PORT OF OAKLAND · 2016-03-10 · September Delivering Progressive Transportation 1 Tess Lengyel,...

OMAR BENJAMIN Executive Director MICHELE HEFFES Acting Port Attorney ARNEL ATIENZA Port Auditor JOHN T. BETTERTON Secretary of the Board

PORT OF OAKLAND BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS 530 Water Street i Oakland, California 94607 (510) 627-1696(w)i(510) 839-5104(f)iTDD/TTY 711

E-Mail: [email protected] Website: www.portofoakland.com

AGENDA

GILDA GONZALES President

JAMES W. HEAD First Vice-President

ALAN S. YEE Second Vice-President

CESTRA BUTNER Commissioner

EARL HAMLIN Commissioner

BRYAN R. PARKER Commissioner

VICTOR UNO Commissioner

Regular Meeting of the Board of Port Commissioners Thursday September 20, 2012 – 1:00 p.m.

Board Room – 2nd Floor

ROLL CALL 1st Vice President Head, 2nd Vice-President Yee, Commissioner Butner, Commissioner

Hamlin, Commissioner Parker, Commissioner Uno and President Gonzales. 1. CLOSED SESSION

1.1 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION. Pursuant to Subdivision (a) of California Government Code Section 54956.9.

SSA Terminals, LLC and SSA Terminals (Oakland), LLC v. the City of Oakland, Acting by

and Through its Board of Port Commissioners Docket No. 09-08

1.2 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION. Significant

Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Subdivision (b) of California Government CodeSection 54956.9: 5 matter(s)

1.3 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT

Title: Port Attorney

1.4 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Titles: Executive Director, Port Auditor, Board Secretary

AGENDA

1 of 93

2

1.5 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS. Pursuant to Subdivision (a) of

California Government Code Section 54957.6. Employee

Organizations:International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW Local 1245), International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE Local 21), Service Employees International Union (SEIU Local 1021), and Western Council of Engineers (WCE)

ROLL CALL/OPEN SESSION (approximately 4:00 p.m.) 1st Vice President Head, 2nd Vice-President Yee, Commissioner Butner, Commissioner

Hamlin, Commissioner Parker, Commissioner Uno and President Gonzales. CLOSED SESSION REPORT The Port Attorney or Board Secretary will report on any final actions taken in Closed

Session. 2. MAJOR PROJECTS This segment of the meeting is reserved for action and discussions regarding the status

of Major Projects and issues of special importance.

2.1 Report: ERP Update (Engineering)

3. BUDGET & FINANCE This segment of the meeting is reserved for action or discussion regarding the status of

Budget and Finance issues.

4. STRATEGY & POLICY This segment of the meeting is reserved for action or discussion on Strategy and Policy

Issues.

4.1 Report: Alameda County Transportation Commission, presentation regarding the Transportation Expenditure Plan (Government Affairs)

4.2 Report: MAPLA Progress Report for June 1, 2011 through June 30, 2012 (SRD)

5. CONSENT ITEMS Action by the Board under “Consent Items” means that all matters listed below have

been summarized and will be adopted by one motion and appropriate vote. Consent Items may be removed for further discussion by the Board at the request of any member of the Board.

AGENDA

2 of 93

3

5.1 Authorization of Grant of Easement with East Bay Municipal Utility District (Aviation)

5.2 Amendment to Temporary Rental Agreement with DeSilva Gates Construction (Aviation)

5.3 Report: Executive Director Awards of Recent Public Works and Professional Services Contracts (Engineering)

6. REMAINING ACTION ITEMS

Remaining Action Items are items not previously addressed in this Agenda that may

require staff presentation and/or discussion and information prior to action by the Board.

6.1 Request for Authorization to enter into Other Transaction Agreement (OTA) with the Transportation Security Administration relating to Checked Baggage Recapitalization Screening Design Services. (Aviation)

6.2 Authorization to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Harris Miller Miller &

Hanson, Inc. to provide aviation-related acoustical consulting services for an amount not to exceed $375,000 in support of the Noise and Environmental Compliance Office for five years. (Aviation)

6.3 Authorization to enter into a Two-Year contract with up to Two Extensions for a Total of

Five Years with Aramark Uniform Services for the Port's Uniform Rental and Laundry Service Needs (Aviation, Maritime, Finance)

7. UPDATES/ANNOUNCEMENTS The President and / or Executive Director will report on noteworthy events occurring

since the last Board Meeting. 8. SCHEDULING This segment of the meeting is reserved for scheduling items for future Agendas and/or

scheduling Special Meetings OPEN FORUM The Board will receive public comment on non-agenda items during this time. Please fill

out a speaker card and present it to the Secretary of the Board. ADJOURNMENT The next Regular Meeting of the Board will be held on October 4, 2012 at 1:00 p.m. in

the Board Room.

AGENDA

3 of 93

4

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Disability Related Modifications Any person who requires a disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, in order to participate in the meeting, may submit a written request, electronic request, or telephone request [via the California Relay Service (telephone) for the hearing impaired at (800) 735-2922], to the Secretary of the Board no later than five working days prior to the scheduled meeting date.

John Betterton, Secretary of the Board 530 Water Street, Oakland, CA 94607

[email protected] (510) 627-1696

Language & Interpretive Services As a grantee of federal aid grant funds from the US Department of Transportation, the Port is responsible for ensuring equal access to its programs, services, and benefits. To request bilingual interpreters or materials in alternate formats, please contact the Assistant Secretary of the Board no later than five working days prior to the scheduled meeting date.

Daria Edgerly, Assistant Secretary of the Board 530 Water Street, Oakland, CA 94607

[email protected] (510) 627-1337

Scented Products Please refrain from wearing scented products to this meeting so attendees who experience chemical sensitivities may attend.

To Speak on an Agenda Item You may speak on any item appearing on the Agenda. Please fill out a Speaker’s Card and give it to the Board Secretary before the start of the meeting or immediately after conclusion of Closed Session. Cards received after the start of the meeting will be treated as a single request to speak in Open Forum. All speakers will be allotted a minimum of one minute.

Agenda & Related Materials Should you have questions or concerns regarding this Agenda, or wish to review any of the Agenda Related Materials, please contact the Board Secretary, John Betterton, at (510) 627-1696, or visit our web page at www.portofoakland.com

To receive Port Agendas and Agenda Related Materials by email, please email your request to [email protected]

AGENDA

4 of 93

MAJOR PROJECTS

This segment of the meeting is reserved for action and discussions regarding the status of Major Projects and issues of special importance.

MAJOR PROJECTS Tab 2

5 of 93

ERP Update

September 20, 2012

1

MAJOR PROJECTS Tab 2.1

6 of 93

BackgroundActivities Up to Now

• July 2009– Board approves funding, Phase 1 implementation begins

• October 2010– System goes ‘live’ – Financials, human resources, projects, procurement, asset

maintenance and property managementmaintenance and property management

• October 2010 – March 2012– System stabilization (issue fixes & refinements)– Evaluation of system by specialists

• March 31, 2012– End of Phase 1, continue fixes & refinements as ongoing

operations

2


7 of 93

Number of New Issues by Week

25

30

35

40

45

50

0

5

10

15

20

4/19

/11

5/14

/11

6/8/

11

7/3/

11

7/28

/11

8/22

/11

9/16

/11

10/1

1/11

11/5

/11

11/3

0/11

12/2

5/11

1/19

/12

2/13

/12

3/9/

12

4/3/

12

4/28

/12

5/23

/12

6/17

/12

7/12

/12

8/6/

12

3


8 of 93

Total Number of Issues

1500

2000

2500

0

500

1000

Open

Closed

4


9 of 93

Current Status: Issues and WhatWe’re Doing About Them

• More reports needed– Currently developing high priority reports

• Program issues & issue tickets– Continuing to fix

• Port’s evolving business (e.g. labor negotiations) • Port’s evolving business (e.g. labor negotiations) requires programming/configuration changes– Making these changes as they occur

• Process development– Developing better business processes for utilizing Oracle– Weekly working sessions continuing

• Training– Focused training

5


10 of 93

Current Status: Critical Areas

Special focus on these areas:– Purchasing– Project Accounting & Grants– Audit Findings– Audit Findings

Area still outstanding:– Property Manager (variable rent calculations)

6


11 of 93

Current status: FinancialsPhase 1 (2009-March 31, 2012):

Software Licensing & Maintenance: $1.67M

Implementation: $12.5M

Phase 2 (Fiscal 2013+): $1.35M

Ongoing costs (non-labor)• Capital Improvement Budget: $500,000/year

• Expense (licensing renewal & hosting): $500,000/year

7


12 of 93

Current status: Support Model• Port Oracle Staff

– 1 supervising programmer– 4 programmers– 2 additional highly experienced

programmers (to be hired)– 2 additional business analysts (to be hired)– 2 additional business analysts (to be hired)

• Hitachi Consulting• Temporary Employees

Number of external staff expected to decrease as new Port employees are hired and brought up to speed.

8


13 of 93

Current Status:Filling Open Staff Positions

Advertisement for four ERP staff positions concluded on July 27th

– Critical to find the right people to support the – Critical to find the right people to support the system

– Severe difficulties in filling the two key Oracle programmer positions

9


14 of 93

Future: Continued Issue Resolution& System Enhancement

• Continuous effort to resolve issues and enhance system as part of standard operations

• Required Board actions• Required Board actions– Due to the delay in bring onboard the new

Programmer Analysts and Business Analysts, staff will be requesting Board approval for continued consulting and temporary staff in order to support Oracle ERP.

10


15 of 93

Future: Phase 2

• Need to wait for the additional budgeted staffing resources and planning effort prior to proceeding

• Phase 2A: Business analytics– Trending, analysis, and forecasting– Will start once we finish developing transactional/detailed

reporting and processes for balancing and reconciling.reporting and processes for balancing and reconciling.

• Phase 2B: Additional functionality – More functionality for procurement, receivables, entering

expense reports and recruitment– A cost-benefit analysis needs to be conducted to see if it's

feasible to implement and which ones to implement.

11


16 of 93

Questions?

12


17 of 93

BUDGET & FINANCE

This segment of the meeting is reserved for action or discussion regarding the status of Budget and Finance issues.

BUDGET & FINANCE Tab 3

18 of 93

STRATEGY & POLICY

This segment of the meeting is reserved for action or discussion on Strategy and Policy Issues.

STRATEGY & POLICY Tab 4

19 of 93

1

Delivering Transportation SolutionsDelivering Transportation Solutions

A Presentation to the

Port of OaklandArthur L. Dao, Executive Director

Delivering Transportation Solutionsfor a

Vibrant, Livable Alameda County

Delivering Transportation Solutionsfor a

Vibrant, Livable Alameda County

September

Delivering Progressive Transportation 1

Tess Lengyel, Deputy Director of Policy, Public Affairs & Legislation 2012

Alameda County Transportation Commission• Newly founded agency in July 2010 • Streamlined operations and enhanced deliveryS ea ed ope a o s a d e a ced de e y• The Alameda CTC Commission is comprised of 22

members, with the following representation:All five Alameda County SupervisorsAll citiesAC Transit and BART

Members of the first Alameda CTC Commission

Mayor Green , ChairSupervisor Haggerty, Vice Chair


STRATEGY & POLICY Tab 4.1

20 of 93

2

Successes: Exceptional Value• 100% clean audits for 10 years• Citizens Watchdog Committee (CWC) reviews and Citizens Watchdog Committee (CWC) reviews and

reports annually to the public• Merger saves taxpayers over $3 million• Close work with regional, state and federal

governments to fund valuable programs to:Extend the life of aging infrastructure


Increase safetyProtect the environmentImprove transportation access for all communitiesCreate jobs

W l f d d d li t d We plan, fund and deliver to expand access, improve mobility and foster a vibrant and livable Alameda County.



21 of 93

3

Successes: Economic Vitality

• Job creation through contracts with local companies

• More efficient movement of people and goods that stimulates the economy

• Investments in transportation systems to attract and retain businesses


retain businesses• Over $495 million in the past decade

to Alameda County businesses

$2,000,000,000

$2,500,000,000

$3,000,000,000

$3,500,000,000• Measure B$756 M in capital investments results in over $ 3 B in projects

Leveraging Dollars Supports Economy

$0

$500,000,000

$1,000,000,000

$1,500,000,000

Measure BInvestment

Total ProjectsFunded

Measure B Investment Total Projects Funded

4 Fold Leverage

results in over $ 3 B in projects Almost half a billion in local pass-through funds support, maintenance, operations, programs and services

• State and Federal Funds (since 2000)


Alameda CTC attracted over $560 M for transportation investments; many of which support Measure B investments


22 of 93

4

Economic Vitality: BART to Warm Springs

Sponsor

BART to Warm Springs (WSX) • Expands critical commuter rail line in Alameda County

SponsorBay Area Rapid Transit (BART)

Cost Estimate$ 890M

2000 Measure B Commitment$ 224.4M

• First stage for extension to Silicon Valley

• Expanded access to jobs utilizing transit


ConstructionUnder ConstructionAnticipated Completion: 2015

Economic Vitality: BART Oakland Airport Connector

BART Oakland AirportConnector (OAC)

• Connects Coliseum Station to Oakland International Airport

• Provides better transportation SponsorBay Area Rapid Transit (BART)

Cost Estimate$ 484.1M

2000 Measure B Commitment$ 89M

• Provides better transportation access for people traveling to and from the region

• Provides local jobs and strengthens the economy


$ 89M

Construction (DBOM)Under ConstructionAnticipated Completion: May 2014


23 of 93

5

Improved Mobility: Congestion Relief

• Helped reduce congestion on

I-238 Widening Project

• Helped reduce congestion on major connector corridor between I-580 and I-880; Ribbon Cutting Ceremony held October 2009

Route 84 Expressway

• Moved freeway cut-through traffic


out of downtown Livermore

• Expands direct freeway to freeway access from I-580 to I-680; Groundbreaking Summer 2012

Forward-Thinking Solutions

I ti l ti f t t d E t B hi h

I-80 Integrated Corridor Mobility

• Innovative solutions for most congested East Bay highways; ranked one of the most important bond projects; real-time closed-circuit cameras and changeable message signs; ramp metering to manage congestion

I-680 Southbound Express Lanes

Fi t l i N th C lif i ff l d i


• First express lane in Northern California; offers solo drivers a choice to pay to use the carpool lane and avoid congestion; provides safe and reliable trip times; part of the MTC Express Lane Network; opened September 2010


24 of 93

6

Community Benefit: Safe Routes to Schools

• Encourages children to walk and bike to school

Safe Routes to Schoolsand bike to school

• Increases children’s health

• Decreases carpools, congestion and pollution

SponsorAlameda CTC

Cost Estimate$ 2.3M

2000 Measure B Commitment$ 27M


$ .27M

Countywide

Community Benefit: Travel Training

Tri-City Travel Training

• Trains seniors and persons with disabilities to ride AC Transit, BART and Union City Transit

• Engages Tri-City ethnic communities and non-English speakers

• Fosters community and social support networks



25 of 93

7

Improved Mobility: Maintenance, Operations, Safety

Direct allocations to local jurisdictions and transit operators

• Local Streets and Roads• Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety

projects and programs• Transit operations: rail, bus

and ferry


y• Special Transportation for

Seniors and People with Disabilities (Paratransit)

Key Factors Affecting Transportation• Decreased funding and volatility create challenges

for adequately delivering multimodal needs$ Millions Sales tax remains

• Legislative mandates:

0 20 40 60 80

100 120 140 160 180 200 220

1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 YearSTP/CMAQ… STIP TFCA Lifeline

Sales tax remains most steady


• Legislative mandates:AB32: Global Warming Solutions Act – reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020

SB 375: Transportation planning, sustainable communities strategy, environmental review to reduce GHG emissions


26 of 93

8

Alameda County Today• Second largest county by population

in Bay Region: 20% of population• Home to 14 cities, major universities,

international port/airport• 40% of Bay Area congestion is in

Alameda County• Population growing – expected to be

l t 2 illi d i l i h i j


almost 2 million during planning horizon, major increase in senior population

• One of the 19 Self-Help Counties in California

Planning Solutions

• New plans to meet future needs• Developed the Countywide Transportation Plan and p y p

the 2012 Transportation Expenditure Plan to continue investments in Alameda County

New plans build off of existing successes and


expand opportunities


27 of 93

9

Looking to the Future:Transportation Expenditure Plan (TEP)• A$7.8 billion plan for initial 30 years• Legislation allows for a one-time opportunity to • Legislation allows for a one-time opportunity to

augment sales: November 6, 2012• Accountability measures

- Independent Watchdog Committee- Continuation of other public committees- Strict environmental, full funding and reporting requirements- Commitment to modes


Commitment to modes- Complete Streets requirement- Performance and accountability measures in every contract- Voter check in and approval of new plan every 20 years

2012 TEP Development

• Culmination of two-year process:Steering Committee – 13 elected officialsCAWG – 27 membersCAWG 27 membersTAWG – 58 participants

• Extensive outreach throughout the CountyOver 40 public meetings specifically on CWTP-TEP development, 2 public opinion polls (over 2/3 support)

• Analysis of over 300 applications submitted as part of i 2011 ll f j t d h t l


spring 2011 call for projects and how to leverage current investments to meet Plan’s vision and goals

• Responsible investments with extensive safeguards to achieve 2/3 voter approval


28 of 93

10

TEP Summary

• Investments are focused on a $7.8 billion multimodal plan over 30 years

Mass Transit – 48% ($3.7B)Mass Transit 48% ($3.7B)- Senior/Disabled Transportation- Student Transit Pass Program

Local Streets & Roads – 30% ($2.3B)- Freight and Economic Development

Highway Maintenance and improvement – 9% ($677M)- Freight and Economic Development

Safety Bike and Pedestrian routes 8% ($651M)


Safety Bike and Pedestrian routes – 8% ($651M)Sustainable Land Use and Transportation – 4% ($300M)Technology and Innovation – 1% ($77M)

Highway Efficiencies & Freight• Highway Efficiencies &

Freight = $677 million, 8 7% f f d8.7% of funds

Highway Capital Projects –$600M, 7.7%- I-80 Improvements- Route 84 Improvements- I-580 Improvements

I 680 Improvements


- I-680 Improvements- I-880 ImprovementsFreight & Economic Development – $77M, 1%


29 of 93

11

Freight & Economic Development• Innovative approaches to moving goods safely

Spur the economy

Mitigate environmental impacts

• Investments benefiting the Port of OaklandFreight access improvements

- Outer Harbor Intermodal Terminalo Expansion of rail freight use

7th St t d ti


- 7th Street grade separation

Freight & Economic Development• Highway investments that support freight

Freight and economic development program- I-80 Corridor ($76 million)

o Improvements to Gilman Street and Ashby Avenue interchanges- I-880 Corridor ($284 million)

o Interchange improvements throughout Oakland and Haywardo Northbound carpool/toll lane, from A St. (Hayward) to Hegenberger Road

(Oakland)- I-680 Corridor ($60 million)

o Carpool/high-occupancy toll lanes from Route 84 to Alcosta BoulevardI 580 Corridor ($48 million)


- I-580 Corridor ($48 million)o Interchange improvements: I-680/I-580, Isabel Ave, Greenville Road,

Vasco Road- SR-84 Corridor ($132 million)

o Widening from Pigeon Pass to Jack London Boulevardo Widening and improvements at the I-680/Route 84 interchange


30 of 93

12

Local Streets & Roads Overview

• Local Streets & Roads = $2.3 billion, 30% of funds$2.3 billion, 30% of funds

Major Commute Corridors, Grade Separations, Seismic Safety, Freight* – $800M, 10%

Local Streets & Roads pass-through program to cities and County – $1,548M, 20%


* Funds will be allocated through the Capital Improvement Program every two years, based on readiness and geographic equity. Complete streets requirement.

Public Transit Overview• Public Transit = $3.7 billion,

48% of fundsMass Transit: Operations, Mass Transit: Operations, Maintenance, and Safety Program –$1,857M, 24%

- Student transit pass program $15M- Innovative grants: successful youth

transit pass programs receive priority

Specialized Transit For Seniors and Persons with Disabilities – $774M, 10%Bus Transit Efficiency and Priority –$35M 0 5%


$35M, 0.5%BART System Modernization & Expansion – $710M, 9.2%Regional Rail Enhancements –$355M, 4.6%


31 of 93

13

Bicycle and Pedestrian Overview• Bicycle & Pedestrian =

$651 million, 8.4% of fundsGap Closure on Three Major Trails: Iron Horse, Bay Trail and East Bay Greenway/UPRR Corridor – $264M, 3.4%

Bike and Pedestrian pass-through program to cities and County – $230M, 3%


y $

Bike and Pedestrian grant program for regional projects and trail maintenance –$153M, 2%

Sustainability, Land Use, Technology

• Sustainable Land Use & Transportation = & Transportation $300 million, 4% of funds

PDA/TOD Infrastructure Investments* – $300M, 4%

• Technology, Innovation & Development = $77 4 million 1% of funds


$77.4 million, 1% of funds* Funds will be allocated through the Capital

Improvement Program every two years, based on readiness and geographic equity. Complete streets requirement.


32 of 93

14

What the TEP does for the County

• Fix it First: 70% of the funds are dedicated to maintaining and operating the existing system

• Sustainable communities and GHG reduction60% of funds support SCS implementationCWTP shows GHG reductions of 24-25% per capita - CWTP and TEP investments

aligned in final CWTPTOD/PDAs capital investmentsMajor bike, pedestrian and transit funding increases


• Geographic equity• Essential multimodal

investments

TEP Support• Alameda County Board of

Supervisors• 14 cities support the TEP

Alameda Building TradesAlameda Labor Council, AFL-CIOEast Bay Regional Park DistrictEast Bay Bicycle CoalitionUnited Seniors of Oakland and Alameda CountyCarpenters Local 713

Additional Support

ppNorth County: Alameda, Albany, Berkeley, Emeryville, Oakland and Piedmont Central County: Hayward and San LeandroSouth County: Fremont, Newark and Union CityEast County: Dublin, Livermore

Carpenters Local 713Center for Independent LivingBay Planning CoalitionAlbany Strollers and RollersWalk Oakland Bike OaklandTransFormEast Bay Economic Development AllianceMetropolitan Transportation CommissionOakland Metropolitan Chamber of


East County: Dublin, Livermore and Pleasanton

• AC Transit• BART

pCommerceChinatown Chamber of CommercePort of OaklandChambers of CommerceSEIU Local 1021State and federal elected officials


33 of 93

15

TEP Schedule

• June 2012 – Board of Supervisors placed TEP onthe ballot

• November 6, 2012 – TEP on the ballot as Measure B1Requires 2/3 vote


QuestionsFor more information:

www.AlamedaCTC.org or (510) 208-7400g ( )

Find us on Facebook: Facebook.com/AlamedaCTC

And Twitter: @AlamedaCTC



34 of 93

INFORMATIONAL REPORT(This I tem is for in format ion only and no act ion is

requested or requ ired o f the Board o f Por t Commiss ioners . )

TITLE: Maritime and Aviation Project Labor Agreement (MAPLA)Annual Progress Report Summary (July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012)

BOARD MEETING DATE: September 20, 2012

SUBMITTED BY: Jean G. Banker, Deputy Executive Director

APPROVED BY: Omar R. Benjamin, Executive Director

SUMMARY

In accordance with the Maritime and Aviation Project Labor Agreement (MAPLA) reporting commitment, the annual MAPLA Progress Report Summary for July 2011 - June 2012 is attached for your review as attachment 1.

In summary, accomplishments during the reporting period include:

Contractors achieved notable increases in LIA/LBA1 hires, as well as apprenticeship hires and utilization despite the continuation of construction downturn.

A five-year MAPLA extension was executed in February 2011 extendingthe MAPLA through December 31, 2015.

MAPLA requirements are now able to be applied to U.S. Department of Transportation funded projects without the local hiring goal requirement.

Consistently no work stoppages as a result of outstanding labor relations with the Building and Construction Trades Council of Alameda County, AFL-CIO.

The report includes the background of MAPLA, and summary results in local workforce utilization, and local and small business utilization. It also outlines the status of the Social Justice Trust Fund, the MAPLA extension, labor relations and the application of MAPLA to DOT funded projects.

MAPLA AdministrationMAPLA was adopted by the Board in 2000 and covers all applicable capital projects in the aviation and maritime areas. The program is administered by Davillier-Sloan, Inc. (DSI) in concert with Ed Manning Consultants, Marstel-Day, LLC and the Engineering and Social Responsibility divisions at the Port.

The Port pays DSI consultants an annual amount of $84,000 to administer the MAPLA program.

1 LIA = Local Impact Area (Cities of Oakland, Alameda, Emeryville and San Leandro); LBA = Local Business Area (Counties of Alameda and Contra Costa).


35 of 93

******** ********

PORT of OAKLAND

MARITIME and AVIATION PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT

PROGRESS REPORT SUMMARY July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2012

Presented

To the Oakland Board of Port Commissioners

September 20, 2012

1


36 of 93

******** ********

2

HISTORICAL OVERVIEW TO MAPLA The Port of Oakland Maritime and Aviation Project Labor Agreement (MAPLA) was adopted by the Board of Port Commissioners in 2000. It was intended to cover the capital projects in the Port’s Aviation and Maritime areas. In response to Board policies, the MAPLA was designed to ensure project labor stability, employment of Port Local residents, and utilization of Port-recognized small businesses. Initially adopted for five (5) years (through December 2004), MAPLA was extended for two (2) years as a result of the settlement of an arbitrator’s award extending coverage of MAPLA to Port tenants’ construction activities (through December 2006) and has been further extended three times by Board action and the concurrence of the Building Trades Unions on a month-by-month basis. In June 2010, the Board extended MAPLA for five (5) years and an agreement between the Port and Alameda County Building and Construction Trades Council was executed February 2011 and will run through June 30, 2015. The MAPLA Local Hire Program continues to advance the Port’s local-hire goals. MAPLA sets specific goals for the hiring of residents from the Port’s LIA and LBA.1 LIA residents are to perform 50% of all hours worked, on a craft-by-craft basis to ensure local resident utilization in all crafts. If LIA residents are not available, capable or willing to work, LBA residents may count for compliance purposes. Apprentice utilization, as allowable by law, are to perform 20% of all project hours performed on a craft-by-craft basis and the goal is that all of these hours will be performed by LIA resident apprentices, with LBA resident apprentices as an allowable back up. This report contains a summary update that serves as a progress report covering highlights of the Port’s MAPLA during the period of July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2012.

SUMMARY UPDATE (July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2012)

HIGHLIGHTS Highlights of the fiscal year include: • MAPLA as a catalyst for enhancing Port efforts to secure Local Impact Area (LIA)

employment opportunities and sound labor relations on Port projects.

1 LIA = Local Impact Area (Cities of Oakland, Alameda, Emeryville and San Leandro); LBA = Local Business Area (Counties of Alameda and Contra Costa)


37 of 93

******** ********

3

• Despite pressures noted below, Port projects have not been subject to labor disruption and all disputes have been resolved using MAPLA’s agreed-to dispute resolution provisions. There were no major labor relations issues on Port projects that developed over the reporting period.

• Craft jurisdiction remains a key interest of labor, but disputes are resolved away from the construction projects and with the jurisdictional disputes resolution mechanisms, thereby insuring no disruptions.

• The Unions have worked to dispatch the skilled workforce that the Port sought as part of its effort to ensure sound, on-budget and on-time construction of its projects. Unions continue to work successfully with non-Union Contractors working under the MAPLA to ensure that those Contractors are able to use both their “core” employees and skilled Union members from the hiring halls on their work crews.

• The jointly administered Employer-Union Joint Apprenticeship Committees (JATC) have provided key opportunities for LIA/LBA residents to receive on-the-job training on the MAPLA construction projects and the start of many careers in the construction Trades.

• The MAPLA Social Justice Trust2 continues to provide financial support to local workforce development efforts that support the LIA employment goals of MAPLA, especially with regard to utilization of LIA apprentices.

Local Workforce Utilization The MAPLA Local-Hire Program continues to be an important element of the Port’s Social Justice Program and a key Port priority. The MAPLA sets goals for the hiring of residents from the Port's Local Impact Area (LlA) and the Local Business Area (LBA) and asks Contractors to use reasonable and good faith efforts to achieve those goals. Collaboration among the Port, Contractors, the Unions and community groups occurs in the forums identified below, and this achievement is entirely through the voluntary efforts of the Contractors and not through use of any enforcement mechanisms available under MAPLA. The Social Justice Committee3 and its Local Hire Subcommittee4 regularly review the MAPLA local-hire performance and work with Contractors to help them achieve these goals. The committees provide excellent venues to review local-hire outcomes and to engage Contractors and Unions in constructive dialogue to see how this important Port goal can be best accomplished, consistent with all other requirements. The Local Hire Subcommittee also serves as a forum for other, local agencies with their own local-hire programs; improving information flow concerning the nature of other local-hire efforts and exploring common problem areas in securing qualified local residents for dispatch

2 See Attachment A: MAPLA Committee Structure for visual structure. Social Justice Trust Committee established by Joint Administrative Committee (JAC) as a forum to manage trust funds for community grants; and makes fiscal grant decisions. 7 Labor and 7 Management (Appointed) and meets quarterly. 3 Social Justice Committee: Labor-Management-Community (Open Membership); MAPLA, Article III, Section 1; Meets quarterly 4 Local Hire Subcommittee: Labor-Management-Community (Open Membership); established by Social Justice Committee and meets monthly.


38 of 93

******** ********

4

• Reduced number of hours for MAPLA project work during the report period

to Contractors. Agencies regularly participating as members of the Local Hire Subcommittee include:

• County of Alameda, Department of Public Works • County of Alameda, Social Services Agency • City of Oakland, Contract Compliance Department

The overall results of the local-hire program and the results in this fiscal year period are displayed in Table 1a (below). During the report period a total of 57,430 construction work hours were compiled. This represented an increase of 34,875 work hours over the reporting period from July 2010 to June 2011.

This increase in the number of project hours had the following effect upon LIA and Apprentice participation during the report period.

• Total LIA work hours increased by 8,126 or 144% during the current reporting

period • Total LIA/LBA work hours increased by 17,276 or 124% during the current

reporting period • Total Apprentice utilization increased by 2,281 hours or 104% during the current

reporting period • LIA Apprentice work increased by 946 hours or 156% during the current

reporting period • LIA/LBA Apprentice work increased by 522 hours or 32% during the current

reporting period

The overall participation levels for LIA residents and apprentices were impacted by the following conditions:

• Construction industry downturn during the reporting period causing contractors to look more toward preserving employment for their core workers


39 of 93

******** ********

5

Table 1 sets out the totals and percentages of hours – cumulative through 2011 (the last period), and then cumulatively through the end of June 2012 for your ready reference.

Table 1: MAPLA Local-Hire Performance Summary

Cumulative Results January 2000 Thru

June 2011

Cumulative Results January 2000 Thru

June 2012

Difference

MAPLA

MAPLA Hours

% of Total

MAPLA Hours

% of Total

MAPLA Goals

MAPLA Hours

% Increase

Total Hours Worked 3,737,411 3,794,841 57,430LIA Residents 1,155,002 30.90% 1,168,770 30.88% 50% 13,768 1.18%LIA/LBA Residents 2,208,931 59.10% 2,240,135 59.03% 50% 31,204 1.39%Total Apprentices 464,555 12.43% 469,033 12.36% 20% 4,478 0.95%

LIA Apprentices 223,174 5.97% 224,726 5.92% 20% 1,552 0.69%LIA/LBA Apprentices 347,266 9.29% 349,401 9.21% 20% 2,135 0.61% Table 1a: MAPLA Local-Hire Performance Summary

July 2010 Through June 2011 July 2011 Through June 2012 Difference

MAPLA MAPLA hours for

12 months

% of total

hours in 2011

Apprentice Trades

hours only

MAPLA hours for

12 months

% of total hours in

2012

Apprentice Trades hours

MAPLA Goals MAPLA

hours %

Increase

Total Hours Worked 22,555 57,430 56,661 34,874LIA Residents 5,642 25.01% 13,768 23.97% 50% 8,126 144%LIA/LBA Residents 13,928 61.75%

22,309

31,204 54.33% 50% 17,276 124%Total Apprentices 2,197 9.74% 9.85% 4,478 7.80% 7.90% 20% 2,281 104%

LIA Apprentices 606 2.69% 2.75% 1,552 2.70% 2.74% 20% 946 156%

LIA/LBA Apprentices 1,613 7.15% 7.23% 2,135 3.72% 3.77% 20%

522 32%

(Please note that under prevailing wage and other rules, certain craftwork is not eligible for placement of apprentice workers, notably the work of Teamsters, Laborers working in Asbestos Abatement, and some dredging and barge work. In order to more accurately reflect apprenticeship participation as a percentage of MAPLA craft hours worked during this reporting period, the shaded column above shows Apprentice participation as a percentage of the total available Apprentice Hours (i.e., the "apprenticeable hours") worked for the period.) During the reporting period the combined LIA/LBA participation level was 54.33% with a cumulative participation level of 59.03% through June 2012.


40 of 93

******** ********

6

Economic Impact of MAPLA during Report Period During this reporting period local area employment on MAPLA Projects point to the following estimated wage earnings:

• LIA residents estimated earnings of $708,305.55

• LIA/LBA residents estimated earnings of $1,817,312.76

• Apprentice estimated earnings of $191,261.05

• LIA apprentices estimated earnings of $58,899.27

• LIA/LBA Apprentices estimated earnings of $86,886.46 While the program had been subject to a historic trend of reduced apprentice utilization during the downturn, as Table 2 displays below, the MAPLA Team continues to work with community groups, contractors and labor through the Local Hire Subcommittee to return apprentice utilization to a level more in line with the success achieved during the “boom” years of MAPLA construction activity. Table 2: Total Employment Hours vs. MAPLA Apprentice Utilization (Annual by Hours & Percentage) from July 2005 – June 2012

MAPLA Period Total

Employment Hours

Apprentice Employment Hours

Apprentice Percentage Hours

July 2011-Jun 2012 57,430 4,478 7.80%Jan 2010 – June 2011* 82,059 9,418 11.48%

Jan – Dec 2009 57,611 3,739 6.49%Jan – Dec 2008 220,489 18,585 8.43%Jan – Dec 2007 498,620 63,226 12.68%Jan – Dec 2006 567,702 79,093 13.93%July – Dec 2005 193,880 31,353 16.17%

Note: The 2010-2011 represents 18 months of performance activity as compared to 12 months of performance activity delineated in the other time periods.

MAPLA Pace Setters—Craft Unions

The partnership with the various Unions affiliated with the Building and Construction Trades Council of Alameda County (AFL-CIO) plays a crucial role in achieving the local-hire goals of the MAPLA. To this end, the Unions displayed in Table 3 cooperated with Contractors through hiring hall dispatch in achieving the LIA/LBA hiring and LIA/LBA apprentice utilization levels that benefit the MAPLA local-hire goals as shown below.

Table 3: Crafts Meeting One or More LIA/LIA/LBA Journey Dispatch Goals during the July 2011 to June 2012 period.


41 of 93

******** ********

7

Craft % LIA % LIA/ LBA

Electricians - 69.5% Laborers 58.6% 77.9% Asbestos Removal Workers

- 77.4%

Operating Engineers - 58.5% Iron Workers - 50.2% Pile Driver - 69.8% Teamsters - 78.0%

MAPLA Pace Setters—Contractors The partnership with the various Contractors performing MAPLA-covered work also plays a crucial role in achieving the local-hire goals of the MAPLA. To this end, the lengthy list of Contractors displayed in Table 4 achieved significant measures of the LIA/LBA hiring and LIA/LBA apprentice utilization levels that benefit the MAPLA local-hire goals as shown below. The listed contractors performed a minimum of 1,000 craft hours of work during the period.

Table 4: Contractors Meeting One or More LIA/LBA Journey and/or Apprentice Dispatch Goals during the July 2011 to June 2012 period.

Craft % LIA % LIA/ LBA

% LIA Apprentice

% LIA/LBA Apprentice

Cupertino Electric-Electricians - 68.1% -- -- Valentine Construction-Carpenters 53.9% 53.9% -- -- Turner Construction-Laborers 98.0% 100% -- -- D.W. Nicholson-Electricians 15.1% 68.8% 11.1% 11.7% Gallagher & Burk-Laborers- 46.3% 81.7% -- -- St. Francis Electric-Electricians -- 80.0% -- -- Columbia Electric-laborers 47.6% 83.8% -- -- Bay Cities Paving & Grading-Laborers 52.4% 99.5% 14.6% 14.6% Bay Cities Paving & Grading-Operators 55.4% 84.8% 32.9% 31.9% Beliveau Engineering-Laborers 47.3% 59.8% 15.0% 15.0% OC Jones-Laborers 45.3% 54.3%

MAPLA Extension The Port and the Building and Construction Trades Unions signatory to the MAPLA negotiated successfully on establishing a five (5) year extension of MAPLA. Prior to this agreement, MAPLA had been in effect under an extension that provided continuation on a month-by-month basis unless, and until such time as, either the Port or the Unions


42 of 93

******** ********

8

provide 90-day notice of their desire to cease further extensions, providing coverage of new, qualifying Port and tenant projects. The new agreement (signed in February 2011) provides for a fixed extension period of five years, ending on December 31, 2015, providing coverage of new, qualifying Port and tenant projects. The extension fixes MAPLA in place for a time certain, and allows the Port to achieve its objectives as established by Board policy. Specifically those policies were to ensure project labor stability, provide employment opportunities for Port Local Impact Area (LIA) residents, and achieve Building Trades support for Port policies for the utilization of Port-recognized local, small businesses.

Social Justice Trust Fund The low work hours under MAPLA during the year adversely affected the amount of funds available for the Trustees of the MAPLA Social Justice Trust to grant to community agencies. Contractors that perform MAPLA project work are required to contribute $0.15 per craft hour worked to the Social Justice Fund. Grants from the fund are made by the Social Justice Trustees which operates under the direction of the Social Justice Sub Committee. The Social Justice Trust membership consists of equal representation from Labor and Management with the Port also having a seat. No additional grants to community groups have been made since the January 2011 grant of $10,000 for continued support for pre-apprentice preparation and apprentice retention. This grant, made to the Oakland Workforce Collaborative, supports a multi-community based organization effort to identify and retain Oakland-based apprentices through collaboration with contractors and the Alameda County Building Trades affiliate members. Currently there is approximately $5,000 in available funds. The Trustees have also requested an audit of contractor compliance with the $0.15 per hour contribution and will receive that report at their September 5th meeting. Contractor contributions funded to the East Bay Community Foundation are being compared to contractor hour’s reports and follow-up contacts will be made to secure any overlooked contributions. By the time of this report, the grant process for the current year cycle will have begun and the Trustees will have decided at their September 5th meeting whether sufficient funds exist (or are anticipated to exist by year end) to make a grant at their November 2012 meeting.

Application of MAPLA to DOT Funded Projects The Port has been in extended negotiations with the US. Department of Transportation to resolve the on-going question of MAPLA’s applicability to U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) funded projects. The US DOT, during the negotiations, offered to allow MAPLA requirements to be used on US DOT projects so long as the provisions regarding binding arbitration to enforce the local hiring goals were removed. The Port and the Building & Construction Trades Council of Alameda County agreed to do so in order to secure application of the MAPLA to US DOT funded projects. On September 1,


43 of 93

******** ********

9

2011 the Port of Oakland and the Building & Construction Trades Council executed a Letter of Understanding accepting the US DOT’s proposal. The effect of the agreement with US DOT is already being felt. A significant increase in the number of Port projects designated as MAPLA is noted along with some major Tenant Improvement. Some of these projects include:

• Shore Power System Construction, various Berths-$17,246,655 • Central Utility Plant- Terminal One- $25,000,000 • Expansion work on Fed Ex Metroplex Center-several projects-estimated at more

than $75,219,431 in total Other projected major projects anticipated for the 4th quarter of 2012 and into 2013 will assist in providing expanded employment opportunities for LIA residents and increased revenue for the Port’s Social Justice Fund. This project activity will be reported upon in upcoming MAPLA Progress Reports.

Labor Relations The MAPLA team is again pleased to report that no work stoppages occurred on projects working under the MAPLA during the report period. This is another example of outstanding labor relations with the Building and Construction Trades Council of Alameda County, AFL-CIO under the MAPLA.

Local and Small Business Utilization In relation to the collective bargaining agreement, MAPLA is unique in providing protections and opportunities for Port LIA and LBA businesses to participate in the MAPLA covered contracts issued for Port Maritime and Aviation Construction projects. The MAPLA contains a Small Business Exemption Program (SBE) designed to help small local construction firms to increase their capacity to perform work through involvement in the Port’s construction programs. Over 90% of contracts have been issued to LIA/LBA businesses and LIA/LBA small businesses that enjoy a fair share, including contracts set aside for qualifying small businesses under the “exemption” program that allows such Contractors to enjoy the benefits of MAPLA without having to subscribe to MAPLA. Over two-thirds of the $15 million allocated in this program has been awarded. One project was funded during the reporting period that fell under the Small Business Exemption (SBE) program. That project was the Demolition of Building #833 at the Oakland Army Base, Outer Harbor. Port engineering staff indicated that increased SBE opportunities are planned for the upcoming months. This activity will be reported on in subsequent reports.

Going Forward The MAPLA team remains committed to the cost-effective management of its social justice and labor-management goals and objectives. Toward this end, the priorities for the next period are:


44 of 93

******** ********

10

• Because of MAPLA’s application to tenant projects, continuing to work with the Port’s private partners and tenants to ensure application of MAPLA on maritime and aviation projects

• Building upon the already successful Community-Port-Labor-Contractor forums and working relationships to secure best efforts at achieving the Port’s social justice goals for local residents and businesses

• Sustaining the highly productive and cooperative labor-management relationships that have proven a boon to the efficient execution of MAPLA covered projects

• Continuing to streamline and make more cost effective the management and oversight of MAPLA in light of the reduced capital program it supports

The principles of MAPLA continue to provide a sound framework for attaining solid results based upon performance and the Port’s business model change toward Public Private Partnerships for capital improvements, continues to provide a sound process to attaining positive employment results with its private partners and tenants. The MAPLA team is available to answer any questions the Board may have regarding its management and implementation.

Acknowledgements

This report was prepared with information compiled by the following:

Davillier-Sloan, Inc. Ed Manning Consultants

Marstel-Day, LLC Port of Oakland Engineering Division

Port of Oakland Social Responsibility Division


45 of 93

CONSENT ITEMS

Action by the Board under “Consent Items” means that all matters listed below have been summarized, and are considered to be perfunctory in nature, and will be adopted by one motion and appropriate vote. Consent Items may be removed for further discussion by the Board at the request of any member of the Board.

CONSENT ITEMS Tab 5

46 of 93

BOARD MTG. DATE: 9/20/12

1 AGENDA ITEM:

AGENDA REPORT

TITLE: Authorization of Grant of Easement with East Bay Municipal Utility District (Aviation)

AMOUNT: No Monetary Consideration

PARTIES INVOLVED:

Corporate Name/Principal LocationEast Bay Municipal Utility District Oakland, California

TYPE OF ACTION: Ordinance

SUBMITTED BY: Deborah Ale Flint, Director of Aviation

APPROVED BY: Omar Benjamin, Executive Director

Staff seeks Board approval for a Grant of Easement with the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), and to delegate authority to the Executive Director to execute the Grant of Easement, subject to approval of the Port Attorney as to form and legality. The easement is intended to address an unintended geographical gap recently discovered. All terms and conditions of the easements issued in 2000 remain the same.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

On July 5, 2000, the Board adopted Resolution No. 20246 for the execution of various easements with public and private utility companies required to relocate their respective facilities to accommodate construction and realignment of the Airport Roadway Project. Along with the other utility companies, upon completion of construction, EBMUD and the Port executed a Grant of Easement for the affected water transmission lines. This new Grant of Easement affects a portion of Ron Cowan Parkway (formerly known and identified on the illustration as “Air Cargo Road”) directly abutting and intersecting with the existing easement rights that are vested in EBMUD, and as depicted on the attached map.

This new Grant of Easement will complete the continuity of easement rights for the EBMUD water transmission lines and related equipment situated throughout Oakland International Airport. ANALYSIS

Subsequent review of the legal description attached to the original Grant of Easement identifies a “gap” in the right-of-way. This new Grant of Easement grants easement rights to EBMUD beneath the affected portion of Ron Cowan Parkway, consistent with easement rights approved by the Board in 2000.

CONSENT ITEMS Tab 5.1

47 of 93


2

Easement Area: Non-exclusive use of approximately 6,969 square feet underlying Ron Cowan Parkway (formerly “Air Cargo Road” as illustrated below:

Use: EBMUD controlled and operated water transmission lines and related equipment.

Term: Granted easement rights for the affected portion of Ron Cowan Parkway will exist in perpetuity. However, in the event EBMUD ceases to use the Easement Area for the transmission and distribution of water (abandonment), the Port shall have the right to terminate the Grant of Easement (consistent with the terms in the existing Grant of Easement).


48 of 93


3

Relocation: The Port shall have the right to request EBMUD to relocate its pipeline(s) provided that all costs for such relocation shall be borne by the Port.

Capital Contributionand MaintenanceResponsibilities: The Port has no capital contribution or maintenance responsibilities for

the water transmission lines within the affected easement area. EBMUD will be responsible for all repair, replacement, upgrading, maintenance and surface/roadway restoration activities in connection with its water transmission lines in the affected easement area.

STRATEGIC PLAN

The Grant of Easement supports the goals of the Port’s 2011-2015 Strategic Plan:

Strategic PriorityAreas

Goal Objective Result

SustainableEconomic and Business Development

Goal A: Create Sustainable Economic Growth for the Port and Beyond.

1. Affirm Port identity as a public enterprise.2. Pursue strategic partnerships at all levels: local, regional, national and international.

EBMUD supports the delivery of potable and non-potable water services for various functions at Oakland International Airport, its customers and tenants.

Stewardship and Accountability

Goal F: Aggressively Obtain Maximum Amount of External Grant and Government Funding and Regulatory Relief.

1. Partner with other agencies to create joint grant strategies.

EBMUD is a major public utility services provider for Oakland International Airport, its customers and tenants.

BUDGET & FINANCIAL IMPACT

The Board’s approval of the Grant of Easement will have no impact on the Port’s current year, or future year operating budgets.

STAFFING IMPACT

There will be no staffing impact as the result of approving the Grant of Easement.

SUSTAINABILITY

There are no obvious environmental opportunities or direct sustainability opportunities associated with the Grant of Easement.

ENVIRONMENTAL


49 of 93


4

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15061(b) (3) (“the general rule”) states that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Approving the Grant of Easement with EBMUD will not have a significant effect on the environment, and therefore, is not a project under CEQA and no environmental review is required.

MARITIME AND AVIATION PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT (MAPLA)

The provisions of the Port of Oakland Maritime and Aviation Project Labor Agreement (MAPLA) do not apply to this action.

OWNER CONTROLLED INSURANCE PROGRAM (OCIP)

The Grant of Easement is not within the scope of the Port’s Owner Controlled Insurance Program.

GENERAL PLAN

This action does not meet the definition of “project” under the City of Oakland General Plan, and no conformity determination is needed.

LIVING WAGE

Living Wage requirements, in accordance with the Port’s Rules and Regulations for the Implementation and Enforcement of the Port of Oakland Living Wage Requirements (the “Living Wage Regulations”), do not apply because the requested action is not an agreement, contract, lease, or request to provide financial assistance within the meaning of the Living Wage Regulations.

OPTIONS

1. Approve the terms and conditions of the Grant of Easement with EBMUD and authorize its execution by the Executive Director. This is the staff recommendation; or

2. Reject the Grant of Easement with EBMUD, which will result in a small section of EBMUD’s facilities installed within Port property but not covered by any agreement; or,

3. Reject the Grant of Easement with EBMUD, but authorize different terms and conditions.

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the Board approve the Grant of Easement with the East Bay Municipal Utility District and authorize the Executive Director to execute the Grant of Easement subject to the Port Attorney’s review and approval as to form and legality.


50 of 93

BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERSCIT-Y-OF-OAKLAND

ORDINANCE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THEEXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE A GRANT OFEASEMENT TO THE EAST BAY MUNICIPALUTILITY DISTRICT (“EBMtJD”).

WHEREAS the Board of Port Commi ion s of the City ofOakland (“Board “) has reviewed and eval the g nda Report forAgenda Item 5.1, dated September 20, 2 2 (the “Age a eport”) andrelated agenda materials, has received e ex rt test ony of Port ofOakland (“Port”) staff, and has prov d unities for and takenpublic comment; now, therefore

BE IT ORDAINED by th ard of r Commissioners of theCity of Oakland as follows:

Section 1. In acting n t s matter, the Board hasexercised its independe dgment based on substantial evidence inthe record and adopts nd e ies u the facts, data, analysis, andfindings set forth i the Agend Report and in related agendamaterials and in testi n ecei

Sect6 . he o r hereby finds and determines that it isin the best,/tere of t Port to approve and authorize theExecutive D tor of P t or his designee to execute the Grant ofEasement to h East y Municipal Utility District (“EBMUD”) forwater transmis i ii s running through a portion of Ron CowanParkway (“Grant f E ment”) as more fully described in the AgendaReport.

Section 3. The Board hereby finds and determines that theGrant of Easement is exempt from the environmental review requirementpursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”)Guidelines.

283679


51 of 93

Section 4. This ordinance approves and authorizes the

execution of an easement in accordance with the terms of this

ordinance. Unless and until a separate written instrument is duly

executed on behalf of the Board as authorized by this ordinance, is

signed and approved as to form and legality by the Port Attorney, and

is recorded on title, there shall be no valid or effective easement.

President.

Attest:

___________________________________

Secretary.Approved as to form and legality:

Port Attorney

283679


52 of 93


AGENDA REPORT

TITLE: Amendment to Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes with DeSilva Gates Construction (Aviation)

AMOUNT: Additional Monthly Revenue of $2,500.00

PARTIES INVOLVED:

Corporate Name/Principal Location DeSilva Gates Construction Dublin, California

TYPE OF ACTION: Resolution


APPROVED BY: Omar Benjamin, Executive Director Staff seeks Board approval to extend an existing Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes, to a month to month tenancy with DeSilva Gates Construction (DeSilva), and to delegate authority to the Director of Aviation to execute an Amendment to Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes (Amendment), subject to approval by the Port Attorney for form and legality. FACTUAL BACKGROUND In October 2011, the Director of Aviation executed a Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes with DeSilva to utilize Port-owned vacant real property located at the southwest corner of Eden Road and Doolittle Drive (the “Property” as further defined below), immediately adjacent to the Metropolitan Golf Links. The term of the Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes was for no more than one (1) year, commencing on October 14, 2011, and scheduled to expire at the close of business on October 13, 2012. Pursuant to the Port’s Amended Bylaws and Administrative Rules, the standard form Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes can be executed by the Executive Director or designee for a term not to exceed one year without Board action. DeSilva’s operation was formerly located at the Materials Management Program (MMP) site on the South Field of Oakland International Airport (OAK). After completing contracted work on the East Apron Phase 3 Project, DeSilva moved its operation to the Property to produce cement treated base material for projects located outside of OAK. ANALYSIS The Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes allows DeSilva to utilize the Property and install and complete various site improvements (valued at $100,000) in lieu of paying

1 AGENDA ITEM:


53 of 93


monetary rents for the initial 12-month period. Extending the Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes to a month to month tenancy, entails the following terms and conditions: Property: Approximately 3.5 acres of vacant, Port owned real property at

the southwest corner of Eden Road and Doolittle Drive.

Eden Road/Doolittle Drive Property utilized by DeSilva Gates Const.

Permittee: DeSilva Gates Construction (also owns and operates Gallagher

and Burk). Term: Month to month, commencing October 14, 2012 and expiring on

October 13, 2013. Use: Equipment and materials storage (no rock crushing), minor

material treatment activities. Compensation: Permittee shall pay a monthly permit fee of $2,500.00

(commencing with the first month of the Amendment to Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes).

Capital Contribution And Maintenance Responsibilities: The Port has no capital contribution or maintenance

responsibilities for the Permittee’s use of the Property. Permittee will be responsible for all maintenance responsibilities or additional site improvements connected with Permittee’s use.

2


54 of 93


STRATEGIC PLAN The Amendment to Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes supports the goals of the Port’s 2011-2015 Strategic Plan:

Strategic Priority Areas

Goal Objective Result

Sustainable Economic and Business Development

Goal A: Create Sustainable Economic Growth for the Port and Beyond.

1. Affirm Port identity as a public enterprise. 2. Maximize the use of existing assets.

DeSilva puts the property to productive use and generates rental revenue for the Port.

BUDGET & FINANCIAL IMPACT Approval of the Amendment to Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes will generate additional and unbudgeted rental revenues as much as $21,250 ($2,500 per month commencing October 14, 2012) during FY2012/2013. STAFFING IMPACT There will be no staffing impact as the result of this action. SUSTAINABILITY There are no obvious environmental or direct sustainability issues associated with the Amendment to Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes. ENVIRONMENTAL This action is categorically exempt from requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines pursuant to Section 15300.4 and the Port CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301(p), which exempts renewals, extensions or amendments to leases or license and concession agreements where the premises or licensed activity was previously leased or licensed to the same or another person, and involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that previously existing. Mitigation No construction activities will occur. This project will not have any significant impacts to the environment; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. Related Plans and Policies This project does not require mitigation measures; therefore, there are no related or adopted plans for this project. Environmental Compliance DeSilva Gates will properly handle, and dispose of hazardous materials as required by local, state and federal regulations, and will be inspected periodically by the Environmental Programs and Planning Division.

3


55 of 93


4

MARITIME AND AVIATION PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT (MAPLA) The provisions of the Port of Oakland Maritime and Aviation Project Labor Agreement (MAPLA) do not apply to this action. OWNER CONTROLLED INSURANCE PROGRAM (OCIP) The work performed under the Amendment to Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes is not within the scope of the Port of Oakland’s Owner Controlled Insurance Program. GENERAL PLAN The Amendment to Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes does not meet the definition of “project” under the City of Oakland General Plan, and no conformity designation is needed. LIVING WAGE

Living Wage requirements, in accordance with the Port’s Rules and Regulations for the Implementation and Enforcement of the Port of Oakland Living Wage Requirements (the “Living Wage Regulations”), do not apply to this agreement as the tenancy agreement is not expected to generate greater than $50,000 in payments to the Port over the term of the tenancy agreement. However, the tenant will be required to certify that should living wage obligations become applicable, the tenant shall comply with the Living Wage Regulations.

OPTIONS 1. Approve the Amendment to Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes with DeSilva Gates Construction, which is the staff recommendation. 2. Do not approve the Amendment to Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes with DeSilva Gates Construction which will result in a loss of as much as $21,250 ($2,500.00 per month commencing October 14, 2012) in additional and unbudgeted revenue for FY2012/2013. 3. Approve the Amendment to Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes with DeSilva Gates Construction, under different terms and conditions. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Board approve the Amendment to Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes with DeSilva Gates Construction as outlined above, and authorize the Director of Aviation to execute the Amendment to Temporary Rental Agreement for Specific Purposes, subject to the Port Attorney’s review and approval as to form and legality.


56 of 93

09/20/12Item No.: 5.2JS/Ihr

BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERSCITY OF OAKLAND

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING ANAMENDMENT TO TEMPORARY RENTAL AGREEMENTWITH DESILVA GATES CONSTRUCTION.

WHEREAS, the Board of Port Co ssi n s (“Board”) hasreviewed and evaluated Board Agenda R9 Ite o. 5.2, datedSeptember 20, 2012 (the “Agenda Report”)/d related e a materials,has received the expert testimony of t o Oakland Port”) staff,and has provided opportunities for and k ic comment; and

WHEREAS, the Director of Aviatio the Port (“Director ofAviation”) executed a Temporary tal Agr m t (“Temporary RentalAgreement”) with DeSilva Gates C ru on ( eSilva”) in October of2011 to utilize Port—owned vac t 1 roperty located at thesouthwest corner of Eden Road and D lit e Drive; now, therefore beit

RESOLVED, (h<a ij’ acting pon this matter, the Board hasexercised its independud men based on substantial evidence inthe record and a aii’d\”rlies upon the facts, data, analysis, andfindings set 1 t1ze\genda Report and in related agendamaterials an n testi o yr94ived; and be it

H RES VED, that the Board hereby finds anddetermines that ‘t is the best interest of the Port to approve andauthorize the Di c of Aviation to execute an amendment to theTemporary Rental Ag ement with DeSilva to extend the term to be monthto month, commencing October 14, 2012 and expiring on October 13,2013, and to require a monthly payment of $2,500.00 as more fullydescribed in the Agenda Report; and be it

283641


57 of 93

FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution is not evidence ofand does not create or constitute (a) an agreement, or the grant ofany right, entitlement or property interest, or (b) any obligation orliability on the part of the Board or any officer or employee of theBoard. This resolution approves and authorizes the execution ofagreements in accordance with the terms of this resolution. Unlessand until a separate written agreement is duly executed on behalf ofthe Board as authorized by this resolution, is signed and approved asto form and legality by the Port Attorney, and is delivered to othercontracting party, there shall be no valid or effec ye agreement.

283641


58 of 93


INFORMATIONAL REPORT (This Item is for information only and no action is

requested or required of the Board of Port Commissioners.)

TITLE: Executive Director Awards of Recent Public Works and Professional Services Contracts

PARTIES INVOLVED:

Executive Director Awards of Public Works Contracts:

7th Street Lane Reconfiguration, Phase 2: Corporate Name/Principal Location Interstate Grading & Paving, Inc. South San Francisco, CA Craig Caron, Vice President

Demolition of Building 833 at Former OAB:

Corporate Name/Principal Location Asbestos Management Group of CA, Inc. Oakland, CA Brent Bates, President

Shore Power System Construction, Berths 30 & 32:

Corporate Name/Principal Location Shimmick Construction Company, Inc. Oakland, CA Paul A. Cocotis, President

Partial Demolition of Building L-142:

Corporate Name/Principal Location JUV, Inc. Oakland, CA Vladimir Chernyavskiy, President

Executive Director Award of Professional Services Contract:

Port Network Security Project Design and Implementation: Corporate Name/Principal Location Xterra Solutions, Inc. San Francisco, CA Sean Lee, Principal Network Architect LookingPoint, Inc. Pleasant Hill, CA Sean Barr, President


59 of 93


BOARD MEETING DATE: September 20, 2012

SUBMITTED BY: Chris Chan, Director of Engineering

APPROVED BY: Omar Benjamin, Executive Director SUMMARY This Informational Report consolidates information regarding (a) four recent public works contract awards; and (b) one recent professional services contract award. FACTUAL BACKGROUNDS: PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS 7th Street Lane Reconfiguration, Phase 2: On September 15, 2011, by Resolution No. 11-117, the Board of Port Commissioners authorized the Executive Director to execute a contract for 7th Street Lane Reconfiguration – Phase 2, Between Trapac Exit Gate & Ben E. Nutter Terminal, Middle Harbor, Oakland, California with the lowest responsible responsive bidder, based on formal sealed bids. The engineer’s estimate was $300,000.00. On February 22, 2012, the Secretary of the Board of Port Commissioners received seven formal bids for the above Work. The lowest responsible responsive bid was submitted by Interstate Grading & Paving, Inc. A bid protest was filed by the second bidder, O. C. Jones & Sons. On April 18, 2012, the Executive Director, acting on the authority delegated to him by Resolution No. 11-117, adopted the Hearing Officer’s recommendations that all deficits noted in the bid protest be deemed immaterial minor irregularities that may be waived per the provisions of Port Ordinance 1606, Section 5, that the bid protest be rejected, and that Interstate Grading & Paving be affirmed as the lowest responsive and responsible Bidder. Accordingly, on April 18, 2012, the Executive Director approved the award of a contract for the above Work to Interstate Grading & Paving for their bid amount of $248,950.00. Project location map is attached (Attachment A). Demolition of Building 833 at Former OAB: On July 21, 2011, by Resolution No. 11-88, the Board waived standard bidding procedures for Demolition of Building No. 833 at the Former Oakland Army Base, Outer Harbor, Oakland, California, authorized inclusion of the project in the Port’s Small Business Enterprise (SBE) Program, and authorized the execution of a contract with a small local contractor. The engineer’s estimate was $54,000.00.

217840.v1


60 of 93


On March 28 2012, the Chief Engineer received two informal bids from Port-certified SBEs for the above Work. The lowest responsible responsive bid was submitted by Asbestos Management Group of California, Inc. Accordingly, on April 20, 2012, the Executive Director approved the award of a contract for the above Work to Asbestos Management Group of California for their bid amount of $47,100.00. Project location map is attached (Attachment B). Shore Power System Construction, Berths 30 & 32: On September 15, 2011, by Resolution No. 11-111, the Board of Port Commissioners authorized the Executive Director to execute a contract for Shore Power System Construction, Berths 30 and 32, Outer Harbor, Oakland, California, Federal Aid Project No. CML-6057(013) to the lowest responsible responsive bidder, based on formal sealed bids. The engineer’s estimate was $6,500,000.00. On April 10, 2012, the Secretary of the Board of Port Commissioners received eight formal bids for the above Work. The lowest responsible responsive bid was submitted by Shimmick Construction Company, Inc. Accordingly, on April 26, 2012, the Executive Director approved the award of a contract for the above Work to Shimmick Construction Company for their bid amount of $5,895,900.00. Project location map is attached (Attachment C). Partial Demolition of Building L-142: On March 15, 2012, by Resolution No. 12-29, the Board of Port Commissioners authorized the Executive Director to execute a contract for Partial Demolition of Building L-142, North Field, Oakland International Airport, Oakland, California to the lowest responsible responsive bidder, based on formal sealed bids. The engineer’s estimate was $1,100,000.00. On July 31, 2012, the Secretary of the Board of Port Commissioners received one formal bid for the above Work, submitted by JUV, Inc. The bid was determined to be responsible and responsive. Accordingly, on August 14, 2012, the Executive Director approved the award of a contract for the above Work to JUV, Inc. for their bid amount of $904,300.00. Project location map is attached (Attachment D).

217840.v1


61 of 93


217840.v1

FACTUAL BACKGROUND: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT Port Network Security Project Design and Implementation: Board Resolution No. 11-57, dated May 26, 2011, authorized the Executive Director to accept Federal Department of Homeland Security grants for Port-wide security system resiliency improvements for the Port’s IT network, and further authorized the Executive Director to execute an agreement for Port of Oakland Network Security Project Design and Implementation with consultants selected through a competitive bidding process and to procure network equipment related to the project in a total amount not to exceed $1,856,752 for the entire project. On February 21, 2012, proposals were received from four consulting firms. A panel comprised of Port staff and outside IT professionals evaluated the proposals, based on each team's qualifications, responsiveness to the requirements of the Request for Proposals, relevant experience, the quality and experience of key project personnel, and the team's technical and project management abilities. Upon final evaluation, two firms were selected to receive a contract: Xterra Solutions, Inc. and LookingPoint, Inc. Xterrra Solutions’ role is that of technical project manager and LookingPoint will be responsible for designing and implementing the network improvements. The equipment procurement process will be initiated after the completion of the design phase. The amount of the equipment procurement contract is estimated to be $1.1 million. Accordingly, on June 19, 2012, the Executive Director approved the award of a contract for project management of the above work to Xterra Solutions, Inc. for their bid amount of $300,000.00. Negotiations with LookingPoint, Inc. are in progress. They have tentatively agreed to a contract for design and implementation of the above work for their bid amount of $400,000.00.


62 of 93


63 of 93

rgalang

Typewritten Text

Executive Director Awards of Recent Public Works and Professional Services Contracts ATTACHMENT A


64 of 93

rgalang

Typewritten Text

Executive Director Awards of Recent Public Works and Professional Services Contracts ATTACHMENT B


65 of 93

rgalang

Typewritten Text

Executive Director Awards of Recent Public Works and Professional Services Contracts ATTACHMENT C


66 of 93

rgalang

Typewritten Text

Executive Director Awards of Recent Public Works and Professional Services Contracts ATTACHMENT D

REMAINING ACTION ITEMS

Remaining Action Items are items not previously addressed in this Agenda that may require staff presentation and/or discussion and information prior to action by the Board.

REMAINING ACTION ITEMS Tab 6

67 of 93

BOARD MTG. DATE: September 20, 2012

@[email protected] 1

AGENDA REPORT

TITLE: Authorization for the Executive Director to Enter into an Other Transaction Agreement (OTA) with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) for Design Services relating to Checked Baggage Screening Recapitalization.

AMOUNT: Capital Budget --$350,000 (largely reimbursed by TSA)

PARTIES INVOLVED:

Corporate Name/Principal LocationTransportation Security Administration

Arlington, Virginia

Program Manager, Shahzan Akber




EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of this Agenda Report is to seek authorization from the Board of Port Commissioners (Board) for:

1) the Executive Director to enter into an Other Transaction Agreement (OTA) with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) for design services relating to the Checked Baggage Screening Recapitalization Program

2) Authorize project design budget of $350,000 (capital funds to be largely reimbursed by TSA)

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The TSA’s Electronic Baggage Screening Program (EBSP) is undertaking a recapitalization effort because many of the existing checked-bag Explosives Detection Systems (EDS) deployed at airports throughout the country are nearing the end of their projected useful life. The recapitalization effort refers to the replacement of EDS machines on a one-for-one basis, typically with a newer model EDS machine with similar throughput and capabilities.

As part of this effort, TSA is using a performance and risk-based prioritization process to determine a schedule for equipment recapitalization projects. Through that process, the in-line EDS machines located at Oakland International Airport, Terminal 2 have been

REMAINING ACTION ITEMS Tab 6.1

68 of 93



identified for replacement. The proposed recapitalization project design is funded by the TSA and is budgeted to be funded with federal FY2012 appropriations.

In order to ensure efficient and effective baggage screening operations it is TSA’s goal to work collaboratively with the Port of Oakland to execute an OTA to fund the design and associated facility modification efforts relating to EDS equipment recapitalization. Upon completion of the design effort, TSA anticipates executing a modification to the OTA to fund the facility modifications as needed to support removal and replacement of the EDSequipment. The TSA will fully fund this design, including Port staff efforts, and no cost share will be required from the Port of Oakland (Port) for the recapitalization project, assuming all work performed is within the scope of the project as detailed in the OTA.

ANALYSIS

The in-line EDS Baggage Screening equipment in Terminal 2 at OAK, is an essentialelement of the airport’s overall security system. Since the end of 2002, the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001 mandates that TSA use electronic methods to screen all checked bags at airports before being loaded into the belly of a scheduled airline flight. The T2 in-line EDS system at OAK was one of the first in the country to be implemented.1 The Port and TSA made significant investments in the original design and implementation of this system. Southwest Airlines, the airline tenant using Terminal 2, is responsible for the on-going maintenance of some portions of the screening and conveyance system.

1 In-line EDS systems includes EDS machines as part of a larger baggage handling system (BHS) that allows for baggage to automatically flow through the screening process. The EDS recapitalization program replaces only the EDS machines and the BHS is only modified to the extent necessary to accommodate the new EDS machines.


69 of 93



Under the terms of the OTA, the Port is responsible for providing the architect and engineering services to develop the design and construction specifications to install the EDS replacement. Following execution of the OTA, the Port will initiate a process to select a design team. The design team will either be contracted through one of the previously approved on-call contracts or under a new contract requiring Board approval. If a new contractor is selected, we would return to the Board for contract authorization approval.

Upon completion of the design process (estimated to take approximately one year), the TSA would enter into a separate agreement with the Port to fund the future costs of construction and implementation of the Recapitalization Project, if the plan is approved and funding is available. Staff will return to the Board for approvals of:

Authorization to contract with selected design team, if on-call contract is not used(Fall 2012)

Authorization to enter into new OTA with the TSA for construction and implementation of EDS Recapitalization at T2 (Fall 2013)

In order to maintain on-going baggage screening, avoid future maintenance issues, preserve investments and take advantage of federal funding availability, it is recommended that the Port agree to the terms of the OTA and participate in the TSA’s equipment recapitalization program.

STRATEGIC PLAN

The Port of Oakland’s Strategic Plan was adopted by the Board of Port Commissioners on October 5, 2010. The Strategic Plan provides direction and overall alignment for Port initiatives. It provides the framework for focusing the work of staff and the Board of Port Commissioners with the overall strategic goals of the organizations in identified key areas of Sustainable Business and Economic Development, and Stewardship and Accountability.

This project would help the Port achieve the following goals and objectives:

Strategic Priority Areas

Goal Objective How Implemented?

Goal A: Create Sustainable Economic Growth for the Port and Beyond

1. Maximize the use of existing assets.

The Port and TSA have made considerable investment in the in-line EDS for T2. Replacement of aging machines will help to ensure the continued efficient and effective baggage screening operations and extend the useful life of associated infrastructure.


70 of 93



Sustainable Business and Economic Development

Goal A: Create sustainable economic growth for the Port and beyond.

4. Pursue strategic partnerships at all levels.

This interagency collaboration with TSA will allow the Port to ensure the safety and security for individuals traveling through OAK.

Goal B: Maintain and aggressively grow core business.

1. Retain existing customers and tenants.

The in-line baggage screening system provides a high level of security for the traveling public and is mandated by the TSA.


Goal F: Aggressively obtain maximum amount of external grant and government funding and regulatory relief.

1. Seeks out and pursues all promising and prospective grants and external funding resources.

It has been determined that the baggage screening equipment in T2 has reached its useful life. The timely authority to enter into this agreement will assure that the federal funding will be in place for this project.


This project was not included in the 5-year Capital Needs Assessment (CNA), therefore staff is requesting that the estimated design budget of $350,000 be authorized and added to the FY 2012-13 CNA. The Port would pay all design cost as specified in the OTA, with this authorized budget. Based on the OTA and past experience with TSA, and, we are expecting 80-100% reimbursement from the TSA, pending final review of the total design budget. Any costs not reimbursed by TSA would be paid for using Port cash.

STAFFING IMPACT

It is anticipated that the design of the T2 Recapitalization Program would be accomplished within the current Port staffing levels.

SUSTAINABILITY

No existing or foreseeable sustainability issues are related to this proposed action.

ENVIRONMENTAL

CEQA DeterminationCalifornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15378(2) states that “Project” means the whole of an action that has a potential for resulting in either direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. The general rule in Section 15061(b)(3) of the Guidelines additionally states that CEQA applies only to activities that have a potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that entering into an OTA with TSA to replace baggage screening equipment may have a significant effect on the environment, the action is not a “Project” under CEQA, and is not


71 of 93



subject to CEQA under the General Rule Exclusion. No further review of this action under CEQA is required.

Replacing baggage screening equipment is categorically exempt from the requirements of CEQA pursuant to Section 15301, which addresses repair, maintenance equipment, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency’s determination.

Environmental ComplianceApproval of this action will not involve handling soil, groundwater, hazardous materials, or any other regulated material.

MitigationThis action will not have any significant impacts to the environment; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

Related Plans and PoliciesThis action will not require mitigation measures; therefore, there are no related or adopted plans for this project.


The matters contained in this Agenda Report do not fall within the scope of the Port of Oakland Maritime and Aviation Project Labor Agreement (MAPLA) and the provisions of the MAPLA do not apply.


Because this is a capital improvement project, the Port's Professional Liability Insurance Program (PLIP) will apply to the design phase and the Owner Controlled Insurance Program (OCIP) will apply to installation.

GENERAL PLAN

This action does not change the use of any existing facility, make alterations to an existing facility, or create a new facility; therefore, a General Plan conformity determination pursuant to Section 727 of the City of Oakland Charter is not required.

LIVING WAGE

Living wage requirements, in accordance with the Port’s Rules and Regulations for the Implementation and Enforcement of the Port of Oakland Living Wage Requirements, do not apply to this requested action because the Transportation Security Administration is a government agency.


72 of 93



OPTIONS

1. Authorize the Executive Director to enter into an Other Transaction Agreement (OTA) with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) for design services relating to the Checked Baggage Screening Recapitalization Program and authorize project design budget of $350,000 (to be largely reimbursed by TSA).

2. Do not authorize the Executive Director to enter into an Other Transaction Agreement (OTA) with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Under this option, the Port would forego the opportunity to design the equipment recapitalization project while being fully funded by the TSA under this approved budget cycle, and risk not being approved for funding in future years.

RECOMMENDATION

Staff recommends the Board to authorize the Executive Director to enter into an Other Transaction Agreement (OTA) with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) for design services relating to the Checked Baggage Screening Recapitalization Program and authorize project design budget of $350,000 (to be largely reimbursed by TSA).

.


73 of 93

September 20, 2012Itern6lCTmJ fl

‘ \L

BOARD OF PORT COMMI53IONRCITY OF OAKLAND

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN OTHERTRANSACTION AGREEMENT WITH THE TRANSPORTATIONSECURITY ADMINISTRATION FOR DESIGN ERVICESRELATING TO CHECKED BAGGAGE ,SCREENINGRECAPITALIZATION.

>WHEREAS, the Board of Port CorniLoners (“Board”) has reviewed

and evaluated the Agenda Report Item”ç’1, dated September 20, 2012(“Agenda Report”) and related/materia1”s<\has received the experttestimony of Port of OaklanI (“Port”) \staff, and has providedopportunities for and taken publó., comment; n’w therefore, be it

RESOLVED that the ••Board her•by approves and authorizes theExecutive Director tq/enter. info. an Other Transaction Agreement(“OTA”) with THE TR9?ORTATIbN SECURITY ADMINISTRATION (“TSA”), fordesign services relttng t Checked Baggage Screening Recapitalizationand authorizes a proj.ct/de.sign...capital budget of $289,000 which willbe fully reimbuic.sedb\rSA as further described in the Agenda Report;and be it .‘ .

N/ \“, \‘

FURTHR RESOLVED “that this resolution is not evidence of and doesnot create ‘ ,constitut (a) a contract, or the grant of any right,entitlement o\property; interest, or (b) any obligation or liabilityon the part of\the/,ord or any officer or employee of the Board.This resolution approVes and authorizes the execution of an agreementin accordance withthe terms of this resolution. Unless and until aseparate written agreement is delivered to other contracting party,there shall be no valid or effective agreement; and be it

283671


74 of 93

FURTHER RESOLVED that in acting upon this matter, the Board hasexercised its independent judgment based on substantial evidence inthe record and adopts and relies upon the facts, data, analysis, andfindings set forth in the Agenda Report and in related agendamaterials and in testimony received.

2

/7*>N7

283671


75 of 93


AGENDA REPORT

TITLE: Authorization to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Harris

Miller Miller & Hanson, Inc. to provide aviation-related acoustical consulting services for an amount not to exceed $375,000 in support of the Noise and Environmental Compliance Office for five years.

AMOUNT: $375,000

PARTIES INVOLVED:

Corporate Name Location Harris Miller Miller & Hanson, Inc. 8880 Cal Center Drive

Suite 430 Sacramento, CA 95826



APPROVED BY: Omar Benjamin, Executive Director SUMMARY This request is to approve the selection of Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc. (HMMH) to provide as-needed aviation-related acoustical consulting services to the Port of Oakland’s (Port’s) Aviation Division for a period of five years. This action would authorize the Executive Director to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with HMMH to provide aviation-related acoustical consulting services for the five-year term not to exceed $375,000. FACTUAL BACKGROUND The Port is subject to various state and federal aviation noise regulations, as well as settlement agreements, with local communities and citizen organizations. As a result, the Port is required to produce noise abatement reports (i.e. CA State Title 21 Report) and work with local communities and aviation stakeholders to maintain its commitments to mitigate aircraft noise and to support further noise reduction objectives. The Noise and Environmental Compliance Office in the Aviation Division is responsible for managing the Airport’s aircraft noise abatement program. The Port of Oakland has used, and continues to require the support of, professional services for aviation-related acoustical services including the generation of the CA Title 21 Noise Report.

1


76 of 93


Port staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for aviation-related acoustical consulting services on May 10, 2012. The Port advertised the RFP in the Port of Oakland and Airport websites, in a national publication (Airport Noise Report) and included outreach to local Oakland and East Bay firms via local news media, including the Oakland Tribune, and email blasts. Other acoustical consulting firms were contacted directly including BridgeNet International and ESA Airports. Due to the specialized skill set needed for this project, the Port received a Statement of Proposal (SOP) from one respondent, HMMH, on June 22, 2012, who is the Port’s current as-needed noise consultant. Subject to the Non-Discrimination and Small/Local Business Utilization Policy, the Social Responsibility Division (SRD) evaluated the consultant’s proposal and determined that the firm is located outside of the local area and, therefore, preference points were not allocated. ANALYSIS The Port does not maintain full capability to perform some of the areas of technical acoustical planning analysis and reporting. HMMH has provided excellent support to the on-going technical acoustical work performed by the Aviation Division’s Noise and Environmental Compliance Office over the past several years. HMMH performs the analytical process required by the California Title 21 noise regulations and produces the required quarterly reports. In addition, HMMH provides expert level technical support in the Port’s efforts to maintain aircraft noise mitigation programs and to improve upon these efforts. Without this consultant support, the Noise and Environmental Compliance Office would lose needed technical resources that could have a negative impact on the airport noise program. Possible results could be increased noise complaints and unresolved community noise issues that could eventually lead to costly noise litigation. Past noise litigation between the Port and communities resulted in various costly settlement agreements and caused major time delays to airport development. In consultation with the Port Purchasing Department and SRD, the Aviation Division determined sufficient outreach was done for this RFP and has elected to move forward with the one proposal it received. Given the proposal was from the current firm providing this service, the Port is confident the supplier, HMMH is fully capable and qualified to provide this service. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT

2

The Strategic Plan was adopted by the Board on October 5, 2010. The guiding principles the Board identified and adopted as part of the Strategic Plan include environmental stewardship as a lens for all Port activities; maximizing Port assets, investments and resources; and developing relevant and timely information for effective Board stewardship and decision-making. Authorizing the proposed contract for the aviation-related acoustical


77 of 93


services reflects the Port’s commitment to sustainable economic growth as well as stewardship and accountability, and directly relates to the following Port Strategic Plan goals and objectives.

STRATEGIC

PRIORITY AREA

GOAL OBJECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION


Goal B: Maintain and aggressively grow core businesses.

4. Promote effective strategic communication with Port customers.


Goal G: Sustain healthy communities through leading edge environmental stewardship.

5. Develop effective relationships with regulatory and resource agencies.

Communications and Information

Goal K: Promote a proactive and responsive communications model.

1. Develop a strategic and comprehensive communications plan which reaches out to a wide range of internal and external stakeholders and incorporates state-of-the-art practices and technology.

The proposed contract will:

1. support civic interaction to insure airport future plans are balanced with the need to mitigate known environmental impacts; engagement with communities informs citizens on the long term value of airport services and business investment in the local economy.

2. provide services to ensure compliance with State and Federal noise regulations and provide technical guidance for program enrichment.

3. provide guidance, which has been highly effectively in addressing various aircraft noise concerns of East Bay Area communities including eight political districts.

4. support Port efforts in proactive utilization of the latest advancements in technology for achieving noise mitigation and public education.

BUDGET & FINANCIAL IMPACT The new contract will allow up to $75,000 per year and is contained in the Airport’s F/Y 2012/13 Operating Budget. The annual budget and total contract amount are unchanged from the current noise consultant contract that expires on September 4, 2012. The total anticipated expenses for FY 2012/13 to FY 2017/18 will not exceed $375,000. STAFFING IMPACT

3

This contract will not require any additional staff resources. The proposed Board action will support the existing staffing and structure of the Noise and Environmental Compliance


78 of 93


Office. Without the proposed services, Port staff time and resources would be impacted by the additional work required, which would potentially jeopardize the Port’s ability to meet requirements of existing agreements. SUSTAINABILITY The Noise and Environmental Compliance Office has been implementing processes with all current consultants to submit all documents, reports, graphics, etc. in electronic format, either via e-mail or CD-ROM, to the extent possible. Staff has not identified any additional sustainability opportunities associated with the proposed Board action. ENVIRONMENTAL CEQA Determination The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15061(b)(3) ("the general rule") states that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Executing the professional services agreement with HMMH and performing aviation-related acoustical services including the generation of the CA Title 21 Noise Report will not have a significant effect on the environment, and therefore, is not a project under CEQA. No further environmental review is required. Environmental Compliance This project will assist the Port in keeping compliant with California State Title 21 Noise Regulations. Mitigation This project will not have any significant impacts to the environment therefore no mitigation measures are required. Related Plans and Policies This project does not require mitigation measures; therefore there are no related or adopted plans for this project. MARITIME AND AVIATION PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT (MAPLA) This contract is for professional services that do not include construction testing and inspection. Therefore the provisions of the Port of Oakland Maritime and Aviation Project Labor Agreement (MAPLA) do not apply to this work. OWNER CONTROLLED INSURANCE PROGRAM (OCIP)

4


79 of 93


5

The matters contained in this Agenda Report do not fall within the scope of the Port of Oakland Owner Controlled Insurance Program (OCIP) and the provisions of the OCIP do not apply. GENERAL PLAN This action does not meet the definition of a “project” under the City of Oakland General Plan, and no conformity determination is required. LIVING WAGE Living wage requirements, in accordance with the Port’s Rules and Regulations for the Implementation and Enforcement of the Port of Oakland Living Wage Requirements (the “Living Wage Regulations”), do not apply to the services under this item, as the service providers will not employ 21 or more employees on Port-related work. However, the service provider will be required to certify that should living wage obligations become applicable, the service provider shall comply with the Living Wage Regulations. OPTIONS

1. Authorize the Executive Director to enter into a Professional Service Agreement with

Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc. to provide aviation-related acoustical consulting services for the Aviation Division’s Noise and Environmental Compliance Office. The agreement shall be for a five year term, commencing September 4, 2012 and ending September 3, 2017, in an amount not to exceed $375,000.

2. Do not authorize the Executive Director to enter into Professional Service

Agreements with Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc. to provide aviation-related acoustical consulting services for the Aviation Division’s Noise and Environmental Compliance Office. If not authorized, the noise office would lose needed technical resources that could have a negative impact on the airport noise program.

RECOMMENDATION Authorize the Executive Director to enter into a Professional Service Agreement with Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc. to provide aviation-related acoustical consulting services for the Aviation Division’s Noise and Environmental Compliance Office. The agreement shall be for a five year term, commencing September 4, 2012 and ending September 3, 2017, in an amount not to exceed $375,000.


80 of 93

BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERSCITY OF OAKLAND

RESOLUTION FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT A PROPOSED AGREEMENT WITH

HARRIS MILLER MILLER & HANSON, INC. AT A MAXIMUM COMPENSATION OF

$375,000 FOR CONSULTING SERVICES CONSTITUTE’> PROFESSIONAL,

TECHNICAL AND SPECIALIZED SERVICES THAT ARE TE4’QARY IN NATURE,

WAIVING STANDARD BIDDING PROCEDURES AND EXECUTION OF

AGREEMENT.

WHEREAS, the Board of Port Commisi has reviewed and

evaluated Agenda Report Item No. 6.2, 20, 2012 (“Agenda

Report”) and related agenda materials, has “r,ecived the expert testimony ofPort of Oakland (“Port”) staff, anA”hs provi’dd\pportunities for and takenpublic comment; now, therefore, be’\it,,””,,

RESOLVED, that in acting upon this matter, the Board has exercised itsindependent judgment based ,on-subst itia1 evidnce in the record and adoptsand relies upon the ar’alsis, and findings set forth in the

Agenda Report and in r92’a7d aeiida m\rials and in testimony received; andbeit //.

\/

FURTHER RESOLVED, thi based upon the information contained in the

Agenda Report, ,t’hè”Bar ‘hereby finds and determines that the proposed

agreement wit)4AIS NIL R MILLER & HANSON, INC. for aviation-related

acoustical ón/p1lting er’ice in support of the Aviation Division’ s Noise

and Enviroiental Comp3ince Office will constitute an agreement for

obtaining pro”fâsional, thnical and specialized services that are temporaryin nature and “thä it i”s” in the best interest of the Port to secure suchservices from HARI. MII.LE’R MILLER & HANSON INC. without standard bidding and

standard competitiv\dd’ing procedures are waived; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board hereby approves and authorizes the

Executive Director of the Port to execute for and on behalf of the Board said

agreement, upon terms and conditions consistent with the Agenda Report and

providing that HARRIS MILLER MILLER & HANSON, INC. shall be compensated

283625


81 of 93

for such services, including costs of miscellaneous reimbursable expenses, ata maximum compensation that that shall not exceed $75,000 per year at anaggregate amount of $375,000 over a period of five (5) years commencingSeptember 4, 2012 and ending September 3, 2017; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution is not evidence of and does notcreate or constitute (a) a contract, or the grant of any right, entitlementor property interest, or (b) any obligation or liability on the part of theBoard or any officer or employee of the Board This resolution approves andauthorizes the execution of an agreement in accordance with the terms of thisresolution. Unless and until a separate written agreement is duly executedon behalf of the Board as authorized by this resolution, is signed andapproved as to form and legality by the Port Attorne , nd is delivered toother contracting party, there shall be no valid or ef’ e tive agreement.

283625


82 of 93


1 of 6

AGENDA REPORT

TITLE: Authorization to Enter into a Two-Year Contract with up to Two Extensions for a Total of Five Years with Aramark Uniform Services for the Port’s Uniform Rental and Laundry Service Needs.

AMOUNT: Not-to-Exceed $600,000 over five years. (The initial two-year contract willnot-exceed $240,000.)

PARTIES INVOLVED:

Corporate Name LocationAramark Uniform Services (a Division of Aramark Uniform & Career Apparel, LLC)

Oakland, CA (Laundry Facility1)Hayward, CA (Business Office)


SUBMITTED BY: Deborah Ale Flint, Director of AviationJames Kwon, Director of MaritimeSara Lee, Chief Financial Officer


SUMMARY

On April 20, 2012, the Port Purchasing Department issued a formal Request for Proposal (RFP) 11-12/03, for Uniform Rental and Laundry Service. The Port has approximately 140 to 170 employees in various trades and specialties who are required to wear uniforms for either safety or aesthetic reasons. After a detailed analysis and review, Aramark Uniform Services was unanimously ranked the highest supplier by the evaluation committee. The Port is seeking authorization to enter into a two-year contract with up to two extensions (for a total of five years) with Aramark Uniform Services for the Port’s uniform rental and laundry service needs.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The Port has approximately 140 to 170 employees in various trades and specialties who are required to wear uniforms for either safety or aesthetic reasons. These uniforms are not owned by the Port and are rented from a uniform supplier that provides weekly laundry service and mending for wear and tear of the uniforms. The employees who require uniforms are located at six to eight different locations within the Port’s facilities spread across approximately

1 The Oakland laundry facility employs 221 employees under a collective bargaining agreement and is in compliance with the City of Oakland’s living wage ordinance.


83 of 93


2 of 6

20 miles, with some locations requiring special security clearance. Approximately 30% of the uniform wearers are female.

In conducting the formal RFP, the Port developed specialized specifications to address itsunique needs and to overhaul its uniforms to portray its world-class image. The specificationshad 25 criteria and 15 qualifications that the suppliers needed to meet. Some of the unique and specialized needs of the Port are as follows:

Male and Female Uniforms: Must be able to provide both male and female uniforms. The female uniforms must be a female cut and not just smaller sizes of male uniforms. Currently, female Port employees wear smaller cuts of male uniforms.

All Inclusive Weekly Rental Fee: The Port will only pay a flat weekly rental fee for each garment. The weekly rental fee must include all costs such as the occasional mending of a uniform, hemming of the uniform, seasonal switchovers (from long sleeveto short sleeve clothing and vice versa), weekly laundering, etc.

Sample Uniforms: Suppliers must provide sample uniforms with their proposal. The Port is looking for high quality, functional uniforms, and a style that portrays the Port as a world-class institution. Suppliers were to recommend an appropriate style (based on their expertise) that will best suit the Port’s needs. The Port evaluates both the pricing and the quality of sample garments submitted.

Special Cleaning Procedures: Must be able to demonstrate their ability to properly clean and launder flame resistant and (electrical) arc flash uniforms, so as not to diminish their flame retardant and arch flash resistance qualities.

Other Specialty Requirements: The selected supplier must adhere to the Port’s Living Wage requirements, general social responsibility requirements for the treatment of workers at their facilities and Environmental Sustainability requirements as they relate to sustainable laundry practices and non-toxic detergents.

Security Background Check: The supplier must have a minimum of three delivery personnel who can pass a security background check. These personnel will be given badges that will access the Port’s delivery and drop-off sites located in secure areas of the Port’s facilities.

ANALYSIS

The Port Purchasing Department issued a formal RFP for (Port-wide) Uniform Rental and Laundry Service. The RFP was directly emailed to 12 local suppliers of uniform and laundry services, was posted the on the Port’s website, and was publicly advertised in the Oakland Tribune on April 25, 2012. In addition, the Port sent to all 11 Chambers of Commerce (within the local area) a copy of the RFP to disseminate to their constituency, the Port’s Social Responsibility Division sent the RFP to 68 firms who were certified providers of uniform and clothing services with the Department of General Services (and other State Agencies) and to one certified supplier within the Port database. Additionally, 17 firms downloaded the RFP from the Port’s website. A total of six firms attended the mandatory pre-proposal meeting on May 4, 2012, and three firms submitted responses by the proposal due date of May 25, 2012.


84 of 93


3 of 6

The intent of the RFP was to identify a supplier who would be able to provide quality uniforms that portray the Port as a world-class institution yet are functional and comfortable to wear by both male and female staff. Each supplier had to recommend and provide sample uniforms. As mentioned in the Factual Background section, the RFP had 25 very specific criteria and 15 qualifications that each supplier needed to meet. In addition, the uniform supplier had to provide an all inclusive weekly rental fee that included any mending, hemming, laundry service fees, etc. The Port evaluated both the quality and price of each sample garment the suppliersproposed and ranked each of the suppliers based on the following six evaluation criteria (weights are in parenthesis):

1) References, Resources, and Key Personnel (10%)2) Knowledge and Experience (20%)3) Plan and Approach (10%)4) Sample Garments and Proposed Costs (40%)5) Port Policy Requirements and Required Forms (5%)6) Port Non-Discrimination and Small/Local Business Utilization Policy (15%)

Three firms submitted responses by the proposal due date of May 25, 2012, of which one firm’s proposal was non-responsive. An evaluation committee consisting of subject matter experts from Aviation, Maritime, Purchasing, and SRD evaluated the proposals based on the above six criteria and unanimously ranked each supplier as follows:

Supplier Location Rank

Aramark Uniform Services Oakland, CA(Laundry Facility)

Hayward, CA(Business Office)

1

Mission Linen Supply Union City, CA 2

Unifirst Corp. Hayward, CA Non-responsive (Only provided a price and did

not provide any sample garments or any of the above five other evaluation criteria.)

In order to properly evaluate the pricing for this service, the Port had selected a subset of its uniform needs and provided estimated quantities to the suppliers to use in pricing the Port’s uniform needs. At this point, the Port does not know the actual quantities and styles of uniforms it will require and is requesting Board approval to begin negotiations with the highest ranked supplier to determine actual types, styles, quantity of uniforms needed, and final costs. If the Port and the highest ranked supplier cannot agree to final costs (in a timely manner), or if the supplier’s costs are not consistent with the costs quoted in the proposals received, then the Port will seek to reach an agreement with the second highest ranked supplier until an agreement on fees and final costs is reached with a supplier.


85 of 93


4 of 6

STRATEGIC PLAN

Strategic Priority Area Goal Objective How and When


Create sustainable economic growth for the Port and beyond.

Maximize the use of existing assets.

Improve the quality, style, and fit of employees’ uniforms to represent the world-class service that our employees provide.

Maintain and aggressively grow core businesses.

Market strategically and aggressively to attract new customers and tenants.

Improve uniforms market the world-class service that the Port provides and makes the public awarethat it’s desirable to do business with the Port.


For fiscal year 2011-12, the Port spent approximately $90,000 for its uniform needs. Going forward, the Port is looking to improve the style of uniforms, to upgrade its world-class image and to better accommodate the female workforce, and to enhance safety. The Port estimates the annual cost for the uniforms will vary from $100,000 to $120,000, per year (depending on the style and quantities of uniforms it chooses), with a not-to-exceed cost of $600,000 over five years. Upgraded styles and female uniforms cost significantly more than standard male uniforms. (For example, a standard male work pant can cost $.20 per week versus anupgraded male pants can cost $.29 per week, and a female pant cost’s $.74 per week.) This amount has been budgeted for in FY 2013 and will be appropriately budgeted for in subsequent years.

Additionally, the Port may have to pay some transition costs associated with not returning any existing lost uniforms. Since the current uniform provider is the also the highest ranked supplier listed in this Agenda Report, the Port will try to minimize and negotiate any transitioncosts associated with turning in the old uniforms. Any transition cost (for lost uniforms) is not part of this Agenda Report and will be paid for separately under a purchase order once those costs (if any) are identified. The Port staff does not anticipate those costs to be material.

STAFFING IMPACT

There will be no impact to Port staffing as a result of the proposed actions.


86 of 93


5 of 6

SUSTAINABILITY

The Port is aware that these suppliers have sustainable policies or practices, as it relates to environmentally safe and sustainable laundry practices. The highest-ranked supplier, Aramark Uniform Services, provides minimal environmental impact because laundering of uniforms is performed locally in Oakland (since 1965), thus minimizing carbon footprint due to minimal transportation distance. They also are a Green Certified industrial launder of uniform in the Bay Area.

ENVIRONMENTAL

The proposal to authorize the Executive Director to contract for uniform rental and laundry service was reviewed in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the Port CEQA Guidelines. Under CEQA Section 15378(b)(2), continuing administrative or maintenance activities, such as purchases for supplies, personnel-related actions, general policy and procedure making are not projects under CEQA. Furthermore, the general rule in Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines states that CEQA applies only to activities that have a potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that contracting for uniform rental and laundry service will result in a physical change in the environment, and therefore this action is not subject to CEQA and no further environmental review is required.


The scope of service and the work performed under this agreement are not within the scope of the MAPLA and the provisions of the MAPLA do not apply to this work.


The Owner Controlled Insurance Program (OCIP) does not apply to this action as it is not a capital improvement project.

GENERAL PLAN

Work performed under this agreement will not change the existing use of any facilities. Therefore, the proposed action conforms to the Oakland General Plan.

LIVING WAGE

Living wage requirements, in accordance with the Port’s Rules and Regulations for the Implementation and Enforcement of the Port of Oakland Living Wage Requirements (the “Living Wage Regulations”), apply to this agreement as the service provider employs 21 or more employees working on Port-related work, the service provider is principally providing


87 of 93


6 of 6

services related to maritime or aviation business, and the contract value is greater than $50,000.

OPTIONS

1. This is the recommended option:

a. Authorize the Executive Director to enter into a two-year contract with up to one, two-year extension and one, one-year extension for a total of five years with Aramark Uniform Services for the Port’s uniform rental and laundry service needs, not to exceed $600,000 total over five years.

b. In the event that the highest-ranked supplier (Aramark) fails to come to contract terms when final quantities and styles of uniforms are selected by each Port department, authorize the Executive Director to negotiate contract terms in an amount not to exceed $600,000 over five years, with the second-ranked supplier until an agreement on fees and final costs is reached with a supplier.

2. Do not authorize the Executive Director to enter into a new uniform rental and laundry service contract. Continue with the current method for uniform rental and laundry services, which means: monthly uniform rental without a formal contract established, no uniforms suited to female workers, and items such as mending, seasonal switchovers, etc. negotiated and handled on a case-by-case basis.

RECOMMENDATION

Authorize the Executive Director to enter into a two-year contract with up to one, two-year extension and one, one-year extension for a total of five years with Aramark Uniform Services for the Port’s uniform rental and laundry service needs, not to exceed $600,000 total over five years. In the event that the Port is unable to come to contract terms with Aramark Uniform Services, authorize the Executive Director to negotiate contract terms with the second-ranked supplier until an agreement on fees and final costs is reached with a supplier, but not to exceed $600,000 total over five years.


88 of 93

bOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERSCITY OF OAKLAND

09/20/12Tab No.MCR/aro

RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE TOTALPROJECT BUDGET OF $455,000 FOR CONSTRUCTION OFLARGE VEHICLE WASH RACK, NORTH FIELD, OAKLANDINTERNATIONAL AIRPORT; GRANTING AUTHORZON TOINCLUDE THE PROJECT IN THE S BUSINESSPROGRAM; FINDING AND DETERMINING T T IS INTHE BEST INTEREST OF THE PORT OF 0 “PORT”)TO CONTRACT FOR SUCH WORK UT T ARDBIDDING PROCEDURES; AUTHORIZI T E DIREC FENGINEERING OF THE PORT OF 0 0 APPRO HEPLANS AND SPECIFICATIO , AUTHOR ZINGEXECUTION OF A CONTRACT FOR C WORK BASED ONRECEIPT OF INFORMAL PROPOSAL IN A TOTALAGGREGATE AMOUNT NOT CEED $20

WHEREAS, the Boa o ort Co sioners (“Board”) has reviewedand evaluated Board g da eport em No. 6.3, dated September 20,2012 (“Agenda Report”) n late agenda materials, has received theexpert testimony ort t ff, and has provided opportunities for andtaken public c n w, h fore, be it

RESOL , that i a ting upon this matter, the Board hasexercised its i depend judgment based on substantial evidence inthe record and d ts d relies upon the facts, data, analysis, andfindings set fo h the Agenda Report and in related agendamaterials and in te mony received; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that based upon the information contained in theAgenda Report, the Board hereby finds and determines that it is in thebest interest of the Port to approve a budget authorization for fiscalyear 2012-13, for Construction of a Large Vehicle Wash Rack, NorthField, Oakland International Airport, Oakland, California (“Large WashRack”) in a total aggregate project budget amount not to exceed$455,000; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board hereby finds and determines thatthe development and use provided for in the project manual and thesubsequent use of the development approved by this resolution are inconformity with the General Plan of the City; and be it

283589.vI


89 of 93

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Director of Engineering of the Port ofOakland (“Director of Engineering”) or his designee is authorized toapprove the plans and specifications for the Large Wash Rack in advanceof construction, pursuant to Government Code Section 830.6; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that based upon the information contained in theAgenda Report, the Board hereby finds and determines that the Port’sSmall Business Utilization Program encourages small contractors todevelop the capacity to perform public works contracts on a competitivebasis, thereby increasing the pool of competitive contractors for futurePort contracts; and therefore it is in the best interest of the Port toaccomplish the Large Wash Rack, without standard bidding procedures andthat said standard bidding procedures are hereby wa ; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board authori hat the Large WashRack, be included in the Small Business Progra ; an b it;

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board h eby approve authorizesthe Executive Director of the Port of akla (“Execu ye Director”)to execute for and on behalf of the o r o contract with a localsmall contractor, for the Large Wash Rac , ased upon the receipt ofinformal proposals; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that if t x tive irector determines thatno acceptable proposals have ee re ved from local smallcontractors, he is hereby autho d t negotiate and execute acontract for such work,,-with\ any q lified contractor based upon thereceipt of informal and b

FURTHER RESOLV’1a” t e gregate total of all contracts,change orders, au’t ization orders, or purchase orders forconstruction, ita n and materials authorized by thisresolution, cluding any xes, duties and transportation costs,shall not e e d $200,0 0 a d be it

FURTHER 0 VED, hat bonds for the faithful performance of thework, and a bond o rantee the payment of all claims for labor andmaterials furriishe and for amounts due under the UnemploymentInsurance Code sha 1 be provided by the contractors as prescribed byapplicable laws and regulations and the contract specifications; andbe it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that this project will be covered by theprovisions of the Maritime and Aviation Project Labor Agreement(“MAPLA”), however, this project is available to be included in thePort of Oakland MAPLA small business exclusion program. If thecontract is awarded to a local small contractor that is eligible forand requests in writing to be excluded from the operationalrequirements of the MAPLA, it is the Port’s intention to approve theexclusion, under the program established by MAPLA’s Appendix “G”—

283589.vl


90 of 93

Letter 01 uncterstancting re: Small Business Utilization Program; and beit

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board hereby finds and determines thatthis project is categorically exempt from the California EnvironmentalQuality Act (“CEQA”) and Port CEQA Guidelines pursuant to Section15303 (d) (e), which includes water main and sewage connections, andaccessory structures; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that, pursuant to Port Ordinance 1606, Section22, the Board finds and determines it to be in the Port’s best interestto delegate to the Executive Director, and hereby delegates to theExecutive Director, the authority to finally resolve bid protests inconnection with the Large Wash Rack; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution is t vidence of and doesnot create or constitute (a) a contract, or he nt of any right,entitlement or property interest, or (b) a o igaton or liability onthe part of the Board or any officer or mp oyee of h oard. Thisresolution approves and authorizes th exec ion of agreement inaccordance with the terms of this 1 t Unless and until aseparate written agreement is duly execut d on behalf of the Board asauthorized by this resolution, is signed pproved as to form andlegality by the Port Attorney, n is deliv e to other contractingparty, there shall be no valid or ¶,, e agr ment.

I283589.vl


91 of 93

UPDATES & ANNOUNCEMENTS

The President and / or Executive Director will report on noteworthy events occurring since the last Board Meeting.

UPDATES & ANNOUNCEMENTS Tab 7

92 of 93

SCHEDULING

This segment of the meeting is reserved for scheduling items for future Agendas and/or scheduling Special Meetings.

SCHEDULING Tab 8

93 of 93

PORT OF OAKLAND · 2016-03-10 · September Delivering Progressive Transportation 1 Tess Lengyel,...

Documents

Transcript of PORT OF OAKLAND · 2016-03-10 · September Delivering Progressive Transportation 1 Tess Lengyel,...