meetings of the transit management committees...mr. crowley said we'll start with the ticket...

VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433

MEETINGS OF THE Transit Management Committees

TMC/RMC Joint Meeting

Transit Management

Committee (TMC)

(TMC Members are encouraged to call into

the meeting)

Rail Management Committee (RMC)

Date

Wednesday, November 1, 2017

Starting time 11:00 a.m.

Meetings to occur sequentially

Location

Valley Metro Lake Powell Conference Room (10A)

101 N. 1st Avenue, 10th Floor Phoenix

If you require assistance accessing the meetings on the 10th floor, please go to the 13th floor or call 602-262-7433.


October 25, 2017

Joint Meeting Agenda Transit Management Committee

and Rail Management Committee

Wednesday, November 1, 2017 Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1st Avenue, 10th Floor

11:00 a.m.

Action Recommended

1. Items from Citizens Present (yellow card) An opportunity will be provided to members of the public at the beginning of the meeting to address the Board on non-agenda items. Up to three minutes will be provided per speaker or a total of 15 minutes for all speakers.

1. For information

2. Chief Executive Officer’s (CEO) Report Scott Smith, CEO, will brief the TMC/RMC on current issues.

2. For information

3. Minutes Minutes from the October 4, 2017 Joint TMC/RMC meeting are presented for approval.

3. For action

4. Public Comment on Agenda Action Items (blue card) The public will be provided with an opportunity at this time to address the TMC/RMC on all action agenda items. Up to three minutes will be provided per speaker to address all agenda items unless the Chair allows more at his/her discretion. A total of 15 minutes for all speakers will be provided.

4. For information

CONSENT AGENDA 5A. State Government Relations Consulting Services Contract Award Staff recommends that the TMC/RMC forward to the Boards of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute a contract with Highground/Kruse to provide State Government Relations Consulting Services to Valley Metro for two years, with three one

5A. For action

2

year extension options in an initial year amount of $72,000 with a 10% contingency of $7,200. The total contract value will not exceed $412,500. VMR costs will not exceed $206,250. RPTA costs will not exceed $206,250. 5B. Federal Government Relations Consulting Services Contract Award Staff recommends that the TMC/RMC forward to the Boards of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute a contract with Cardinal Infrastructure, to provide Federal Government Relations Consulting Services to Valley Metro for two years, with three one-year options in an initial year amount of $120,000. The total contract value will not exceed $600,000. VMR costs will be $300,000. RPTA will be $300,000.

5B. For action

REGULAR AGENDA 6. Fiscal Year 2017 Quarterly Reports Quarterly Reports for Valley Metro RPTA and Valley Metro Rail are provided as an informational update of Valley Metro activities.

6. For information

7. Travel, Expenditures and Solicitations

The monthly travel, expenditures and solicitations for Valley Metro RPTA and Valley Metro Rail are presented for information.

7. For information

8. Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events

Chairs Basha and Brady will request future agenda items from members, and members may provide a report on current events.

8. For information

Qualified sign language interpreters are available with 72 hours notice. Materials in alternative formats (large print, audiocassette, or computer diskette) are available upon request. For further information, please call Valley Metro at 602-262-7433 or TTY at 602-251-2039. To attend this meeting via teleconference, contact the receptionist at 602-262-7433 for the dial-in-information. The supporting information for this agenda can be found on our web site at www.valleymetro.org.

http://www.valleymetro.org/


DATE AGENDA ITEM 1 October 25, 2017 SUBJECT Items from Citizens Present PURPOSE An opportunity will be provided to members of the public at the beginning of the meeting to address the TMC/RMC on non-agenda items. Up to three minutes will be provided per speaker or a total of 15 minutes for all speakers. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Scott Smith Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None

mailto:[email protected]


DATE AGENDA ITEM 2 October 25, 2017 SUBJECT Chief Executive Officer’s Report PURPOSE Scott Smith, Chief Executive Officer, will brief the TMC/RMC on current issues. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Scott Smith Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None



DATE AGENDA ITEM 3 October 25, 2017

Minutes of a Joint Meeting of Transit Management Committee

and Rail Management Committee Wednesday, October 4, 2017

11:00 a.m. Transit Management Committee Meeting Participants Paul Basha, City of Scottsdale, Chair Kevin Phelps, City of Glendale, Vice Chair Gina Montes, City of Avondale - phone Roger Klingler, City of Buckeye Marsha Reed, City of Chandler James Shano, City of El Mirage - phone Jacob Ellis, Town of Gilbert - phone Reed Kempton, Maricopa County - phone Chris Brady, City of Mesa Stuart Kent for Jeff Tyne, City of Peoria Maria Hyatt for Ed Zuercher, City of Phoenix Nicole Lance, City of Surprise - phone Eric Iwersen for Steven Methvin, City of Tempe Members Not Present Aubree Perry, ADOT Rob Bohr, City of Goodyear City of Tolleson Rail Management Committee Meeting Participants Chris Brady, City of Mesa, Chair Maria Hyatt for Ed Zuercher, City of Phoenix, Vice Chair Kevin Phelps, City of Glendale Marsha Reed, City of Chandler Eric Iwersen for Steven Methvin, City of Tempe Chair Basha called the meeting to order at 11:05 a.m. 1. Public Comment Mr. Crowley said thank you. Let me collect myself for a moment. I stopped at New Times. And you have the article in front of you. And later in the agendas on both the rail and bus, you're going to be discussing the Valley Metro Code of Conduct and the installation of a security designation and signage at rail platforms.

2

When it comes to code of conduct, did any of you happen to see the New Times article dated August 31 through September 6? The headline is outward bound, "Phoenix Man Awaiting Deportation After Failing to Buy a Light-Rail Ticket." And then it says that the PPD, who I believe is our security personnel, Mr. Minton determined that the individual was in the country illegally. He got in touch with ICE. And ICE over the phone determined that he was illegally here. So if you guys would scan that article by the time we get around to that Code of Conduct part on the other two meetings we'll be dealing with it. I'll bang the drum once more. Where are your bus stops when it comes to Scottsdale, the 29, between Phoenix and theirs? Is there a reason that six of them don't have a shelter? Because I believe status quo for the system needs to be that every stop has a shelter. Because we, unfortunately, living in the middle of a desert and during the parts of the summer when it's injurious to your health to be out in direct sunlight for over ten minutes, if you're fair skinned like most of you are, I would feel that you would understand that this is a part of what we need to be doing and getting done. I'd also like to point out that in the upcoming changes to the scheduling, y'all haven't been adhering to what we, the ones that put together Prop 400, said you needed to be doing, which was in the metroplex continue to make the grid a part of the system and also extending into the rural areas. And speaking of the rural areas, we need to reestablish the north side Wickenburg connector starting it in Aguila or even further bringing it into the Valley along Surprise, et cetera. But we also need to be doing the same thing from Queen Creek and from Tonopah. They're also a part of the county. I would have brought you the county map to show you where all you represent, but I figure you all understand that. 2. Chief Executive Officer’s Report Scott Smith, CEO, provide an update on the following: 50th Street Light Rail Station Gilbert Road Extension Vanpool Customer Service Week Phoenix Business Journal General Counsel Nomination Principals for a Day Mesa Chamber of Commerce’s Mesa Leadership Class Extra Rail Cars

3

3. Minutes Minutes from the September 6, 2017 Joint TMC/RMC meeting were presented for approval. IT WAS MOVED BY ROGER KLINGLER, SECONDED BY KEVIN PHELPS AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 6, 2017 JOINT TMC/RMC MEETING MINUTES. 4. Public Comment

Mr. Crowley said we'll start with the ticket vending machines. I requested the rationale that we could take care of those that are not considered the lowest in our system, those that don't use the bus as in those on the rail and those that use the BART, the Bus Rapid Transit, which goes to the Park-and-Ride lots. And I said is there a reason you don't have these vending machines at the -- oh, what would we call it -- the transit centers. Now at one Park-and-Ride in Gilbert, the system did mess up and put it there that is also a transit center. But with these machines and their upgrade, I can understand how it costs bunches and bunches of money. But then that was your excuse for not putting them at the transit centers. You said that well, it would cost too much to put security cameras and such things at the centers for that system to function that way. Now, I know some of you are on the rail, but all of you are on the bus. So when I see this I'm going, where's the bus part; where's the transit part for each of your communities. Even though it doesn't exist, where was the ticket vending machine at Loma Linda in Scottsdale? Where is the one at Desert Sky in Phoenix, how about Sunnyslope or the Metrocenter? So, being that this isn't included in the transit system in a way that maximizes its efficiency to them, I have a problem that you haven't addressed that. As in the liability insurance and the coverage, that's something you know better than I, and I believe as managers, if you need to ask questions on it, you will. And lastly, the non-revenue fleet maintenance contract almost three-quarters of a million dollars, and what is it for non-revenue that means all of your management vehicles, your police vehicles, I think. And I go, why -- are we doing this in-house? And if it's not in-house, why not, because we do have a lot of mechanics, so let's get this stuff done in-house instead of putting it out to the general public and get it done correctly. And don't tell me that it's going to cost more if we do it ourselves. We already got the mechanics.

4

5. Consent Agenda Chair Basha said items are being presented on the consent agenda for approval. Chair Basha said first, is there any discussion on the three consent items? Mr. Phelps said I have questions on Items A and B for staff. On A, just out of curiosity, Windows XP extended coverage ended in April of 2014. And we're now three years beyond that and improving the operating system. Just wondering what the thought was there. It's typically not a best practice. And so just maybe understanding why we waited so long to upgrade an operating system not supported by the developer. Mr. Abraham said Chair and members of the TMC, RMC, we were still able to get parts for the computers even though XP is no longer supported by Microsoft. And it's just been in the last recent months that we've been told that we would not be able to get parts anymore for the computer. So that's when we decided that it was time for us to upgrade the computers completely. Chair Basha said do we have XP in other parts of the agency by any chance? Mr. Smith said I don't believe so. As a matter of fact, we are either Microsoft 7 or we're migrating to 10. And just so you -- this is just related to this one particular system with the ticket vending that that went to. And part of the thing was we were, you know, eventually we're planning the long-term migration to whatever system is there and moving away. So part of the reason for deferring the expense is we were thinking we might have a long-term solution before we had to go and spend this money and that -- we're not ready yet to go there. We're still a couple years away. And finally it got to the point where, okay, we have to make this change. So that's one reason we deferred. Mr. Phelps said great. Thank you. And then a question on our liability insurance coverage. I notice that our self-insurance is $250,000 which for an organization this size seems to be just a little bit on the light side. So I'm wondering what the as the recommendation came forward from the consultant to use that as the retention amount and then put excess liability above that, was there analysis done as to what the impact on premiums would be and where the kind of where the business case we made whether we increased or decreased the self-insurance amount? Mr. Minnaugh said yes, to all of the above. Our broker is Arthur J. Gallagher, and we met with Arthur J. Gallagher as well as risk management folks from the different

5

member cities. Part of the discussion was the seven layers of insurance that we're required to get in order to get to our hundred-million-dollar coverage amount. And also part of the discussion was whether or not we should adjust or consider shop around the industry for adjustments in that self-insured retention amount. The cost analysis associated with modifying that amount did not make sense, so we stayed with the current $250,000 amount. Chair Basha said Mr. Phelps, are you satisfied with the answers? Very good. Any further discussion on the three consent agenda items? Is there a motion? IT WAS MOVED BY MARSHA REED, SECONDED BY MARIA HYATT AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. 6. Travel, Expenditures and Solicitations This item was presented for information. 7. Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events None. With no further discussion the meeting adjourned at 11:26 a.m.


DATE AGENDA ITEM 4 October 25, 2017 SUBJECT Public Comment on Agenda Action Items PURPOSE The public will be provided with an opportunity at this time to address the TMC/RMC on all action agenda items. Up to three minutes will be provided per speaker to address all agenda items unless the Chair allows more at his/her discretion. A total of 15 minutes for all speakers will be provided. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Scott Smith Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None



DATE AGENDA ITEM 5A October 25, 2017 SUBJECT State Government Relations Consulting Services Contract Award PURPOSE To request authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute a contract with Highground/Kruse to provide State Government Relations Consulting Services to Valley Metro for two years, with three one year extension options in an initial year amount of $72,000 with a 10% contingency of $7,200. The total contract value will not exceed $412,500. VMR costs will not exceed $206,250. RPTA costs will not exceed $206,250. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION Valley Metro’s current contract for state legislative consulting services will expire on December 31, 2017. Valley Metro continues to have a need for government relations consulting support to successfully address activities at the state level. Consulting services may include but not be limited to:

• Governmental Relations – The primary duty of the legislative consultant will be to monitor, track, and lobby public transit issues at the state legislature, the Governor’s office, and/or state agencies.

• Strategic Planning – Assist with strategic planning by identifying challenging or potentially challenging issues, proactively advising Valley Metro on issues which may impact public transit policies or programs or other emerging long range issues and providing practical plans/initiatives to respond.

In August 2017, Valley Metro issued a Request for Proposals for this contract. Proposals were evaluated based on 1) Qualifications & Experience of the Firm and Key Personnel; 2) Understanding/Approach to the Scope of Services; 3) Overall Evaluation of the Proposal; and 4) Price Proposal. Proposals were received on September 21, 2017. A total of five proposals were received and determined to be responsive from the following firms:

• Arizona Governmental Affairs • Dorn Policy Group, Inc. • Highground/Kruse Group Joint Venture • Pivotal Policy Consulting • Public Policy Partners

2

The selection committee was comprised of two Valley Metro staff and a staff member from the cities of Avondale, Phoenix, and Tempe. Committee members were chosen based on their expertise in government relations. After an initial evaluation process, the panel selected three firms to interview. At the conclusion of the evaluation process and interviews, the selection committee prepared its final scoring and ranking results as reflected below.

State Government Relations Consulting Service Ranking Highground/Kruse Group Joint Venture 1st Dorn Policy Group, Inc. 2nd Pivotal Policy Consulting 3rd

The selection committee determined that Highground/Kruse as the most qualified and highest ranked firm to perform State Government Relations Consulting services. COST AND BUDGET The initial contract year will be $72,000 with up to a 10 percent contingency in the event that additional educational materials/research is desired related to public transportation, bringing the total first year contract to an amount not to exceed $79,200. The contract will allow for up to a two percent annual increase over the five-year contract period. The contract will not exceed $412,500 over the five year contract period. The cost of the contract will be evenly divided between RPTA and VMR. Costs for the State Government Relations Consulting contract are included in the FY18 fiscal year are included in the FY18 Valley Metro Operating and Capital Budget. Projects in future years will be identified in future year budgets and within the Five-Year Operating Forecast and Capital Program. COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: October 17, 2017 for information TMC/RMC: November 1, 2017 for action Boards of Directors: November 16, 2017 for action STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item relates to the following goals and strategies in the Five-Year Strategic Plan, FY 2016 – 2020:

• Goal 1: Increase customer focus o Tactic C: Enhance customer service to member cities

• Goal 3: Grow transit ridership o Tactic C: Communicate availability, attractiveness and safety of transit

service

3

• Goal 4: Focus on economic development, regional competitiveness and financial resources

o Tactic A: Secure dedicated, sustainable, long term funding to advance the total transit network

o Tactic B: Pursue all available funding opportunities for transit projects and services

o Tactic C: Seek opportunities for revenue generation • Goal 5: Advance the value of transit

o Tactic C: Maintain sound relationships with federal, state, regional, and local agencies

RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the TMC/RMC forward to the Boards of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute a contract with Highground/Kruse to provide State Government Relations Consulting Services to Valley Metro for two years, with three one year extension options in an initial year amount of $72,000 with a 10% contingency of $7,200. The total contract value will not exceed $412,500. VMR costs will not exceed $206,250. RPTA costs will not exceed $206,250. CONTACT John Farry Government Relations Officer 602-744-5550 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None



DATE AGENDA ITEM 5B October 25, 2017 SUBJECT Federal Government Relations Consulting Services Contract Award PURPOSE To request authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute a contract with Cardinal Infrastructure, to provide Federal Government Relations Consulting Services to Valley Metro for two years, with three one-year options in an initial year amount of $120,000. The total contract value will not exceed $600,000, for the base and option years. VMR costs will be $300,000. RPTA will be $300,000. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION Until December 2015, Valley Metro retained federal legislative consulting services to represent the agency and region at the federal Congressional and Administrative levels since 1997. At the end of 2015, staff determined that federal relations efforts could be handled with existing in-house staff and outside services were not reprocured. The primary factor in this decision was the passage of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act at the end of 2015, which established public transportation programs and funding levels through 2020. Accordingly, the need for representation in Washington was minimized. The situation in Washington has changed since the end of 2015. Disregarding the funding authorized in the FAST ACT, the Trump Administration has proposed eliminating the funding of rail transit capital projects. In both the 2017 and 2018 budget proposals, the Administration proposed no new funding for Capital Investment Grant (CIG) projects (New Starts), and eliminating the TIGER grant program. In FY 2017, Congress ignored the Administration proposal and appropriated transit funds at FAST Act levels. For FY 2018 and beyond, it is apparent that Congress will need to take the lead in transit funding. Many members in Congress on both sides of the aisle do not agree with the Administration’s position. Our ability to obtain federal funding for projects in development will be determined in large part by taking part in the deliberations and negotiations in Congress. Additionally, the FAST Act will expire in 2020. The FAST Act authorizes all transportation programs and funding. Not only will current public transportation programs need to be reauthorized, but a stable revenue source will need to be identified for the next reauthorization. The FAST Act used several revenue streams outside of the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) to fund the legislation, but those revenues are not permanent. Congressional hearings will likely begin within the next year to begin FAST Act reauthorization and the associated funding mechanism.

2

In August 2017, Valley Metro issued a Request for Proposals for this contract. Proposals were evaluated based on 1) Qualifications & Experience of the Firm and Key Personnel; 2) Understanding/Approach to the Scope of Services; 3) Overall Evaluation of the Proposal; and 4) Price Proposal. Proposals were received on September 21, 2017. A total of 9 proposals were received and determined to be responsive from the following firms: Best Best & Krieger LLP Cardinal Infrastructure Carpi & Clay Inc Crossroads Strategies Dickenson Wright PLLC NEXUS Consulting Normandy Group Squire Patton Boggs Van Scoyoc Assoc Inc

The selection committee was comprised of two Valley Metro staff and a staff member from the cities of Mesa, Phoenix, and Tempe. Committee members were chosen based on their expertise in government relations. After an initial evaluation process, the panel selected four firms to interview. At the conclusion of the evaluation process and interviews, the selection committee prepared its final scoring and ranking results as reflected below.

Federal Government Relations Consulting Service Ranking

Cardinal Infrastructure 1st Van Scoyoc Associates Inc 2nd Squire Patton Boggs 3rd Carpi and Clay 4th

The selection committee determined that Cardinal Infrastructure as the most qualified and highest ranked firm to perform Federal Government Relations Consulting services. COST AND BUDGET The initial contract year will be $120,000. The total contract will not exceed $600,000.00 over the five year contract period. The cost of the contract will be evenly divided between RPTA and VMR. Costs for the Federal Government Relations Consulting contract are included in the FY18 fiscal year are included in the FY18 Valley Metro Operating and Capital Budget.

3

Projects in future years will be identified in future year budgets and within the Five-Year Operating Forecast and Capital Program. COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: October 17, 2017 for information TMC/RMC: November 1, 2017 for action Boards of Directors: November 16, 2017 for action STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item relates to the following goals and strategies in the Five-Year Strategic Plan, FY 2016 – 2020:

• Goal 1: Increase customer focus o Tactic C: Enhance customer service to member cities

• Goal 3: Grow transit ridership o Tactic C: Communicate availability, attractiveness and safety of transit

service • Goal 4: Focus on economic development, regional competitiveness and financial

resources o Tactic A: Secure dedicated, sustainable, long term funding to advance the

total transit network o Tactic B: Pursue all available funding opportunities for transit projects and

services o Tactic C: Seek opportunities for revenue generation

• Goal 5: Advance the value of transit o Tactic C: Maintain sound relationships with federal, state, regional, and

local agencies RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the TMC/RMC forward to the Boards of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute a contract with Cardinal Infrastructure, to provide Federal Government Relations Consulting Services to Valley Metro for two years, with three one-year options in an initial year amount of $120,000. The total contract value will not exceed $600,000. VMR costs will be $300,000. RPTA will be $300,000. CONTACT John Farry Government Relations Officer 602-744-5550 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None



DATE AGENDA ITEM 6 October 25, 2017 SUBJECT Fiscal Year 2017 Quarterly Reports PURPOSE To provide an informational update of activities at Valley Metro. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION Quarterly Reports are provided as an informational update of Valley Metro activities

• Operations • Safety and Security • Capital and Service Development

• Communication & Marketing • Finance

COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS TMC/RMC: November 1, 2017 for information Boards of Directors: November 16, 2017 for information RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Ray Abraham Chief Operations Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] Adrian Ruiz Director of Safety and Security 602-262-7433 [email protected] Wulf Grote, P.E. Director of Capital & Service Development 602-322-4420 [email protected]

Hillary Foose Director, Communications & Strategic Initiatives 602-262-7433 [email protected] Paul Hodgins Chief Financial Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected]






10/27/2017

1

Operations & MaintenanceFY18 Q1 Report

November 2017

Regional Ridership

- 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 6,000,000

July Aug SeptBus 3,421,580 4,466,578 4,433,776

Light Rail 1,173,622 1,387,778 1,365,280

FY17 Q4 FY17 Q1 FY18 Q1

Bus 11,936,358 11,926,774 12,321,934

Light Rail 4,091,799 4,050,043 3,926,680

Total 16,028,157 15,976,817 16,248,614

10/27/2017

2

Fixed Route Bus – East Valley

Performance Indicator Target FY17 Q4 FY17 Q1 FY18 Q1

On-Time Performance ≥ 92% 93% 93% 93%

Complaints Per 100,000 Boardings

≤ 45 49 53 49

Mechanical Failures Per 100,000 Revenue Miles

≤ 12 4 16 4

Revenue Service Completed

≥ 99.85% 99.96% 99.82% 99.97%

Preventable Accidents per 100,000 Miles

≤ 0.90 0.65 0.93 0.91

Ridership -- 3,266,115 3,589,814 3,470,024

Fixed Route Bus – West Valley



Complaints Per 100,000 Boardings

≤ 45 50 43 46

Mechanical Failures Per 100,000 Revenue Miles

≤ 12 9 6 15

Revenue Service Completed

≥ 99.85% 99.99% 99.98% 99.98%


≤ 0.90 0.00 0.38 0.37

Ridership -- 126,023 122,315 125,382

10/27/2017

3

Light Rail



Complaints Per 100,000 Boardings ≤ 3.0 0.3 0.5 0.5

Preventative Maintenance Inspections - % On-Time (LRV)

≥ 80% 100% 100% 100%

Preventative Maintenance Inspections - % On-Time (Systems)

≥ 80% 99% 98% 99%


≤ 0.90 0.00 0.12 0.00

Ridership -- 4,091,799 4,050,043 3,926,680

Customer Service – Call Center


Calls Received -- 295,737 311,015 336,484

Complaints Processed -- 7,891 7,634 9,387

NextRide Inquiries Handled by Interactive Voice Response (IVR)

-- 260,579 308,948 243,933

NextRide Inquiries Handled by Text Messaging

-- 437,110 475,179 471,529

Average Talk Time -- 2:09 2:15 2:07

Average Speed of Answer ≤ 1.00 :19 :30 :18

10/27/2017

1

Safety, Security & Quality AssuranceFY18 Q1 Report

November 2017

Bus Accidents

95

106

77

2 1 6

FY17 Q4 FY17 Q1 FY18 Q1

Total NTD

2

10/27/2017

2

Police Incidents - Bus

1211

8

44

7

FY17 Q4 FY18 Q1Total Incidents Criminal Damage Other

3

Rail Accidents

4

11

10

12

11

10

12

FY17 Q4 FY17 Q1 FY18 Q1

NTD

10/27/2017

3

Fares Inspected

5

581,856

647,591

432,874

FY17 Q4 FY17 Q1 FY18 Q1

% of total ridership

15.9%14.2%

11%

Fare Inspections and Fare Evasions

6

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

20.0%

Oct‐16 Nov‐16 Dec‐16 Jan‐17 Feb‐17 Mar‐17 Apr‐17 May‐17 Jun‐17 Jul‐17 Aug‐17 Sep‐17

Inspected and Fare Evasion Percentage

Percentage Inspected Fare Evasion

10/27/2017

4

Fare ComplianceTotal Inspections for Q1= 647,591

92% 94% 92%

FY17 Q4 FY17 Q1 FY18 Q17

Citations Issued by Allied Universal

8

447

365

576

FY17 Q4 FY17 Q1 FY18 Q1

10/27/2017

5

Top Violations

491

146

661

94 47

241

FY17 Q4 FY17Q1 FY18 Q1

Fare Violations Disobey Traffic Signals/Security Notice9

Fare Sweeps Total Activity

10

The purpose of a fare sweep is to ensure Fare Compliance and Revenue Recovery

18

201

96

14

204

67

TOTAL FARE SWEEPS CITATIONS ARREST (WARRANT)

FY17 Q4 FY18 Q1

10/27/2017

6

Criminal Activity

11

Criminal Activity FY17 Q4 FY17 Q1 FY18 Q1

Property CrimesPlatform 22 8 22Park N' Ride 7 3 1

Crimes Against PersonsPlatform 19 36 53Park N' Ride 39 0 0

Gateway CrimesPlatform 2491 171 2074Park N' Ride 197 418 222

Activity FY17 Q4 FY17 Q1 FY18 Q1

Medical ResponsesPlatform 256 149 336Park N' Ride 1 7 4

Warrant ArrestsPlatform 22 12 15Park N' Ride 3 6 0

Quality Assurance

• Gilbert Road Extension: Two Reviews Performed

• Tempe Street Car: Two Reviews Performed

• 50th Street: Upcoming audit Topic: Submittals

• North West Extension TPSS Audit/Quality Assurance Report: Open

• Central Mesa Extension and North West Extension Safety Security Certification Verification Report: Currently with ADOT-pending closure

12

10/27/2017

1

Capital & Service Development FY18 Q1 Report

November 2017

Transit Planning

10/27/2017

2

Transit Planning ProjectsProject/Study Name

Completion

DateStatus

Mesa Five-Year Transit Plan

November 2017

• Received feedback from Mesa staff

• Updating based on preliminary feedback

Light Rail Incident Hot

Spot GIS Mapping July 2017

• Developed concept with Safety and Security• Completed reporting structure and updated

schedule

Short Range Transit

ProgramMarch 2018 • 2018 update scheduled to begin October 2017

Scottsdale Circulator

Service Optimization

Study

January 2017• Drafted Scope of Work• Initiated Analysis of Existing Conditions

3

4

Project/Study NameCompletion

DateStatus

Transit Stop Inventory and Accessibility Study

November 2017

• Completed bus stop inventory field data collection

• Revised bus stop design guideline• Continuing review of draft final technical memo

Transit Stop Inventory

Reconciliation with

Bus Stop Database

January 2018• Verifying bus stop amenities and locations for

use in on-line maps• Preparing bus stop photos for on-line publishing

Future Transit Network Input - Regional Transit Framework Study Update

September 2018

• Complete - Conducted a workshop to develop

background bus network with member city

inputs

Transit Planning Projects

10/27/2017

3

5

Project/Study NameCompletion

DateStatus

October 2017 Fixed Route Service Changes

October 2017• Final changes approved by Valley Metro Board• Implementation underway

April 2018 Fixed-Route Service Changes

April 2018• Presented proposed changes to Valley Metro

Board• Public Comment scheduled for October

Northwest Valley Express Routes Reconfiguration

April 2018

• Two proposals developed for public comments

• Included in April 2018 Service Changes

Proposal

Transit Planning Projects

Capital Planning

10/27/2017

4

7

Northwest LRT Extension Phase IIProject

CompleteCurrent Phase

Phase Complete

Status

2023 Environmental/PreliminaryEngineering

Spring2018

Revising EA based on FTA’s comments and project changes Submitted New Starts Rating package to FTA Continue coordination with ADOT & MAG

8

Capitol/I-10 West LRT ExtensionProject


Phase Complete

Status

2023 (Phase I) Environmental Assessment (EA)

Fall2018

ADOT, County and City coordination on-going Revising the EA based on construction phasing and downtown

configuration Anticipate public review of EA in Fall 2018 Finalizing the I-17 Change of Access Report

10/27/2017

5

9

West Phoenix/Central GlendaleProject


Phase Complete

Status

2026 Alternatives Analysis

Spring 2018 Continued coordination with ADOT, GCU and other stakeholders Continue to identify options to cross I-17, transition into Downtown

Glendale and crossing Grand Avenue

10

OMC ExpansionProject


Phase Complete

Status

2017Preliminary Engineering

Fall 2017

Completing the final planning study report Developing internal building configuration and trackwork designs

as part of the Preliminary Engineering phase Developed bridging documents for design-build procurement

10/27/2017

6

11

Peoria Park-and-RideProject

CompleteCurrent Phase Phase Complete

Summer 2019ROW

AcquisitionDecember 2017

Status

• City of Peoria initiating right-of-way acquisition

12

Fiesta-District Alternatives Analysis

Project Complete

Current Phase Phase Complete

2019 Alternatives Analysis

Spring 2019

Status

• Held a project kick-off with City of Mesa• First public meeting to be held in October

10/27/2017

7

13

Northeast LRT Feasibility Study

Project Complete

Current Phase Phase Complete

2034 Feasibility Study Summer 2018

Status

• Analyzed engineering feasibility for the two corridors• Conducted ridership assessment for the two corridors• Targeted stakeholder outreach

14

I-10/I-17 Direct Access Bus Ramp

Project Complete Current Phase Phase Complete

TBD Planning Spring 2018

Status

Revising Categorical Exclusion Revising I-17 Interstate Change of Access Methods

and Assumptions document for ADOT, FWHA, and Phoenix approval

Coordinating with ADOT and Phoenix on next steps Developing and evaluating conceptual designs for

various operating options Submitted an application for the TIGER program

10/27/2017

8

Design and Construction

16

Project Complete

Current PhasePhase

CompleteStatus

2019 Construction(18% complete)

Spring 2019 Designer and CMAR continue working together Continue construction for private utilities Began construction for civil infrastructure

50th Street Station

Data as of 30SEP17

10/27/2017

9

50th Street StationProject Progress• Design

– The Designer of Record continues to assist Valley Metro with design services during construction.

– Real estate acquisition continues – Remains at 67% complete as of Sept. 6, 2017

• Construction– Private utility construction continued – Southwest Gas completed the installation

of the new 8-inch high pressure gas main and tapped into the existing system. – The Contractor began coordination effort with APS, COX, and CenturyLink for

the upcoming underground and overhead utilities relocation.– Excavation for the underground joint trench and retaining walls began.– Set forms for the retaining walls on the south side of Washington Street.– Stockyards parking lot stalls were available ahead of schedule.

17Data as of 30SEP17

18

50th Street StationSchedule Summary

Data as of 30SEP17

10/27/2017

10

50th Street StationProject Cost and Budget

19

Description Budget ($M)

Expended ($M)

%Earned

Forecast ($M)

Contracted Services $ 19.0 $ 3.5 18.0% $ 19.0

Right of Way $ 0.7 $ 0.1 14.0% $ 0.7

Professional Services $ 3.2 $ 1.5 48.5% $ 3.2

Total $ 22.9 $ 5.1 22.2% $ 22.9

Data as of 30SEP17

50th Street StationProject Contingency

Description Dollars ($M)

Total Contingency $ 4.5

Executed Change Orders & Budget Transfers $ (1.0)

Total Project Contingency Remaining $ 3.5


10/27/2017

11

21

Gilbert Road ExtensionProject


Phase Complete

Status

2019 Construction(37% complete)

Spring 2019 • Construction continues on the following items:• Waterlines and associated Gas relocations• Joint trench (electrical & 3rd party utilities)• Century Link vaults• Catch basin storm drain laterals• Building environmental mitigation & demolition• Business sign relocations

Data as of 30SEP17

Gilbert Road Extension Project Progress• Design - 100% completed. Design Services During

Construction ongoing• Early Construction Activities (GMP I) completed• Full Construction Activities (GMP II) – joint utility trench for

SRP and City of Mesa complete.• Right of Way – 120 of 123 parcels have been acquired.• Artwork – per public comment, switched between Gilbert

Road and Stapley Drive stations


10/27/2017

12

23

Gilbert Road ExtensionSchedule Summary

Data as of 30SEP17

Gilbert Road Extension Project Cost and Budget

24

DescriptionCurrent Budget

Expended ($M)

% EarnedForecast

($M)

Contracted Services $143.5 $31.8 22.1% $143.5

Light Rail Vehicles $16.9 $3.1 18.7% $16.9

Right of Way $14.8 $4.0 27.2% $14.8

Professional Services $10.9 $6.0 54.9% $10.9

Total $186.0 $44.9 24.1% $186.0

Data as of 30SEP17

10/27/2017

13

Gilbert Road ExtensionProject Contingency

25


Total Contingency $10.7

Executed Change Orders & Budget Transfers $(1.4)

Total Project Contingency Remaining $9.3

Data as of 30SEP17

26

Project Complete

Current PhasePhase

CompleteStatus

2023 Design(18% complete)

Summer 2019 60% submittal for 7th Avenue/7th Street Roadway Improvement Package completed

40% submittal for Project wide design due November 2017

South Central Extension

Data as of 30SEP17

10/27/2017

14

South Central Extension Project Progress

• Design – Continuing to work toward 60% Salt River Bridge submittal and Project

Wide 40% submittal, both due on November 15, 2017

• Construction – CM@Risk contract awarded, Preconstruction phase commencing.

• Public Art – Awarded contracts for Public Art at 14 locations along the alignment


28

South Central Extension Schedule Summary

Data as of 30SEP17

10/27/2017

15

South Central Extension Project Cost Estimate

29

Description Forecast($M)

Expended ($M)

%Earned

Contracted Services $ 605.7 $ 1.0 0.2%

Right of Way $ 33.5 $ 0.0 0.0%

Professional Services $ 65.3 $ 0.4 0.5%

Total $ 704.5 $ 1.4 0.2%

Data as of 30SEP17

South Central Extension Project Contingency



Executed Change Orders & Budget Transfers $ 0.0



10/27/2017

16

31

Tempe Streetcar Project

CompleteCurrent Phase Phase Complete Status

2020 Final Design and Pre-

Construction(76% complete)

Winter 2018 Designer delivered 60% drawings in August Early Work Package 2 utility relocation (downtown

Tempe) began work in September

Data as of 30SEP17

Tempe StreetcarProject Progress

• Design– Advancing the 90% design for the project with a delivery date of

November 17, 2017. – Received 100% of the titles for all 39 parcels. – Public Information coordination continues south of downtown Tempe.

• Letter of No Prejudice (LONP)– FTA approved a LONP to procure special track work and rail welding for a

not-to-exceed amount of $7.1 million.• Construction

– Continuing Early Work Package #2 utility relocation in the field.


10/27/2017

17

Tempe Streetcar Schedule Summary


Tempe Streetcar Project Cost Estimate

34

Description Forecast ($M) Expended ($M) % Earned

Contracted Services $ 90.5 $ 1.7 1.8%

Vehicles $ 35.0 $ 3.5 10.0%

Right of Way $ 3.9 $ - 0.0%

Professional Services $ 56.6 $ 9.2 16.2%

Total $ 186.1 $ 14.4 7.7%

Data as of 30SEP17

10/27/2017

18

Tempe Streetcar Project Contingency

35



Executed Change Orders & Budget Transfers $ 1.1


Data as of 30SEP17

10/27/2017

1

Communication & MarketingFY18 Q1 Report

November 2017

Communications Update

• Coordinated with city partners to celebrate new bus service on 10/23, providing:– Event planning support– Marketing & graphics– Regional news release & PR

• Supported PR associated with the SCE artist selection, who are 80% local

• Executed second computer donation w/ Cox Comm. for schools/families in Mesa

• Initiated Safe Place annual refresher training w/ front-line staff

2

10/27/2017

2

Community Relations Update

• Continued with GRE Business Assistance programs:– Business access signage– Back-to-school/SHOP On mailer– Health assessments by Local First– Mesa’s utility voucher program

• Opened up 13th Annual Cool Transit STUFF 3rd grade art contest– Entries due on 10/13

• Staffed ASU fall move-in events• Conducted design review public

meetings for TSC & GRE projects 3

Commute Solutions Update

• Conducted nomination process & registration for 30th annual Clean Air Campaign Awards & Luncheon– Luncheon is set for 10/31

• Initiated pledge and commuter challenge for Rideshare Month (Oct.)

• Executed monthly contests, including a video contest, at ShareTheRide.com

• Operated 387 vanpools as of June 30 – Saving vanpool riders nearly 57.3M miles of

travel & 2.2M gallons of fuel 4

10/27/2017

3

Marketing Update

• Sent to print the Oct. 2017 Transit Book – Process also includes maps & customer

notification elements

• Received Board support for updated paint schemes for streetcar & future light rail fleet

• Conducted usability testing for the valleymetro.org re-design– New website is scheduled to launch in Dec.

• Continued to support Phoenix w/ Transportation 2050 branding & microsite development 5

10/27/2017

1

Finance DivisionFY18 Q1 Report

November 2017

Valley Metro RPTA Operating Results – Q1

2

RPTA Budget vs. Actual Report $ Millions

For the quarter ending September 30, 20171st Quarter Year to Date

Operations Expenditures Budget Actual

Variance

(Unfav.) Budget Actual

Variance

(Unfav.)

Fixed Route Bus 23.7 22.9 0.8 23.7 22.9 0.8

Paratransit 9.4 8.6 0.8 9.4 8.6 0.8

Vanpool 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0

Regional Services 3.2 2.3 0.9 3.2 2.3 0.9

Planning 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.3 0.4

Administration 0.9 0.6 0.2 0.9 0.6 0.2

METRO Rail (Salary, Fringe, OH) 5.4 4.6 0.9 5.4 4.6 0.9

Total Operations Expenditures 43.4 39.4 4.0 43.4 39.4 4.0

10/27/2017

2

Valley Metro RPTA Capital Results – Q1

3

RPTA Budget vs. Actual Report $ Millions


Capital Expenditures Budget Actual

Variance


Variance

(Unfav.)

Bus Purchases

Valley Metro 8.4 0.0 8.4 8.4 0.0 8.4

Lead Agency 1.3 0.0 1.3 1.3 0.0 1.3

Paratransit Vehicles

Lead Agency 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1

Vanpool Vehicles 1.1 0.9 0.2 1.1 0.9 0.2

Other Capital 3.7 0.4 3.4 3.7 0.4 3.4

METRO Rail 10.9 8.0 2.9 10.9 8.0 2.9

Total Capital Expenditures 25.7 9.3 16.4 25.7 9.3 16.4

Valley Metro RailOperating Results – Q1

4

VMR Budget vs. Actual Report $ Millions


Operations Expenditures Budget Actual

Variance


Variance

(Unfav.)

Rail Operations 12.0 9.9 2.1 12.0 9.9 2.1

Future Project Development 4.4 4.1 0.3 4.4 4.1 0.3

Agency Operating 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.1

Total Operating Activities 16.8 14.3 2.5 16.8 14.3 2.5

10/27/2017

3

Average Rail FareFY 2017 History / FY 2018 1st Quarter

Average Fare - 12 Months Rolling by Quarter

5

$0.80 $0.81 $0.81 $0.82 $0.80

$0.50

$0.55

$0.60

$0.65

$0.70

$0.75

$0.80

$0.85

$0.90

$0.95

$1.00

FY17‐Q1 FY17‐Q2 FY17‐Q3 FY17‐Q4 FY18‐Q1

Average Fare Per Ride Budget

$0.85

Q1 Q1

Fare Revenue Budget $3,446,000 Fare Recovery Budget 28.8%

Fare Revenue Collected $3,133,000 Fare Recovery Actual 31.8%

Variance ($313,000)

Valley Metro RailCapital Results – Q1

6

VMR Budget vs. Actual Report $ Millions


Capital Expenditures Budget Actual

Variance


Variance

(Unfav.)

Rail Projects

Central Mesa 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0

Tempe Streetcar 10.8 6.0 4.8 10.8 6.0 4.8

Gilbert Rd 14.3 6.4 7.9 14.3 6.4 7.9

50th St LRT Station 2.0 1.5 0.5 2.0 1.5 0.5

South Central 3.7 1.4 2.3 3.7 1.4 2.3

OMC Expansion 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

System‐wide Improvements 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1

Total Capital 31.3 15.8 15.5 31.3 15.8 15.5


DATE AGENDA ITEM 7 October 25, 2017 SUBJECT Travel, Expenditures and Solicitations PURPOSE The monthly travel, expenditures and solicitations are presented for information. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Paul Hodgins Chief Financial Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS Valley Metro Travel Reimbursement Report Valley Metro RPTA and Valley Metro Rail Monthly Accounts Payable over $25,000 Active Requests for Proposals, Qualifications and Invitations for Bids


Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority

Monthly AP Payments over $25,000

September 21, 2017 to October 20, 2017

Document

Number Name Transaction Description

Effective

Date

Transaction

Amount

20170929W003 FirstGroup America, Inc. August 2017 Fixed Route Bus Services 9/29/2017 5,445,562.35

20170922W001 City of Phoenix Sept. 2017 FR Bus Svc, DAR, FR Svc Op Supp 9/22/2017 2,221,306.83

20171019W001 City of Phoenix Oct 2017 Fixed Route Service, DAR, Fare Handling Fee 10/19/2017 2,221,306.83

37427 Transdev Services, Inc July 2017 Regional Paratransit Services 9/27/2017 1,236,816.57

20170929W009 ADP Wages Payables-Reverse Wire PPE 9-24-17 9/29/2017 468,794.88

20171012W004 ADP Wages Payable PPE 10/8/17 10/12/2017 463,335.61

20170929W007 United Healthcare Oct. 2017 EE Dental, Medical & Vision Coverage 9/29/2017 349,717.97

37385 Extreme Integration, LLC June 2017 IVR Replacement Project 9/21/2017 210,676.35

20171012W004 ADP Federal,State, SS/Med EE/ER Tax - PPE 10/8/17 10/12/2017 196,612.89

20170929W009 ADP Federal, State, SS/Med EE/ER Tax-ACH PPE 9-24-17 9/29/2017 195,767.45

37385 Extreme Integration, LLC 7/1/2017-7/31/2019 - 3 Year Extreme Care 24 x 7 Service and Support 9/21/2017 149,028.00

20170929W006 Total Transit Enterprises, LLC Aug. 2017 Zoom (Avondale) Bus 9/29/2017 138,465.41

20170929W006 Total Transit Enterprises, LLC Aug. 2017 Glendale Express Bus Run 9/29/2017 128,908.62

37378 CDW Government LLC Data Storage Management Solution Licenses and Support 9/21/2017 111,132.14

20171012W005 ASRS ASRS Contributions Employee PPE 10/8/17 10/12/2017 85,925.20

20171012W005 ASRS ASRS Contributions Employer PPE 10/8/2017 10/12/2017 85,925.20

20170929W010 ASRS ASRS Contributions Employee PPE 9-24-17 9/29/2017 85,748.37

20170929W010 ASRS ASRS Contributions Employer PPE 9-24-17 9/29/2017 85,748.37

20170929W006 Total Transit Enterprises, LLC Aug. 2017 Vee Quiva Bus Run 9/29/2017 79,877.46

37408 City of Scottsdale - Remittance Processing PTF Expenditure Reimb Request #91-ADA Services Reimbursement 9/27/2017 78,706.26

37484 Moses, Inc. Aug 2017 Marketing and Advertising 10/10/2017 57,656.74

20170929W004 Second Generation, Inc. dba Ajo Transportation August 2017 Rural Connector Route 685 9/29/2017 56,676.69

20170930-3 City of Mesa September 2017 Utilities 9/30/2017 54,454.67

37446 Knowledge Services Sept. 2017 IT Services Consultant 10/5/2017 54,406.25

20171019W004 Second Generation, Inc. dba Ajo Transportation Sept 2017 Rural Conector Route 10/19/2017 50,436.00

20170922W003 CopperPoint Mutual Insurance Company Oct. 2017 Mobility and Call Center Rent 9/22/2017 48,579.69

37456 vRide, Inc. July 2017 Vanpool Services 10/5/2017 47,471.76

20170922W005 Senergy Petroleum LLC Mesa Diesel Fuel 9/22/2017 47,289.83

37399 vRide, Inc. June 2017 Vanpool Services 9/21/2017 45,140.43

37468 Bentley Systems, Inc 7/1/17-6/30/18 System Software Support and Maintenance 10/10/2017 42,354.00

37508 Creative Bus Sales Inc. 49150 2017 Ford Transit Van Silver 10/18/2017 41,043.21


Page 1 of 3




Document


Effective

Date

Transaction

Amount

































Page 2 of 3




Document


Effective

Date

Transaction

Amount









20171019W002 Creative Software Solutions/MJM Add Surprise - One Time Development Fee for Trip Tracking Feature 10/19/2017 31,000.00

20171019W002 Creative Software Solutions/MJM Aug 2017 Taxi Trips Final Billing 10/19/2017 30,153.41

10152017 Wells Fargo September 2017 Wells Fargo Credit Card Purchases 10/15/2017 29,439.56

20171019W002 Creative Software Solutions/MJM 8/1/17-8/15/17 Estimated Taxi Trips 10/19/2017 28,888.56

20171019W002 Creative Software Solutions/MJM July 2017 Taxi Trips Final Billing 10/19/2017 27,891.61

20170929W006 Total Transit Enterprises, LLC Aug. 2017 Engine Rebuild 1598 9/29/2017 27,404.40

Total 16,421,846.77

Page 3 of 3

Valley Metro Rail, Inc.Monthly AP Payments over $25,000


Document Number Name Transaction Description

Effective

Date

Transaction

Amount

20171005W007 Stacy and Witbeck-Sundt JV GRE August 2017 Stacy and Witbeck Gilbert Rd Extension 10/5/2017 5,226,994.88

20171012W002 City of Mesa Aug. 2017 Gilbert Road Extension 10/12/2017 1,054,354.70

20170929W AECOM Technical Services July 2017 S Central Extension 9/29/2017 891,227.47

20171005W Alternate Concepts Inc. July 2017 Transportation Services 10/5/2017 767,026.24

20171005W003 City of Mesa July 2017 GRE- City of Mesa IGA 10/5/2017 740,188.36

20171012W004 HDR/SR Beard & Associates July 2017 HDR Planning/Comm Relations Support 10/12/2017 731,224.35

20170929W004 Stacy and Witbeck 50th St/Tempe SC August 2017 50th ST Station 9/29/2017 721,791.76

029619 Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Aug. 2017 Tempe Streetcar Design Services 10/12/2017 678,491.93

029668 RPTA City of Mesa Paid VMR for 2 RPTA Invoices #17840 and 17841 10/18/2017 521,603.08

20171012W Allied Universal Security Services Aug. 2017 Fare Inspection and Security Services 10/12/2017 416,254.47

V-20170930-01 APS Sept 2017 Utilities 9/30/2017 225,821.95

029462 B & C Transit, Inc. July and Aug. 2017 SCADA Upgrade 9/21/2017 220,000.00

20171005W004 DMS - Facility Services, Inc. August 2017 Facilities and LRV Cleaning Services 10/5/2017 171,905.44

20171012W005 PB-Wong Joint Venture August 2017 Project Mngt Construction Mngt 10/12/2017 168,843.67

029614 Microeletrica - USA LLC High Speed Circuit Breaker Parts 10/12/2017 129,555.70

20170922W001 USBC Real Estate LLC Oct. 2017 Rent, CAM, Taxes 9/22/2017 123,573.14

V-20170930-19 SRP Sept 2017 Utilities 9/30/2017 95,573.42

029466 City of Chandler - MS 412 Transit Services Refund of Funds - Fiesta Downtown Chandler Project 9/21/2017 76,093.78

20171005W003 City of Mesa August 2017 GRE - City of Mesa IGA 10/5/2017 74,327.25

20171012W006 RouteMatch Software, Inc. August 2017 Routematch 10/12/2017 72,000.00

20170929W002 DMS - Facility Services, Inc. Aug 2017 Facilities Maintenance Services 9/29/2017 54,064.99

20171005W001 ARCADIS 7/24-8/20/17 Consulting Support Services TO 14 10/5/2017 53,616.26

029514 NASG Holdings Inc. LRV Cab Windshield 9/27/2017 53,370.87

029505 Hill International, Inc. July 2017 Program Management 9/27/2017 48,565.03

029671 SRP Miscellaneous Accts Receivable Gilbert Rd Extension Utilities 10/18/2017 47,873.46

20171005W001 ARCADIS 7/24-8/20/17 Consulting Support Services TO 7A 10/5/2017 47,606.75

029604 City of Phoenix Sept. 2017-Fare Handling Fee 10/12/2017 38,907.00

029526 United Right-of-Way Aug 2017 Facilities Landskeeping Services 9/27/2017 33,074.60

V-20170930-05 City of Mesa Sept 2017 Utilities 9/30/2017 31,278.52

20171012W Allied Universal Security Services August 2017 Fare Inspection and Security Services 10/12/2017 30,741.11

029516 Parsons Transportation Group Inc. 7/1-8/25/17 SCADA Upgrade 9/27/2017 30,619.00

V-20170930-13 City of Phoenix Sept 2017 Utilities 9/30/2017 28,208.34

10152017 Wells Fargo September 2017 Wells Fargo Credit Card Purchases 10/15/2017 27,260.80

029481 Suns Legacy Partners, LLC Phoenix Suns - Contract Sponsorship Bill 1 of 3 9/21/2017 26,655.12

13,658,693.44

Valley MetroMonthly RTAG Solicitation Update

Solicitation Type Solicitation Title Release Date Proposal Due Date Targeted Board Award Date

RFP Agency Owned Vehicle Fleet Maintenance 6/19/2017 7/24/2017 11/16/2017RFQ Northwest Extension II - Public A 6/23/2017 8/4/2017 11/16/2017RFP Federal Legislative Consulting Service 8/21/2017 9/21/2017 11/16/2017RFP State Legislative Consulting Service 8/21/2017 9/21/2017 11/16/2017IFB Motor and Center Truck Overhaul Parts 9/21/2017 10/19/2017 11/16/2017

RFP Marketing Materials Storage & Delivery Service 10/10/2017 11/2/2017 January

RFQ Northwest Extension Design - Reissue 9/29/2017 11/9/2017 2/15/2018

RFP OMC Expansion - 2 step Design/Build 10/19/2017 11/21/2017 6/28/2018

Solicitation Type Solicitation Title Release Date Proposal Due Date Targeted Board Award Date

IFB Mobile Sand Filling Machine TBD TBD January

RFPADA Paratransit Eligibility Certification and Travel Training Services

11/28/2017 TBD 4/19/2018

RFP CARE Evaluation Dec-17 2/1/2018 5/17/2018

IFB Uniforms TBD TBD TBD

IFB Station Sails TBD TBD TBDIFB HVAC TBD TBD TBDIFB LRV Friction Brakes TBD TBD TBDRFP Off-Site Records Storage TBD TBD TBD

ACTIVE SOLICITATIONS

UPCOMING SOLICITATIONS


DATE AGENDA ITEM 8 October 25, 2017 SUBJECT Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events PURPOSE Chairs Basha and Brady will request future agenda items from members, and members may provide a report on current events. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Scott Smith Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT Pending Items Request


2

Pending Items Request

Item Requested Date Requested Planned Follow-up Date


October 25, 2017 Transit Management Committee Wednesday, November 1, 2017 Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1st Avenue, 10th Floor

11:00 a.m. Action

Recommended

1. Public Comment on Agenda Action Items (blue card) The public will be provided with an opportunity at this time to address the TMC on all action agenda items. Up to three minutes will be provided per speaker to address all agenda items unless the Chair allows more at his/her discretion. A total of 15 minutes for all speakers will be provided.

1. For information

2. Minutes Minutes from the October 4, 2017 TMC meeting are presented for approval.

2. For action

3. Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events

Chair Basha will request future agenda items from members, and members may provide a report on current events.

3. For information and discussion

4. Next Meeting

The next meeting of the Board is scheduled for Wednesday, January 3, 2018 at 11:00 a.m.

4. For information

Qualified sign language interpreters are available with 72 hours notice. Materials in alternative formats (large print, audiocassette, or computer diskette) are available upon request. For further information, please call Valley Metro at 602-262-7433 or TTY at 602-251-2039. To attend this meeting via teleconference, contact the receptionist at 602-262-7433 for the dial-in-information. The supporting information for this agenda can be found on our web site at www.valleymetro.org



DATE AGENDA ITEM 1 October 25, 2017 SUBJECT Public Comment on Agenda Action Items PURPOSE The public will be provided with an opportunity at this time to address the TMC on all action agenda items. Up to three minutes will be provided per speaker to address all agenda items unless the Chair allows more at his/her discretion. A total of 15 minutes for all speakers will be provided. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Scott Smith Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None



DATE AGENDA ITEM 2 September 27, 2017

Summary Minutes

Valley Metro RPTA Transit Management Committee Wednesday, September 6, 2017 Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1st Avenue, 10th Floor

Phoenix, AZ 11:00 a.m.

Transit Management Committee Meeting Participants Paul Basha, City of Scottsdale, Chair Kevin Phelps, City of Glendale, Vice Chair Gina Montes, City of Avondale - phone Roger Klingler, City of Buckeye Marsha Reed, City of Chandler James Shano, City of El Mirage – phone Jacob Ellis, Town of Gilbert - phone Reed Kempton, Maricopa County - phone Chris Brady, City of Mesa Stuart Kent for Jeff Tyne, City of Peoria Maria Hyatt for Ed Zuercher, City of Phoenix Nicole Lance, City of Surprise Eric Iwersen for Steven Methvin, City of Tempe Members Not Present Aubree Perry, ADOT Rob Bohr, City of Goodyear City of Tolleson Chair Basha called the meeting to order at 11:26 a.m. 1. Public Comment on Agenda Action Items Mr. Crowley said I was going to ask for a show of hands, but without the glasses I couldn't see. How many of you read this Code of Conduct? Okay. Well, half of you. I have been trying to read it today, and I have offense to where you've got a thing that says memo under development. Well, if you don't know what you're voting on, then why is it even here. And I, in the public, I just got this and have been reading through it. I came across two parts that I had a real problem with. One was your instructions on the bicyclists. Now, since I had stage 4 cancer and such, I'm not the strapping young man I used to be and lifting that bike up onto that thing is not something that I even consider.

2

So when you've got it in there saying if you don't do these things, you're off the rail. I have a problem with that. I also didn't find anything in here that really had anything to do with transit other than you have to rubber stamp what the rail is wanting to do. Now I can't find it at the moment, but there was a thing in here, I believe, that said an individual that had urinated, defecated or thrown up on themselves would not be allowed on the rail. Well, unfortunately, you have the mentally challenged and the people with incontinence that ride the bus all the time. Does that mean that these people will also be barred from using the bus? Can you get where I'm coming from here? When did you guys go with that? So I need you to put this on hold, and we need to be able to review it and go through it and see what it is because we're not supposed to be doing social engineering. And I love that it starts out in the security efforts on fare compliance. Now it wasn't a security effort on fare compliance. You're just trying to make sure that they're paying it. But they got that word security in there, and now you guys have expanded it. And Ms. Ruiz now wants to get her police to be able to do I don't know what. And I find it totally unacceptable. And with the article in the New Times did any of you get a chance to read it. It's been out for a month. The behavior of Allied Barton, the behavior of our security police it's not that of ICE and the unexpected, and I don't believe as a safety issue that any of our brown-skinned ridership should be worrying that somebody's going to look at them and say: Are you here illegally, and what did you do here on our code of conduct that puts you out of compliance so we can have you deported. Thank you. 2. Minutes Chair Basha said the minutes from the September 6, 2017 TMC meeting were presented for approval. IT WAS MOVED BY NICOLE LANCE, SECONDED BY ROGER KLINGLER AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE SEPTEMBER 6, 2017 TMC MEETING. 3. Valley Metro Code of Conduct

Chair Basha said the next item on the agenda is the Code of Conduct. Mr. Smith, would you please present this item. Mr. Smith said thank you. This is a unique item that we're presenting here in the Transit Committee, although it is a two-part item.

3

And just so you know, the Code of Conduct is something that the Transit Committee will act upon because this code of conduct is meant to apply to the entire Valley Metro system. There's no doubt that the emphasis initially will be on the light rail, and there are subsequent items that involve actual implementation of this that will request financial support that will be taken care of in the Rail Committee Meeting. But what I would like to do is go over the code of conduct in general now and maybe get into some of the other things, even though you as transit members won't be voting upon the specific light rail deal rather than have two separate conversations, if I can, Mister Chair, go through the presentation once, and then we'll vote on just the Code of Conduct in the TMC. And then when we get to the Rail Committee they'll vote on the actual implementation of some of the things, if that's okay. Just a little bit of background and this is, once again, driven primarily by what's happened on the light rail over the last eight and a half years. Safety and security has always been an issue. And it's an issue with our bus system, it's an issue with our paratransit and with our rail. We can't operate a system unless it's safe and it's secure. And this goes both ways. We have to actually provide a safe system and you actually have to have a system that people believe is safe. We can say all we want that our system is safe, but if the perception is out there if either we're not providing that kind of safety or we're acting in a way that doesn't give people that comfort or if the discussion in the community is such that people perceive that our system is not safe, then we're playing catch-up. We're not serving our public. And we've seen that happen in our system. I want to emphasize to everybody is that the data shows in our experiences that we have a safe system. Our light rail is safe. Our buses are safe. That doesn't mean it's perfect. We do have incidents. But the number of major incidents that involve our passengers are very low considering the number of passengers we carry, once again, 70 million passengers a year. We have very few incidents, and I can assure everyone that they should feel very safe on our system, but we do have enough other incidents that rise to the level of needing to take action. We also have seen in the last year or two an uptick in the number in the, I would say, the bad behavior on both our buses and our light rail. It's like something got in the water. And I've met with CEOs from around the country and it's a common theme. And it's not just Phoenix, for whatever the reason, over the last year, year and a half nearly every system in the country has dealt with an uptick in what we would call bad behavior,

4

people being disrespectful, people acting out, people, basically, creating an unsafe environment for the fellow riders. With this in mind, about a year ago we started working on ways that we could find a balance. And that balance is such that we want people -- we believe that every person in this community, first of all, has a right to ride on a public system. We also believe that every one of those riders has a right to feel safe and secure as they ride. And there's a balance, because we do not want to be so heavy-handed that we are -- the cure is worse than the disease. On the other hand, we have found that in many areas, especially on light rail, the system that we had did not actually allow us to take care of those incidents that really called out for service. For example, if you came onto our system and you were obviously intoxicated, drunk, you were belligerent, you were disrespectful to passengers but you had a ticket, we basically had no authority or did not act on those. I believe that everyone has a right to ride if they have a ticket. I also believe that I shouldn't have to sit there and have a potentially volatile situation because someone is out of control and have the security sit there and not do anything until they actually assault me or create that kind of situation. And that's really the gaps that we had in both the instructions that we had to our security and safety people, our operators, and also the basic framework. As we started looking at that framework, we've always had a set of rules, a manners matter, a respect the ride, but those rules are very general and they don't cover these situations and they don't give our people and the police also the tools necessary to create the kind of environment we want. So we started looking what other systems had done who had confronted this. So, we, once again, we're not the only one. We studied several systems who had dealt with this issue, systems that were older than ours that had reached this. And one system that we really looked at was MARTA in Atlanta who about four or five years ago was really having some difficult issues. And they implemented a program similar to what we have here. And that is to really take a gentle yet firm approach and recognize that bad behavior will not be tolerated simply because we want those who ride our system to be able to enjoy their ride. We, using these as guidelines, we came up with an expanded and more detailed Code of Conduct. This Code of Conduct is meant to give our security and our personnel and our riders a guideline of what's expected when you ride our system, the behavior that's

5

expected to make sure that everyone has a safe and uneventful ride. We are asking you, both bodies, to approve this Code of Conduct as the starting place for a much more extensive campaign. That campaign is built upon, once again, creating the framework, the regulatory or rule framework. Then secondly, the training and the coordination of both our security personnel on light rail and our private security and then also with our city police, both the city police along light rail and then expanded later to the police in all of your communities and how they interact with transit-related incidents. Our police basically intervene when someone has violated a law. I go back to the drunk person purely obviously intoxicated. It's not against the law to be drunk in public. Mostly it used to be, but it's not against the law. You can be drunk, obnoxious, whatever. And if you're walking down a street probably no one's going to bother you. When you get on that bus or you get on that light rail and all of a sudden you're a captive audience, that's a different scenario. Police would not intervene to that person because he or she has not broken a law. Our security people, who have primarily been focused on fare enforcement, they would not intervene, so we found that our passengers were sitting there really stuck in the middle in sort of no man's land. So we are going to adjust that working with our police and working with our security to close that gap so that if there is that kind of behavior, whether you have a ticket or not, our personnel can remove you from the system. If you go to the next level, the police will be there to back up our security people. Once again, the idea is to act generally but forcefully if needed to be respectful and to really raise the bar. The next thing, and this is where transit people we are going moving into our rail, as you see in front of me a couple of things on the floor on that, and, that is, one thing it's an orange line. One thing we do not have is that we do not have -- and we'll bring it up here, and Pat, if you want to bring it up here for those out there to see it. What we have is that we have an open platform system on our light rail. And there is no demarcation as to when you are, for example, on a public sidewalk and when you move into a platform. And so there's some confusion as to what is expected. Many other systems are closed system. In New York, you go to New York you have to go through a turnstile in places like that. In other systems that are open platform, they have a line of demarcation that basically defines what is transit and what is not transit. We are proposing that each of our light rail stations have this strip installed which defines what is a paid fare zone. So, in other words, if you're on this side, you operate in a public area. You cross that line and now you operate under our code of conduct

6

rules and your expectations go up. You have to have a fare. You have to have that paid, and we expect your behavior to be respectful and to be one that is commensurate with riding -- the privilege of riding on a rail without bothering other people. This will be installed on all 35 of our stations. In addition, we will up the signage which will remind people exactly what is expected of them. We will improve signage inside the station, which will be not so much as a list of don'ts but expectations: Respect your fellow passenger. Disruptive behavior is really not cool. And on the inside of the train, we're changing our signage to be friendlier yet more exacting. The other thing is the public awareness. We want people to understand that we recognize that they have a right to ride this safely and securely. We also want to let those who will do harm know that, you know, we're not going to stand by and let them disrupt what is an otherwise wonderful service, whether it be on the bus or on the train. This will be part of a public outreach program. I'd like to show you something that they did in Atlanta, for example, as part of their "ride with respect" program which was from 2013. These are some of the little public service announcements they made and they ran on TV. This was the night one. We're looking for the daylight one. (A video is shown.) The approach, as you can see, is somewhat whimsical, but also there's a very serious message there. And we're speaking to both audiences. We'll produce things that are similar to this with the same approach where we want to talk to those people who want to ride and who basically feel they can't ride our system. Probably the number one complaint that I receive both directly from customers and from you and from your city council members are complaints they get from people who talk about an incident or series of incidents where they say I just don't feel safe on the bus; I don't feel safe on the train. Usually these are not serious incidents. Usually they're either one or a series of minor incidents, but understandably make people think I don't like where I was. I didn't feel safe and secure. We want to talk to both parties. And I think that Atlanta did a good job. And they're, like I said, this came out in 2013, and it's been a very successful program. They turned around what was an extremely serious problem and turned it into a positive where -- and, once again, this is not just a single instant. We are going to push the Respect the Ride consistently. You'll see other communications, signage, ads, things like that with Respect the Ride that will be out because we want to continually send that message. This will start on light rail. We're asking you to forward it to the Board so the Board can act formally on this on October 19. And the timing would be that if the Board approves that we would begin to implement the physical nature of it including the signage, the lines on the train stations,

7

and also the training of our security and the coordination with our police department. There will be some types -- and outreach to the community, palm cards, other types of signage and things like that that would take place through the holiday season. The idea is that we now have a tool that if we need to, we can begin to implement that. But we don't want to do it until we're ready. This will be a soft opening. We're wanting to change a culture. We're not just trying to crackdown. Then in January we'll be ready to have a full implementation on the rail side also on the bus side as needed we'll be able to do that, and we believe that over the next two to three months we'll be in a position that we'll be able to do that. Adrian is here if you have any specific security questions related to how Allied Universal our rail security or our interaction with police. And she's been working hard over the last year really to bring everyone together. Believe it or not, we were in many different areas as it related to how your police departments and our security looked at security and enforcement on light rail, and it took a lot of work to bring everyone to the table and get on the same page. And Adrian's done a great job, stellar work in making that happen. And we think we're -- we didn't bring this to you until we believed that we were at that point where we could do something that was consistent, was fair, was reasonable but also was serious. So, Adrian, just give a couple of -- a quick update of what we're going to do on security. Ms. Ruiz said thank you, Chair, members of the committee, I just wanted to give -- again, echoing what Scott said but not to take too much of your time. But this is a program or a shift in culture being nine years under our belt now where we're addressing behaviors. This is not addressing a socioeconomic class or demographic or medical condition or a handicap of any kind of any individual. This is to address behaviors. And we know that over the last nine years being a barrier-free system, we have established a kind of a trend of negative behavior where we want to give the ride back to the passenger. The 96, 98 percent that ride the system that want a pleasant trip, we want to own that message for them. Also, it's a destination-based service, so we provide a service. We -- just like Starbucks sells coffee, they don't sell tee shirts, unless they say Starbucks on it, of course, but we get people to places they need to be.

8

So, this is destination-based type service of which we provide, and we do have the right in echoing the 98, 96 percent that whenever they're having an unpleasant trip to refuse that service to people who don't want to behave or follow the code of conduct. This will take time. This has been nine years in the making for us to now revisit this. We have visual representations of how our stations will look different in the future and the extensions themselves will incorporate those new design elements. So this will take some time. We are meeting with all of Allied staff next week and all staff over two different sessions. And we have worked very long and hard with our local law enforcement, their legal counsel to police, and also their prosecutors. We have met several times over the course of the last year to have them adopt this presentation that we've viewed ourselves as an industry that serves a purpose to transport people and that we should have the right to refuse service if people aren't following our rules and code of conduct. P.D. has adopted that and has accepted it and prosecutors understand that we have the trespass procedures or trespass for ARS standards Title 13, our statutes that we can rely upon. So when we find someone that is not -- is going to be resistant to abide by the code of conduct refusing to the leave the system and refusing to change the behavior, we have the ability, and Allied as our agent or any staff here, to tell the person to leave. And we do have a more detailed policy we are finalizing. If they refuse, P.D. has agreed to back us up on that. So that's kind of a recap of where we've come to get to this point. I appreciate your attention. And if you have any questions of me. Mr. Klingler said Mister Chairman, question about the maybe the prosecutors have addressed this, but obviously, we can't notify everybody of a four-page document in a sign. How do we give notice to people so that they can prosecute that they've had proper notice? I mean, are some things going to be on the Website? Mr. Klingler said is there something on the ticket that says abide by -- by accepting this you somehow accept this code of conduct or what's the connection -- I think it's a great program, by the way. I'm sorry. I think it's good. I just want to make sure it happens. It sounds like there's a gap now, but I want to make sure that how do we close that. I'm sure you've talked to the prosecutors about that. Ms. Ruiz said yes. Under the law of a civil society, there is obviously reasonable notification of certain parameters such as where a property line exists and possibly, you know, what when you enter a door of a business if no weapons are allowed, for example, they have the right to give you that notification. However, fault for everything, there's no reasonable exception -- and I would lean to

9

Mike also, he can chime in because we've had this conversation, to notify every citizen of every law and rule that they're subject to in society. So when we talk about the big ones, the big four that we have listed on the sign, is to at the bottom of that it says: Failure to abide by any of these rules or code of conduct or ordinances means that you will be either cited or removed from the system. So first notification is going to be our staff or Allied Universal. If someone's boarding a train with an open container like that with your cup and no lid, no resealable or seal-proof container is to advise them of that rule and give them that notification right then and there. The person once upon being notified and given that reasonable notification that that is a prohibited item and they are welcome to finish it off the platform or they can throw it away, but we can't have them board the train or be on the platform with it. That's the notification. It's not like I caught you with that. I'm going to remove you right now. I give you the notification that's a code of conduct or a rule, and I give you the opportunity now to abide by it. So that's how we encompass all of these four pages. It's the first notification. It can be verbal or we take the big four, which we have listed here on a sign, and we're going to have more signage on the platform as well. Hopefully that answers your question. Mr. Smith said the other thing is we do want to make sure that you understand, we're not here to arrest people. You've got to basically cross a pretty big line to get arrested and that's where the police department comes in. We don't have the authority nor do we want to arrest people. We want people to behave. And if you behave, you're welcome on our system. If you don't behave, our primary objective is to remove them from that scenario at that point in time until they do behave. If somebody is on a train or a bus and they assault somebody, well they've obviously not only broken our rule, but they've broken a law. And at that point in time the police department will get involved. If someone is now belligerent with our security or another passenger or they refuse the command and then come back on the system, at that point in time, once again, they've gone outside our code and they've violated a law. They've now trespassed. They've now assaulted. They've done whatever. And then the police will get involved. And that's where we've coordinated with them. So I just want to make sure to assure that we're not looking to arrest people, nor are we looking to get people -- and the police, we don't want to burden the police for things that really are behavioral and they're basically golden-rule type of stuff, which is what our code of conduct is meant to

10

do. And that's why it took so long to get the prosecutors and the police to deal with the issues that you're talking about and also to make them realize that, you know, this is going to be an escalating thing. We want to deal with good behavior on the trains. If someone crosses that into violating a state law ordinance, police are right there to take care of it. Ms. Ruiz said and just to tie-in on that, this code of conduct, once adopted and approved by the Board, will be posted to the Internet, so it will be on the Website. Yes. Mr. Kempton said at the last meeting when we first saw this, somebody suggested the bikes must be hung from the racks, and I pointed out that I couldn't do that with my bike. And now under Conduct Civility No. A, Item No. 4, includes recumbent bikes. Obviously, that wasn't what I intended when I said I couldn't hang it from the rack. I've taken my bike on numerous times and I just stand in the aisle with it. So why was recumbent bikes added? Was that simply to keep me off the train? Mr. Smith said this, once again, this is something that we went back and forth. Our primary objective here is to create a safe environment which means that if you have a bike and you can hang it, that's what creates a safe environment. One of our big challenges on light rail are people who block either aisles or who block exits. And that's the behavior we're looking at. The challenge we have with recumbent bikes, which literally just came up recently and came up from our transit staff, is that you can't hang them and they're not allowed on buses because they block aisle ways and they block other ways. That's obviously something that we're open to discuss. But we have had a problem with -- not you, Reed, but others who maybe when they stand with their bikes, they're standing in places that really creates a very unsafe situation as they block an aisle or a doorway. So if there's a way we can work with that and define a rule that protects safety while also allowing people to do it, we're open to that. But that was -- our transit people were pretty adamant that that's one thing they wanted added because they have had issues with it. So, we'd love to talk to you more about it if we need to. Mr. Kempton said I've ridden a recumbent since 2000, and I'm not going back to one of those old standard diamond-framed bikes because I can't ride on those seats very well. So, I'm obviously disappointed in that specific line and cannot vote in favor of this.

11

Mr. Smith said and my guess is, and this is where the training comes in and maybe we can change the wording, if you're on a train and you're not blocking anything and you're in a place, my guess is that no one will make a big deal about it. But if you -- we need the ability that if someone simply won't move and they're blocking it, we have that ability to, once again, protect the other passengers. So we're open for more discussion on that. Ms. Hyatt said this is a great start on this. I think that, you know, we'll find that as we move through this, we may need to make some changes, you know, especially, Reed's comments and others, but we have to start somewhere. And I think we've all worked on this for a while. And the Board very much understands that we need to start somewhere on this. I think it's going to be a whole lot easier to implement on the train. We're going to have some challenges on the buses. We cover so many more miles. We'll need to work through union issues with operators enforcing these rules et cetera, and under the Valley Metro name we've got several entities that operate the service. But if we're going to put this on our Website, it really needs to be one system, as we tell our customers all the time, that it is one system and they shouldn't have to care whether the City of Phoenix or Valley Metro or City of Scottsdale or Glendale operates whichever vehicle it is. So I'm committed to working through it from the Phoenix standpoint. And I just want to say really good job on starting this and getting it moving. Mr. Smith said if I might say, you're exactly right. This is a living, breathing document in the sense that it's out there to be the starting place. We tried to identify the major points and to give people tools. We recognize we can't cover everything, which is one reason we're starting on light rail. And we will, you know, we don't believe that the work is done just because this goes out. We're going to be working with you, your staff, and the public to fine-tune this as it moves along and it needs to be. Mr. Kent said just a couple comments, as I was looking through, I'm assuming this would theoretically also apply to Dial-A-Ride as well and obviously we have a different contractor there. And then theoretically applied to those communities that offer Dial-A-Ride outside of exclusively the Valley Metro model. So, I, you know, having seen this just sort of now and understanding some of the pieces, I have some concerns -- I'm not saying any of it's bad. I'd rather it be a more encompassing rollout rather than sort of a parceled out rollout starting on light rail and

12

going to buses. I was thinking about bus stops and how we're sort of communicating this, how we're either adding placards that Valley Metro doesn't operate the bus stops. Those are typically the local jurisdiction. But how that plaque or even it's just a post and there isn't a stop or a shade structure how we're attaching that to the sign post. Thinking about new routes we're starting in three weeks, do I want to start trying to get this kind of verbiage out there? And so I'm a little anxious. I get you want to get going, but I'm a little anxious about trying to roll it out right now given, you know, at least in my instance, I just saw this for the first time ten minutes ago. So I was looking at that. But then the other question was, is there anything that this wouldn't apply to relative to Valley Metro. Is there any part of the source -- I mean, does it apply to vanpool? I mean, I'm sort of assuming it does, and that's sort of a self-police function and I get that. But I guess what I'm trying to figure out where does this stop and start, because I think -- I think it's very well intentioned, but I think there may be some unintended consequences. Maybe it's we go through it and then we figure it out and fix it. Mr. Smith said yes. There's one thing it doesn't apply to and that's good behavior. And, frankly, the framework is such and we're not looking at this, once again, as being a thou shalt not in every situation. Does it apply to vanpool? If you're drunk and disorderly and you're bothering your fellow vanpool, yeah, it applies. If you, but things such as open containers, those are strictly, for example, being identified as light rail related because they deal with that. We're not going to tell someone in a vanpool that they can't have a Big Gulp if no one else in the vanpool cares. That's the idea. So, I think, be cautioned about thinking that this is that strict rule that we're going to -- someone's going to walk around and be looking for people to do things to enforce. It's, once again, it's a guideline. It is, if you approve it, it will be the rules, but I'm hoping that our training will be that we're really there to enhance the ride, and we enhance the ride by eliminating bad behavior. That's our approach. It's a positive approach as opposed to we got to stop all this stuff. No. We want to enhance the ride. And, for example, if someone is doing something that ruins the ride, I don't care if you're on paratransit or where you are, they shouldn't be allowed to go forward. If they're abusive to a fellow passenger, an operator, they shouldn't be -- we shouldn't be carrying them. It's that simple. If they're not, we'll go wherever they -- wherever our system goes. And that's the spirit in which we're doing this.

13

We started with light rail for a couple reasons: number one, it's well defined; and the other thing is it's, frankly, where we're having most of our problems right now. It's the biggest concentration of people. When you have a concentration of people, you bring everything from society into that concentration. So while we're a safe system, you know, if you're at a festival, guess what, there's more police there because the more you pack people into one place, you're going to bring those most who do good, but some who don't want to do well and want to harm others, and we want to protect against those. And I hope that as we roll this out and we implement it, it gives our people a tool. If they take it too far, we're going to pull them back, because we want to find that balance between what it's like to have a safe and enjoyable ride. Ms. Ruiz said and if I could chime in real quick, too, we talk about totality of circumstances. So in the scenario you gave, even scenarios that were brought up here, Mr. Reed on the phone as well, and even the audience, when you look at this being a black and white statute, it is not. It is a guideline. As Scott mentioned, it's a guideline for us to use as a resource, it's a tool that under the totality of circumstances, if a person's behavior is such that it causes a safety or security issue, disruptive to other passengers' enjoyment of their ride, whether it's intentional or not, most of the time it's intentional, 99 percent it's intentional. If it becomes a safety issue we're talking about a person that's under the influence and they're not bothering anybody, are we going to remove them because they're sleeping and they've been on the system for hours and hours and just let them go. That becomes more of a safety or a health issue. No, we're not. We're going to make sure they get to where they need to go safely. If a person in a vanpool has a Starbucks, they just spent their six bucks on and the entire group is like, hey, I'm okay with it, just make sure you don't spill it because I got to clean it up, then that's something they communally decide. But it's tied to a totality of the circumstances. Much like in law enforcement there is discretion. Officers do have an opportunity to use discretion if in the event they can stop the incident, make it safe, have control, and determine based on that if they still have a violation of ARS Statute or Title 28, if they do have to make an arrest. If they have to make the arrest and actually book someone or they can cite in lieu of, so there's discretion even in the law enforcement world. So this is the same platform or same methodology is that there is discretion. And will we have some bugs to work out, absolutely. We are going to work very much in tune with our Allied staff in making sure that they understand there is discretion here.

14

But this gives them a tool and a resource much like it does for anyone as an agent of Valley Metro or staff to utilize that to make sure the behavior doesn't produce a safety hazard or a security issue. And it doesn't impede the safe, pleasant trip of other riders. Hopefully that answers your questions. Mr. Kent said one other follow-up just since you brought that up. One other thing that sort of catches my eye is we essentially have about a 60 day, 70-day window to do the training and everything else. Is that sufficient? It seems like it's pushed a little bit. Mr. Smith said if it's not, we'll extend it. Once again, this is an ongoing -- we're going to look and see. We're not even absolutely sure that we can do all the physical installations on the light rail. Our contractor has told us that that's possible. But, once again, once it is in place, we will roll it out. We'll roll it out systematically. And when we get to the point where we feel comfortable that we then can start saying, okay, this is daily what we're going to do, we'll do it at that time. Whether that's the first of January or first of March, we're not -- either one works because this is expected to be a long-term and a consistent cultural thing for us, so there is no end to this what we want to do. So, we'll be patient to do it right. Ms. Ruiz said it's an education outreach awareness, and it's going to start with our front-line staff and our contractors. So hopefully that answers your question. And definitely we can have more discussion. Mr. Brady said thank you for this presentation. I think you've repeated it over and over again. Our first priority has to be to ensure the safe and comfortable environment of those who have paid to be on these transit means. And if we don't do that, we are slowly losing the expectation of that through the general community as a whole. And when that happens, then the whole system will suffer because it will only be perceived to be safe and a comfortable place for a limited part of the demographic. Mesa's fully supportive of this. My perspective would be the sooner the better get it set up. Take it as literal as possible to initially. And then learn from that and then if you need to slowly back off. The most difficult thing we could do is to be apprehensive in rolling out the equipment and then -- or rolling out the program and then slowly implementing it. I think that creates -- we manage -- we can't manage those expectations. If we're going to present this as improving the comfort and safety of the ride and when this gets out publicly, there will be those who will say, okay, maybe I'm willing to try it again or try it for the first time. But if their experience is much different than that, we don't get them back. And it's very difficult to convince those who had a difficult experience in any one of these areas to convince them it's okay, things are different.

15

And so the position of Mesa would be more and sooner. I know you're doing your best, but it's a point of emphasis. We have to do better. And we have to make this a different environment because it is impacting what we perceive as those who should be looking at this as an opportunity, and specifically in Mesa we get a lot of students who ride light rail, but a lot of them now who choose not to because they are concerned and maybe their parents are concerned about their safety. I think the idea of having bicycles and carts can be very difficult on the transit because they want to be right there by the doors. And as important as that is in the whole transit system, it has to be in second place to those who are coming in and off. So I don't know how to answer that. It's a difficult question. But their priority has to always be given to the customers who are not in that mode. And so there has to be a balance in making that happen. So, again, fully supportive, sooner and more. Thank you. Ms. Lance said Scott, the memo says under the cost and budget section there's no cost to RPTA at this time, but we're talking about signage and installation and production of PSAs, so what's your kind of cost estimate or forecasting on that? Because I know the code of conduct itself doesn't cost anything but the implementation will. Mr. Smith said at this time we're starting out with light rail and that's one thing that the Rail Management Committee will be voting upon. And we're going to expend up to almost a half million dollars on the light rail side on all these -- we're proposing to spend that much. We're not proposing any signage or anything right now at bus. You know, part of the challenge is, and, I think, both Mr. Kent and Mr. Brady make good points, but this is a, you know, this is a big Valley and there's a lot of different places, and we had to start somewhere. And since light rail is the place that is the most noticeable, and it's one of the places we have the biggest problem, and where we can really focus and target and fine-tune the program, we've chosen to start there. Once we get that, then there will be proposals coming to RPTA if we are to put signage on bus stops or other types of things. And when we come back to you at a later meeting when we come up with maybe our promotional, there might be an ask of RPTA. Because the Respect the Ride is a systemwide message, we'll come back to that. We don't have that program planned yet. That's not going to rollout until 2018, so there could be something in the next budget year. But we decided for right now just to focus on the rail side, so that's where the money is going to be spent in the short-term. Chair Basha said Scott, to be certain I understand, the Rail Management Committee will be discussing this item immediately following this committee meeting; correct? Mr. Smith said right. That's the vote on the Rail Management. Mr. Iwersen said quick comment from Tempe. I want to thank you guys. And I know we

16

had some real information on this, too. And I just wanted to note that we, like Maria's comments and Chris's comments, we support this. We think this is a good effort to move forward with. We're happy that you've been working and coordinating with our local police departments in helping them to understand and refine this as you went along, so that's really helpful. And then recognizing that you did work with other transit agencies, peer agencies, to develop this, so this is something that has been happening at other transit agencies around the country and is a good thing to do. I would note, I think there was a comment by Mr. Brady about the concern of bikes. In the language it does say bikes, you know, are supposed to use the racks or the hooks, but they can, if they can't use those they can kind of store to the side, and as long as it's not a really crowded day or some situation where they're not in the way that they can be there. I don't know what to do about the issue with the recumbents, but I'm sure that something like that can be refined as we go along. We can look at this and refine the language of this as needed. I think someone made the comment that you can -- we implement this now and move forward with it and refine it as we go along. And then, finally, I'll just say that it would be nice, and I think we've mentioned this, to have some sort of like brochure or collateral material that's like a friendly, you know, public piece as well as something that staff and electeds can use to talk about the program. Mr. Smith said to answer that. We are working on finalizing that. And we'll have something before the Board meeting that you'll be able to use. It will be nice like we do for projects and things like that. And then, of course, ongoing, there will be several different brochures and other collateral information that will go as part of the community outreach and the education and communication process that we'll obviously share with the staff, because, you know, if there are questions we're here to answer. Remember, Respect the Ride is our motto and it's the message we want to get out, and we want it to be a positive yet firm message that speaks to all audiences. Chair Basha said further questions or comments? Scott, I have a question I'd like to ask of you. Given the variety of comments, most of them supportive, I feel obligated to ask a question. What would be the consequences if we delayed this action to November? Mr. Smith said the consequences would be simply one of -- well, it would be timing. We've heard that -- we've heard -- probably our number one comment is would echo what Mr. Brady says which is the sooner the better, get it done.

17

We don't believe there's anything fatal in it. We recognize that there will be wordsmithing. There may be even some issues. This has gone through a long arduous process with a variety of stakeholders to come up with the language we have, but we know that you'll always find better ways of saying things. There will always be a gap here or a gap there. The consequence would be that everything would be deferred. And with the holidays coming up, what we really wanted to do was we wanted to get it going now so that we could work during this next time and not have to deal with the holidays, and we think it would create a delay that would not be the end of the world, but it certainly isn't our desire that we delay this any longer, especially on the rail side. Chair Basha said thank you, Scott. Prior to requesting a motion I'd like to make a few comments if I may. First off, I ride the rail quite regularly. For some inexplicable unjustified reason, it takes me a long time to get to rail. I'm not sure why that is. All I can do is make suggestions, Scott, I can't vote. I have noticed situations that others have referenced and I have seen police officers from both Tempe and Phoenix have to remove passengers. And I have seen the Allied Universal security people communicate with riders. And at every situation I've seen the potential for becoming quite uncomfortable, never did it become uncomfortable to me as a rider and to other people that I saw and chatted with who were riding. So, congratulations to you, Adrian and Scott, for your people and your interaction with the various police jurisdictions. It's all going very well. Scott, I do appreciate your opening remarks mentioning that this is a safety and security topic that Valley Metro has been attentive to since the initiation of rail service in the Valley.

I also appreciate that when you say the word "transit" you mean both rail and bus that it truly is a systemwide initiative. I also appreciate that you showed the connection and described the connection between security and code of conduct. Thank you for doing so. With those comments, is there a motion? IT WAS MOVED BY CHRIS BRADY SECONDED BY MARIA HYATT AND CARRIED TO RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE VALLEY METRO CODE OF CONDUCT AS PRESENTED. MARICOPA COUNTY VOTED NO. Chair any further questions or discussions? Mr. Kempton said I would support this if they just removed the word "recumbent." Because in Item 7 it says you can hold a bike as long as it's not blocking the doorway, so my guess is that the concern about the recumbent is already covered in that statement. Just the way it's worded right now at no time day or night or regardless of

18

any other situation could I bring my bike on. So the way it's written now I can't support it. But if that line were changed and you strengthen number seven a little bit to just say you can't block the aisles or the doors then I'd support it. Chair Basha said I have a question. How much flexibility will staff have to modify this, put aside this particular issue, but going as you look at wondering, you know, as you learn from this experience things you may want to be stronger with or be able to loosen. I mean, when we approve this, are we literally approving every word or what? Can we give some broader guidance to allow you to go work out these kind of issues? Mr. Smith said I think you could. Our understanding would be that you're approving the basic principles and the concept, and we would have the flexibility to adjust wordsmithing that as long as it was with the consistent with the original principle. And when we get to the Board, I think what we might do is to clarify that to make sure that we understand what we're doing. Remember, this is just an advisory to take it to the Board. So we probably need to focus in on that to make sure that we have that flexibility. Mr. Brady said I maintain my motion without the amendment. I just -- I don't think we should be modifying. I'm more concerned about personal conflicts of interest, too, and so let's just try to get this to the Board and then give that language that you can make it within the guidelines. Mr. Smith said and we're open to discussion on those kind of. That did come from staff, so, we're, you know, I wouldn't want to do it now and override all the people that have input. They're pretty adamant. So, but, once again, we're open to it. This is a principle-driven initiative not a specific initiative. So our principle is safety and security. And if things violate that, we'll change it. If they don't, if they need to be worded better, we'll change it as long as we stay with the basic principles. Chair Basha said further questions or comments? Thanks for the discussion, obviously very involved discussion. IT WAS MOVED BY CHRIS BRADY SECONDED BY MARIA HYATT AND CARRIED TO RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE VALLEY METRO CODE OF CONDUCT AS PRESENTED. MARICOPA COUNTY VOTED NO. 4. Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events None.

19

With no further discussion the meeting adjourned at 12:18 p.m.


DATE AGENDA ITEM 3 October 25, 2017 SUBJECT Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events PURPOSE Chair Basha will request future agenda items from members, and members may provide a report on current events. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Scott Smith Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT Pending Items Request


2



VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 602-262-7433

October 25, 2017

Rail Management Committee Wednesday, November 1, 2017 Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1st Avenue, 10th Floor

11:00 a.m.

Action Recommended

1. Public Comment on Agenda Action Items (blue card) The public will be provided with an opportunity at this time to address the Board on all action agenda items. Up to three minutes will be provided per speaker to address all agenda items unless the Chair allows more at his/her discretion. A total of 15 minutes for all speakers will be provided.

1. For information

2. Minutes Minutes from the October 4, 2017 RMC meeting are presented for approval.

2. For action

CONSENT AGENDA 3A. Motor and Center Truck Overhaul Program Staff recommends that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute contracts with Bridgestone Industrial Products America, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $565,500 and with Vulcanite Pty Ltd. in an amount not to exceed $226,720 for a total amount of $792,220 to provide parts necessary for a Motor and Center Truck overhaul program for the light rail vehicles.

3A. For action

3B. Power Switch Machine Upgrade Staff recommends that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to purchase nine power switch machines from Voestalpine Nortrak, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $200,925.

3B. For action

2

3C. Northwest Phase II Light Rail Extension Public Art Services Contract Awards Staff recommends that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute seven Public Art Services contracts selected by the SARCs for the Northwest Phase II Light Rail Extension for a total of $1,275,000, plus an additional $131,667 (10%) contingency.

3C. For action

3D. 50th Street Station Design Contract Authority Modification

Staff recommends that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to increase the 50th Street Station design contract authority by up to $300,000 which will be held by Valley Metro staff and made available to the Designer, Gannett Fleming, as needed to complete the project.

3D. For action

3E. Tempe Streetcar Design Contract Authority Modification Staff recommends that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to increase the Tempe Streetcar design contract authority by up to $400,000. Funds will be held by Valley Metro staff and made available to the Designer, Stantec, as needed to complete the project.

3E. For action

REGULAR AGENDA 4. Rail Design and Construction Change Process Scott Smith, CEO, will introduce Kyle Strickland, Project Controls Manager, who will provide an update to the Rail Design and Construction Change Process. The updated procedure: includes a revised change review board process; updated levels of authority; and addresses changes in both Federal and local contract administration requirements.

4. For information

5. ArtsLine Update Scott Smith, CEO, will introduce Hillary Foose, Director, Communications & Strategic Initiatives, provide an informational update to the Board on the ArtsLine branding initiative and program helping to enhance the perception of Valley Metro Rail and the local arts and culture community.

5. For Information

3

6. Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events Chair Brady will request future RMC agenda items from members and members may provide a report on current events.

6. For information

7. Next Meeting The next meeting of the RMC is scheduled for Wednesday, January 3, 2018 at 11:00 a.m.

7. For Information

Qualified sign language interpreters are available with 72 hours notice. Materials in alternative formats (large print, audiocassette, or computer diskette) are available upon request. For further information, please call Valley Metro at 602-262-7433 or TTY at 602-251-2039. To attend this meeting via teleconference, contact the receptionist at 602-262-7433 for the dial-in-information. The supporting information for this agenda can be found on our web site at www.valleymetro.org



DATE AGENDA ITEM 1 October 25, 2017 SUBJECT Public Comment on Agenda Action Items PURPOSE The public will be provided with an opportunity at this time to address the RMC on all action agenda items. Up to three minutes will be provided per speaker to address all agenda items unless the Chair allows more at his/her discretion. A total of 15 minutes for all speakers will be provided. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Scott Smith Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None




Minutes from the Rail Management Committee Wednesday, October 4, 2017

Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1st Avenue, Suite 1000

Phoenix, AZ 11:00 a.m.

Members Present Chris Brady, City of Mesa, Chair Maria Hyatt for Ed Zuercher, City of Phoenix, Vice Chair Kevin Phelps, City of Glendale Marsha Reed, City of Chandler Eric Iwersen for Steven Methvin, City of Tempe Chair Brady called the meeting to order at 12:18 p.m. 1. Public Comment on Agenda Action Items Mr. Crowley said well, it's more on that code of conduct. My favorite part of that is that y'all said that there hadn't been any major issues. That murder last month at the Dunlap station that's a minor security issue. And what would this code of conduct done to avoid or stop that? I have other problems with this. I'd love that it says no urinating, defecating on Valley Metro property. Does that mean that we don't have bathrooms? Oh, yeah, that is the case. We don't have bathrooms for our citizenry. You do until five o'clock at the main station there, but if you're riding the rail after five o'clock, you don't need to urinate or defecate, right. So I have a problem with that one. On the bike part, as Reed said about the recumbent, besides that what I do and it says you can't take more than one seat and you can't save these would be reasons for extrication off. When I see people going to a major affair and there's somebody getting on the rail, they may save a seat for the next person, and you're saying that individual and that is to be kicked off the bus. And I know you're going to say it's an individual thing. But then I also go back to number two where I know for the odiferousness of urination, defecation are one thing and it also -- what's the first one you have listed there, blood. No blood. And it doesn't say on clothing. It says in clothing. Does that mean that any young girl that's menstruating and rides our system is going to be kicked off?

2

Because, like you said, sir, you wanted it aggressively done and you wanted it now according to the thing. So it says no blood in the clothing. I think you need to straighten that one up. And what I do when I'm using my bike on the bus a lot of the times, because the system you were supposed to have was one where you could put the bike tire on it and it would pick it up. I can't lift it up there. And what I do is, since I am disabled, I'll go into the handicapped, if there's nobody there, and put my bike and myself in that spot. According to you now, because I'm taking three seats, me and the bike, and when I'm there I'm not blocking the aisle on the doorway, so can we change it around a bit. Also, on the no food, drugs et cetera, every single person from April through October needs to be having one of those things there in front of you, a water, because we do live in a desert and if you're thirsty, it is too late. And one of the things is that we need to be hydrating, and if you ever use the facilities at the light rail station, that water could be a little bit (unintelligible). So, I would appreciate it, if you would, as the chair suggested at the last time, put this off, reword it a little better, especially when it comes to bicycles et cetera. And when it comes to throwing people off or asking questions when there's a situation going on, as it happened to me that I will discuss with you guys later, that when an incident on the rail they were getting and knocking somebody off, I walked up and asked, because I was saying what's the reason they're kicking you off, and it was that he had been riding too long they said. So I called customer service. And when I called customer service and they asked to know what the people looked like and were, I came up to them and asked them their names, I was threatened with jail and being thrown off. When I called it -- when they called me back to find out what had happened, your guy didn't even listen to the tape where I described it. 2. Minutes Chair Brady said minutes from the September 6, 2017 RMC meeting are presented for approval. IT WAS MOVED BY MARIA HYATT, SECONDED BY KEVIN PHELPS AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 6, 2017 RMC MINUTES. 3. Consent Agenda Chair Brady said we now move to the consent agenda. We have two items on the

3

consent. Any questions on the consent agenda? Yes. Mr. Phelps said I'd like to ask staff a question for agenda Item 3A, please. So regarding the increasing of the contingency amount, first of all, of the $110 almost $111 million capital budget, what have we spent down to date in the project? Mr. Smith said Kyle is here. Kyle Strickland is our project control manager. We're actually not increasing the contingency. What we're doing is we're releasing certain contingency from unallocated to and increasing the contract amount so that the contractor can actually make use of the contingency. The budget amount stays the -- is the same, it has not been increased. But the utilization of the line items within that has been what we're talking about, unless I'm wrong on that. Mr. Phelps said that's not how I'm reading it. Mr. Grote said it said the original contingency amount with the project or roughly 5 percent includes the $5,900,000 that we've included that by another 5 percent taking us closer to 10 percent contingency. Mr. Grote said Chair, Mr. Phelps, just to clarify that, this is only the contingency specifically attached to the construction contract. There is more contingency in the project. We also have an unallocated contingency within the project overall. So all we would be doing is utilizing some of the unallocated contingency and providing the authority to spend some of that under the construction contract. Mr. Phelps said so I get that. I'm just, now for me it's also helpful to know how much have we already spent down because really what we're doing we have $700,000 remaining unallocated, but we think that's going to get chewed up. If we only had $20 million left in the project, now you're transferring another $5 million of contingency, that's different than if we've only drawn down $40 million of the contract than we're asking to finalize. Mr. Grote said just one further clarification and I'll let Kyle fill in if he still needs to, but the $700,000 that's left is in the contingency specifically to the construction contract. So we have spent or committed most of that contingency. And we anticipate that over the course of the next couple years as we finish this project that we will likely have more than $700,000 in change order, and we only have authority to give this contractor that $700,000. This would provide us the opportunity. We won't necessarily spend all of it, but it provides us the opportunity to keep moving with the project and utilize that contingency in the contract if needed. Chair Brady said Wulf, so you do this so that you don't put all that allocation out there so

4

the contractor says oh, that's mine. This way they have to earn it or at least come back with an explanation before you release it from the overall into it. That's how I interpret it. Mr. Grote said yes. Mr. Smith said it's really an accounting and the overall budget project is not increasing. We may be shifting from because I found out there's like three levels of contingency. And what we're looking at is the overall project contingency that is now being shifted in. So the overall project budget has not increased. The line item as it relates to construction may have increased based on the transfer, but while that went down that went up, they netted out to zero which means the overall budget remains the same. Chair Brady said and your belief is that the project is still staying within budget overall. Mr. Grote said yes. That's correct. In fact, in a couple areas, particularly in real estate, we're almost done purchasing real estate. And it appears that we have leftover in that item so that we would be able to shift even some of that back into contingency. Mr. Phelps said I have been down this road before. It is a different -- government has a different perspective on how they quantify contingency. I look at contingency as being for the unknown, unexpected. We tend to almost anticipate that as long as we don't spend more the project is coming within budget. So I see this as being on a $110 million of capital, we had a $5 million. We're now going to use that. So now we're at $116 million. Now we're asking to go to another $5 million, $121 million. So what we've done is the project amount has increased from $110 million to $121 million by these actions. And so that is a $10 million dollar increase in capital. I'm just trying to figure out how much we have remaining which will help identify how much risk we have for why it's $5 million versus why are we asking for $2 million more in contingency authority. Mr. Smith said and Kyle can go over that. Once again, the project control manager, he's basically the accountant and the budgeting guy for the project. He tracks every dollar and knows every -- well, I'm not going to build you up too much. You're supposed to know where every cent goes. Kyle's very good. Kyle. Mr. Strickland said I don't have all my files in front of me. But there's roughly about close to $8 million dollars in contingency remaining in the project budget at this point in time. So we're allocating $5 million of that close to $8 million dollars project contingency to the construction contractor's contracts. So we're just increasing their contract authority so City of Mesa staff and the project team has the ability to write change orders as necessary to complete the project.

5

Mr. Phelps said okay. I apologize. What I'm trying to find out is of the $110 million dollars that we make payments along the way, the contract gets drawn down by the contractor as you do work, so it happens over multiple years. We don't wait until the end the end of the process and give them $110 million dollars. We make payments. I'm trying to figure out within this gestation of the project, how much have we expended of the $110 million dollar capital budget? Mr. Strickland said I don't have the most recent month's data, but it's probably somewhere in the range of $12 to $15 million at this point in time of their $110 million contract. Mr. Phelps said has been expended to date? Mr. Strickland said yes. Mr. Phelps said so, we've already on basically, so a lot of this forecasting what we think now, so we're getting revised estimates of future work to be conducted because you certainly wouldn't want to blow through your $5 million obviously and only $12 million of work being done. Mr. Strickland said right. We're just -- so of the $110 million that they have been authorized at this point or at least through the $100 million that's been authorized at this point in time, we're contemplating additional changes that would increase that contract cap. Mr. Smith said and just, we track this literally on a daily basis, Kyle does. Change orders cannot be -- we have next month, as a matter of fact, you're going to get a presentation on our change order procedure. To get change orders, it goes through a multi-step process that involves not only the contractor, the city and Valley Metro but basically different levels of management to make sure that we just don't willy-nilly say, oh, okay, I need another 2 million dollars we'll do this, we'll do that. There's various controls over the fact that we have this budget. If there is a change order, it's gone through a -- this multi-level process before any additional work is approved. Mr. Phelps said I know you didn't imply that I'm suggesting that we do it willy-nilly. I guess what I'm more locked in on is kind of risk going forward. What is our risk profile as to whether even this $5 million is going to stay there or not? Mr. Smith said as I understand your question, and it's a good question, your $12 million dollars into a $110 million dollar deal and you're already asking for $5 million in contingency, you're a little worried when we get to $90 million. Have I restated it?

6

Mr. Phelps said that I think that better characterizes one of my concerns. Mr. Smith said I think it's a good concern. Why are we shifting $5 million at this point in time, which seems like we're early into the actually expenditure on the contract, does that leave us hanging or at risk at the end to where we're going to come back and say, you know, guys, oops, this is now not a $110 million deal. It's a $115 million deal. Is that a good characterization? Mr. Smith said Kyle, what is your comfort level as far as that goes? Mr. Strickland said I mean at this point in time we're well under our planned contingency drawdown for the project, and we share this information with the FTA on a monthly basis as well, too. And they haven't had objections to our drawdown of contingency at this point in time. And so, that's good news. I'm trying to pull up my contingency drawdown curve right now that we planned. Chair Brady said and the way they do this, Kevin, is different than I think the way we do our projects. They actually put aside this like general contingency because there's so many unknowns going into the project, and so until they spend more time on the design -- this is how I understand it -- engineering those certain elements that are out into the future, they anticipate they're going to -- they know they're going to drawdown this contingency not as -- they don't have a perfectly known project when they start. And so this is kind of along the way they've set aside dollars to recognize they're going to have to bring those dollars in as we become further engineering is done as we get through right-of-way purchases and which options we're going to use for different elements along the way. I know I'm not explaining that well. Mr. Smith said but you bring up a good point. I can't remember in the cities do you have -- I don't ever remember the concept on allocated contingency. I mean, I had to -- I had never seen it before I came on this job. And I said wait. Unallocated that seems like an oxymoron unallocated contingency. Because contingency is based on the unknown. But if it's unallocated it dissents to think that -- wait. You do know it's going to exist, you just don't know -- and basically what it is, as Chris said, in these projects we have line item contingencies within the construction budget. And then we have this other big item sitting out there called unallocated that could spread over any part of the contract whether it be cars, engineering, soft costs, or construction so you have this unallocated contingency that we assume we're going to utilize because, as Chris said, there are things in this project that will pop up, and they're different than construction specifically related or other things. But it's planned. It's planned contingency, which to me still doesn't make sense from even a grammatical standpoint that you have planned contingency. It's just not

7

allocated yet. And so it's sitting over there waiting to be allocated from a budgetary purpose to the point where you think you might have to use it even though it doesn't increase the overall project approval, but it's sitting there. And during this project we will transfer from unallocated to allocated contingency and that even doesn't mean that it will still be used, but it will mean that at least we have a better idea that part of this is going to be used in the construction process. It's very confusing. Mr. Phelps said if former Sound Transit CEO Joni Earl ever listens to this conversation, she'd be laughing now because seven years as finance chair we had lengthy discussions organizationally about contingency, and, you know, it can be used effectively. It's an effective tool. For example, we used a lot of contingency on the original light rail line because China was driving prices on steel and concrete. And so we could measure that. We could indicate in our contracts, but we knew it as a risk factor going to the budget. It was indicated that this is a high level of risk on those kind of costs, and so I'm just trying to figure out how we project forward and what that risk is about. I look, you know, kind of coming from thirty years being in the private sector side, my goal is not to spend contingency at all. What we did as an agency -- and here's my concern, to be honest. We got beat up originally when we couldn't meet the initial tunnel design and we were off by almost a billion dollars on a project. What the agency did it started automatically increasing every one of our contingency amounts so that we could say we delivered on-time and on schedule. I'm not sure it meant we were managing our projects any better. We just were able to message that. I just want to make sure as a tool there's an appropriate time to use contingency. I just didn't see what was driving this in the staff report why we're at $12 million into capital construction. We must understand it could be, as Mr. Brady said, it could be real estate acquisition, could be materials cost, could be the labor market, it could be a variety of unknowns. I just didn't see it here. I'm just trying to figure out. Mr. Smith said point well taken. And I think you're right. I don't think there is probably an adequate as I'm reading -- rereading it right here. I don't think that there's an adequate explanation because, frankly, in the accounting thing -- and I'm starting to agree with you, by the way, that this is being moved for accounting purposes so we don't have -- so it's there in case it's needed.

8

And there aren't specific reasons. We don't have a list of these costs add up to $4.9 million dollars, so please allow us to utilize $5 million dollars. That's not what's happening here. But there have been things identified that we know will be there. We'll need to use this for contingency. Okay. Kyle. Mr. Strickland said that's correct. I don't have an itemized list necessarily in the Board memo here, but there are changes that equal this amount in our change log, and some of them are these there's concurrent non-project activities that we're working on behalf of the City of Mesa with their sewer infrastructure that we're trying to build out. So that wasn't a cost that was initially contemplated when we started the contract. Mr. Smith said but I get you -- and I would agree with you. Where I agree with you is I think we did a poor job of really tying that $5 million to the specific reason why we needed the $5 million. And we'll upgrade the memo for the Board to make sure that that information is in there. And we'll get that to you. Mr. Phelps said I'll end it, I promise. You know, to me, there's generally three things that drive your budgets and that's schedule, scope and cost. And so what I don't know here is in approving the $5 million had there been scope changes that the funding body should understand? Is there things on schedule that's causing delay because we couldn't get certain kinds of work done, or are there just actually hard costs whether it be materials, labor market, or unknown factors. Mr. Smith said and we should have that information to you and that's not included in here. We'll get that information to you, and we'll also make sure that it's included in the Board memo so that they understand exactly what this is related to. Mr. Grote said just two other items I wanted to mention. One is typically when we do a project like this and we go into construction, we will have a 10 percent contingency that we'll allocate to the construction amount, that we have the ability to allocate to the construction. In this case we only did five. And we really probably should have done ten to start with.

But the other thing, and Kyle touched on this, a couple million of the contingency that's been drawn down under, you know, under the contract is actually for things outside of the project. There are a couple of million dollars, I think, Kyle that are what we call concurrent non-project activities that are actually paid for outside the project. There are things that the city asks for that aren't within the project scope that we're doing on their behalf because it's convenient. So some of the drawdown that we've had has been because we've had those additional expenses. The City of Mesa is asking the contractor -- to include it now. We -- paid them back. Mr. Smith said I will admit that this memo could have been tightened up a little bit, as I'm reading it. When I read it, of course, it made perfect sense to me. But I have the luxury

9

of having the background on it. So this could have been tightened up to explain that connection between, for example, that simple work that non-project work and the budget and how that works. My primary concern is are we still within our budget. Are we on the overall -- have we done this tradeoff and this and that, so I tend to look at it as I get the accounting going back and forth. It's a really strange way of thinking, but that's the way FTA and everyone does it. And what I want to make sure is that as you're shifting things around do I have to come back to you and ask you to cut a bigger check. Okay. And as long as I'm satisfied that, no, we don't have to cut a bigger check because we have this, this, this and this, and we're not spending money just because it's in the budget to spend it, which hasn't seem to have been a problem with us lately. Staying within the budget is the bigger problem. Then we're satisfied. But I understand that that's not the information that you really deserve and need. So we'll make it better. Chair Brady said very good. When you have a light rail project you can negotiate with these guys on contingency. That's a lot of fun. All right. So we have Item 3A, 3B on consent. Do I have a motion for approval? IT WAS MOVED BY MARIA HYATT, SECONDED BY KEVIN PHELPS AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO FORWARD THE CONSENT AGENDA TO THE BOARD FOR APPROVAL. 4. South Central Light Rail Extension Project Update and Contract Amendments Mr. Smith said Chair, members of the committee, we're coming with another budget issue, but this is one that we can explain, and it actually is one that we're pretty excited about because I think it shows how we can adapt to changing circumstances and do something we think elevates the impact of a project on a community. So, but by doing that, we need to come back to you to ask for some authority to increase some spending on certain design elements related to South Central and the impact on downtown. So I'll turn it over to Wulf Grote who will explain that for you. Mr. Grote provided a presentation which included: Downtown Phoenix LRT Configuration: Purpose Light Rail System Configuration – 2023 (2 slides) Downtown Phoenix LRT Configuration (3 slides) Downtown Phoenix LRT Configuration: Elements

10

Downtown Phoenix LRT Configuration: Two-Line Concept Downtown Phoenix LRT Configuration Concept Phoenix, Arizona – Jefferson Street near Central Avenue (2 slides) Downtown Phoenix – Central Avenue near Washington Street (2 slides) Contract Modifications Needed (2 slides) Funding Recommendation

IT WAS MOVED BY MARIA HYATT, SECONDED BY KEVIN PHELPS AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO FORWARD TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AUTHORIZATION FOR THE CEO TO APPROVE CONTRACT AMENDMENTS TO FACILITATE THE PROPOSED DOWNTOWN CHANGES AS FOLLOWS:

• DESIGN (AECOM) - $2,487,000 • CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK (KIEWIT) - $400,000 • PUBLIC ARTIST SERVICES (ARTISTS TO BE DEFINED) - $700,000

IN ADDITION, A 10% CONTINGENCY TO BE AVAILABLE FOR EACH OF THESE CONTRACTS IS RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD APPROVAL. 5. Valley Metro Code of Conduct Mr. Smith said and because I don't think you got it the first time, we're going to repeat that presentation. No. Chair Brady said tell us how much the checkbook is going to be. Mr. Smith said in order to implement the base things we talked about as far as the physical structures, we're asking approval of 450,000 plus the $45,000, 10 percent contingency, which we believe will cover the station changes, some other security issues, the signage, and some initial costs to implement this system. We believe we can incorporate that within the current budget constraints, current year budget constraints, so we won't need more money. We will defer some things on line items and other things where we've got savings but that's what we're asking for. This also will be handled under the construction -- the overall general construction contract that you approved last month, so we're already having them price it out and we're negotiating the price on that, which is why you don't have a specific contract because this is one of those types of projects that we'll line under the task order or job order contract. So that really what you're voting on, well, you actually have to do two votes. You have to vote to approve, once again, as the Valley Metro Rail Board, the Code of Conduct, but then also the approve the moving ahead with the recommending the funding to implement the physical changes to the light rail stations.

11

Chair Brady said are there any questions? Do we have a motion for approval that includes both these the actual code of conduct and the approval for the expenditure? IT WAS MOVED BY MARSHA REED, SECONDED BY KEVIN PHELPS AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO FORWARD TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS APPROVAL OF THE VALLEY METRO “RESPECT THE RIDE” CODE OF CONDUCT WITH RELATED ENFORCEMENT AND COMMUNICATION EFFORTS TO IMPLEMENT THE CODE, TO DESIGNATE RAIL PLATFORMS AND ADJOINING AREAS AS PAID FARE ZONES, AND TO AUTHORIZE THE INSTALLATION OF STRIPING, SIGNAGE AND SAFETY STRIPING ON TACTILE STRIPS AT ALL RAIL PLATFORMS USING EXISTING CONTRACTS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $450,000, PLUS AN ADDITIONAL $45,000 (10%) CONTINGENCY. 6. Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events None. With no further discussion the meeting adjourned at 12:56 p.m.


DATE AGENDA ITEM 3A October 25, 2017 SUBJECT Motor and Center Truck Overhaul Program PURPOSE To request authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute contracts with Bridgestone Industrial Products America, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $565,500 and with Vulcanite Pty Ltd. in an amount not to exceed $226,720 for a total amount of $792,220 to provide parts necessary for a Motor and Center Truck overhaul program for the light rail vehicles. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION The current age of the light rail vehicles is nine years in revenue service with an average mileage of each vehicle being approximately 470,000 miles. There are currently 50 light rail vehicles (LRVs) in the total fleet and have been in revenue service for nine years. The purpose of the overhaul is to keep the equipment in a state of good repair and to maintain safe and reliable operation. The contractor(s) will provide parts to overhaul components of the motor and center trucks that include the primary and secondary suspension components including air spring assemblies and chevron springs. The contractor will provide all the necessary parts and materials to complete this portion of the overhaul program. This is a materials/parts only requirements contract. All labor will be done in house by Valley Metro Rail staff. In September 2017, Valley Metro issued a Invitation for Bids (IFB) for this contract. An IFB is a competitive procurement utilizing sealed bids and is awarded to the lowest responsive, responsibler bidder. The list of companies that submitted bids were as follows: 1. Bridgestone Industial Products America, Inc. 2. GMI, LLC 3. Kinkisharyo International, LLC 4. Trelleborg Industrial AVS USA, Inc. 5. Vulcanite Pty Ltd. Bridgestone Industial Products America, Inc. and Vulcanite Pty Ltd. were determined to be the lowest, responsive, responsible bidders. An independent cost estimate has been completed. The cost comparison and price analysis were completed by comparing pricing from other transit agencies that have procured similar parts. The proposed price has been deemed fair and reasonable.

2

COST AND BUDGET The cost for the parts being purchased from Bridgestone Industrial Products America, Inc. is $565,500 and with Vulcanite Pty Ltd. is $226,720 for a total amount of $792,220. The current lead time for delivery of the parts is six months from the receipt of order. The cost for the purchase of the parts is included in the Valley Metro Rail Adopted FY 2018 Operating and Capital Budget. Contract obligations beyond FY 2018 are incorporated into the Valley Metro Rail Five-Year Operating Forecast and Capital Program (FY2018 thru FY2022). This project is being funded with Prop 400 funds. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item relates to the following goals and strategies in the Five-Year Strategic Plan, FY 2016 – 2020:

• Goal 2: Advance performance based operation o Tactic A: Operate an effective, reliable, high performing transit system

COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: October 17, 2017 for information RMC: November 1, 2017 for action Board of Directors: November 16, 2017 for action RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute contracts with Bridgestone Industrial Products America, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $565,500 and with Vulcanite Pty Ltd. in an amount not to exceed $226,720 for a total amount of $792,220 to provide parts necessary for a Motor and Center Truck overhaul program for the light rail vehicles. CONTACT Ray Abraham Chief Operations Officer 602-652-5054 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None



DATE AGENDA ITEM 3B October 25, 2017 SUBJECT Power Switch Machine Upgrade PURPOSE To request authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to purchase nine power switch machines from Voestalpine Nortrak, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $200,925. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION A power switch machine is a mechanical installation enabling light rail vehicles to be guided from one track to another. The nine switches being replaced are the same type of switches (20) that were purchased last year to start the replacement process of the original 20-mile alignment. Due to budget and time constraints not all of the switches were replaced last fiscal year. This purchase will complete the upgrade. The original power switch machines along the original 20-mile alignment have reliability issues with clearing signals that indicate the switch position resulting in additional efforts to insure a safe operation. Voestalpines latest design, which Valley Metro Rail is using along the Northwest Extension extension and in the switch replacement last year, uses a new style of indication circuitry that has greater reliability in verifying switch position. Voestalpine Nortrak, Inc. is the sole source provider for the power switch machines. The equipment is sole source because the switch machine is designed to fit into the existing earth boxes that are currently on the alignment. Selecting another swith machine provider would require modification of the boxes that the power switch machine sits in at an additional cost. An independent cost estimate and a sole source justification including a cost comparison and price analysis have been completed. The cost comparison and price analysis was completed by comparing pricing to another transit agency that have purchased the same switch machines in the past and also a competitive supplier. Pricing is determined by quantity and standard price sheets. The proposed price has been deemed fair and reasonable. COST AND BUDGET The cost to purchase the power switch machines from Voestalpine Nortrak, Inc. is for an amount not to exceed $200,925. For the Fiscal Year 2018, The VMR contract obligation is $200,925, which is fully funded within the VMR Adopted FY18 Operating and Capital Budget. Contract Obligations beyond FY18 are incorporated into the Valley Metro Rail Five-Year Operating Forecast and Capital Program (FY2018 thru FY2022). The source of funding is Prop 400.

2

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item relates to the following goals and strategies in the Five-Year Strategic Plan, FY 2016 – 2020:

• Goal 1: Increase customer focus o Tactic B: Evaluate and enhance passenger safety and security

• Goal 2: Advance performance based operation o Tactic A: Operate an effective, reliable, high performing transit system

COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: October 17, 2017 for information RMC: November 1, 2017 for action Board of Directors: November 16, 2017 for action RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to purchase nine power switch machines from Voestalpine Nortrak, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $200,925. CONTACT Ray Abraham Chief Operations Officer 602-652-5054 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None



DATE AGENDA ITEM 3C October 25, 2017 SUBJECT Northwest Phase II Light Rail Extension Public Art Services Contract Awards PURPOSE To request authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute seven Public Art Services contracts selected by the Stakeholder Art Review Committees (SARCs) for the Northwest Phase II Light Rail Extension for a total of $1,275,000 plus an additional $127,500 (10%) contingency. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION The Northwest Light Rail Extension in Phoenix includes two phases. The first 3.2 mile segment along 19th Avenue, from Bethany Home Road to Dunlap Avenue, was completed in March 2016. Phase II is in preliminary engineering and includes a 1.6 mile segment extending west on 19th Avenue to 25th Avenue, then northward to Mountain View Road, then to a terminus west of Interstate 17 adjacent to the Metrocenter Mall. Phase II will include three new stations, potentially two park-and-ride lots and a relocated and expanded Metrocenter transit center. The project will include an elevated structure over Interstate 17 and will terminate just west of the freeway. The Public Art Services Contracts will develop, design and install artwork at all three stations, as well as at the Metro Parkway Transit Center/Park-and-Ride, the Dunlap Avenue Signal House, the 25th Avenue/Mountain View Traction Power Substation site, and the ramp structure of the I-17 light rail bridge. The artists will work with the community to develop artwork that fits within the environment and reflects the spirit of the project. The artists will collaborate with Valley Metro and City of Phoenix staff, the Design Consultant and the CM@Risk Contractor through the process of design and construction. A Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for Northwest Extension Phase II Public Art Services was issued on June 23, 2017. The RFQ solicited information in the form of Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) from experienced and emerging artists. In conjunction with Phoenix Office of Arts and Culture (POAC) and various local organizations, Valley Metro reached out to the arts community via workshops and seminars. Additionally, four (4) SARC’s were developed to select the artists. The SARCs are comprised of individuals active within the community. Valley Metro received 94 SOQs on August 4, 2017. The SOQs will be evaluated and ranked by the SARC’s to determine Offerors who could successfully deliver the public art. The selection process by the SARC’s is anticipated to be complete on October 16, 2017, at which time the 4 evaluation panels will select the 7 artists best qualified to design, fabricate and install the art for Valley Metro.

2

25th Ave/Dunlap Station $250,000 Pete Goldlust Eugene, OR

25th Ave/Mountain View Station $250,000 Mary Lucking Phoenix, AZ

25th Ave/Dunlap Signal House $25,000 Oliverio Balcells Tempe, AZ

25th Ave/Mountain View TPSS $35,000 Janelle Stanley Phoenix, AZ

Bridge Ramp Wall (Design Only) $40,000 Mary Shindell Phoenix, AZ

Metro Parkway Transit Center and Park & Ride $210,000 Susan Zoccola Seattle, WA

Metrocenter Station $270,000 Laurie Lundquist Tempe, AZ

COST AND BUDGET The total price for the seven Public Art Services contracts for the Northwest Phase II Light Rail Extension is $1,275,000. An additional $127,500 (10%) contingency, to be held by staff, is also needed to address unforeseen changes and circumstances that may arise during the art development process. Project funding is included in the Valley Metro Rail adopted FY18 Operating and Capital Budget. Contract obligations beyond FY18 are incorporated into the Five-Year Operating Forecast and Capital Program (FY18 thru FY22). STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item relates to the following goals and strategies in the Five-Year Strategic Plan, FY 2016 – 2020: Goal 2: Advance performance based operation

• Tactic C: Deliver projects and services on-time/on-budget.

Goal 3: Grow transit ridership • Tactic A: Expand and improve transit services to reach new markets. • Tactic B: Improve connectivity of transit services for greater effectiveness.

COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: October 17, 2017 for information RMC: November 1, 2017 for action Board of Directors: November 16, 2017 for action RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute seven Public Art Services contracts selected by the SARCs for the Northwest Phase II Light Rail Extension for a total of $1,275,000, plus an additional $127,500 (10%) contingency.

3

CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director Capital and Service Development 602-322-4420 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None


DATE AGENDA ITEM 3D October 25, 2017

SUBJECT 50th Street Station Design Contract Authority Modification

PURPOSE To request authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to increase the 50th Street Station design contract authority up to $300,000. Funds will be held by Valley Metro staff and made available to the Designer, Gannett Fleming, as needed to complete the project.

BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION The contract for Gannett Fleming was executed In June 2016 as summarized below:

Date Action Cost Contingency Total

Authority June 2016 Design Services $1,221,532 $122,153 $1,343,685

Since that time design contract changes including authorization for additional design services and design services during construction are required to complete the project. A change order summary for the contract is illustrated in Attachment 1. To avoid project delay and allow the designer to continue with their efforts, staff recommends that up to an additional $300,000 be allocated to the Design contract authority. Board action is needed to authorize the CEO to allocate the proposed $300,000 increase for the Design contract. COST AND BUDGET The current total Design contract authority is $1,343,685. The amount of the proposed increase to contract authority is $300,000, bringing the total contract authority to $1,643,685. Funds are available in the project’s overall contingency and this change will not increase the overall project budget of $22,940,000. Project funding is included in the Valley Metro Rail adopted FY18 Operating and Capital Budget. Contract obligations beyond FY18 are incorporated into the Five-Year Operating Forecast and Capital Program (FY18 thru FY22). STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item relates to the following goals and strategies in the Five-Year Strategic Plan, FY 2016 – 2020:

Goal 2: Advance performance based operation o Tactic C: Deliver projects and services on-time/on-budget.

Goal 3: Grow transit ridership

o Tactic A: Expand and improve transit services to reach new markets. o Tactic B: Improve connectivity of transit services for greater effectiveness.

COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: October 17, 2017 for information RMC: November 1, 2017 for action Board of Directors: November 16, 2017 for action

RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to increase the 50th Street Station design contract authority by up to $300,000. Funds will be held by Valley Metro staff and made available to the Designer, Gannett Fleming, as needed to complete the project. CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Capital & Service Development 602-322-4420 [email protected]

ATTACHMENT 1 - Contingency Summary


ATTACHMENT 1

Change Order Summary Executed Change Orders Station Physical Model Scope of Services Clarification Executed Change Order Total $3,220 Pending Changes Final Design Supplement Operator Restroom Facility - CNPA Design Services During Construction Pending Changes Total $334,250 Contract Contingency $122,153 Less Executed Change Order Total ($3,220) Less Pending Changes Total ($334,250) Forecasted Funding Remaining I (Shortfall) ($215,317)

DATE AGENDA ITEM 3E October 25, 2017

SUBJECT Tempe Streetcar Design Contract Authority Modification

PURPOSE To request authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to increase the Tempe Streetcar design contract authority up to $400,000. Funds will be held by Valley Metro staff and made available to the Designer, Stantec, as needed to complete the project.

BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION The contract for Stantec was executed In December 2016 as summarized below:

Date Action Cost Contingency Total

Authority Dec 2016 Design Services $8,951,397 $895,140 $9,846,537

Since that time design contract changes including authorization for additional design services and design of Concurrent Non-Project Activities (CNPA) relating to city of Tempe intersection improvements have been incorporated into Stantec’s contract. The CNPA intersection improvements are fully funded by the City of Tempe and are not included in the project budget. Additionally it is anticipated that re-design efforts will be necessary to provide for a design that is within the construction budget. A change order summary for the contract is illustrated in Attachment 1. To avoid project delay and allow the designer to continue with their efforts, staff recommends that up to an additional $400,000 be allocated to the Design contract authority. Board action is needed to authorize the CEO to allocate the proposed $400,000 increase for the Design contract. COST AND BUDGET The current total Design contract authority is $9,846,537. The amount of the proposed increase to contract authority is $400,000, bringing the total contract authority to $10,246,537. Funds are presently available in the project’s overall contingency to cover this work. Project funding is included in the Valley Metro Rail adopted FY18 Operating and Capital Budget. Contract obligations beyond FY18 are incorporated into the Five-Year Operating Forecast and Capital Program (FY18 thru FY22). STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item relates to the following goals and strategies in the Five-Year Strategic Plan, FY 2016 – 2020:

Goal 2: Advance performance based operation

o Tactic C: Deliver projects and services on-time/on-budget.

Goal 3: Grow transit ridership o Tactic A: Expand and improve transit services to reach new markets. o Tactic B: Improve connectivity of transit services for greater effectiveness.

COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: October 17, 2017 for information RMC: November 1, 2017 for action Board of Directors: November 16, 2017 for action

RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to increase the Tempe Streetcar design contract authority by up to $400,000. Funds will be held by Valley Metro staff and made available to the Designer, Stantec, as needed to complete the project. CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Capital & Service Development 602-322-4420 [email protected]

ATTACHMENT 1- Contingency Summary


ATTACHMENT 1 Change Order Summary Executed Change Orders Baseline Schedule Change Draft DCM Review Change in Scope Rio Salado Alignment Alternatives Design Services During Construction for Early Work Package 30% Design 1st and Ash Intersection - CNPA Rio Salado Alignment Alternative 30% Design Deliverable Delay Design Services During Construction for Early Work Package 2 Accessibility Review Models Executed Change Order Total $385,590 Pending Changes Systems Additions 24" Inch Waterline Salvage Final Design Roundabout - CNPA** SRP Irrigation Design Pending Changes Total $663,292 Contract Contingency $895,140 Less Executed Change Order Total ($385,590) Less Pending Changes Total ($663,292) Forecasted Funding Remaining I (Shortfall) ($153,742)


DATE AGENDA ITEM 4 October 25, 2017 SUBJECT Rail Design and Construction Change Process PURPOSE To provide an overview of the updated Change Process Manual and Procedures for rail projects. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION Agency Staff have finalized an update to the Rail Design and Construction Change Process. The updated procedure: includes a revised change review board process; updated levels of authority; and addresses changes in both Federal and local contract administration requirements. A presentation will be provided at the meeting. COST AND BUDGET Not applicable. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT Not applicable. COMMITTEE ACTION RTAG: October 17, 2017 for information RMC: November 1, 2017 for information Board of Directors: November 16, 2017 for information RECOMMENDATION This item is for information only. CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Capital and Service Development 602-322-4420 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None


10/27/2017

1

Change Management

Change Process & Procedures Manual

November 2017

Summary of Updates

• Updated for FTA Requirements

• Revised Review Boards

• Updated Levels of Authority

• Updated terminology

• Updated Exhibits

10/27/2017

2

Change Process Manual & Procedures Draft document for Design and Construction contract changes Collaborative Best Practices/CPEV FTA Circular 4220.1F

– Guidance for solicitation, award and administration of third party contracts FTA Best Practices Procurement & Lessons Learned Manual – October

2016 Title 48 Federal Acquisition Regulations System – Volumes 1-2, Chapter 1,

Parts 1-53 FTA Pricing Guide for FTA Grantees Arizona Revised Statutes 34-101 definitions ; 41-2543 cost proposals; and

41-2548 records retention

FTA Circular 4220.1F

• Approval Requirements• Cost Restrictions• Independent Cost Estimate• Cost Analysis• Profit• Documentation

10/27/2017

3

Change Process

Change ProcessChange Request

ContractorDesignerOwner

Stakeholder

PM/RE Evaluates and Replies

PM/RE PreparesFOF, RFP, & ROM;Initiates Discipline

Review

PM/RE or EstimatorPrepares

Independent CostEstimate

Scheduler InputsTime Impacts into FOF

10/27/2017

4



Stakeholder



Review

TRAC Reviews Contract Change

(FOF)



Stakeholder



Review


(FOF)

TRAC Committee• Contract Administrator

• Manager of Construction• Manager of Design

• Manager Program Control• City Representative(s)

Note: PM excluded to eliminate potential conflict with E&O considerations

10/27/2017

5



Stakeholder



Review


(FOF)

CCB

if Change > $150kor CNPA



Stakeholder



Review


(FOF)

CCB

if Change > $150kor CNPAChange Control Board

• Director of Capital and Service Development• Chief Operations Officer• Director, Safety, Security and Quality Assurance• Chief Financial Officer• Director, Communications and Strategic Initiatives• Chief Procurement Officer• City Representative(s)

10/27/2017

6



Stakeholder



Review


(FOF)

PM/RE Leads in Negotiations with GC or Designerand Generates

Record of Negotiation.



Stakeholder



Review


(FOF)



PM/RE IssuesChange Order

GC or Designer Signs

Change Order

Agency Representative(w/Approval Authority)Signs Change Order

Contracts & ProcurementCA/Manager of

Contracts & ProcurementSigns CO

Concurrence

10/27/2017

7



Stakeholder



Review


(FOF)





Change Order


PM/RE Conforms

and Distributes



Concurrence

• Contract Change Orders valued at <$25,000 require signature by the PM/RE, with concurrence by the CA.

• Contract Change Orders valued between $25,000 and $99,999.00 require signature by the Deputy Director Rail Program Development, with concurrence by the CA.

• Contract Change Orders valued at $100,000 to $149,999.99 require signature by the Director of Capital & Service Development, with concurrence by the CA.

• Contract Change Orders valued at >$150,000 require signatures by the Chief Executive Officer, with concurrence by the Manager of Contracts & Procurement.



Stakeholder



Review


(FOF)





Change Order


PM/RE Conforms

and Distributes



Concurrence

10/27/2017

8

Change Review Boards

– Merit. A change is determined to have merit if it possesses a reasonable justification, and is in the best interests of the owner.

– Validity. A change is determined to be valid if funds are available for the change, and after negotiations, costs are determined to be fair and reasonable.

– Necessity. A change is determined to have necessity if it is non-discretionary and necessary to fulfill the intended scope of the project (e.g. required for safety, or practical operations).

Change Boards

Technical Review Advisory Committee (TRAC)– Merit, validity, necessity– Sufficient project Contingency– Sufficient Contract Authority– Majority– Escalation protocol– Over $150K forwarded to CCB

10/27/2017

9

Change Boards

Change Control Board (CCB)– Over $150K

• (aligns with FTA Pricing Guidelines Simplified Acquisition Threshold)

– Sufficient Project Contingency– Sufficient Contract Authority NTE Budget

Change Process Manual & Procedures

Target implementation November 1, 2017



SUBJECT ArtsLine Update

PURPOSE To provide an informational update to the Board on the ArtsLine branding initiative and program helping to enhance the perception of Valley Metro Rail and the local arts and culture community.

BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION Valley Metro Rail (VMR) is a connector of communities and destinations of interest. Specifically, VMR connects more than 55 arts and culture organizations within a half-mile of the line. These venues range from major arts centers to musical halls to historical places and museums. In addition to these destinations, VMR boasts a beautiful array of its own public art at all stations, park-and-rides and many traction power substations. With all this in mind, “ArtsLine” has come forward as an opportunity to concentrate all this activity and promotion around a singular brand. This brand and associated program help to build a positive perception for the transit system, maximize the current, public investment in this system and, ultimately, create positive rider experiences and gains in overall ridership. In addition, this program magnifies and further solidifies a strong connection with the local arts and culture community, who also help to enhance the livability and quality of life of this region. ArtsLine comes to life through a variety of current and future initiatives, including:

• Arts & Culture Destination Guide • ArtsLine Rotating Transit Art Series • Youth programs like Design a Transit Wrap contest • Light Rail Plays performed by Rising Youth Theatre actors • World Bazaar Community Market at 19th/Camelback park-and-ride • Holiday events including the Mesa Polar Express • Online at valleymetro.org/arts • And future initiatives that could include more public art (temporary and potentially

permanent); ridership promotions; and events or festivals COST AND BUDGET Some of the programming elements (above) have costs incorporated into the approved FY18 Capital & Operating Budget. These costs are largely printing costs. As the program grows, costs will be factored into future budget cycles.

2

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item relates to the following goals and strategies in the Five-Year Strategic Plan, FY 2016 – 2020: Goal 1: Increase customer focus

• Tactic A: Improve customer satisfaction Goal 2: Advance performance based operation

• Tactic A: Expand and improve transit services to reach new markets • Tactic C: Communicate availability, attractiveness and safety of transit service

COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: October 17, 2017 for information RMC: November 1, 2017 for information Board of Directors: November 16, 2017 for information

RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Hillary Foose Director, Communications & Strategic Initiatives 602-322-4468 [email protected]

ATTACHMENT None


DATE AGENDA ITEM 6 October 25, 2017 SUBJECT Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events PURPOSE Chair Brady will request future agenda items from members, and members may provide a report on current events. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Scott Smith Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT Pending Items Request


2



meetings of the transit management committees...mr. crowley said we'll start with the ticket...

Documents