Access Services
[pic]
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
MONDAY, AUGUST 25, 2014
Closed Session: 12:00
General Session: Immediately Following
The meeting is expected to end by or
before 3:00 p.m.
Los Angeles County MTA
One Gateway Plaza, 3rd Floor
729 Vignes Street, Los Angeles CA 90012
MISSION STATEMENT
Access Services promotes access to all modes of transportation and provides quality and safe ADA paratransit service on behalf of public transit agencies in Los Angeles County.
| | |DISPOSITION |
| |CALL TO ORDER |ACTION |
| |BOARD OFFICER ELECTIONS (page 5) |ACTION |
| | |[Vote Required: |
| |[Staff Recommendation: Elect Officers [Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, Executive Director, Secretary, |majority of quorum |
| |Treasurer] as provided in Bylaws Article VII B to serve for a term beginning August 25, 2014 and ending June |by voice vote] |
| |30, 2015 or the election of their successor, whichever last occurs.] | |
| |PUBLIC COMMENT WITH RESPECT TO CLOSED SESSION ITEMS | |
| |CLOSED SESSION |DISCUSSION/ |
| | |POSSIBLE ACTION |
| |CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: CAL. GOV. | |
| |CODE §54956.9 | |
| | | |
| |Existing Litigation: Gov. Code §54956.9(a) | |
| |Minnis v. Access Services: LASC # BS145949 | |
| |Anticipated Litigation: Gov. Code §54956.9 (b) | |
| | | |
| |Significant exposure to litigation against the | |
| |Agency | |
| | | |
| |Initiation of Litigation: Gov. Code §54956.9 (c) | |
| |SUPERIOR SERVICE AWARD |PRESENTATION |
| |REVIEW & APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE BOARD |ACTION |
| |MEETING ON JUNE 23, 2014 (page 10) |[Vote Required: |
| | |majority of quorum |
| |[Staff Recommendation: Approve minutes as written.] |by voice vote] |
| |REPORT FROM EX-OFFICIO BOARD MEMBERS |INFORMATION |
| |GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT |INFORMATION |
| |CONSENT CALENDAR |ACTION |
| | |[Vote Required: |
| |Consideration to Approve Board of Directors’ Committee Appointments (page 27) |majority of quorum |
| | |by roll call] |
| |Consideration to Authorize the Purchase of 13 Vehicles for Paratransit Service (page 34) | |
| | | |
| |Consideration to Award Data Center Co-Location Contract (AS-3650) (page 36) | |
| | | |
| |Consideration to Approve Real Estate Broker Service Agreement (page 39) | |
| | | |
| |[Staff Recommendation: Approve Consent Calendar] | |
| |CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE POLICY CONCERNING THE FORMAT OF BOARD MINUTES (page 41) |PRESENTATION/ |
| | |ACTION |
| |[Staff Recommendation: Adopt staff’s recommendation that the format of Board minutes be published in a recap |[Vote Required: |
| |of proceedings style consistent with legal requirements.] |majority of quorum |
| | |by roll call] |
| |CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE ACCESS RIDER ID/TAP CARD PROGRAM CHANGES (page 68) |PRESENTATION/ |
| | |ACTION |
| |[Staff Recommendation: Approve the program change that will end the VISA portion of the Access Rider ID/TAP |[Vote Required: |
| |card and improve the visibility aspects of the card.] |majority of quorum |
| | |by roll call] |
| |CONSIDERATION TO AUTHORIZE FTA ADA TRIENNIAL REVIEW FINDINGS RESOLUTION PROCESS (page 71) |PRESENTATION/ |
| | |POSSIBLE ACTION |
| |[Staff Recommendation: Authorize staff to work with the FTA to resolve the findings. The schedule for |[Vote Required: |
| |corrective action is listed in the draft report as March 3, 2015. Any proposed change in Access policies |majority of quorum |
| |will be brought back to the Board for approval at a later date.] |by roll call] |
| |ACCESS SERVICES FUNDING UPDATE |PRESENTATION |
| |METRO REVIEW/CUSTOMER SURVEY AND TOWN HALL MEETINGS: ACTION PLAN (page 76) |PRESENTATION |
| |STATUS UPDATE ON METRO’S REVIEW OF ACCESS SERVICES (page 82) |INFORMATION |
| | | |
| |[Staff Recommendation: Receive and file] | |
| |EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S REPORT |INFORMATION |
| |BOARD MEMBER COMMUNICATION |INFORMATION |
| |NEW BUSINESS SUBSEQUENT TO THE POSTING |DISCUSSION/ |
| |OF THE AGENDA |POSSIBLE ACTION |
| |ADJOURNMENT |ACTION |
Access Services does not discriminate on the basis of disability. Accordingly, Access Services seeks to ensure that individuals with disabilities will have an equal opportunity to participate in the range of Access Services events and programs by providing appropriate auxiliary aids and services to facilitate communication. In determining the type of auxiliary aids and services for communication that will be provided, primary consideration is given to the request of the individual with disabilities. However, the final decision belongs to Access Services. To help ensure availability of those auxiliary aids and services you require, please make every effort to notify Access Services of your request at least three (3) business days (72 hours) prior to the meeting in which you wish to utilize those aids or services. You may do so by contacting (213) 270-6000.
Note: Access Services board meetings are held pursuant to the Ralph M. Brown Act [Cal. Gov. Code §54950] and are open to the public. The public may view and obtain all written information supporting this agenda provided to the board both initially and supplementally prior to the meeting at the agency’s offices located at 3449 Santa Anita Avenue, El Monte, California and on its website at . Documents, including Power Point handouts distributed to Board Members by staff or Board members at the meeting will simultaneously be made available to the public. Three opportunities are available for the public to address the board during a board meeting: (1) before closed session regarding matters to be discussed in closed session, (2) before a specific agendized item is debated and voted upon regarding that item and (3) general public comment. The exercise of the right to address the board is subject to restriction as to time and appropriate decorum. All persons wishing to make public comment must fill out a yellow Public Comment Form and submit it to the Secretary to the Board. Public comment is generally limited to three (3) minutes per speaker and the total time available for public comment may be limited at the discretion of the Chairperson. Persons whose speech is impaired such that they are unable to address the board at a normal rate of speed may request the accommodation of a limited amount of additional time from the Chair but only by checking the appropriate box on the Public Comment Form. Granting such an accommodation is in the discretion of the Chair.
The Board of Directors will not and cannot respond during the meeting to matters raised under general public comment. Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act governing these proceedings, no discussion or action may be taken on these matters unless they are listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. However, the board may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Board of Directors Meeting and the staff will respond to all public comment in writing prior to the next board meeting.
"Alternative accessible formats available upon request."
ITEM 2
AUGUST 18, 2014
TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FROM: JAMES G. JONES, ACCESS SERVICES LEGAL COUNSEL
RE: BOARD OFFICER ELECTIONS
ISSUE:
It is necessary to elect new officers of the Board for Fiscal Year 2014-2015. Attached you will find Bylaw Article VII – Officers of the Agency which details each officer’s responsibilities and duties on the Board.
RECOMMENDATION:
Elect officers to the Board of Directors as per the requirement of the Access Services Bylaws for an approximately one-year term beginning August 25, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015 or the election of their successor, whichever last occurs. The nominees are:
Slate of Officers:
Chairperson: Doran Barnes*
Vice Chair: Dolores Nason*
Treasurer: Martin Gombert
Secretary: Theresa DeVera*
Executive Director: Shelly Verrinder
* Requires term limit waiver by board
ARTICLE VII. OFFICERS OF THE AGENCY
A. Officers of the Agency.
The officers of the agency shall be a Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, Executive Director, Secretary and Treasurer. The agency may also have, at the Board's discretion, such other officers as may be appointed in accordance with this article of these bylaws. Any number of offices may be held by the same person, except that neither the Secretary nor the Treasurer may serve concurrently as Chairperson.
B. Election of Officers.
The officers of the agency, except those appointed under Article VII, Section C of these bylaws, shall be chosen annually by the Board and shall serve at the pleasure of the Board, subject to the rights, if any, of any officer under any contract of employment.
C. Other Officers.
The Board may appoint and may authorize the Executive Director to appoint any other officers that the corporation may require, including, without limitation, a Deputy Executive Director. Each officer so appointed shall have the title, hold office for the period, have the authority, and perform the duties specified in the bylaws or determined by the Board.
D. Removal of Officers.
Without prejudice to any rights or an officer under any contract of employment, any officer may be removed with or without cause by the Board and also, if the officer was not chosen by the Board, by any officer on whom the Board may confer that power of removal.
E. Resignation of Officers.
Any officer may resign at any time by giving written notice to the agency. The resignation shall take effect as of the date the notice is received or at any later time specified in the notice and, unless otherwise specified in the notice, the resignation need not be accepted to be effective. Any resignation shall be without prejudice to the rights, if any, of the agency under any contract to which the officer is a party.
F. Vacancies in Office.
A vacancy in any office because of death, resignation, removal, disqualification, or any other cause shall be filled in the manner prescribed in these bylaws for regular appointments to that office, provided, however, that vacancies need not be filled on an annual basis.
G. Responsibilities of the Officers.
1. Chairperson of the Board:
The chairperson shall preside at meetings of the Board and at meetings of the members and shall exercise such other powers and duties as the Board of Directors shall assign from time to time. In the absence of an Executive Director or Deputy Executive Director, the chairperson shall become the chief executive officer of the corporation and, subject to such supervisory powers as the Board may give to the chairperson of the Board, if any, and subject to the control of the Board, shall direct, supervise and control the agency’s activities, affairs and officers until such time as an Executive Director is elected.
2. Vice Chairperson of the Board:
If the chairperson is absent or unable to perform the duties of the chair, the vice chairperson shall perform all of the duties of the chairperson. When so acting, the vice chairperson shall have the powers of and be subject to all the restrictions applied on the chairperson. The vice chairperson shall have such other powers and perform such other duties as the Board may prescribe.
3. Executive Director:
The Executive Director shall be the Chief Executive Officer of the agency and, subject to such limits as the Board may place on the supervisory powers of the Executive Director, if any, and subject to the control of the Board, shall direct, supervise and control the agency’s day-to-day activities, affairs and non-board appointed officers.
4. Deputy Executive Director:
In the absence or disability of the Executive Director, the Deputy Executive Director, if any, shall perform all the duties of the Executive Director, and when so acting shall have all the powers of, and be subject to all the restrictions upon the Executive Director. The Deputy Executive Director shall have such other powers and perform such other duties as from time to time may be prescribed for them respectively by the Board of Directors, the Bylaws or the Executive Director.
5. Secretary:
a. Book of Minutes:
The secretary shall keep, or cause to be kept, at the corporation's principal office or other such place as the Board may direct, a book of minutes of all meetings, proceedings, and actions of the Board, of committees of the Board and of members' meetings. The minutes of meetings shall include the time and place that the meeting was held, whether the meeting was annual, regular, or special, and, if special, how authorized, the notice given, the names of those present at Board and committee meetings, and the number of members present or represented at members I meetings. The secretary shall keep or cause to be kept, at the principal office in California, a copy of the articles of incorporation and bylaws, as amended to date.
b. Membership Records:
The secretary shall keep or cause to be kept, at the agency’s principal office or at a place determined by resolution of the Board, a record of the agency's members, showing each member's name, address, and class of membership.
c. Notices, Seal and Other Duties:
The secretary shall give, or cause to be given, notice of all meetings of members, of the Board and of committees of the Board required by these bylaws to be given. The secretary shall keep the corporate seal in safe custody and shall have such other powers and perform such other duties as the Board or the bylaws may prescribe.
6. Treasurer:
a. Books of Account:
The treasurer shall keep and maintain, or cause to be kept and maintained, adequate and correct books and accounts of the agency's properties and transactions. The treasurer shall send or cause to be given to the members and directors such financial statements and reports as are required to be given by law, by these bylaws, or by the Board. The books of account shall be open to inspection by any director at all reasonable times.
b. Deposit and Disbursement of Money and Valuables:
The treasurer shall deposit, or cause to be deposited, all money and other valuables in the name and to the credit of the corporation with such depositories as the Board may designate, shall disburse the corporation's funds as the Board may order, shall render to the chairperson of the Board and the Board, when requested, an account of all transactions as treasurer and of the financial condition of the agency, and shall have such other powers and perform such other duties as the Board or the bylaws may prescribe.
c. Disbursement of Funds:
The following signatures shall be required on corporate checks:
(i) The Board of Directors may from time to time open an account or accounts with banks or other financial institutions and shall designate which officers or other designees shall have the authority to execute checks and other items for an on behalf of the agency.
(ii) The Treasurer shall disburse or cause to disburse the funds of the agency with such banks or the financial institutions as designated by the Board of Directors. The Treasurer shall periodically review or cause to be reviewed the disbursements of funds to ensure that all disbursements are undertaken in a manner consistent with procedures established by or under the authority of the Board of Directors.
ITEM 6
MINUTES
ACCESS SERVICES
BOARD MEETING
JUNE 23, 2014
The Access Services Board of Directors meeting convened at 12:05 p.m. on Monday, June 23, 2014 in the third floor Board Room of the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) Building located at One Gateway Plaza in the City of Los Angeles. The presiding Board Member was Doran Barnes, Chairperson. Board Members present included: Dolores Nason, Vice Chair, Martin Gombert, Treasurer, Theresa DeVera, Secretary, Kim Turner, Angela Nwokike, John Troost, Art Ida, and Daniel Levy. Ex-Officio, Michael Arrigo, CAC Chair, Linda Evans, Vice Chair, TPAC and Jim Jones, Access Services Legal Counsel.
Access Services’ staff members present included: Shelly Verrinder, F Scott Jewell, Andre Colaiace, Donna Cisco, Araceli Camuy, Charlene Motta, Jack Garate, Rogelio Gomez, Steve Chang, Mike Greenwood, Matthew Avancena, Bill Tsuei, Kevin Lee, Geoffrey Okamoto, Faye Moseley, Evie Palicz, Hamilton Franco, Alvina Narayan, Louis Burns, Richard Rodriguez, Alfredo Torales, and Ramon Garcia (intern).
PUBLIC COMMENT WITH RESPECT TO CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
No public comments were heard regarding the closed session items.
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
The Board met in Closed Session and reconvened the general portion of the meeting at 1:12 p.m. at which time Michael Arrigo, Chair of the CAC, and Linda Evans, Vice Chair of TPAC, joined the general session.
Chairperson Barnes asked Mr. Jones, Access Services Legal Counsel, to brief the audience on the outcome of closed session.
Mr. Jones reported that prior to taking the dais, the Board met in closed session to discuss existing litigation of Minnis versus Access Services LASC #BS145949, no reportable action was taken by the Board with respect to this matter. The Board also discussed anticipated litigation and initiation of litigation and no reportable action was taken by the Board with respect to those matters.
The Board discussed personnel issues with respect to the evaluation of the Executive Director. He stated that the evaluations were received and would remain part of the confidential record.
Mr. Jones explained the general 3 minute limitation on public comment and that anyone who by reason of a specific disability which prevented them from speaking with normal rapidity and who wished to request an accommodation should so indicate on the speaker request form so that the Chairperson could consider and potentially grant additional time to make their statement but due to the amount of public comments submitted for today’s meeting the Chairperson would only allow three minutes for public comments.
Mr. Jones also explained that individual speakers may not cede their time to anyone else, if someone else had an issue they would need to speak for themselves or if they are unable to speak for themselves the Board should receive written communications to make them part of the record.
SUPERIOR SERVICE AWARDS
Melinda Friend, a Driver from MV Transportation, was the recipient of the Superior Service Award for the month of June 2014.
REVIEW & APPROVAL OF THE BOARD MEETING MINUTES FROM MAY 19, 2014
Motion: Director Nason moved approval of the May 19, 2014 Board meeting minutes.
Second: Director Nwokike seconded the motion.
Discussion: None.
Vote: Via Voice Vote.
In Favor: Directors Gombert, Troost, Levy, Nwokike, Nason, Turner, and DeVera.
Opposed: None.
Abstention: Director Ida.
Pass/Fail: The motion carried.
REPORT FROM EX-OFFICIO BOARD MEMBERS
Michael Arrigo, Chair of the Community Advisory Committee (CAC), began his report by stating that the committee met on Tuesday, June 10, 2014. At which time the committee received a few presentations with the first being a budget review presented by F Scott Jewell, an updated Social Service Survey and the Metro Review of Access Services, presented by Matthew Avancena. Mr. Arrigo stated that one of his favorite presentations was presented by Eric Haack which was related to the premium ADA service that Access Services provides. He also added that it always amazed him how many great premium services Access provides, such as the Return to Work program, Parents with Disabilities program and extended reservation hours.
Mr. Arrigo concluded his report by stating that he was always amazed how staff met with each of the individuals that made public comment after the meeting.
Linda Evans, Vice Chair of the Transportation Professional Advisory Committee (TPAC) stated that the committee met on Thursday, June 12, 2014 which she felt was very productive with many items to discuss. She added that staff provided a couple of presentations, the 2014/15 budget which was on the agenda for the Board’s consideration of approval. Matthew Avancena provided a presentation on the Social Services Transportation Inventory report which highlighted a number of key areas relative to Access Services role as the CTSA for the region. There was also a presentation on the Access 20/20 initiative which was the effort to start agency’s planning and preparing Access Services’ short range transportation plan. She stated that as part of this initiative staff would conduct outreach and solicit feedback from TPAC, CAC and Access Services Member Agencies regarding the Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP).
Ms. Evans also reported that Mr. Avancena also provided a presentation on non ADA services provided by Access Services. She added that the TPAC committee was generally supportive of the services currently provided by Access Services because they were services that helped the customers’ experience. Ms. Evans continued to report that the TPAC committee formed an officer nominations subcommittee to nominate officers for next year. She concluded her report by stating that Mr. Avancena announced that Access Services fares would be increasing on July 1, 2014.
Chairperson Barnes thanked Ms. Evans and Mr. Arrigo for their detailed report and stated that the Board appreciated their ongoing leadership.
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
Michael Conrad stated that he was present today to speak on behalf of his friend that was also an Access rider. He stated that his friend and her PCA were scheduled to be picked up on Saturday at 3:00 p.m. in Long Beach traveling to Culver City but the vehicle arrived late. He stated that the real issue was that there were two people in the Toyota Prius when it arrived and it was not a contracted taxi cab company that worked for Access but he felt that Access Services should still be held responsible. Mr. Conrad added that they finally got everyone into the Prius and from Long Beach to Inglewood no one in the back seat was wearing their seat belts because they could not connect them because it was too crowded.
Mr. Conrad concluded his public comment by stating that overcrowding these small vehicles really needed to stop because it was a danger to the riders and he felt that the Metro Board of Directors and the Board of Supervisors should know about these issues.
Ms. Verrinder informed Mr. Conrad that Access Services Project Administrator for the Eastern and West Central regions, Alfredo Torales would follow-up with him after the meeting.
Rachele Goeman stated that she scheduled a pick-up last Tuesday, June 17, 2014 traveling from Redondo to Paramount and the vehicle arrived on-time but it was filled with an oversized wheelchair and two riders. She also mentioned if the vehicle was full why was it sent to pick her up. She added that she had to wait another 45 minutes for another vehicle to arrive. Ms. Goeman concluded her public comment by asking why this continued to happen to her because it was not the first time.
Ms. Verrinder informed Ms. Goeman that Access Services Operations Administrator Jack Garate, would follow-up with her after the meeting.
Jesse Padilla stated he was also present to make a public comment on behalf of a friend that did not get picked up on June 9th from the East Los Angeles Regional Center. He added that he had to utilize the free fare program but if he did not have the use of that program what could he have done? He asked if that was an ongoing issue and he would like this issue addressed. Mr. Padilla concluded his public comment by stating that he continues to enjoy serving as a CAC member.
Ms. Verrinder informed Mr. Padilla that Access Services Project Administrator for the Southern and Santa Clarita regions, Rogelio Gomez, would follow-up with him after the meeting.
CONSIDERATION TO AMEND CONTRACT SCOPE FOR ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION SERVICES CONTRACT (AS-2441)
Access Services Manager of Eligibility, Kurt Hagen provided a brief presentation on staff’s recommendation to amend the contract scope for eligibility determination services.
Board Questions &
Comments: Director Levy asked what the daily capacity of the new facility was. Mr. Hagen replied that they would be conducting 12 to 13 evaluations per day and it would depend specifically on the demand because the demand fluctuates considerably on a daily basis in the Antelope Valley.
Director Levy stated that he was surprised to see that the startup cost was only $14,000, he asked if the new facility would have the same layout as the CARE facility in Los Angeles. Mr. Hagen replied that it would not have the same layout as the Los Angeles facility but staff anticipates a much smaller amount of clientele at the Antelope Valley facility. The Antelope Valley facility would only have one Transit Evaluator and one Transit Mobility Specialist. The facility also had some outdoor space to simulate the items that they simulate at the Los Angeles facility.
Director Levy asked if there would also be vehicles at the facility. Mr. Hagen replied that staff was currently looking into some possibilities for this location. Director Levy added that without the vehicles it would be a different experience because they would not get the full experience of boarding a vehicle or paying a fare.
Mr. Hagen agreed with Director Levy and added since Diversified Transit did not have a vehicle at their facility staff found other alternatives to simulate the individual paying the fare or boarding a vehicle. Ms. Verrinder added that the Santa Clarita and Antelope Valley areas have been growing and Access Services has been moving towards having an eligibility site very similar to the eligibility site in Los Angeles but currently the demand has not been justified. As of now she believed that the site would be open five days a week with the one Transit Evaluator and in the next couple of months staff would be bringing something to the Board to create a more permanent site like the one in the Los Angeles.
Director Levy asked what happened to the Mobile Evaluation Unit (MEU) and what type of vehicle was it. Mr. Hagen replied that it was a minivan and for the time being the MEU would be utilized in the Santa Clarita area because Access would still provide MEU service for the next couple of months in Santa Clarita, after that the vehicle would go back into the general service.
Motion: Director Gombert moved approval of Item 8.
Second: Director Ida seconded the motion.
Discussion: None.
Roll Call: Chairperson Barnes asked for a roll call.
In Favor: Directors Levy, Nwokike, Nason, Turner, DeVera, Ida, Troost, and Gombert.
Opposed: None.
Abstention: None.
Pass/Fail: The motion carried.
CONSIDERATION TO AMEND CONTRACT AND ADD FUNDS FOR ELIGIBILITY SERVICE CONTRACT (AS-2441)
Access Services Chief Operating Officer, F Scott Jewell provided a brief presentation on staff’s recommendation to amend the contract and add funds for eligibility services.
Mr. Jones stated that this was a surprise to staff and everyone since all the documentation was prepared and provided to the landlord. Staff had every expectation that it would be approved because he had discussions with the landlord’s counsel and then suddenly everything changed, so this was why the item was coming back to the Board as an amended item at the last minute.
Public Comment: Item 9 (Consideration to Amend Contract and Add Funds for Eligibility Service Contract
Hugh Hallenberg stated that he would like to commend CARE Evaluators for doing a great job but why did it take so long to complete the evaluation if an individual was able bodied then the first thing they would lose was the ability to safely drive their own vehicle. Mr. Hallenberg reiterated, why it takes so long for an individual to become eligible for Access Services.
Mr. Hallenberg thanked Chairperson Barnes and stated that Access Services never took into account the time that the rider needed to get to where they were going ever since they became a shared ride system. He stated that he felt that was wrong and was something that staff needed to look into.
Ms. Verrinder informed Mr. Hallenberg that Access Services Manager of Eligibility, Kurt Hagen, would follow-up with him after the meeting.
Board Questions &
Comments: None.
Motion: Director Levy moved approval of Item 9.
Second: Director DeVera seconded the motion.
Discussion: None.
Roll Call: Chairperson Barnes asked for a roll call.
In Favor: Directors Nwokike, Nason, Turner, DeVera, Ida, Troost, Gombert, and Levy.
Opposed: None.
Abstention: None.
Pass/Fail: The motion carried.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Director Levy pulled Items 10-b, 10-c, 10-e, 10-f and 10-g, for purposes of discussion.
Motion: Director Nason moved approval of the remaining Items 10-a, and 10-d on the Consent Calendar.
Second: Director DeVera seconded the motion.
Discussion: None.
Roll Call: Chairperson Barnes asked for a roll call.
In Favor: Directors Nason, Turner, DeVera, Ida, Troost, Gombert, Levy and Nwokike.
Opposed: None.
Abstention: None.
Pass/Fail: The motion carried.
DISCUSSION: Item 10-b (Consideration to Amend Contract for TAP Card Productions (AS-3030)
Director Levy stated that he was under the impression that staff was going to move away from the VISA card aspect of the TAP card. He asked if staff was going to continue with it because of the contract.
Mr. Jewell replied that the item was added to the consent calendar in case Metro’s procuring of a new TAP card vendor was delayed further than what Access Services anticipated. He added that Metro just issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the production of the TAP cards without the VISA logo which was about two months later than what staff anticipated, so Item 10-b was to request more money in case there were further delays in the TAP card production. Mr. Jewell also mentioned that if there were no further delays then staff should be able to meet with Metro’s procurement process to make the transition to the TAP card without the VISA logo.
Director Levy asked if staff knew the cost of the TAP card without the VISA logo. Mr. Jewell replied that staff anticipated a couple of dollars off the cost for each card but until Metro’s process was complete, staff did not have a dollar amount. Director Levy also asked if this was the same contractor that Metro currently utilized. Mr. Jewell replied “no,” Access Services contract was with Ready Credit.
Board Questions &
Comments: None.
Motion: Director Levy moved approval of Item 10-b.
Second: Director Nwokike seconded the motion.
Discussion: None.
Roll Call: Chairperson Barnes asked for a roll call.
In Favor: Directors Turner, DeVera, Ida, Gombert, Troost, Levy, Nwokike, and Nason.
Opposed: None.
Abstention: None.
Pass/Fail: The motion carried.
DISCUSSION: Item 10-c (Consideration to Amend Contract Scope and Add Funds for Eastern Region Service Contract (AS-3421) San Gabriel Transit, Inc.)
Director Levy asked how many calls per day did the region receive that were actually related to eligibility. Mr. Gomez replied that it was anticipated an additional one hundred calls per day would be added. Director Levy also asked how many call takers did the region already have in place and was there a dramatic increase to require hiring an additional person to handle those calls.
Mr. Gomez replied that currently there were nine call takers and on average each call taker would handle roughly 90 to 100 calls per day.
Board Questions &
Comments: None.
Motion: Director Nwokike moved approval of Item 10-c.
Second: Director Gombert seconded the motion.
Discussion: None.
Roll Call: Chairperson Barnes asked for a roll call.
In Favor: Directors Ida, Gombert, Troost, Levy, Nwokike, Nason, Turner, and DeVera.
Opposed: None.
Abstention: None.
Pass/Fail: The motion carried.
DISCUSSION: Item 10-e (Consideration to Approve Purchase of Three Staff Vehicles)
Director Levy stated that currently Access Services has eight staff vehicles, how often were those vehicles being utilized. Mr. Streiff replied that during the day the vehicles are being used all day with some staff waiting for them to return so they can do their site visits. He also added that there are 80 employees in the office and during the day it can get really busy which could cause a shortage. Mr. Streiff informed the Board that he selected the CNG Honda’s to give staff an idea of what it was like to drive a vehicle with alternative fuel options.
Director Levy asked where staff would fuel the CNG vehicles. Mr. Streiff replied that staff would use Clean Energy cards and would have a couple of options - Foothill Transit and the City of El Monte, which just opened an alternative fuel station around the corner from Access Services’ office.
Ms. Verrinder also added that in the proposed budget for the next year there are four new positions for Road Supervisors and those additional vehicles would help with the additional staff. Director Levy asked what kind of vehicles would the Road Supervisors be using because the CNG Honda’s did not seem to be the correct vehicles for the new Road Supervisors. Ms. Verrinder replied that the new CNG Honda’s would replace some of the current accessible staff vehicles that the new Road Supervisors would be using.
Board Questions &
Comments: None.
Motion: Director Nason moved approval of Item 10-e.
Second: Director Levy seconded the motion.
Discussion: None.
Roll Call: Chairperson Barnes asked for a roll call.
In Favor: Directors Levy, Nwokike, Nason, Turner, DeVera, Ida, Gombert, and Troost.
Opposed: None.
Abstention: None.
Pass/Fail: The motion carried.
DISCUSSION: Item 10-f (Consideration for Approval to Purchase up to Thirteen CNG Vehicles for Paratransit Service)
Director Levy stated that during earlier discussion it was mentioned that there was a need to have a third party audit for vehicle construction because these vehicles were being purchased from the dealer and because they were already built did that mean that they did not have to do an audit? Mr. Streiff replied that these vehicles were built in accordance with the ADA FTA approved specifications (in other words, generic line built) so no inspection during construction was required.
Director Levy asked if staff only had to do the inspection when it was a custom built vehicle. Mr. Streiff replied “yes,” after a vehicle was cut that was when they had to do the inspections.
Board Questions &
Comments: None.
Motion: Director Levy moved approval of Item 10-f.
Second: Director Nason seconded the motion.
Discussion: None.
Roll Call: Chairperson Barnes asked for a roll call.
In Favor: Directors Levy, Nwokike, Nason, Turner, DeVera, Ida, Gombert, and Troost.
Opposed: None.
Abstention: None.
Pass/Fail: The motion carried.
DISCUSSION: Item 10-g (Consideration to Enter Into a Facility Space Sublease)
Director Levy stated that the lease rate seemed reasonable but did staff look at any competing sites or was this the only location. Mr. Jewell replied that staff looked at the current Diversified location and also looked at Southland’s because they were offering more space in terms of what was available and the ability to move into the location immediately. Also as Ms. Verrinder mentioned staff was looking into a more permanent plan.
Director Levy asked what the length of the lease was. Mr. Jewell replied that the lease was for a two year period with an option to terminate the lease immediately since the current contractor Southland Transit was utilizing part of the facility for their regional center for the Antelope Valley. Director Levy stated that it seemed confusing, but would it be correct to state that this was a sub-lease of a sub-lease of a lease. The owner leases the facility to Southland Transit, Southland leases to Access and Access leases to CARE. Mr. Jewell replied that CARE would be a licensee. Mr. Jones added that it was essentially a sub-lease.
Ms. Verrinder added that outside of the growth within the Antelope Valley, CARE Evaluators and the MEU had experienced some issues with crime in the Antelope Valley to the point that Access did not want to go to individuals’ homes in that area. Staff looked to see what sub-leases that they had through a real estate agent but one of Access Services contractors, San Gabriel Transit through their subsidiary company Southland Transit, had a very large building that they were willing to sublet. Staff went out to look at the location which was a temporary space but it fit the need with a little more space than the site that was being used. She added that this would allow staff to get the MEU off the streets of Antelope Valley and eligibility into a more permanent space.
Director Levy asked if the building was fully accessible. Ms. Verrinder replied that the building was fully accessible and had an accessible restroom but there were some improvements to be made and the landlord was willing make them. The location was very similar to the space that was currently being used at Diversified. Director Levy asked what year was the building built. Mr. Jewell replied that it was built in 1971. Director Levy added that there had been some changes this year for the requirements related to restrooms, he recommended that staff look into those changes for the current code.
Board Questions &
Comments: None.
Motion: Director Nwokike moved approval of Item 10-g.
Second: Director Gombert seconded the motion.
Discussion: None.
Roll Call: Chairperson Barnes asked for a roll call.
In Favor: Directors Nwokike, Nason, Turner, DeVera, Ida, Gombert, Troost, and Levy.
Opposed: None.
Abstention: None.
Pass/Fail: The motion carried.
CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014/15
Access Services Controller, Hector Rodriguez provided a brief presentation on the budget subcommittee’s recommendation for the FY 2014/15 budget approval.
Chairperson Barnes stated that at the last Board of Directors meeting there was an item brought forward related to potential conflict of interest by certain Board members. He stated that he asked Access Services legal counsel, Jim Jones, to research the item and provide an opinion.
Mr. Jones stated that some of the members of the Access Services Board of Directors were employed directly by other public transit agencies and some of those agencies may receive reimbursement for their participation with the Free Fare program. An issue was raised whether or not a Director could vote on the overall budget for Access Services with a part of that budget including an amount for the Free Fare program.
Mr. Jones added that he issued an opinion that a Director in fact can make such a vote without having a permissible conflict of interest but could not vote on the actual appropriation of those funds towards such a contract. A contract with an agency in which they were directly employed by that very department of that agency would be a conflict of interest and they could not vote on that issue but in his opinion they can vote on the overall budget that may contain authorization of funds but not the appropriation.
Board Questions &
Comments: Director Levy stated had the finding gone the other way it would have indicated things had gone wrong in previous years so in some respects Mr. Jones was in a conflict of interest to make a ruling on that so it would have been nice to have an outside viewpoint. Director Levy also added that he felt the better way to do this would be to segregate the two items and everyone vote on all the budget items except the Free Fare Program and all the individual with a conflict of interest recuse themselves on the Free Fare Item. Mr. Jones stated that he disagreed with Director Levy.
Director Turner stated that she checked with the City of Torrance’s counsel and was approved to vote on these items.
Motion: Director Turner moved approval of the budget subcommittee’s recommendation.
Second: Director Ida seconded the motion.
Discussion: Director Levy asked where in the budget was the match amounts for some of the grants listed. Mr. Rodriguez replied that they were contained within the revenue section, staff takes whatever amounts are needed for matching and deduct them from the Prop C allocations.
Chairperson Barnes thanked the members of the budget subcommittee who spent considerable time on the budget looking at the numbers.
Roll Call: Chairperson Barnes asked for a roll call.
In Favor: Directors Nason, Turner, DeVera, Ida, Gombert, Troost, Levy, and Nwokike.
Opposed: None.
Abstention: None.
Pass/Fail: The motion carried.
CONSIDERATION OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMPENSATION
Access Services Legal Counsel, Jim Jones stated that Access Services Executive Director Shelly Verrinder was employed by the agency under an employment agreement and the agreement provides for annual reviews and compensation adjustments. Access Services “Best Practices”, which are required by law, have a compensation committee which was a standing committee that meets and was responsible for recommending to the full Board the annual salary bonus and other benefits direct or indirect of the agency’s Executive Director and Director of Finance and Administration and such members of senior management as the Board may request. He stated that it was his understanding that the committee had met and had a recommendation and discussed with the Executive Director a compensation package increase for the ensuing year which would commence on July 1, 2014. A five percent increase was proposed to the Executive Director and was acceptable and was now on the agenda for the Board to consider and vote on.
Chairperson Barnes stated that he was the Chair of the compensation committee along with Vice Chairperson Nason and Director Gombert. The committee met and reviewed the performance evaluation of the Executive Director and agreed upon a five percent compensation adjustment.
Board Questions &
Comments: None
Motion: Director Ida moved approval of the compensation committee’s recommendation.
Second: Director Nason seconded the motion.
Discussion: None.
Roll Call: Chairperson Barnes asked for a roll call.
In Favor: Directors Turner, DeVera, Ida, Gombert, Troost, Levy, Nwokike, and Nason.
Opposed: None.
Abstention: None.
Pass/Fail: The motion carried.
CONSIDERATION TO AWARD SYSTEM HARDWARE CONTRACT (AS-3729)
Access Services Senior Manager of Information Technology, Bill Tsuei provided a brief presentation on staff’s recommendation to award the system hardware contract.
Board Questions &
Comments: Director Levy stated that there were seven sites listed; one in each region plus CARE Evaluators. Mr. Tsuei replied “that was correct.” Director Levy asked if staff took into account the new site for CARE Evaluators in the Antelope Valley. Mr. Tsuei replied that it was after the Board item was submitted but staff was definitely going to include that in the design. Director Levy asked if staff was going to come back to the Board for more money. Mr. Tsuei replied for hardware “no” because the hardware would reside in the central location and the provider sites would connect to that.
Director Gombert asked if Mr. Tsuei could briefly explain the GSA information technology schedule, he asked if that was a government cooperative purchasing agreement. Mr. Tsuei replied “that was correct,” it was approved by the federal government under schedule 70 IT purchasing schedule.
Motion: Director DeVera moved approval of the budget subcommittee’s recommendation.
Second: Director Turner seconded the motion.
Discussion: None.
Roll Call: Chairperson Barnes asked for a roll call.
In Favor: Directors Ida, Gombert, Troost, Levy, Nwokike, Nason, Turner, and DeVera.
Opposed: None.
Abstention: None.
Pass/Fail: The motion carried.
CONSIDERATION TO PURCHASE VEHICLES FOR PARATRANSIT SERVICE FISCAL YEAR 2014/15
Access Services Manager of Fleet Design and Maintenance, Rick Streiff, and Hector Rodriguez, Controller provided a brief presentation on staff’s recommendation to purchase paratransit vehicles for fiscal year 2014/15.
Ms. Verrinder added that this was the first time the Access Services Board had seen a vehicle item this early in the year. Metro had asked staff not to carry forward capital funds or not to use capital funds in order to balance the operating budget later in the year. Ms. Verrinder added that as soon as the MOU was signed with Metro, Access staff will submit the vehicle order and all of the capital funds would be expended by February or somewhere around that time frame so there would be no money sitting in an account for capital funds.
Mr. Rodriguez added that the only exception would be the section 5310 funds which would be entirely dependent on Metro’s Board approval cycle. Ms. Verrinder also added that the majority of the capital money would be expended much earlier than usual, for example, a Board item was submitted for consideration and approval to purchase some vehicles for this year but in this case staff was asking to purchase all of the vehicles except for the vehicles that need to go out to bid.
Board Questions &
Comments: Director Levy stated that at the last meeting or the meeting before there was a mention of developing a vehicle allocation formula and was that something that would apply to these vehicles. Ms. Verrinder replied that staff started the basis of this plan with the vehicle allocation formula but staff was still in the process of finalizing that based upon the number of vehicles needed that Access provides versus the vehicles needed for the contractor. The next step would be to meet with each of the contractors in order to determine their vehicle needs and now she believes that the process was being fine-tuned and would go back to the CAC and TPAC for review.
Mr. Jewell replied that the allocation formula would go to the CAC and TPAC in August and if the timing worked out then it would come back to the Board for consideration at the August or September Board meeting.
Motion: Director Nwokike moved approval of the budget subcommittee’s recommendation.
Second: Director Levy seconded the motion.
Discussion: None.
Roll Call: Chairperson Barnes asked for a roll call.
In Favor: Directors Gombert, Troost, Levy, Nwokike, Nason, Turner, DeVera, and Levy.
Opposed: None.
Abstention: None.
Pass/Fail: The motion carried.
Chairperson Barnes mentioned that the chart showing vehicle health was the first time the Board had seen those in that format. He added that he personally felt that it was very helpful in terms of seeing how the Access fleet breaks out and where we were with the vehicles. Chairperson Barnes stated that he would encourage staff to continue to use the chart. Mr. Jewell stated that staff would add it to the Board Box under the operations report on a quarterly basis.
STATUS UPDATE ON METRO’S REVIEW OF ACCESS SERVICES
Access Services Manager of Planning and Coordination, Matthew Avancena provided a brief update on Metro’s review of Access Services.
Board Questions &
Comments: Director Levy stated that in terms of measuring the impact of the travel training program why wasn’t staff looking at the TAP card data to see the before and after and how many transit trips were taken by a rider. Mr. Avancena replied that staff was looking into that possibility but staff would also have to look into privacy issues. Staff would also need to consult with legal counsel because that was a methodology that was being used elsewhere. Director Levy stated that staff could then compare that information to the number of Access trips.
Ms. Verrinder added that when the Free Fare program started there was a lot of input within the community and one of the assurances that the community wanted was that the data would not be used against them or used to evaluate their eligibility. Ms. Verridner mentioned that staff was looking into putting together a subcommittee and in the item it was also mentioned that staff would partner with Easter Seals to look at this nationally regarding travel training issues such as how was smart card data being used within the eligibility process across the nation and to get some input on best practices.
Chairperson Barnes thanked Mr. Avancena for his detailed presentation on status update on Metro’s review of Access Services and reminded the Board that this was an information item only and no action was needed.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S REPORT
Access Services Executive Director, Shelly Verrinder began her report by reminding everyone that the Access Roadeo was coming up on Saturday, June 28th. She also mentioned that a schedule of the events taking place that day was distributed to each of the Directors which also included a new event called the Call Center Challenge.
Ms. Verrinder briefly reviewed the Metro Review of Access Services by stating that what was presented to the Metro Board of Directors was the customer satisfaction survey and the Town Hall meetings. There were two different surveys done, the first was for active riders and the second was a survey of individuals that do not use Access Services but are eligible. Ms. Verrinder also related some of the comments from the Town Hall meetings. She also stated that the Metro Board had requested that Access Services classify those into an action plan as to how staff was going to address them. Staff has been working with a consultant that worked with Metro along with Todd Remington from Fairfax Research Group to try and put together a comprehensive presentation for the Board along with an action plan for the August Board of Directors meeting.
Ms. Verrinder also reported that there was a lot of discussion at the Metro Executive Management Committee meeting on annual independent surveys being done on Access Services by Metro and there were a number of different suggestions and Todd Remington came up with a good suggestion so staff will be working with him. What staff and everyone agreed on was not to duplicate surveys or audits that are done. Ms. Verrinder concluded her report by reminding everyone that in July there would not be a Board meeting because a few of the Directors, along with Donna Cisco, will be attending the APTA Board Member & Board Support Seminar in Cleveland, Ohio.
BOARD MEMBER COMMUNICATION
Mr. Arrigo thanked Mr. Foster for the many years he had worked with the CAC as their liaison. He also welcomed Ms. Sherry Kelley and stated that he looked forward to working with her.
Director Levy stated that at the Metro Board meetings and at a previous agency he was with the power point presentations were always handed out as part of the packages and were made available to the public. He stated that he was not sure if that was a Brown Act requirement, he asked if staff could check into this because the Power Points had a lot of information and some of the questions that he was going to ask were answered in the Power Point presentation, so it would be nice to have those ahead of time. Director Levy also added that there was some discussion at Metro getting some key performance indicators from Access staff. He stated that he was aware that they were provided within the Board Box but it may be a good idea for staff to set up a subcommittee to develop them and bring them back to the Board at the next Board meeting in August for consideration so Metro could have them for the new year.
Director Turner thanked staff for the presentations they presented at today meeting.
Director Nason stated that she would be attending the APTA Board Members Seminar in Cleveland, Ohio. She added that the seminar was a wonderful opportunity to learn from other Board members from all over the United States and Canada. Director Nason also mentioned that she was a member of the APTA ADA Paratransit committee and they had been working very hard on a presentation/session that they would be presenting at the seminar on “Preparing Individuals to Ride Public Transportation.”
Director DeVera stated that this past weekend she received a letter from a provider thanking her for her participation in the San Gabriel Express Booking System. She stated that she took a look back and realized that riders rarely received recognition, so she thanked San Gabriel Transit and mentioned that she was the first Board member to condemn the Express Booking System but as a result she can book a “to and from” trip in less than five minutes so she hoped that they would continue with the program.
Director Nwokike thanked Access Services especially Rogelio Gomez and his team for the outreach they provided at the Service Center for Independent Living, ILC in Claremont and for meeting with their blind group and teaching them how to ride Access Services. She also thanked F Scott Jewell for attending their open house and Steve Chang for providing a lot of outreach to their Center in Claremont.
Director Gombert thanked staff for their multiple presentations at today’s meeting. He also asked if staff could present a summary of any impact to Access Services from the recently passed governor’s budget and Cap and Trade revenue in the form of a presentation at the next Board meeting or in written correspondence to the Board of Directors.
Director Nason stated that if anyone needed a professional speaker she would recommend Mr. Steve Chang. She added that Mr. Chang spoke at her Annual Awards Dinner on June 19, 2014. Mr. Chang introduced a veteran and his speech was so moving and he spoke beautifully.
NEW BUSINESS SUBSEQUENT TO THE POSTING OF THE AGENDA
No new business was heard subsequent to the posting of the agenda.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Director Nason moved to adjourn the meeting.
Second: Director DeVera seconded the motion.
Vote: Via Voice Vote.
Pass/Fail: All were in favor and the meeting adjourned at 2:52 p.m.
Approval
Theresa DeVera, Secretary Date
ITEM 9-a
AUGUST 18, 2014
TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FROM: DONNA CISCO, ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGER/BOARD LIAISON
RE: CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE BOARD OF DIRECTORS’ COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS
ISSUE:
It is necessary to appoint Board members to the Audit Committee, Quality Services Subcommittee, and Compensation Committee.
RECOMMENDATION:
Appoint Board members or there designated appointee to serve on the following committees effective August 25, 2014:
Audit Committee: Director Daniel Levy, Michelle Caldwell from Foothill Transit, nominated by Chairperson Doran Barnes and Jim Mills from Torrance Transit, nominated by Director Kim Turner.
Quality Services Subcommittee: Director Nwokike.
Compensation Committee: Directors Barnes, Nason, and Gombert.
BACKGROUND:
In July of 2005, the Board adopted a resolution forming and appointing an Audit Committee and Compensation Committee. The above individuals are proposed for these committee. In addition, the Board appoints one of its members to the Quality Services Subcommittee (QSS) of the CAC.
The resolution forming the committees does not specify a term and the law does not specifically require it, but good agency governance principles suggest that standing committee members without specific terms be reappointed annually.
ACCESS SERVICES
APPOINTMENT OF AUDIT COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, California law (Gov. Code §12586(e) (2)) requires that the Board Directors establish an audit committee, and the Bylaws of the corporation do not limit the Board’s authority to do so;
WHEREAS, regardless of state law, the Board of Directors notes that the adoption of an audit committee will, among other things, strengthen the independence of this Agency's independent auditors and, if applicable, this Agency’s internal auditors thereby helping to assure the objectivity of agency financial statements and the maintenance of appropriate accounting practices and internal accounting controls; and
WHEREAS, this Board of Directors has determined that it is in the best interests of this corporation and of its members that an audit committee be appointed, with powers as set forth in these resolutions;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that an audit committee (the “Audit Committee”) consisting of ____ persons is hereby created, and the following persons are appointed thereto, none of whom are staff members or the chairman of the finance committee or have any material financial interest in any entity doing business with this Agency: ________, _______ and _________ with the Director of Finance and Administration being an ex-officio member of the committee.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that to the full extent permitted by applicable law, the Audit Committee shall exercise the following powers and duties:
(a) To meet with the independent auditors of this corporation at least annually to discuss and review the scope of the annual audit, any open questions as to the choice of acceptable accounting principles to be applied, any matters of difference of opinion or dispute between the independent auditors and the officers or employees of this corporation, and all other matters relating to the auditors' relationship with the corporation;
(b) If applicable, to meet with internal auditors of this corporation, at intervals selected by the Audit Committee as sufficient to carry out its duties under these resolutions, to raise with, and received from, such auditors questions relating to: internal controls and other matters respecting the corporation, the internal auditors' duties and their relationship to other officers and employees of the corporation, and other matters germane to effective performance by the internal auditors of their duties;
(c) To advise and assist the Board of Directors in evaluating the auditors; independent performance, including the scope and adequacy of the auditors' review;
(d) To nominate, for approval of the Board of Directors, the firm of independent auditors to be submitted to the members of the Agency for ratification at the annual meeting thereof if such submission is deemed desirable by the Board and to the extent permitted by law, negotiate the compensation of such auditors and to recommend to the Board of Directors the termination of the auditors;
(e) To review the audit and the Agency’s annual financial statements, including the footnotes, and discuss such statements with the independent auditors prior to release of the corporation's annual reports to members;
(f) To determine whether to accept the audit;
(g) To receive and consider the independent auditors' comments and suggestions as to internal audit and control procedures, adequacy of staff, and other matters, and based upon such comments and suggestions, to make such recommendations to the Board as the Audit Committee shall deem necessary and appropriate;'
(h) To periodically consult with the independent auditors as to the result of any internal reviews of this Agency’s financial statements performed by them and to review with such independent auditors and the corporation's management from time to time the extent to which changes or improvements in financial and accounting practices recommended by such independent auditors or management personnel, have been implemented; and
(i) To meet with and request and obtain reports and information from the Agency’s officers, employees and others as the Audit Committee, in consultation with the Executive Director and/or Director of Finance and Administration, shall determine to be necessary in carrying out their duties as set forth above.
(j) To approve the performance of any non-auditing services by the audit firm and to preserve the independence of the auditors.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that each member of the Audit Committee shall serve as such until such member's successor shall be appointed by the Board of Directors or until the existence of the Audit Committee is terminated by the Board. In the event that any member of the Audit Committee shall resign, the vacancy so caused shall be filled by the Board.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that two (2) members of the Audit Committee shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that meetings of the Audit Committee may be held in any place, and in any manner, permitted by applicable law and the Bylaws of this Agency. The Audit Committee shall adopt rules of procedure and shall meet as provided by those rules or as provided by this resolution and the Bylaws in the absence of a rule duly adopted by the Audit Committee to the contrary. Meetings shall be held when called by any member of the Audit Committee, the Board of Directors, or otherwise as permitted by the Bylaws, the call to be communicated orally or in writing to each member of the Audit Committee at least twenty-four (24) hours before the hour fixed for the meeting; the call shall be directed to each member at his or her business address (if sent for receipt during regular business hours), or residence (if not sent for receipt during regular business hours). All calls and notices and any such waivers, consents, or approvals respecting a meeting shall be made a part of the minutes of the meeting.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that each member of the Audit Committee shall not be compensated for serving on such committee but shall be reimbursed for reasonable expenses incurred in attending meetings of the committee.
BACKGROUND
California Government Code § 12586(e) (2) requires that:
a. Certain non-profit entities create an audit committee.
b. That no staff member can be a member of that committee.
c. The audit committee may include persons who are not members of the Board of Directors.
d. Members of the Audit Committee shall not receive any compensation from the corporation in excess of the compensation, if any, received by members of the Board of Directors for service on the Board and shall not have a material financial interest in any entity doing business with the entity.
e. Subject to the supervision of the Board of Directors, the Audit Committee shall be responsible for recommending to the Board of Directors the retention and termination of the independent auditor and may negotiate the independent auditor's compensation, on behalf of the Board of Directors.
f. The Audit Committee shall confer with the auditor to satisfy its members that the financial affairs of the corporation are in order.
g. The audit committee shall review and determine whether to accept the audit;
h. The audit committee shall assure that any non-audit services performed by the auditing firm conform with standards for auditor independence; and
i. The Audit Committee shall approve performance of non-audit services by the auditing firm.
ACCESS SERVICES INCORPORATED
APPOINTMENT OF COMPENSATION COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, California law (Gov. Code § 12596(g)) requires that the compensation, including benefits, of the Executive Director and the Director of Finance and Administration upon hiring, renewal or extension of the term of employment or upon modification of compensation be reviewed and a determination made as to whether such compensation is just and reasonable;
WHEREAS, this Board of Directors notes that the appointment of a Compensation Committee composed of ___________ to review and approve the compensation of executives promotes a forum providing independent oversight over the fairness of the compensation arrangements for such executives and greater management accountability; and
WHEREAS, this Board has determined that it is in the best interests of this Agency and of its members that such a committee be appointed, with powers as set forth in these resolutions, and that the committee be called the "Compensation Committee" of this Board;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Committee (the "Compensation Committee") consisting of ____ persons is hereby created, and the following persons are hereby appointed as its members: ______________________
FURTHER RESOLVED, that each member of the Compensation Committee shall serve until such member's successor shall be appointed by the Board or until the existence of the Compensation Committee is terminated by the Board of Directors. In the event that any member of the Compensation Committee shall resign or cease to be a Director of this corporation, the vacancy thus caused shall be filled by the Board.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that two (2) members of the Compensation Committee shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that meetings of the Compensation Committee may be held in any place, and in any manner, permitted by applicable law and the Bylaws of this corporation. The Compensation Committee shall adopt rules of procedure and shall meet as provided by those rules or as provided by this resolution and the Bylaws in the absence of a rule duly adopted by the Compensation Committee to the contrary. Meetings shall be held when called by any member of the Compensation Committee or the Board of Directors or otherwise permitted by the Bylaws, the call to be communicated orally or in writing to each member of the Compensation Committee at least twenty-four (24) hours before the hour fixed for the meeting; the call shall be directed to each member at his or her business address (if sent for receipt during regular business hours). All calls and notices and any such waivers, consents, or approvals respecting a meeting shall be made a part of the minutes of the meeting.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that to the extent permitted by applicable law, the Compensation Committee shall exercise the following powers and duties:
(a) Review and approve or recommend to the full Board the annual salary, bonus and other benefits, direct and indirect, of this Agency’s Executive Director and Director of Finance and Administration and such other members of senior management as the Board may request;
(b) Upon hiring, renewal or extension of the term of employment or modification of compensation for the Executive Director or Director of Finance and Administration, determine whether the compensation (including benefits) for such executives is just and reasonable and report such determination and the basis thereof to the Board.
(c) Administer executive compensation or incentive compensation arrangements for this Agency, to the extent that the Board of Directors would otherwise be involved in the administration thereof and to review and submit to the Board of Directors' recommendations concerning new executive compensation;
(d) Establish and periodically review this Agency’s polices regarding management prerequisites;
(e) Establish, when applicable, guidelines for incidental use by Agency personnel and their families of Agency resources that are not otherwise being utilized;
(f) Periodically review and submit to the full Board of Directors recommendations regarding non-officer employee compensation and benefit policies;
(g) Function, on an ad hoc basis, as the committee having delegated authority to determine whether or not indemnification should be provided to officers and directors who are also employees;
(h) Review and submit to the full Board of Directors recommendations concerning long-range planning for executive development and succession; and
(i) Consult with appropriate management personnel and/or outside consultants periodically concerning levels of executive compensation, emerging trends in the compensation area and other matters which would be relevant in carrying out their duties as set forth above.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Compensation Committee shall be subject at all times to the control of the Board, which shall have the power to revise or alter any action taken by the Compensation Committee, provided, however, that no rights of third parties that have attached or arisen shall be adversely affected thereby.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that each member of the Compensation Committee shall not be compensated for serving on such committee but shall be reimbursed for reasonable expenses incurred in attending meetings of the Compensation Committee.
ITEM 9-b
AUGUST 18, 2014
TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FROM: RICK STREIFF, MANAGER OF FLEET DESIGN AND MAINTENANCE
RE: CONSIDERATION TO AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE OF 13 VEHICLES FOR PARATRANSIT SERVICE
ISSUE:
Board approval is required to purchase thirteen vehicles for paratransit service during Fiscal Year 2014-2015.
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize staff to purchase thirteen (13) low-emission Flex Fuel ADA-accessible low floor Dodge minivans for a cost not to exceed $580,000.
IMPACT ON BUDGET:
The funds needed for this purchase were included in the Access FY2013/14 budget. These vehicles are being funded by a grant of 5310 funds from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Grant approval was formally received on June 12, 2014. The federal grant of 5310 funds requires a local match of 11.47%. The estimated total expenditure includes applicable sales tax, license and fees.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
No alternatives were considered.
EFFECT OF APPROVAL OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
If this staff recommendation is approved by the Board, the staff would be authorized, but not required, to negotiate and enter into a written contract for the purchase of vehicles upon terms and conditions no less favorable to Access Services than those proposed above. Access Services would not be legally bound to the vehicle purchase contract unless such contract is incorporated into a formal written agreement executed by all parties thereto and approved as to form by this entity’s legal counsel.
BACKGROUND:
The paratransit vehicles scheduled for replacement have each accumulated approximately 240,000 miles. The FTA useful life standard for these vehicles is 4 years or 100,000 miles.
Procurement
As was the case with our most recent vehicle procurement, staff is proposing to purchase these vehicles through an approved vendor of the CalACT/Morongo Basin Transit Authority (MBTA) Purchasing Cooperative. Based on past experience, purchasing from cooperative contract schedules – a practice encouraged by the FTA - expedites the purchasing process, while ensuring that a competitive price is paid for goods and services.
MBTA, a member of CalACT, is the lead agency in the CalACT/MBTA Vehicle Purchasing Cooperative. The Cooperative was formed because many of the CalACT member agencies felt that an alternative to the traditional state bid process was necessary in order to create a more competitive marketplace for vehicle purchases in the State of California. The type of procurement used by the cooperative entails the development of a Local Government Schedule, as defined in the FTA third party procurement guidelines (Circular 4220.1F, Chapter V, Part 4), wherein the FTA extends to local governments the opportunity to purchase goods or services at established prices.
5310 Process - Future
5310 funds have been traditionally allocated by the federal government to the states to help meet the transportation needs of seniors and people with disabilities. The passage of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) in 2012 gave states more freedom to decide how to allocate 5310 funds. States are still allowed to distribute these monies via a competitive process but MAP-21 also allows local entities, such as Metro, to be designated by the state as a recipient of their share of state funds.
Under the current Caltrans process (of which this approval is based), Access could only receive a maximum annual award of $600,000. For future 5310 funding Access and Metro staff worked cooperatively to ensure that Metro was the designated recipient for the region’s share of 5310 funds, which is approximately $6.5 million annually. As a result, a 5310 Working Group recommended that Access receive $2.5 million for the FY14/15. These funds have been included in the Access budget and are awaiting approval by the Metro Board of Directors.
ITEM 9-c
AUGUST 18, 2014
TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FROM: WILLIAM TSUEI, SENIOR MANAGER OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
MARK GLANZMAN, PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTS ADMINISTRATOR
RE: CONSIDERATION TO AWARD DATA CENTER CO-LOCATION CONTRACT (AS-3650)
ISSUE:
Access’ existing data center was designed over ten years ago as a traditional on premise installation concept when cloud based computing was still in its infancy. This design followed traditional rules so as to be as self-sustaining as possible, including using tape backup as the disaster recovery option. In an effort to modernize the technology system landscape staff is requesting to relocate the data center to a third party carrier-graded data center. This request also includes establishing the secondary disaster recovery data center to fulfill the agency’s mission to provide superior and uninterrupted services to our external and internal customers.
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize staff to award a data center co-location contract with a five (5) year base term plus three one (1) year options in the amount not to exceed $1,379,840 to Internap in Redondo Beach, California for the lease of primary and disaster recovery data centers and implementation services and assist with migrating existing applications and databases to the new facilities.
IMPACT ON BUDGET:
Funding for this project has been budgeted for FY 2014/15 operating and capital expenses and will be budgeted appropriately in subsequent fiscal years.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
Enhancement to the existing El Monte on premise data center has been considered. The difficulties to improve the on premise water based fire extinguishing system, enhance the building structure and provide a disaster recovery plan has led to the conclusion that seeking a specifically designed co-location data center makes more economical sense.
EFFECT OF APPROVAL OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
If this staff recommendation is approved by the board, the staff will be authorized, but not required, to negotiate and enter into a written contract for co-location data centers and services on terms that are no less favorable to Access Services than those proposed above. Access Services would not be legally bound to this contract unless it is incorporated into a formal written agreement executed by all parties thereto and approved as to form by this entity’s legal counsel.
BACKGROUND:
Access’ demand has grown in double digits for the past 5 years and the reliance on network services has become mission critical. The existing data center in Access’ administrative office is based on ten (10) + year design that has been a challenge to maintain due to both technical and physical limitations. To address this staff has begun to redesign the system landscape based on a modern architecture as well as to incorporate a more robust disaster recovery environment.
The technology system landscape modernization project consists of the following pieces from a high level point of view:
1. Hardware colocation: identify primary data center and disaster recovery site
2. Equipment installation: procure and install system hardware at the data centers identified from above
3. Data connectivity: establish data connection between locations
This award is to address the 1st technical piece listed above. As cloud based technology evolved over the past 15 years, it has become a more mature and commercially viable solution that has been adopted globally. Staff plans to take a phased approach to implement the entire co-location solution. Phase I will establish the primary data center and go-live before end of December 31, 2014. Phase II will establish the disaster recovery data center and go-live before end of June 30th, 2015.
The following is the cost breakdown of this award:
|5 year base |$849,900 |
|Implementation/Services Costs |$20,000 |
|3-1 year options |$509,940 |
| Total Data Center Contract Costs |$1,388,940 |
This procurement will support on-going agency operations along with a disaster recovery environment.
This procurement was conducted via a Request for Proposal (RFP) that was published on July 1st, 2014. Access Services received 6 bids from various vendors. After an initial review, two vendors were selected for further consideration. An evaluation of the materials provided, primary data center sites visits, and client reference checks, resulted in the scores below:
| |Internap |Allied Digital Services, LLC |
|Cost |20.0 |14.6 |
|Dark Fiber Connection Between Datacenters |14.6 |12.5 |
|Technician/Qualifications/Certifications |14.7 |14.8 |
|Facility Robustness |14.0 |13.2 |
|Client Reference |19.8 |19.7 |
|Service Level Agreement |15.0 |14.7 |
| | | |
|Total |98.1 |89.5 |
Based on the scores collected from the project evaluation team members, Internap is the recommended vendor. Internap’s network of premium data centers provides cost-effective, high-density power and cooling coupled with state-of-the-art resiliency designs and processes that will successfully support the technology system landscape modernization project’s goals.
ITEM 9-d
AUGUST 18, 2014
TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FROM: F SCOTT JEWELL, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER
RE: CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE REAL ESTATE BROKER SERVICE AGREEMENT
ISSUE:
Staff is exploring a number of scenarios to address real estate needs in the upcoming fiscal year. Accordingly staff requires the expertise of a professional firm to assist in the proper identification and negotiation of these real estate needs.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the real estate broker services agreement between Access Services and Jones Lang LaSalle Brokerage, Inc. for the period of September 1, 2014 – August 31, 2015.
IMPACT ON BUDGET:
Compensation for real estate broker services is generally obtained from a landlord, sub-landlord or developer therefore there is no anticipated impact on budget.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
The depth and complexity of the Los Angeles County area real estate market cannot be effectively evaluated by staff alone hence the recommendation of the above agreement. These type of services can exempted from a competitive bidding process (sole source) if approved by the Board.
EFFECT OF APPROVAL OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
If this staff recommendation is approved by the board, the staff will be authorized, but not required, to negotiate and enter into an agreement with Jones Lang LaSalle Brokerage, Inc. under terms that are no less favorable to Access Services than those proposed above. Access Services would not be legally bound to this contract unless it is incorporated into a formal written agreement executed by all parties thereto and approved as to form by this entity’s legal counsel.
BACKGROUND
The growth in demand and potential changes in services is requiring staff to explore a number of scenarios where it may be of strategic and cost-effective value to be the lease holder of contractor premises in the Los Angeles County area. In order to quantify and narrow these scenarios staff is recommending to enter into an exclusive representation agreement with a professional real estate brokerage firm. Jones Lang LaSalle Brokerage, Inc. (JLL) had worked with Access in previous engagements and, based upon their extensive knowledge and familiarity of Access’ operational and real estate needs, staff is recommending that JLL continues as Access’ real estate broker.
ITEM 10
AUGUST 18, 2014
TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FROM: F SCOTT JEWELL, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER
RE: CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE THE POLICY CONCERNING THE FORMAT OF BOARD MINUTES
ISSUE:
Access Services minutes have changed over the years from a summary of action taken to a more comprehensive narrative style. While this style has the favorable characteristic of assuring that the process by which decisions were made is captured, it has the vice of overly complicating the minutes. Access Services maintains one verbatim copy of what occurred at each meeting which is in the form of a recording. This document is available to the public and can be referenced if questions arise.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt staff’s recommendation that the format of Board minutes be published in a recap of proceedings style consistent with legal requirements.
BACKGROUND:
As outlined in the issue above, the evolution of the minutes has become more complex and detailed in the transcription of discussions related to Board items. In review of other agencies’ practices related to the publishing of minutes it is apparent that a recap style is a concise and accepted form of published minutes and also meets the legal requirements as listed below. Accordingly staff recommends moving to this format along with maintaining the recorded verbatim copy for archival purposes.
Legal
A. Requirement that Minutes be kept
Corp. Code § 6320 requires that an agency formed as a non-profit public benefit corporation such as ASI keep minutes in writing of the proceedings of its members, board and committees of the board.
B. Responsibility for Keeping the Minutes
ASI Bylaws Article VII G 5 (a) delegates this duty to the Secretary and in this regard provides:
“a. Book of Minutes:
The secretary shall keep, or cause to be kept, at the corporation's principal office or other such place as the Board may direct, a book of minutes of all meetings, proceedings, and actions of the Board, of committees of the Board and of members' meetings. The minutes of meetings shall include the time and place that the meeting was held, whether the meeting was annual, regular, or special, and, if special, how authorized, the notice given, the names of those present at Board and committee meetings, and the number of members present or represented at members meetings. The secretary shall keep or cause to be kept, at the principal office in California, a copy of the articles of incorporation and bylaws, as amended to date.”
C. Minutes of Closed Session
Government Code § 54957.2 (part of the Brown Act) provides that a legislative body may designate a clerk or other office or employee of the local agency to attend closed sessions and “keep an entry in a minute book a record of topics discussed and decisions made at the meeting.” It also provides that the minutes of closed session are not Public Records and are confidential
D. Legal Effect of Minutes
Corp. Code § 314 provides that minutes certified by the secretary or assistant secretary, is prima facie evidence the meeting was held and that the resolutions stated therein were duly adopted.
Despite the legal requirements mentioned, it is not essential to the validity of corporate acts and resolutions that they be recorded in the minutes of the corporation. Bank of Napa v. Ferguson Burns Estate (1920) 48 Cal.App. 319.
E. Responsibility for Knowingly False Minutes
Corporations Code § 6215 provides that officers, directors, employees, and agents engaging in the following acts are jointly and severally liable for the resulting damages to the agency or to an injured person who has relied on those acts:
(1) Making or publishing a report, circular, certificate, financial statement, balance sheet, public notice, or document regarding the corporation or its memberships, assets, liabilities, business, earnings, or accounts that is materially false, knowing it to be false. (Corp. Code § 6215(a).)
(2) Making an entry in the corporate books, minutes, records, or accounts that is materially false, knowing it to be false. (Corp.Code § 6215(b).)
(3) Removing, erasing, altering, or canceling an entry in corporate books or records with intent to deceive. (Corp.Code § 6215(c).)
Corporate minutes have heightened importance in the post-Sarbanes–Oxley era, because plaintiffs (both government and private) increasingly focus on minutes when seeking to establish breach of the duty of care, loyalty or good faith.
• Minutes should reflect the process and extent to which directors informed themselves before taking action (e.g., noting reports received, board questions, management responses, etc.).
• As routine “housekeeping,” retain only the final minutes approved by the board. Discard earlier—and possibly erroneous—drafts that could be misconstrued
EXAMPLES:
For purposes of comparison the following exemplars are attached:
a. Attached as Exhibit A is an example of Access Services minutes from 2000
b. Attached as Exhibit B is current example of Access Services minutes from 2014
c. Attached as Exhibit C is an example of Metro’s minutes from 2014
d. Attached as Exhibit D is an example of Foothill Transit’s minutes from 2014
Exhibit A
MINUTES
ACCESS SERVICES
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
MONDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2000
CALL TO ORDER
The Access Services Board of Directors Meeting convened at 12:00 p.m. on Monday, December 11, 2000. The presiding Board Member was Terri Slimmer, Chair. Directors present included Jan Heidt, Treasurer, Barbara Miyamoto, Secretary, and Nathan Chroman. Eric Levinson, Ex-Officio and Jim Jones, Access Services Legal Counsel, were also present. Directors Jeff Cressy and Jim Parker were not present.
Staff members present included Richard DeRock, Shelly Lyons, Jacqueline Horak, Giovanna Gogreve, David Foster, Marlon Perry, Lance Millar, F Scott Jewell, John Fushman, Brian Selwyn, Arun Prem and Ken Slon.
CLOSED SESSION
Legal Counsel Jim Jones reported that the Board met in closed session at 12:01 p.m. to discuss Personnel Issues (California Government Code 54957). Also discussed were litigation matters (California Government Code 54956.9) Flores et al versus LACMTA, ASI et al. The Board determined to retain counsel during the executive session.
SUPERIOR SERVICE AWARD
The following employees were recognized as Superior Service Award recipients for the month of November and December 2000:
• Louis Burns, Operations Shuttle
• Dorra Parra, Operations Shuttle
• Maria Shadler, San Gabriel Transit
BOARD MEMBER COMMUNICATIONS
Director Chroman inquired about the progress of the curb-to-curb issue. Mr. DeRock responded that this issues has been assigned to the Quality Services Committee which has not meet recently due to the cancellation of their last meeting.
REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 23, 2000 MEETING MINUTES
Director Chroman moved for approval of the minutes from the October 23, 2000 Board of Directors Meeting as submitted. Director Heidt seconded; all were in favor and the motion carried.
REPORT FROM THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
No report was given at this time due to the cancellation of the November 2000 Advisory Committee Meeting.
PUBLIC COMMENT
All comments heard during the public comment segment will be investigated and responded to within ten business days of the Board Meeting.
Ms. Loraine Wells voiced her concern about her recent eligibility-appeal result that prevents her comfort animal from traveling with her when using Access Services.
Mr. Gary Jansen discussed an accident which occurred recently while traveling aboard an Access Services vehicle.
Ms. Joyce Phillips voiced her concern about a recent incident which occurred between a rider with a mental disability and an Access Services driver.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REPORT
Ms. Jacqueline Horak, Director of Finance and Administration presented the financial report for July through October 2000.
Mr. Brian Selwyn, Operations Analyst, presented the operations report for October 2000.
Mr. DeRock indicated that more than 2/3 of the complaints and late trips complaints occurred during Metro strike the first two weeks in October. Since the end of the strike the complaints rate has fallen by 40-50% and the hour late trips have fallen by the same amount. Mr. DeRock stated that the strike significantly impacted the service.
Mr. DeRock reported that due to medical leave issues Marlon Perry has taken the position, on an acting basis, as Manager of the Operations Monitoring Center for the next six months.
Metro is currently accepting Access Paratransit riders' ID cards for free fare on their buses. The program is working effectively with very few complaints. Currently staff is working on proposed MOUs with about seven other systems which will be brought to the Board after the first of the year for an expansion program with other cities and transit agencies. This year's goal is to have 30 transit systems recognizing Access Paratransit ID cards as a free fare.
CONSENT AGENDA
Director Heidt moved approval of Consent Items IX-a, c, d, e, and f. Director Chroman seconded the approval; all were in favor and the motion carried.
Item IX-b (Approval to Purchase Call Recording Technology) was pulled for discussion. Mr. DeRock informed the Board that the recommended vendor, Dictaphone, informed staff that they have entered into Chapter 11 Bankruptcy proceedings. They have indicated that this has no impact on their ability to deliver the contract and service. Staff recommends staying with Dictaphone. After discussion, Director Chroman moved approval of staff's recommendation to execute a contract with Dictaphone Corporation for the purchase and installation of the network-wide call recording system in an amount not to exceed $140,000. Director Heidt seconded the approval, all were in favor and the motion carried.
TDD DEMONSTRATION
Mr. Lance Millar, Operations Analyst, briefed the Board regarding the TDD/TTY machines used in the Operations Monitoring Department, Customer Service Center and the Reservations Department. Staff gave a live demonstration of the functions of the current machine used in the departments.
Ms. Linda Kerstein inquired if the new numbers were given to the dispatchers. She stated that at one time the wrong numbers were provided to the dispatchers. She explained that when trying to call during the day or after 5:00 p.m. she is still being connected to an answering machine and not a live TDD operator. Staff will investigate Ms. Kerstein's statement.
Director Slimmer would like staff to demonstrate the functions of the Mobile Data Terminal system currently being used within the next couple of months.
APPROVAL OF COMBINING VACATION, FLOATING, AND SICK HOLIDAYS INTO ONE PAID TIME-OFF (PTO) BENEFIT
Director Heidt moved approval of staff's recommendation to combine vacations, floating, and sick holidays into one PTO benefit. Director Chroman seconded the approval; all were in favor and hearing no discussion, the motion carried.
ESTABLISHMENT OF AN ACCESS SERVICES TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Mr. DeRock briefed the Board on the establishment of the Technical Advisory Committee. He recommended the committee should be comprised of transportation operators to provide input on the service policies and coordination issues relating to the Mobility Maximizer program. Staff recommends a 21-member Technical Advisory Committee consisting of seven fixed route operators, seven dial-a-ride operators and seven social service and private transit operators. Staff also recommends that applications be solicited and upon receipt brought to the Board for approval and final appointment. Mr. Chroman asked for clarification regarding the name of the committee. After some discussion the Board supported the concept of the establishment of the committee, and requested that staff rename the committee. On a motion made by Director Chroman, seconded by Director Miyamoto; all were in favor and the motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS SUBSEQUENT TO THE POSTING OF THE AGENDA
In response to Director Chroman inquiry regarding the Public Relations Subcommittee, Mr. DeRock responded that Director Cressy indicated that he would have a meeting in January specifically to review work currently being done on communication processes and techniques.
ADJOURNMENT
Hearing no further discussion before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 3:00 p.m.
Approval
________________________ _____________
Barbara Miyamoto, Secretary Date
Exhibit B
MINUTES
ACCESS SERVICES
BOARD MEETING
MARCH 17, 2014
The Access Services Board of Directors meeting convened at 12:02 p.m. on Monday, March 17, 2014 in the third floor Council Chamber Conference Room at Access Services Headquarters (Metro Division 9) Building located at 3449 Santa Anita Avenue in the City of El Monte, California. The presiding Board Member was Doran Barnes, Chairperson. Board Members present included: Dolores Nason, Vice Chair, Martin Gombert, Treasurer, John Troost, Art Ida, Daniel Levy, and Angela Nwokike. Ex-Officio, Michael Arrigo, CAC Chair, and Jim Jones, Access Services Legal Counsel.
Directors Theresa DeVera, Secretary, Kim Turner and Kathryn Engel, TPAC Chair, were excused from the meeting.
Access Services’ staff members present included: Shelly Verrinder, F Scott Jewell, Andre Colaiace, Donna Cisco, Araceli Camuy, Charlene Motta, Jack Garate, Richard Rodriguez, Evie Palicz, Rogelio Gomez, Jessica Thompson, David Foster, Steve Chang, Galen Hale, Mike Greenwood, Matthew Avancena, Hector Rodriguez, Bill Tsuei, Geoffrey Okamoto, Faye Moseley, Steve Montes, Alvina Narayna, and Ramon Garcia (intern).
PUBLIC COMMENT WITH RESPECT TO CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
No public comments were heard regarding the closed session items.
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
The Board met in Closed Session and reconvened the general portion of the meeting at 1:04 p.m. at which time Michael Arrigo, Chair of the CAC joined the general session.
Chairperson Barnes asked Mr. Jones, Access Services Legal Counsel, to brief the audience on the outcome of the closed session.
Mr. Jones reported that prior to taking the dais, the Board met in closed session to consider and discuss the existing litigation of Minnis versus Access Services and Debra Mitchell versus Access Services. No reportable action was taken by the Board with respect to both matters. The Board also discussed potential initiation of litigation and no reportable action was taken by the Board with respect to this matter.
Mr. Jones explained the general 3 minute limitation on public comment and that anyone who by reason of a specific disability which prevented them from speaking with normal rapidity and who wished to request an accommodation should so indicate on the speaker request form so that the Chairperson could consider and potentially grant additional time to make their statement but due to the amount of public comments submitted for today’s meeting the Chairperson would only allow three minutes for public comments.
SUPERIOR SERVICE AWARDS
Richard Cabrera, a Mechanic from Santa Clarita Transit, was the recipient of the Superior Service Award for the month of March 2014.
REVIEW & APPROVAL OF THE BOARD MEETING MINUTES FROM JANUARY 27, 2014
Chairperson Barnes asked if there were any changes or corrections to the January 27, 2014 Board meeting minutes.
Motion: Director Nason moved approval of the January 27, 2014 Board meeting minutes.
Second: Director Troost seconded the motion.
Discussion: None.
Vote: Via Voice Vote.
In Favor: Directors Gombert, Troost, Levy, Nwokike, Nason, and Ida.
Opposed: None.
Abstention: None.
Pass/Fail: The motion carried.
REPORT FROM EX-OFFICIO BOARD MEMBERS
Michael Arrigo, Chair of the Community Advisory Committee (CAC), began his report by thanking Directors Gombert and Troost for attending the previous CAC meeting for this year, which he felt they both enjoyed. He also reported that the topic of discussion was the performance standards review, a presentation on the relationship between Metro and Access Services and a report on the upcoming survey that Metro would be conducting on Access Services.
Mr. Arrigo concluded his presentation by stating that Access Services Chief Operating Officer, F Scott Jewell provided a presentation on the TAP card regarding some of the upcoming minor changes. He wished everyone a happy Saint Patrick’s Day.
Chairperson Barnes thanked Mr. Arrigo for his continued leadership of the CAC and added that the Board appreciated all his contributions.
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
Maryann Cuevas requested that the Board allow her to receive transportation. She stated that it was very difficult for her to walk without a cane or walker. She also stated that she had discussed the issue with Mr. Louis Burns from Access Services and requested that Access send a Road Supervisor to conduct a site evaluation but nothing had been done. Ms. Cuevas briefly went over her recent medical conditions and concluded her public comment by requesting that Access Services send someone out to conduct a site evaluation.
Ms. Verrinder informed Ms. Cuevas that Access Services Manager of Eligibility, Kurt Hagen would follow-up with her after the meeting.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion: Director Ida moved approval of all the Items on the Consent Calendar.
Second: Director Nwokike seconded the motion.
Discussion: None.
Roll Call: Chairperson Barnes asked for a roll call.
In Favor: Directors Levy, Nwokike, Nason, Ida, Troost, and Gombert.
Opposed: None.
Abstention: None.
Pass/Fail: The motion carried.
CONSIDERATION TO EXTEND THE ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION SERVICE CONTRACT (AS-2441)
Access Services Deputy Executive Director of Planning and Governmental Affairs, Andre Colaiace and Kurt Hagen, Manager of Eligibility provided a brief presentation on the staff recommendation for the Board to consider the approval to extend the eligibility determination service contract.
Board Questions &
Comments: Director Levy stated that on page 28 of the Board agenda the item stated that the extension would be funded with funds that were budgeted for survey work that would not be occurring this year. He asked what kind of survey work would be.
Ms. Verrinder replied that staff had budgeted for the Customer Satisfaction survey that takes place every other year but this year it would not be taking place so there was $60,000 in funds available for that line item.
Director Levy stated that the next item on the Board agenda was related to the survey, he asked if it would make more sense to utilize the funds there. Ms. Verrinder replied that it could be done that way but she wanted to list all the possibilities. She added that staff did not transfer directly from one line item to the next because staff moved money around as the year progressed depending on circumstances. Ms. Verrinder stated that she wanted to list all the available items that show money available. Mr. Jewell added that the next agenda item regarding the survey was just under $20,000 so there would be $40,000 that would not be used in that category.
Director Levy mentioned that it stated in the agenda item that there was no money available for the survey so staff was asking for money. Ms. Verrinder replied that the next agenda item stated that there was not enough money available to fund the scope of work being requested. She added that there was $4,000 left in the contract and staff was requesting Board approval to increase that amount.
Ms. Verrinder stated that in the past staff would calculate the projections for eligibility but starting with next fiscal year’s budget the projections for eligibility would be done by HDR using a modeling technique similar to the technique that was used for ridership. Staff also hoped that those projections would be more accurate; to about one to three percent like the ridership projections. This would help the contractor C.A.R.E. Evaluators and Access Services plan for the future of eligibility.
Motion: Director Ida moved approval of staff’s recommendation.
Second: Director Nwokike seconded the motion.
Discussion: None.
Roll Call: Chairperson Barnes asked for a roll call.
In Favor: Directors Nwokike, Nason, Ida, Gombert, Troost, and Levy.
Opposed: None.
Abstention: None.
Pass/Fail: The motion carried.
CONSIDERATION TO AWARD CONSULTING CONTRACT FOR SURVEY CONSULTING SERVICES
Access Services Executive Director, Shelly Verrinder provided a brief presentation on staff’s recommendation for the Board to consider the approval of awarding the consulting contract for survey consulting services. Director Levy recused himself from this item due to a conflict.
Board Questions &
Comments: None.
Motion: Director Gombert moved approval of staff’s recommendation.
Second: Director Ida seconded the motion.
Discussion: None.
Roll Call: Chairperson Barnes asked for a roll call.
In Favor: Directors Nason, Ida, Gombert, Troost, and Nwokike.
Opposed: None.
Abstention: None.
Pass/Fail: The motion carried.
ACCESS SERVICES BUDGET UPDATE
Access Services Chief Operating Officer, F Scott Jewell provided a brief overview of the status of the Access Services budget.
Board Questions &
Comments: Ms. Verrinder stated that last month when the budget update was done staff had projected a deficit of $1.2 million. This month staff was projecting a surplus of $190,000, she asked Mr. Jewell how that could happen over a course of one month. Mr. Jewell replied that he projected what Access Services expenses would be at the end of January 2014 for just that month. Ms. Verrinder asked what were Access Services projections for the rest of the fiscal year. Mr. Jewell replied if the ridership continued to be at 4.5% over budget and staff was able to maintain all other program expenses within the budget then it would be around $900,000 over budget by the end of the year.
Ms. Verrinder explained that when you talk about 1 or 2% you are talking about a significant number of trips or a significant dollar amount, so although they sound like small numbers they have a significant impact on the budget. She also mentioned that when she talked about moving money around staff would have to find all the areas with surplus items to move them into the operations or capital areas in order to balance the budget. Mr. Jewell added that this year staff was committed to purchase all the capital vehicles for this year, so that would not be a line item to report additional funds for fiscal year 2013/2014.
Chairperson Barnes thanked Mr. Jewell for his detailed presentation on Access Services budget and reminded the Board that this was an information item only and no action was needed.
STATUS UPDATE ON METRO’S REVIEW OF ACCESS SERVICES
Access Services Manager of Planning and Coordination, Matthew Avancena, provided a brief update on each of the recommendations.
Board Questions &
Comments: Director Levy stated that item number two of the Metro Review on Access Services, the projections, was requested by one of the Metro Board of Directors. Ms. Verrinder replied that staff just received the final draft and it was scheduled to go into the next Board Box but staff would send him a copy.
Chairperson Barnes thanked Mr. Avancena for his detailed presentation on Metro’s Review of Access Services and reminded the Board that this was an information item only and no action was needed.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S REPORT
Access Services Executive Director, Shelly Verrinder, began her report by stating that she removed the financial component from her report which would now be handled as a separate item under the budget update. She also mentioned if any of the Board members would like to see any other information that staff was not currently providing to please let Mr. Jewell know. Ms. Verrinder also mentioned if any of the Board members were interested, staff could also include a copy of her report in the Board Box, as a separate email, or on the website.
Ms. Verrinder reported that total trips for the month of February decreased by 2.6% which had an effect on Access Services over/under from a budget prospective. She added for the month of March Access Services reached a number of record ridership days including one in the Antelope Valley and one in the Southern region. Global Paratransit Inc. booked and performed more trips than Access had ever done before in a single region. Ms. Verrinder also reported that Access Services on-time performance was still struggling in some areas but staff was working on it. She explained that part of the struggle had to do with vehicles, some of the scheduling systems and the way in which the implementation of the software has gone. Staff was currently recovering, Mr. Chang and his group had an excellent path to try and finish the year out at the standard of 91%.
Ms. Verrinder continued to report that the average initial hold time for reservations increased slightly but was still a positive number at 83 seconds. Average initial hold time was something that staff paid a lot of attention to from a reservation and customer service standpoint because you cannot look at one number without the others. Staff wanted to look at the calls on hold over five minutes because you could have a very low average initial hold time but have a lot of calls on hold. For reservations 4.6% were below Access Services standard and eligible riders increased by 2% to 149,430. Ms. Verrinder stated that when they received the HDR report she encouraged them to review either the first or second appendix that contained the projections for the eligibility numbers moving forward.
Ms. Verrinder stated that as for the Metro Review, staff was reporting the average initial hold times for customer service and the numbers showed a dramatic decrease to 59 seconds. Ms. Verrinder stated that the interesting thing was that staff had not received a lot of complaints regarding the customer service representatives trying to hurry them off the phone and calls on hold over five minutes were at 4.2%. Ms. Verrinder added that the other statistics staff was looking into with customer service was abandoned calls. Abandoned calls had decreased to 3.2% which was a very positive number and significantly below the industry standard.
Faye Moseley, Deputy Executive Director of Administration stated that Access Services was hosting a group of undergraduates and graduate externships students from USC school of Public Policy and Transportation as Access Services continued to focus on generating the next group of employees. Ms. Moseley introduced the group to the Board of Directors. Ms. Verrinder offered a few words of advice to the externships by stating that she strongly encouraged them to consider a career in ADA paratransit.
Ms. Verrinder informed the Board that Access Services Annual Membership meeting was coming up on Wednesday, March 26, 2014 which was also Access Services 20th Anniversary and staff had a great journey planned to look at the past and into the future with some good food and some very special guests. She also introduced a few new Access Services employees, Hector Rodriguez, Access Services new Controller who was responsible for managing and administering finance, accounting, treasuring, payroll, data analytics and procurements. Mr. Rodriguez previously worked as the City Manager of Barstow and Cudahy and had previously worked with Metro. Access Services new Senior Manager of Information Technology, William “Bill” Tsuei, who would be responsible for the management of technological applications and moving forward with technology.
Ms. Verrinder concluded her report by encouraging everyone to read the next Behind the Scenes Newsletter. She stated that she wrote an interesting article because she was interested to see where Access Services fell in terms of the number of individuals that were associated with providing our services on a day-to-day basis. She added that this would not include consultants or anyone that was not involved in the day-to-day business of Access Services. Ms. Verrinder stated that as of Friday, March 14, 2014 there were 2,255 that worked full time on behalf of providing the service and the largest employer was Global Paratransit in the Southern region with 660 employees followed by the Eastern region San Gabriel Transit, who employed 654 employees and Antelope Valley with 58 employees.
BOARD MEMBER COMMUNICATION
Director Nwokike stated that she was very happy to report that she attended the Diamond Bar Community meeting which was very well attended. She added that the presentation provided by Jack Garate and Rogelio Gomez on how the riders could book their reservations was excellent.
Director Troost stated that he attended the CAC meeting on March 11, 2014 as the Board representative and really enjoyed how Chairperson Arrigo handled the meeting. He also mentioned that he learned a lot at this meeting.
Director Nason stated that she was informed that Access Services Manager of Customer Support Services, David Foster’s brother passed away recently. She offered her condolences to Mr. Foster and his family.
Director Ida stated that he also wanted to welcome the students from USC School of Public Policy and Transportation and stated that they should not totally rule out the fixed route service because it was also very exciting and they were in need of some young professionals. He also stated that this past Christmas he was at the Mall which was very crowded and he saw an Access vehicle picking up a rider which made him feel really proud to have a seat on the Access Services Board of Directors.
Director Gombert stated that on Tuesday, February 11, 2014 he attended the CAC meeting with Director Troost which was a very good meeting. He also stated that he attended the community meeting held in the Southern region on February 8th which was extremely well attended and was a very spirited meeting.
Chairperson Barnes stated that it was great to hear that so many of the Board members were attending the various meetings of Access Services. He added that he appreciated the outreach which helped to educate each of the Board members and witness firsthand what went on at a community. Chairperson Barnes also stated that he would like to congratulate Ms. Verrinder on her efforts to build a truly remarkable Management Team. He stated not only with the additions of Hector Rodriguez and Bill Tsuei but with the work she had been doing over the last several months to continue to strengthen the team which he felt was quite remarkable.
Chairperson Barnes mentioned that he had the chance to get to know Mr. Tsuei through the Leadership APTA program. He stated that the Leadership APTA program was a very prestigious and competitive program and very difficult to get into. Twenty-five of the most talented up and coming professionals in the industry participate and Mr. Tsuei was a participant. He also mentioned that he had the chance to work with Mr. Rodriguez through Metro and if Ms. Verrinder had not hired him to be part of her management team he would had been coming after him next.
NEW BUSINESS SUBSEQUENT TO THE POSTING OF THE AGENDA
No new business was heard subsequent to the posting of the agenda.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Director Nason moved to adjourn the meeting in memory of Mr. Foster’s Brother, Doug Foster.
Second: Director Troost seconded the motion.
Vote: Via Voice Vote.
Pass/Fail: All were in favor and the meeting adjourned at 2:08p.m.
Approval
Theresa DeVera, Secretary Date
Exhibit C
RECAP of Proceedings
Regular Board Meeting Board of Directors
One Gateway Plaza 3rd Floor Board Room
Called to Order at 9:40 a.m.
Directors Present:
Eric Garcetti, Chair
Mark Ridley-Thomas, 1st Vice Chair
John Fasana, 2nd Vice Chair
Michael Antonovich
Mike Bonin
Diane DuBois
Jacquelyn Dupont-Walker
Don Knabe
Paul Krekorian
Gloria Molina
Ara J. Najarian
Pam O’Connor
Zev Yaroslavsky
Carrie Bowen, non-voting member
Officers
Arthur T. Leahy, Chief Executive Officer Michele Jackson, Board Secretary Karen Gorman, Acting Ethics Officer Karen Gorman, Inspector General
County Counsel, General Counsel
1. APPROVED Consent Calendar Items: 2, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23, 26, 27, 43, 44, 45**, 46, 47, 52, 53, 55, 58 and 62.
Consent Calendar items are approved by one motion except items 14 and 45 which were held by a Director for discussion and/or separate action.
**Item required 2/3 vote
|MA |GM |PK |PO |
|GM = G. Molina |MRT = M. Ridley-Thomas |JF = J. Fasana | |
|PK = P. Krekorian |EG = E. Garcetti |JDW = J. Dupont-Walker | |
|PO = P. O’Connor |ZY = Z. Yaroslavsky |DK = D. Knabe | |
LEGEND: Y = YES, N = NO, C = HARD CONFLICT, S = SOFT CONFLICT ABS = ABSTAIN, A = ABSENT, P = PRESENT
13. AUTHORIZED ON CONSENT CALENDAR the Chief Executive Officer to award a 36 month (October 1, 2014 through September 30, 2017), indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity, firm fixed unit price contract under RFP PS30203299 with Cubic Transportation Systems, Inc., the highest-scored responsive responsible proposer for TAP third party vendor network services for an amount not to exceed $654,552 for the three base years, and three two-year options effective October 1, 2018 through September 30, 2023 for an amount not to exceed $1,557,399, for a combined not to exceed $2,211,951.
14. AUTHORIZED the Chief Executive Officer to award a five year, firm fixed-unit rate contract, Contract number PS145210201401, U.S. Bank Institutional Trust & Custody to provide custody, compliance reporting, and performance measurement services. The three-year base contract (August 1, 2014 to July 31, 2017) will be for an amount not
to exceed $870,000 and the two one-year options (August 1, 2017 to July 31, 2019) for an amount not to exceed $580,000, for a total not to exceed
$1,450,000 effective August 1, 2014.
|MA |GM |PK |
|VISA Activated Cards |28,679 |17.2% |
|VISA Activated Cards w/funds (TransitPlus) |3,783 |2.3% |
|VISA Activated Cards w/funds (non-TransitPlus) |150 |0.1% |
The low usage rate of the cards, coupled with other concerns such as activation issues being handled by customer service (about 20% of TAP related calls) and having to have a VISA card as a RiderID, has led to staff’s recommendation that the VISA functionality be discontinued. It is important to note the following with this recommendation –
• Access will still be able to accept any debit/credit card (except AMEX) on vehicles for fare payment including the old Access RiderID/TAP card with the VISA functionality.
• The TAP card functionality for the Free Fare program will not change.
• Access will not replace all the existing cards. Cards will be issued to new eligible riders, recertifications, or lost/stolen cards.
• Current users of the card would be able to continue to use their existing Access Rider ID/TAP card with VISA until the card expired or was lost/stolen. At that point they would receive their Access Rider ID/TAP card as appropriate to their eligibility but without the VISA function. If there were funds still remaining on their old card they would be issued a ReadyCredit debit VISA card which would function as a TransitPlus card.
• Any existing Access RiderID/TAP cards with VISA functionality that have not been activated by the transition to the new card will not be able to be activated for VISA functionality after that date.
Card Visibility Aspects
The removal of the VISA functionality (particularly the VISA card number and logo) has allowed for revisiting the how the card looks. Feedback from stakeholders has led to the proposed new look of the card that enhances legibility and enlarges key fields such as rider name, ID number, eligibility date and PCA status. There will be no embossing on any part of the card.
[pic]
ITEM 12
AUGUST 18, 2014
TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FROM: ANDRE COLAIACE, DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
RE: CONSIDERATION TO AUTHORIZE FTA ADA TRIENNIAL REVIEW FINDINGS RESOLUTION PROCESS
ISSUE:
Every three years, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) reviews transit agencies who receive federal funds to ensure they are complying with various federal laws and regulations. In Los Angeles County, Access Services, as the provider of complementary Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) paratransit, is included in every Triennial Review of its member agencies.
Staff has received the first draft report from the City of Culver City which contains three findings which are discussed below.
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize staff to work with the FTA to resolve the findings. The schedule for corrective action is listed in the draft report as March 3, 2015.
As always, any proposed change in Access policies will be brought back to the Board for approval at a later date.
IMPACT ON BUDGET:
Without knowing the final shape of any agreement on fare and no show policies, it is impossible to quantify the budgetary impact of any changes. However, staff believes that implementing Origin to Destination service, whereby customers who qualify are provided door-to-door service, would cost between $44 million to $74 million over the next four years. This figure is derived from a September 19, 2012 Technical Memorandum prepared by HDR Decision Economics.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
No alternatives were considered.
BACKGROUND:
Discussion of the three findings are for Culver City and expected for Foothill Transit and Metro and are outlined below:
The FTA conducted Triennial Reviews of Beach Cities Transit, Gardena Municipal Bus Lines and Long Beach Transit from December 2013 through January 2014. During the ADA portion of the review, the FTA determined that Access Services did not make any provisions for assistance beyond the curb for passengers whose disabilities may require such assistance, otherwise known as Origin-To-Destination service. These systems did not receive any findings related to fares or insufficient no show policy. Culver City was the first of three systems scheduled for a Triennial Review this year. Foothill Transit and Metro are also scheduled for Reviews this year.
Finding #1
ADA Complementary Paratransit service deficiencies (73) Culver City’s one-way base fare is $1.00 per trip, whereas Access Services lowest fare for an ADA complementary paratransit trip is $2.50 per trip. This is more than twice Culver City’s fixed-route fare.
FTA Proposed Corrective Action:
For the deficiency, ADA Complementary Paratransit service deficiencies (73), by March 3, 2015, submit documentation to the FTA Region IX Civil Rights Officer that demonstrates Access Services is charging no more than twice the fixed-route fare for comparable trips.
Regulatory Discussion:
DOT ADA Transportation regulations 49 CFR §37.131(c) restrict fares charged by complementary ADA paratransit service to no more than twice “…the fare that would be charged to an individual paying full fare (i.e. without regard to discounts) for a trip of similar length at a similar time of day, on the entity’s fixed route system.”
Appendix D Provides: “To calculate the proper paratransit fare, the entity would determine the route(s) that an individual would take to get from his or her destination on the fixed route system. At the time of day that the person was traveling. What is the fare for that trip on those routes?”
“Where bus and rail systems are run by the same provider (or where the same bus provider runs parallel local and express buses along the same route), the comparison would be made to the mode on which a typical fixed route user would make the particular trip, based on schedule, length, convenience, avoidance of transfers, etc.” (emphasis added)
It is unclear how this standard, in the context of a coordinated plan, should be applied. However, nowhere in the regulations is there any specific guidance as to how to determine fares in a coordinated system in which many of the constituent members routes are not just contiguous but overlapping and in which a variety of fixed route fare structures exist for similar rides.
Staff Discussion:
On August 1, 2006, Access staff sent a letter to the FTA in response to a similar finding. The letter is attached for Board review. Since that time Access’ fare methodology, which uses a statistical analysis of comparable fixed-route fares (Option 2 in the letter), has been reviewed numerous times and been found compliant.
That being said, staff looks forward to discussing this issue with the FTA and talking about the benefits of having a coordinated fare for our customers. Access developed its simple two-tier fare structure with substantial input from dozens of meetings with the disability community. This fare structure has worked because it is easy for riders to understand and for the Access contract service providers to administer.
In the 1990s, during the demonstration phase of Access, the Agency attempted to charge each customer a different fare for each comparable trip. This procedure was discarded because our customers disliked being charged different fare for different trips. In addition, it proved almost impossible to maintain in practice. A simple one-way trip required an additional three to five minutes to schedule, and over half the time the trip planning computer could not find the address, which required manually making a determination that required ten to fifteen additional minutes. Staff believes that, even with the advances in technology that implementing a “dynamic fare process” would slow down the reservations process. Furthermore, if Access decided to charge twice the fixed-route fare for each route booked, a significant number of customers, particularly those that booked longer, regional trips, could pay substantially more than the current $3.50 fare.
Finding #2
Failure to provide origin-to-destination service (307)
Culver City relies on Access Service to provide ADA complementary paratransit services for its fixed-route operations. The ADA service is described as curb-to-curb in the public information that is provided to passengers. No provisions are made for assistance beyond the curb for passengers whose disabilities may require such assistance in order to reach their destination or leave their point of origin. Under 49 CFR § 37.129(a), complementary paratransit service for ADA paratransit eligible persons must provide origin-to-destination service. Where the basic mode of paratransit service is curb-to-curb, service may need to be provided to some individuals to ensure that they are actually able to travel from their points of origin or destination.
FTA Proposed Corrective Action
For the deficiency, failure to provide origin-to-destination service (307), by March 3, 2015, submit documentation to the FTA Region IX Civil Rights Officer that demonstrates Access Services is providing origin-to-destination service for ADA complementary paratransit services as required.
Regulatory Discussion
The Code of Federal Regulations states the following:
49 CFR 37.129(a)
(a) Except as provided in this section, complementary paratransit service for ADA paratransit eligible persons shall be origin-to-destination service.
Staff has maintained, consistent with Appendix D of the regulations (which is considered the definitive guidance), that it is up to the local planning process to decide if the paratransit system in a particular region should be door-to-door or curb-to-curb. The FTA agreed with this position for a decade until 2005 when it published its Origin to Destination Guidance, which now forms the basis for the finding, A more detailed discussion of this issue has been previously provided to the Board.
Staff Discussion
As it has for the last year, staff will continue to work with the FTA on this issue.
Finding #3
Insufficient no-show policy (316)
Access Services’ written no-show policy does not take into account frequency of travel prior to suspension. Further, the written policy, which calls for suspending passengers for 10 days after the first occurrence, 30 days for a second occurrence, 60 days for a third occurrence and 90 days for a fourth occurrence of no-shows, does not meet the reasonableness requirement of 49 CFR 37.125(h). Additionally, Access Services treats subscription trips canceled after 10:00 p.m. the night before as no-shows; FTA permits cancellations to be regarded as no-shows only if they are made within one to two hours of the pickup time provided to the passenger.
FTA Proposed Corrective Action
For the deficiency, insufficient no-show policy (316), by March 3, 2015, submit to the FTA Region IX Civil Rights Officer revised policies and public information materials for no-shows and suspensions, including templates for no-show notification, suspension and appeal letters relating to no-shows, late cancellations, and suspensions.
Regulatory Discussion
49 CFR 37.125 provides in part that:
(h) The entity may establish an administrative process to suspend, for a reasonable period of time, the provision of complementary paratransit service to ADA eligible individuals who establish a pattern or practice of missing scheduled trips.
(1) Trips missed by the individual for reasons beyond his or her control (including, but not limited to, trips which are missed due to operator error) shall not be a basis for determining that such a pattern or practice exists.
(2) Before suspending service, the entity shall take the following steps:
(i) Notify the individual in writing that the entity proposes to suspend service, citing with specificity the basis of the proposed suspension and setting forth the proposed sanction.
(ii) Provide the individual an opportunity to be heard and to present information and arguments;
(iii) Provide the individual with written notification of the decision and the reasons for it.
(3) The appeals process of paragraph (g) of this section is available to an individual on whom sanctions have been imposed under this paragraph. The sanction is stayed pending the outcome of the appeal.
Staff Discussion
Staff believes that Access’ No Show and Late Cancellation policies comply with all the applicable regulations in policy and practice and have been successful in reducing the Agency’s no-show rate. (Operationally, no shows and late cancellations waste scarce transit resources and affect the quality of service for other customers.) Previous Triennial Reviews of Access and its member agencies have found these policies to be compliant.
Access has always looked at these policies as a chance to educate, rather than punish, its customers and suspensions are rarely given to customers who, despite accruing enough no shows to warrant a suspension (defined as six no shows in a six month period), engage and contact Access staff to discuss their individual circumstances.
That being said, staff looks forward to working with FTA to craft a resolution to these issues.
ITEM 14
AUGUST 18, 2014
TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FROM: MATHEW AVANCENA, MANAGER OF PLANNING AND COORDINATION
RE: METRO REVIEW/CUSTOMER SURVEY AND TOWN HALL MEETINGS: ACTION PLAN
ISSUE:
In June 2013, the Metro Board passed a motion asking for an independent review of Access Services. The firm of Bazilio Cobb Associates (BCA) was retained to perform the review and also asked to conduct several surveys of Access customers. While the survey results were very good overall, Access staff is presenting an Action Plan to address some concerns raised in specific areas of Access’ operations.
BACKGROUND:
The firm of Bazilio Cobb Associates performed three different customer surveys: 1) a survey of active users on Access Services; 2) a survey of non-active users on Access, and 3) six town-hall meetings throughout Los Angeles County.
The survey results showed that Access Services is providing quality paratransit service to people with disabilities in L.A. County. Access is particularly proud that many elements of the service were rated either Very Good or Good by over 90 percent of respondents and that 93 percent of its customers rated the overall quality of their most recent ride as Very Good or Good.
That being said, the results also showed that there were areas that could be improved to make the service even better. Listed below are Access’ action plans to address these areas.
Operational Action Plan
On-Time Performance: Customer perception of Access’ on-time performance was below the actual on-time performance of the system. 81 percent of Access customers surveyed said the vehicle arrived in a timely fashion within our standard 20-minute window. The overall system on-time performance tends to be stable and closer to the Agency’s standard of 91 percent.
The Operations Department has enhanced its provider oversight to ensure all service providers moving forward meet and exceed Access on-time performance standard of 91 percent.
The following initiatives have or are being implemented:
• Enforcing performance standards and contract requirements by exercising contract provisions (i.e. cure notices) when service providers do not meet expectations. (Implemented)
• Developed a “performance non-compliance” matrix for staff to address performance issues in a uniform fashion. (Task to be completed in August 2014)
• Six hundred and sixty-three (663) Access-owned vehicles will be in use by end of FY15. About 96 percent of those are projected to have less than 250,000 miles, the healthiest fleet Access has had in the field in years.
• Provided service providers with latest ridership projections by region to support provider efforts in developing strategic plans and resource management planning through the fiscal year. (Task to be completed in August 2014)
• Enhanced daily performance updates are sent from service providers to Access with emphasis on vehicle, driver, dispatcher, and call taker resources and service impacts. (Implemented)
• Access’ new Business Intelligence Analyst provides daily system and regional performance updates to staff from a historic and trending perspective.
• Access Information Technology team is scheduled to perform a technical health check of servers and systems for each service provider to proactively address any potential technical issues. (Task to be completed in October 2014)
Trip Negotiation: In the survey, 77 percent of Access customers rated their ability to get their requested pick-up time positively. The ADA allows paratransit agencies to negotiate trip times with customers up to one hour on either side of the requested time. This allows paratransit providers to stagger service demand over peak times. Access expects all ADA reservations booked in the system to have a negotiated pick up time up to one hour on either side of the requested time.
In reviewing customer comments on trip negotiation, it appears there is a gap between the ADA regulations and customer expectations whereby a customer’s preference is to naturally have the negotiated pickup time as close to the requested time as possible. The corrective actions outlined below will focus on making sure our customers’ reservation experience is consistent across the different regions.
• Operations staff conducts monthly call taker phone observations, denial observations, and service provider call taking procedures to verify service providers are negotiating pickup times within the ADA +/- one hour window. Operations staff conducts.
• Delta Services Group, Inc. conducted a review of the trip reservation and negotiation process in FY14. The findings identified specific steps that Operations Staff will take to improve the reservations experience including:
o Improve the reservation script for step by step consistency for every region.
o Ensure consistent trip negotiation experience for every region despite any differences in reservation systems.
o Develop process to audit script adherence and any regional variance.
o (Task to be completed in December 2014)
• Identify opportunities to educate potential customers during the certification process on reservation and the negotiation process. (Task to be completed in January 2015)
• Identify opportunities to educate customers while on board Access vehicles (i.e. signage, posters) on reservation and negotiation process. (Task to be completed in January 2015)
Customer Experience (Travel Time, Routing, Service Animal, and Passenger Comfort): One of the more common comments from Town Hall Meetings was that the routing of trips needs to be improved so that less time is spent on the vehicle. It should be noted that the ADA considers a paratransit trip to be “comparable” if it takes the same time as a trip on a fixed-route bus, so there is a customer education element to this as well.
• A directive was issued to all service providers to prohibit transporting more than two passengers in the back seat of any sedan at any time. Daily monitoring and auditing by region is currently underway. (Task completed in July 2014)
• A newsletter was distributed to dispatchers stating that no more than two passengers are allowed in the back seat of any sedan at any time and that customers are allowed to eat onboard Access vehicles due to medical conditions. (Task completed in July 2014)
• Operations staff verified and confirmed with all service providers that a “service animal attribute” is in place for trip routing ensuring a vehicle seat or vehicle space will be reserved for the service animal during the trip routing process. (Task completed in July 2014)
• The travel time comparability report will be enhanced to provide better insight on travel time and fixed route comparability by region and information will regularly be shared with service providers. (Task to be completed in October 2014)
• Develop and publish an estimated travel time matrix by mileage using Metro’s Go511 fixed route travel time information. The purpose of this matrix guide is to offer customer information on booking trips with realistic expectations of travel times. (Task to be completed in November 2014)
Call-Outs: Customers can request a “call out” to let them know a vehicle is near and that they should make their way to the curb. Only 57 percent of customers rated this service as Very Good or Good, which was one of the lowest marks for the entire survey. There are limitations that prevent all call outs from being completed successfully. Radio signal “dead spots,” where a vehicle’s request to initiate a call out is not transmitted, is the main issue. In addition, call outs do require a driver to manually initiate the process to begin the call-out. To address these issues Access is looking at the following solutions, including customer education and other strategies.
• Revise reservation process to require customer always provide a call-out number, rather than just as an option. (Task to be completed by September 2014)
• Review feasibility of further automating the call-out function to potentially be triggered based on either a distance or time based parameter). (Task to be completed by October 2014)
• Further explore technology options such as smart phone apps and text messaging as ways to reach our customers. (Task to be completed in December, 2014)
Customer Service Action Plan
Customer Service Experience: Some of the lowest marks in the survey centered on the various call centers operated by Access Services and its contractors. (It should be noted that the overall reservations experience got high marks but customers were less satisfied when they called for immediate assistance or to register a complaint or compliment.)
Our contractors’ call centers are responsible for taking reservations and handling service issues that they may receive from customers. Access Services operates a call center (Customer Service and Operations Monitoring Center) to answer questions about the service, take complaints and commendations about the service and also to help with immediate service issues.
Access recently hired a veteran transit call center manager, Sherry Kelley, who is in the process of examining both internal and external processes to determine what changes can be made to increase customer satisfaction in this area.
Requests for Immediate Assistance: Customer Service has been reorganized to realign internal staff resources in three critical areas to ensure that our customer needs are met in a timely manner. CSR staff has been assigned to a specific area and the most experienced CSRs have been assigned to handle immediate customer issues.
The breakdown of these three areas is as follows:
• Customer Care and Priority Lines
o Complaint follow up & investigations
o Provider assistance
o Risk Management reporting
• Customer Service Lines
o Commendations, complaints and general service inquiries
o Applications and Eligibility
o Access TAP card replacements
• Operations Monitoring Center (OMC)
o Customer assistance calls
o Real time issues
Furthermore, the following initiatives will be completed by September 2014 to improve customer satisfaction with the Access customer service process:
• In-depth review of calls via live call shadowing
• Implementation of after-call surveys
o Measure satisfaction & agent performance
o Obtain new ideas from customer perspective
o Responsiveness to customer needs
• Improve technology to allows CSRs to answer estimated time of arrival calls (ETAs) in real time
Customer Service Call Duration: Customer service calls answered have increased system-wide by 20% (includes general service inquiries, applications, eligibility, commendations and complaints) which has led, at peak times, to hold times that don’t meet Agency standards. A long-term plan to address the continued growth in customer calls will be included in Access’ Short Range Transit Plan.
In the short-term, the following strategies will be implemented by September 2014 to decrease the call volume for customer service. The main focus will be on analyzing the types of calls coming into Customer Service so that information can potentially be provided to customers electronically so they don’t have to talk to a CSR.
• Upgrade Customer Service Center software to allow management to get better data on current and future staffing needs;
• Use after-call surveys to develop a series of frequently asked questions (FAQs) to reduce future call volume;
• Deploy FAQs via post cards, vehicle take ones and during on-hold messaging;
• Use social media updates to deliver messages to mitigate calls for the same information.
Service Quality Improvements/Complaints Processing: In order to improve the customer experience, staff will implement the following actions by October 2014.
• Standardized call scripts;
• Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) under development for all functions in Customer Service;
• Employee development & training;
• Call shadowing and role playing;
• Customer Service and Operations meetings with provider Customer Relations Managers (CRMs).
ITEM 15
AUGUST 18, 2014
TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FROM: MATHEW AVANCENA, MANAGER OF PLANNING AND COORDINATION
RE: STATUS UPDATE ON METRO’S REVIEW OF ACCESS SERVICES
ISSUE:
In June 2013, the Metro Board of Directors authorized an independent review of Access Services. The final report contained 13 findings which resulted in 12 recommendations including Access’ Management Response to the recommendations. To date, three of the recommendations have been closed. Staff is requesting that recommendations related to the phone customer survey, travel training program and non ADA services now be closed. Recommendations 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 9 will be closed effective August 31, 2014. That will leave three open recommendations in which staff will be working with consultants to study the issues before closing the recommendation. The findings and associated recommendations are detailed in the Metro Staff Report and Final Review located on .
Access staff will be updating the Board on a monthly basis on Agency progress on implementing the remaining recommendations that are still open.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and File.
STATUS REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation #1:
Access Services staff should present its future customer service survey to Access Services’ Advisory Committees and Metro's Civil Rights for review and input, make additional improvements to the survey procurement and sampling plan, and establish a more formal follow-up process.
|Jan – 14 |The report was discussed and placed under Receive and File by the Metro Subcommittees with the understanding that an |
| |independent survey and a series of Town Hall meeting with Access customers will be conducted over the next few months. |
| |Access received a letter from the audit firm conducting the outreach on March 5, 2014. |
|April – 14 |The consulting firm retained by Metro MASD (Bazilio Cobb and Associates) started conducting phone customer surveys the week|
| |of April 14th. The town hall meetings are scheduled to take place on May 5th, 6th and 7th. Access will close this |
| |recommendation at the conclusion of the town hall meetings. |
|May -14 |The phone customer surveys have been completed and results are being tabulated. The Town Hall meetings were completed as |
| |scheduled. A final report of the survey responses will be shared with the Board in June/July 2014. |
|June -14 |The final report on the phone survey responses and town hall meetings is scheduled to be presented at the June 2014 Metro |
| |Board of Directors meeting. A presentation to the Access Board of Directors is scheduled for August 2014. |
|August-14 |Staff is scheduled to present the phone survey results at the August 2014 Board meeting along with an action plan to |
| |address issues identified in the survey. Staff would like to close this recommendation at the end of August. |
Recommendation #2 – CLOSED in February 2014:
Access Services should refine their ridership demand projections to provide more accurate estimates of demand by service area.
|Jan – 14 |Access has already implemented this recommendation. The consulting firm that conducts Access’ ADA paratransit demand |
| |forecasting (HDR Engineering, Inc.) already incorporates a multi-regional forecasting model to provide more accurate |
| |ridership projections. |
| | |
| |CLOSED |
Recommendation #3:
Access Services should consider screening potential travel training clients to recruit high-use Access Services riders and/or riders who may be best able to utilize fixed route services.
|Jan – 14 |Access has already begun contacting customers who take frequent, short trips to see if they would be interested in Travel|
| |Training. |
|April – 14 |Access’ Travel Training contractor Mobility Management Partners (MMP) has already contacted high use riders to offer them|
| |travel training. To date over 202 customers were called and offered training. As this effort is on-going, Access will |
| |close this recommendation at the end of April. |
|May – 14 | |
| |CLOSED |
|June -14 |Director Levy asked to re-open this recommendation pending additional data on high use riders who have been contacted and|
| |offered Travel Training. Access Services provided MMP with a list of the highest volume of “short trip” users during the |
| |month of September 2013. A short trip was defined as less than two miles one-way. The list contained a total of 2,894 |
| |users. Out of the riders on this list, the number of short trips taken per month ranged as follows: |
| | |
| |Number of Short Trips |
| |Count |
| |Percent |
| | |
| |12 or more trips |
| |202 |
| |7% |
| | |
| |7 – 11 trips |
| |235 |
| |8% |
| | |
| |6 trips or less |
| |2,457 |
| |85% |
| | |
| | |
| |Between November 2013 and February 2014 MMP attempted to contact the 202 highest users of short trips to present the |
| |travel training program. The results were as follows: |
| |Contact Results |
| |Count |
| |Percent |
| | |
| |No response |
| |107 |
| |53% |
| | |
| |Not interested - medical concerns |
| |53 |
| |26% |
| | |
| |Not interested – no reason given |
| |26 |
| |13% |
| | |
| |Interested |
| |8 |
| |4% |
| | |
| |Maybe later |
| |6 |
| |3% |
| | |
| |Have already been trained |
| |2 |
| |1% |
| | |
| | |
| |Note: “No response” results include cases of a wrong number, or where two attempts were made by leaving messages and no |
| |return call was received. |
| | |
| |Applications were provided for the 8 riders showing interest in the program, and to date none have resulted in |
| |assessments and/or trainings. Access will ask MMP to further evaluate the list and continue to make calls to the 8% of |
| |riders who have taken between 7-11 trips. |
|August-14 |As time allows, Access and MMP staff will call the remaining high use riders from the original list and offer them travel|
| |training. Since staff would like to make this a continuous component of the Travel Training program, staff would like to|
| |close this recommendation going forward. |
Recommendation #4:
Access Services should consider using the Transit Evaluation Center to offer more cost effective trainings to a larger group of participants.
|Jan – 14 |Access will be undertaking a review of this recommendation in the near future. |
|April – 14 |Access will be discussing group travel training sessions with its contractor and will include funding in the FY 2015 |
| |budget. |
|May – 14 |Staff has contacted its travel training contractor to discuss cost options for group travel training. Staff has included|
| |funding in the FY 2015 budget. |
|June-14 |Staff has budgeted funds in the proposed FY 2015 budget for group travel training. |
|August-14 |Staff has budgeted funds in the FY 2015 budget for group travel training. Staff will work with the contractor to start |
| |group travel training sessions no later than Fall 2014. Therefore, staff would like to close this recommendation going |
| |forward. |
Recommendation #5:
Access Services should require a more accurate and reliable evaluation of the Travel Training Program.
|Jan – 14 |Access will be undertaking a review of this recommendation in the near future. |
|April – 14 |Access will be working with its travel training contractor to develop a methodology to demonstrate the overall |
| |effectiveness of the travel training program in diverting riders from Access to fixed route transportation. |
|May – 14 |The travel training contractor has developed and presented a proposed methodology to demonstrate the cost savings of the |
| |travel training program. Staff will review the proposed methodology and other cost/benefit models utilized in the |
| |industry. |
|June-14 |Since there is no universally accepted formula to determine cost savings, it is common for other agencies that offer |
| |travel training programs to adopt different approaches to determine cost savings. Access Services has approached Easter |
| |Seals Project Action for assistance on best practices on evaluating Travel Training Programs. |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| |The methodology is based on a number of assumptions: |
| | |
| |MMP performs follow-up interviews with clients at one week, one month, two months and six months after the training |
| |program is completed. During these interviews, participants are asked how many one-way trips they have taken on public |
| |transit instead of using Access Services during the time since they completed their training. |
| | |
| |Based on follow-up with participants who have recently completed the program, riders who have been trained are using |
| |fixed route transit for an average of 7 one-way trips per month. These are believed to be conservative numbers. |
| | |
| |Had these same riders not been trained, they would have used Access Services to take the same seven (7) one-way trips. |
| | |
| |The average cost savings per trip diverted to fixed route is $31.33 (the difference between the average cost per trip on |
| |fixed route and the average cost per trip on Access). |
| | |
| |Based on these assumptions, the Access Travel Training Program provides training to 250 individuals per year, or 21 |
| |trainings per month on the average. The cost per training is approximately $2,000, resulting in a monthly cost of roughly|
| |$42,000 to maintain the program. It is important to note that savings are cumulative, in that as more individuals are |
| |trained, the number of trips diverted monthly continues to grow. For example, after one month of training, 21 individuals|
| |have been trained and 147 trips are being diverted to fixed route on a monthly basis. After 12 months of training, 250 |
| |individuals have been trained and 1,750 trips monthly are being diverted to fixed route, and so on. |
| | |
| |After one full year, the ongoing monthly savings resulting from the program has increased to $54,828 ($31.33 x 1,750). |
| |Offset by the monthly cost of $42,000, this now shows a net savings of $12,828 per month moving forward. These savings |
| |continue to grow as more individuals are trained, resulting in over $5.6 million in cumulative savings by the completion |
| |of the 5th year of the project, or an average savings of $1.1 million per year. These are net savings after accounting |
| |for the cost of the program. |
|August-14 |Staff has approached Easter Seals Project Action (ESPA) for assistance on best practices on evaluating Travel Training |
| |Programs. ESPA staff indicated that MMP’s methodology to project cost-benefit is common among agencies that offer these |
| |programs. ESPA staff also suggests reviewing actual fixed route trip data to validate customer travel usage. Based on |
| |ESPA and Director Levy’s suggestion, Access has reviewed TAP data on customers who have been through the travel training |
| |program. Based on an analysis of customer TAP data from July 2013 through May 2014, customers’ fixed route usage confirms|
| |MMP’s methodology to demonstrate the cost savings of the travel training program. A summary of this effort is contained |
| |in the August 2014 Board Box. |
| | |
| |Moving forward, Access will continue to compare MMP’s survey results with actual TAP data. Access will provide this |
| |information on an annual basis in the Board Box. Therefore, staff would like to close this recommendation. |
Recommendation #6:
Access Services should evaluate whether the current fleet mix for contract providers is optimal to balance the need for Access Services vehicles with the desire to maximize fuel efficiency.
|Jan – 14 |Access Services is continuously reviewing its fleet mix and will continue to do so. The Access fleet is comprised of |
| |Access owned vehicles, contractor owned vehicles and taxicabs. Staff presented a vehicle formula for Access owned |
| |vehicles to the CAC and TPAC in March. The formula is expected to be presented to the Board for consideration in April |
| |2014. |
|April – 14 |Staff is working with the transportation service providers on the base assumptions used to drive the vehicle allocation |
| |formula. A revised formula and vehicle service plan will be presented to TPAC and CAC in May 2014. |
|May – 14 |The vehicle allocation formula has been presented to CAC and TPAC. Staff is still in the process of finalizing the |
| |formula. Depending upon modifications the formula may need to go back to the CAC and TPAC. Currently, the formula is |
| |expected to be presented to the Board for consideration in June 2014. |
|June-14 |Access staff has met with each transportation service contractor to review their fleet needs and inventory. The results |
| |of these meetings generated the vehicle acquisitions proposed for FY 14/15 and the distribution of vehicles from the |
| |fleet build for FY 13/14. Staff will now work with the transportation service providers to refine the vehicle allocation|
| |formula. The formula will then be presented to CAC and TPAC for additional input. After CAC and TPAC’s review staff will|
| |present the formula to the Board for consideration. |
|August-14 |The revised formula was presented at the August CAC and TPAC meeting. If there is Board approval at the August Board |
| |meeting staff will close this recommendation going forward. |
Recommendation #7:
Access Services should review industry best practices for controlling and containing costs strategies identified from the literature, research and best practices survey responses and determine the feasibility of implementing them for Access Services.
|Jan – 14 |Access Services believes that there is no perfect or ideal way to deliver service to a region as large as L.A. County. |
| |Each operating model has its pros and cons. While it is apparent in terms of service quality and overall cost (in a |
| |national context) that our service model functions well, it is also important to look at other options. Access Services |
| |will look at including funds in its FY 14-15 budget to further study the issues brought up in Recommendations 10 and 11. |
|May - 14 |Hold for FY 14/15 Budget Approval |
|August-14 |Staff has budgeted funds in the proposed FY 2015 budget for a consultant to further study the issue. The RFP/RFQ will be |
| |released this month and anticipate work to begin in October 2014. |
Recommendation #8: CLOSED in February 2014:
Access Services should conduct a process review of its call center functions with a focus on ensuring that hold times are brought within the established standards. Additionally, Access Services should report quarterly to their Board on OMC and CSC call hold time improvements until it is able to meet its internal standard.
|Jan – 14 |The Access Board of Directors approved revised call standards on December 2, 2013. The call standards will ensure that calls|
| |to OMC and CSC are served promptly. Call center performance will be published monthly in our Board Box report. |
| | |
| |CLOSED |
Recommendation #9:
Access Services should review current ADA services provided beyond the minimum required levels and services provided that are not required by the ADA and assess the costs and benefits of continuing these services.
|Jan – 14 |Staff will be presenting a list of ADA services provided beyond the minimums to QSS, CAC, and TPAC for review. Any |
| |recommendations will be forwarded to the Access Board for consideration. |
|April – 14 |Staff is developing a list of services provided beyond the minimum ADA and plans to present to CAC and TPAC in May/June. |
|May – 14 |Staff will present this item to the CAC and TPAC in June. |
|June-14 |Staff presented a list of ADA services and the associated costs and benefits for discussion at the June 2014 CAC and TPAC|
| |meeting. Both Committees are supportive of the services that are currently provided and are not in favor of any changes |
| |or modifications. |
|August-14 |Staff already presented a list of ADA services at the June 2014 CAC and TPAC meeting. Therefore, staff would like to |
| |close this recommendation. |
Recommendation #10:
Access Services should evaluate whether centralizing the reservations and/or routing function would lead to greater system efficiency.
|Jan – 14 |Access Services believes that there is no perfect or ideal way to deliver service to a region as large as L.A. County. |
| |Each operating model has its pros and cons. While it is apparent in terms of service quality and overall cost (in a |
| |national context) that our service model functions well, it is also important to look at other options. Access Services |
| |will look at including funds in its FY 14-15 budget to further study the issues brought up in Recommendation 7, 10 and |
| |11. |
|April – 14 |Hold for FY 14/15 Budget Approval. |
|May – 14 |Hold for FY 14/15 Budget Approval. |
|June-14 |Staff has budgeted funds in the proposed FY 2015 budget for a consultant to further study the issue. |
|August-14 |The RFP/RFQ will be released this month and anticipate work to begin in October 2014. |
Recommendation #11:
Access Services should develop a long-term service strategy that considers alternatives to the current model including a County-wide model that utilizes a larger bench of contractors.
|Jan – 14 |Access Services believes that there is no perfect or ideal way to deliver service to a region as large as L.A. County. |
| |Each operating model has its pros and cons. While it is apparent in terms of service quality and overall cost (in a |
| |national context) that our service model functions well, it is also important to look at other options. Access Services |
| |will include funds in its FY 14-15 budget to further study the issues brought up in Recommendation 7, 10 and 11. |
|April – 14 |Hold for FY 14/15 Budget Approval. |
|May – 14 |Hold for FY 14/15 Budget Approval. |
|June-14 |Staff has budgeted funds in the proposed FY 2015 budget for a consultant to further study the issue. |
|August-14 |The RFP/RFQ will be released this month and anticipate work to begin in October 2014. |
Recommendation #12: CLOSED in February 2014:
Access Services should consider working with Metro Geographic Information Systems (GIS) services to acquire the necessary software and to revise the current service area maps to reflect actual walking distance from the fixed route service. Service changes should be implemented over time to minimize impact on current clients.
|Jan – 14 |Access Services disagrees with this recommendation as it has no legal basis. Access Service believes that the service area |
| |requirement makes it all but clear that the distance is measured as the crow flies by use of diagrams that literally draw a ¼|
| |mile line on either side of the fixed route and a circle with a ¼ mile radius at the terminus of a fixed route. |
| | |
| |CLOSED BY METRO |
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- access financial management services colorado
- access financial management services wyoming
- access financial management services virginia
- access financial services colorado
- access financial management services oklahoma
- access financial services limited jamaica
- access financial management services col
- access financial management services okl
- access financial management services vir
- access financial management services w
- access financial management services wy
- access financial services address