moorpark City
Transit.
SUMMARY
Federal law requires that all transit operators who receive
federal funding to periodically receive competitive proposals or
bids for their operations contracts. Staff produced a Request For
Proposals (RFP) for the operation of the Moorpark City Transit
fixed route, maintenance of the fleet consisting of three City -
owned buses (two route buses and one backup), and for providing
an additional backup bus to "backstop" the service. Proposals
were due by 3:00 p.m. on May 15, 2002. Four proposals were
submitted and reviewed by staff. Interviews with the four
proposers were held on May 22, 2002. The four Proposers were
Antelope /Coach USA, Parking Company of America, Laidlaw Transit
Service, and Ventura County Shuttle.
After review of the proposals received, staff recommends entering
into an Agreement with Antelope Valley Bus -Coach USA. Their
proposal offers outstanding vehicle maintenance and personnel
safety training programs at a competitive price.
BACKGROUND
The City began financing bus service in January, 1989 with TDA
(Transportation Development Act) Article 8c Funds and has
continued that arrangement in subsequent years. Moorpark City
Transit expanded from a single fixed route to two routes in
September, 2000. Each route consists of a one -way loop of
CA-0 r,-
. .
The Honorable City Council
CC Meeting of July 17, 2002
Page 2
approximately sixteen miles, with about forty stops. The service
is currently operated by a contract with Parking Company of
America.
Moorpark City Transit operates Monday through Friday from 6:00
a.m. to 7:00 p.m. No service is provided on the weekends or on
official holidays observed by the City. Each bus makes a loop
through the City once every hour. This is known as a "one -hour
headway." Route 1 completes eleven (11) trips each day from 6:00
a.m. until 5:20 p.m., and Route 2 completes twelve (12) trips
each day from 6:40 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. The routes circulate in
opposite directions providing two -way service for the community.
Moorpark City Transit connects to Amtrak and Metrolink rail
services. It also connects with VISTA -East, the regional express
service that links Moorpark, Simi Valley and Thousand Oaks.
VISTA -East connects to other VISTA routes in Ventura County. The
student and adult fare is $1.00, the senior and disabled fare is
40�, and children aged four and younger ride for free. The City
has a separate contract with Thousand Oaks Cab Company to provide
a separate paratransit service (dial -a -ride) for persons with
disabilities and senior citizens.
The City has just taken delivery of two new 25 passenger buses.
The City also owns a 1998 Bluebird Transtar and a 1995 GMC
Champion. The City Council authorized surplusing the GMC Champion
when it approved the procurement of the two new buses in
November, 2001. It will be surplused after the new buses are
"broken in." If approved by Council, Antelope Valley Bus has
agreed to provide a second small bus for use as an additional
back up in the event that two buses are out of service at the
same time.
The Request For Proposals documents were sent out to possible
bidders (copy of the RFP was submitted to the Council under
separate cover). The possible bidders were known transit
operators; firms that had requested notification if the City were
to go out to bid for transit services, and firms that had
recently bid on other transit contracts in the area. The RFP was
also advertised in the newspaper of record. The City held a pre -
proposal meeting. Four potential bidders sent representatives to
the meeting. All questions were answered in writing and
distributed to the full list of possible bidders.
Bidders were asked to provide
City Transit Agreement Award
detailed information on their
The Honorable City Council
CC Meeting of July 17, 2002
Page 3
qualifications and ability to perform the work
addition to cost proposals. The standard term
contracts is three years, with two one -year options
discretion of the City.
Proposal Evaluation
requested in
for transit
at the sole
After the receipt of proposals, the City examined and evaluated
all proposals for the purpose of ascertaining their completeness
and responsiveness to the provisions of this RFP. Proposers were
evaluated in the following areas:
1) Proposal Supplemental Questionnaire. Weight: 25 %.
2) Interviews with Proposers, Wednesday, May 22, 2002.
Weight 25%
3) Cost Proposal. Weight: 25 %.
4) Overall Presentation of Proposal. Taking the entire
Proposal into account including all the above and any
additional aspects of the Proposal, including, but not
limited to, completeness, creativity, synergy, and
integration of approach in the Proposal. Weight: 25 %.
The Evaluation Committee included Community Services Director
Mary Lindley and Senior Management Analyst John Brand, and Roy
Myers, the Assistant Civil Engineer, Traffic at the City of
Thousand Oaks.
DISCUSSION
As stated above, four proposals were received. The Proposers were
Antelope /Coach USA; PCA- Parking Corporation of America, the
incumbent firm; Laidlaw Transit Service; and Ventura County
Shuttle. The following is a summary of the proposals.
Antelope Valley Bus /Coach USA. This firm operated the bus service
since its inception in 1989 to 2000. Coach USA is a multi-
national transit firm that acquired Antelope Valley Bus in 1999.
While primarily a charter service, the firm also operates the
VISTA -East commuter bus, VISTA -101, VISTA- CSUCI, VISTA -126, and
the VISTA Conejo Connection. The VISTA routes are administered by
City Transit Agreement Award
The Honorable City Council
CC Meeting of July 17, 2002
Page 4
VCTC for the various participating agencies in Ventura County.
The firm has a maintenance facility on Lambert Street in Oxnard.
Travel distance to Moorpark is about thirty minutes and
approximately twenty -five miles each way. As the former long -term
operator of Moorpark City Transit, this firm is familiar with the
system and the community. The mechanics are familiar with the
City's fleet and will obtain the diagnostic software to service
the new city buses. Antelope will invite the current bus drivers
to apply for jobs. Antelope will install their radios in the City
buses. An extra advantage is that the City drivers will be able
to communicate with the VISTA bus drivers. Antelope has a
dispatcher and /or supervisor on duty during Moorpark City
Transit's operating hours. Antelope has strong facility,
personnel, and complimentary transit services. Its cost proposal
is second lowest overall only $3,000 (less than one -half of one
percent) more than PCA. The commute from Oxnard would add about
75,000 additional vehicle miles per year.
Laidlaw Transit Services. Laidlaw operates service transit
properties in the local area. Laidlaw does fixed route and demand
responsive (dial -a -ride) services for Thousand Oaks Transit,
Camarillo Area Transit, and SCAT Access (dial a ride). Laidlaw is
a national firm with extensive experience in transit. Laidlaw
proposes to house the Moorpark City Transit buses in Moorpark at
616 Fitch Street in Moorpark. AMR American Medical Response, a
local ambulance service, is a subsidiary of Laidlaw. The
mechanics at AMR would maintain the City buses. Laidlaw proposes
to install and use Nextel radios to communicate with the bus
drivers. Laidlaw encourages the existing drivers to apply with
Laidlaw if the firm is the successful Proposer. They will have a
local dispatcher- supervisor in Thousand Oaks. Laidlaw offers
vehicle storage and service facility in Moorpark, excellent
personnel, and good complimentary transit services. Laidlaw asks
the City to consider fuel costs and possible insurance costs as
pass- through amounts. This adds a degree of uncertainty to their
proposal. However, similar contract terms have been approved by
other transit agencies in California. Its cost proposal is third
lowest overall, about 9% above PCA and Antelope.
PCA- Parking Corporation of America. PCA is the incumbent
provider. A combination of contract compliance concerns and a
request for extraordinary cost increases contributed to the
City's decision to solicit proposals one year before the current
contract term would normally expire. PCA manages transit
City Transit Agreement Award
The Honorable City Council
CC Meeting of July 17, 2002
Page 5
operations in Santa Ynez and in the Los Angeles area, including
the City of Monterrey Park's fixed route bus system, and three
fixed route and demand response shuttles for the Southeast
Community Development Corporation, SCDC, (cities of Bell, Bell
Gardens, City of Commerce, Cudahy, Huntington Park, Maywood,
South Gate, Vernon and unincorporated areas.) The firm is based
in Commerce. PCA stores the Moorpark City Transit vehicles at the
old MUSD facility on Flory Street, and when MUSD cancels their
lease for a planned development at the site, PCA proposes to
house the vehicles at the Metrolink layover facility in Moorpark.
The vehicles would continue to be serviced in Moorpark at the
Industrial Service Center, 619 Fitch Avenue. PCA prepared a
detailed proposal, but some of its service parameters are not up
to the City's existing standards. For example, the City's
contract requires that vehicles be washed at least weekly. PCA
proposes to wash them every ten to fourteen days. PCA's Nextel
two -way radio system has proven to be a highly effective
communication system. PCA offers a continuation of current
drivers, local vehicle storage and service in Moorpark without
any facility. Its cost proposal is the lowest overall.
Ventura County Shuttle. Ventura County Shuttle is a local
transportation management firm that provides a general
transportation dial -a -ride in Oxnard and Port Hueneme and also
provides commercial livery (limousines and airport shuttle)
services. They are headquartered in Ventura with a repair shop in
Oxnard. Travel distance to Moorpark is about forty minutes, and
approximately thirty miles each way. Ventura County Shuttle does
not have dispatcher or supervisor. They rely on management staff
for driver oversight. Ventura County Shuttle's cost was the
highest of the proposers by a considerable margin.
EVALUATION
Laidlaw and PCA will store the vehicles locally. Laidlaw would
base vehicles in Moorpark with service and support, while PCA
would merely store the vehicles in town without local service or
support by PCA. Antelope and Ventura County Shuttle have
maintenance and storage twenty -five to thirty miles from
Moorpark.
Antelope and Laidlaw have good local experience. Antelope has ten
years experience with the Moorpark City Transit and other transit
operations. Laidlaw has broad experience in the local area as
City Transit Agreement Award
The Honorable City Council
CC Meeting of July 17, 2002
Page 6
well. PCA and Ventura County shuttle each have less than five
year's transit experience in Ventura County. PCA has operated
Moorpark City Transit for two years.
Antelope and Laidlaw have the best local repair facilities. PCA
relies on a general truck repair shop, and most of Ventura County
Shuttle mechanics' work has been on lighter vehicles, such as
shuttle vans and limousines.
Antelope and Laidlaw have the best staffing and management
experience. Each firm offers local dispatch and supervision, and
each firm has a substantial pool of local drivers that promise to
provide more reliable staffing. Ventura County shuttle does not
appear to have much depth of resources, which may be a problem if
extra backup vehicles or drivers are needed. PCA does not have
any other transit operations in the immediate area. Their closest
operation is in Alhambra. Substitute and vacation relief drivers
may be more difficult for PCA and Ventura County shuttle to
provide. However, PCA has always been able to provide a relief
driver within an hour of any driver absence.
PCA has the lowest rate for each year. Antelope has the second
lowest rates. Over three years, it is only $3,000 above PCA,
within 00.4% over the three -year term. Laidlaw is 9% above
Antelope and PCA, while Ventura County Shuttle is 46% higher in
cost. More specific cost information is attached.
CONCLUSIONS
Each firm provided excellent references and each of the firms has
the basic qualifications. Antelope, Laidlaw and PCA clearly have
far greater experience than Ventura County Shuttle. Each firm
states that they are able to provide backup buses that are
similar in size and style to the City's fleet.
PCA — Parking Corporation of America offers the lowest price.
However, their history of contract compliance problems and mid-
term increase requests tends to lessen the attractiveness of the
price PCA offers. Antelope appears to have much more to offer for
only $3,000 more (less than one half of one percent) over three
years.
Laidlaw offers as much depth and capability as Antelope, and has
a maintenance and storage facility in Moorpark. A local facility
City Transit Agreement Award fIt
C., . .. J
The Honorable City Council
CC Meeting of July 17, 2002
Page 7
will save unnecessary vehicle mileage. Laidlaw costs about 9%
more than Antelope.
Antelope offers the best mix of strengths in their Proposal. The
balance of Antelope's proposal, interview, cost and other
considerations (overall presentation) merit a recommendation that
the City of Moorpark pursue an Agreement with Antelope to operate
and maintain Moorpark City Transit.
If approved by the City Council, Antelope Valley Bus /Coach USA is
prepared to begin operations beginning no later than July 29,
2002.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Accept the proposal from, and award a contract to, Antelope
Valley Bus /Coach USA for the operation and maintenance of the
City fixed route bus, at the not to exceed amount of $225,515 for
the first year, and as proposed in subsequent years, and
authorize the Mayor to execute the Agreement subject to final
language approval by the City Manager and City Attorney.
City Transit Agreement Award
�..rk -
\/ V I- — b
Moorpark City Transit
Operations and Maintenance Proposals
May, 2002
225,515
First Year Cost
Second Year Cost
r
N
Laidlaw Transit
43.08
990.84
247,710
Services, Inc.
G vi
U
U
Parking Company
38.31
y
O H
of America
O
N .-.
O N
Ventura County
56.00
U
U�
U
U
U
U eTa
35.00
Bidder
�-
(estimated)
7 0
7 0
M
M
xo
° v
a v
=
° v
a V
Antelope/
39.22
902.06
225,515
Coach USA
N
r
N
Laidlaw Transit
43.08
990.84
247,710
Services, Inc.
G vi
U
U
Parking Company
38.31
881.13
220,283
of America
O }
M
Ventura County
56.00
1,288.00
322,000
Shuttle
Current Cost
35.00
805.00
201,250
(estimated)
t�
�0
Attachment A
Third Year Cost
N
r
N
a+
>"
U
U
G vi
U
U
w
_
7 O
O }
M
H
°v
40.40 i 929.20 1 232,300 1 1 41.61 1 957.03 1 239,258 1 1 697,0731
43.83 1 1,008.09 1 252,023 1 1 45.68 1 1,050.64 1 262,660 1 1 762,393
40.24 1 925.52 1 231,380 1 1 42.18 1 970.14 1 242,535 1 1 694,198
59.00 i 1,357.00 i 339,250 1 1 62.00 1 1,426.00 i 356,500 i 1 1,017,7501