LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT … · projects that agree to be bound ... Harbor...

LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES

FACILITIES MASTER PLANNING & OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE Educational Services Center

Board Room – First Floor 770 Wilshire Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90017

Wednesday, February 22, 2017 4:45 p.m. – 6:15 p.m.

Committee Members

Mike Eng, Chair Ernest H. Moreno, Vice Chair

Mike Fong, Member Scott J. Svonkin, Board Alternate

Thomas Hall, Staff Liaison Monte E. Perez, College President Liaison

Erika A. Endrijonas, College President Liaison Alternate

Agenda (Items may be taken out of order)

I. ROLL CALL

II. PUBLIC SPEAKERS*

III. ITEMS WITH A MOTION REQUIRED

A. Proposed revision to Board Rule 4006 - Procedures for Retaining Legal

Services.

B. Amendment to Project Labor Agreement (PLA) to apply to Measure CC funded projects.

IV. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS

A. Status Report on Student Housing.

https://spdev.laccd.edu/Board/StandingCommittees/Documents/2016-

2017StandingCommitteeAgendas/Report%20on%20Student%20Housing.pdf

B. Possible future Board action permitting master agreements to be funded from Measure CC.

https://spdev.laccd.edu/Board/StandingCommittees/Documents/2016-2017StandingCommitteeAgendas/Report%20on%20Student%20Housing.pdf

https://spdev.laccd.edu/Board/StandingCommittees/Documents/2016-2017StandingCommitteeAgendas/Report%20on%20Student%20Housing.pdf

C. Program Management Contract re-compete Request for Qualifications/Proposals timeline.

D. Measure CC Implementation Efforts to date.

E. Lead Construction Counsel’s Report on Legal Fees and Costs in the Bond

Program for 2016. F. Active Construction Summary.

V. SUMMARY – NEXT MEETING .......................................................... Mike Eng VI. ADJOURNMENT

*Members of the public are allotted three minutes time to address the agenda issues. If requested, the agenda shall be made available in appropriate alternate formats to persons with a disability, as required by Section 202 of the American with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Section 12132), and the rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof. The agenda shall include information regarding how, for whom, and when a request for disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services may be made by a person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in the public meeting. To make such a request, please contact the Executive Secretary to the Board of Trustees at 213/891-2044 no later than 12 p.m. (noon) on the Tuesday prior to the Committee meeting.

Board of Trustees

Los Angeles Community College District

NOTICE March 8, 2017

Com No. CH/A Division: Chancellor Action Date: April 5, 2017

Approved by _______________________________ Francisco C. Rodriguez, Chancellor

Chancellor and Secretary to the Board of Trustees By:______________________________ Date_________________

Eng ________________ Moreno__________________ Fong _______________ Pearlman________________ Hoffman _____________ Svonkin_________________ Kamlager ___________ Victoriano________________ Student Trustee Advisory Vote

Page 1 of 3 Page Com. No. CH/A Div. Chancellor Dat Date 04-05-17

Notice: 03-08-17

SUBJECT: REVISE BOARD RULE 4006

4006. PROCEDURES FOR RETAINING LEGAL SERVICES.

In retaining law firms for individual cases or matters, the following procedure shall be followed:

A. For ongoing work, the General Counsel shall conduct an open and

competitive process to establish a panel of law firms with commonly-required expertise. In the event a need for additional expertise arises, the General Counsel shall make recommendations to the Board for additional firm(s) as necessary.

B. Supervising Office

1. For general matters involving the District, the Board of Trustees

delegates authority to the General Counsel, or his/her designee, to select and supervise the firm to which an individual case or matter will be assigned. The General Counsel, or his/her designee, shall report the selection of counsel, the basic terms of the firm’s proposal, and the reason for the selection at the first meeting of the Board of Trustees following the selection.

2. Bond counsel will continue to be supervised by the CFO/Treasurer

or designee for issuances or other funding transactions.

3. For new transactions involving construction matters and for real property acquisition, the Board of Trustees delegates authority to the General Counsel, in consultation with the Chief Facilities Executive, Executive Director of Facilities Planning and Development or designee to supervise the firm to which an individual case or matter is assigned, effective December 1, 2012.

Board of Trustees


Com. No. CH/A Division Chancellor Action Date:

April 5, 2017

____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 3 Pages Com. No. CH/A Div. Chancellor Date 04-05-17

Notice: 03-08-17

4. Counsel for the Office of Inspector General and for the District Citizens’ Oversight Committee will be selected and supervised by the Chancellor or designee, effective December 1, 2012.

5. For all transactions involving construction, construction defects litigation

and real property acquisition, the Board of Trustees delegates authority to the Executive Director of Facilities Planning and Development General Counsel, in consultation with the Chief Facilities Executive or designee, to select and to supervise the firms to which individual cases or matters will be assigned, effective January 1, 2013.

6. The applicable office shall be referred to as the Supervising Office.

C. The Supervising Office shall solicit proposals from a minimum of three law firms

for each individual case or matter, except as set forth in section G below.

D. For litigation in superior or federal court, or administrative proceedings, including arbitrations or administrative hearings, the proposal from each law firm will contain a proposed budget, including a litigation plan, a list of services to be provided, a per-unit price for categories pursuant to regulations promulgated by the Chancellor, and a maximum budget for those legal services not subject to unit-based pricing.

1. For matters subject to unit-based pricing, the unit price shall cover all of

the firm’s professional fees associated with the matter, including travel time to and from hearings and depositions, preparation for hearings, trial, motions, and depositions, and the like, except for reimbursable costs allowable under the law firm’s contract with the District.

E. If a law firm’s proposal is accepted, the budget for matters not subject to unit-

based pricing shall be binding unless the Supervising Office determines that unforeseeable circumstances have arisen. Under such circumstances, the Supervising Office may, in the exercise of discretion, agree to an amended budget. The Supervising Office shall promptly notify the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees of the unforeseeable circumstances, the reason for agreeing to an amended budget, and the amount of the amendment allowed, taking appropriate measures for the preservation of confidentiality in attorney-client communications and attorney work-product to protect the District’s interests.

F. Limited jurisdiction civil cases shall be paid at a rate up to, but not to exceed,

$7,500.00, exclusive of costs, through trial or arbitration.

Board of Trustees


Com. No. CH/A Division Chancellor Action Date:

April 5, 2017

____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 3 Pages Com. No. CH/A Div. Chancellor Date 04-05-17

Notice: 03-08-17

G. Transactional matters, such as contract review or negotiations shall not be

subject to the unit-based billing system. Whenever possible, the Supervising Office shall obtain a proposal for a transactional matter, including an estimate of the total number of hours required and a total budget amount. The budgeted amount shall be binding except as provided in section E above. Transactional matters may be assigned to counsel without soliciting multiple proposals.

Amended: 04-05-17

LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT

AMENDMENT TO PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT

1. This is an Amendment to the prior Amended Project Labor Agreement adopted by the

Los Angeles Community College District Board of Trustees on July 8, 2015 and which

became effective on August 13, 2015 (“Current Project Labor Agreement”). The

purpose of this Amendment is to incorporate projects funded with Measure CC bond

funds, passed by the voters on November 8, 2016, into the Current Project Labor

Agreement as set forth herein below.

2. The Agreement is entered into by the Los Angeles/Orange Counties Building and

Construction Trades Council (the “Council”), the signatory Craft Councils and Unions

signing this Agreement (hereinafter together with the Council, collectively, the “Union”

or “Unions”), and those contractors performing work on the projects that are subject to

the Current Project Labor Agreement. The foregoing are also sometimes referred to

hereinafter individually as a “Party”/”party” and/or collectively as the

“Parties”/”parties” to this Amendment.

3. It is understood by the Parties that if this Amendment is acceptable to the Los Angeles

Community College District (“District”), and adopted by its governing Board of

Trustees, it will become the policy of the District that the construction work covered by

this Amendment shall be contracted exclusively to contractors performing work on the

projects that agree to be bound by this Amendment and the Current Project Labor

Agreement.

4. Article II of the Current Project Labor Agreement is hereby amended to include

Measure CC bond funded projects subject to the existing terms, condition and

provisions of Article II. All other portions of Article II, and the rest of the Current

Project Labor Agreement, shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

In witness whereof, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed and effective as of

the day and year first above written:

For the Unions:

____________________________

Ron Miller

Executive Secretary

Los Angeles/Orange Counties Building and

Construction Trades Council

Los Angeles Community College District 2 Amendment to Article II of the Project Labor Agreement

LOS ANGELES/ORANGE COUNTIES BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION

TRADES COUNCIL CRAFT UNIONS AND DISTRICT COUNCILS

Building for tomorrow’s leaders 1

Facilities Master Planning & Oversight Committee

Student Housing Update

February 22, 2017


TABLE OF CONTENTS

• Demand Summary & Housing Preferences

• International Students & Housing

• Affordable Housing- Broad Overview

• California Community Colleges with Housing

• Student Housing Models

• Items for Consideration


DEMAND STUDY vs FEASIBILITY STUDY

DEMAND STUDY • Demand Study analyses:

– Are students interested in student housing

– How many students are likely to live in student housing

– Type of student housing students are likely to live in

– Rents students willing to pay

– Results in a number of beds likely to be filled if the project is constructed

• Items informing demand study – Visioning Session

– Focus Groups

– Stakeholder Interviews

– Off-campus market analysis

– Student Survey

• Cost: $25,000/campus

FEASIBILITY STUDY • Feasibility Study analyses:

– Assesses the financial viability of a project • Number/types of units to construct, rents,

costs.

– Prepares financial modeling • Types of financing (private capital/bonds),

debt service, investor returns, profitability, pro-forma & stabilization

• Items informing feasibility study – Mission: Revenue Generator or Student

Support • Sets the framework for student rents which

impact profitability and ground rent

• Guides procurement & proposals

• May inform whether local zoning rules apply

– LACCD’s/College’s type/level of involvement

– LACCD’s/College’s institutional will

• Cost: $45,335/campus


DEMAND ANALYSIS Demand Analysis addresses: Are students interested in student housing? How many students are likely to live in student housing? What type of student housing are students likely to live in? What rents are students willing to pay?

TOTAL STUDENT HOUSING DEMAND BY CAMPUS (ALL AGE GROUPS)

Harbor College West L.A. College Pierce College L.A. City College

Traditional Student Housing

Traditional 66 109 190 177

Semi-Suite 45 65 64 97

Full-Suite 51 48 92 96

Total: 162 222 346 370

Apartment Student Housing

Studio 15 30 48 67

1-Bedroom / 1-Bathroom 8 24 87 98



Total: 69 127 304 270

Total Bed Demand by Campus: 231 349 650 640

Pierce and L.A. City received the highest overall bed demand in

both categories; West L.A. received higher demand from

Traditional unit type housing


29%

19%

22%

6%

3%

11%

9%

31%

19%

14%

9%

7%

14%

7%

29%

10%

14%

7%

13%

11%

15%

28%

15% 15%

10%

15% 15%

2%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Traditional Semi-Suite Full-Suite Studio 1-Bedroom / 1-Bathroom

2-Bedroom / 1-Bathroom

4-Bedroom / 2-Bathroom

Harbor College West L.A. College Pierce College L.A. City College

HOUSING PREFERENCES • Student demand projections based on survey responses – Demand-Based Program Model

Traditional Student

Housing

Apartment Student

Housing

(s)$1,180-$1,230

(d)$740-$790

(s)$1,360-$1,410

(d)$830-$880

(s)$1,360-$1,410

(d)$830-$880

(s)$1,440-$1,490

(s)$1,805-$1,855

(d)$1,125-$1,175

(s)$1,410-$1,460

(d)$965-$1,015

(s) $1,150-$1,200

Housing rates above are per month/per student


Fall 2016 F-1 Visa Data

19 or Less 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 to 39 40 to 49 50 + Totals:

East L.A. 286 423 74 17 5 5 0 810

Potential Capture 172 254 22 3 1 0 0 451

L.A. City 27 205 86 20 19 6 3 366


L.A. Harbor 6 91 25 2 6 3 0 133


L.A. ITV 1 5 3 1 13 0 0 23


L.A. Mission 13 31 22 3 1 2 0 72


L.A. Pierce 59 143 27 10 3 3 2 247


L.A. Southwest 2 14 1 1 2 1 0 21


L.A. Trade Tech 10 33 35 6 4 2 1 91


L.A. Valley 9 87 21 10 3 2 2 134


West L.A. 35 257 68 17 9 4 0 390


Total International Student Population: 2,287

Total Potential International Student Capture: 1,172

INTERNATIONAL STUDENT CAPTURE

RATE ANALYSIS A capture rate is a percentage point used to capture a portion of the population within the analysis. 76% of int’l students that took the survey were interested in housing, the capture rate for various age groups is listed below. 2.66% of survey responders (99 students ) were int’l students.

19 or Less 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 to 39 40 to 49 50 +

60% 60% 30% 15% 10% 5% 5%


INTERNATIONAL vs DOMESTIC STUDENT

OVERVIEW

INTERNATIONAL

• 59% Very/Somewhat

Likely to live in student

housing

• 32% Very Easy/Easy to

find housing near college

• $704/month in rent &

utility expense ($120

more than domestic)

DOMESTIC

• 38% Very/Somewhat

Likely to live in student

housing

• 59% Very Easy/Easy to

find housing near college

• $584/month in rent &

utility expense


AFFORDABLE HOUSING: Broad Overview

Low-Income

Housing

Product

Restricted

Rents

Specific

Project

Funding*

Specific

Tenant

services**

Objective

Selection of

tenants***

Full- Time

Students as

Residents****

Family Yes Yes Yes Lottery No, w/ exceptions

Senior Yes Yes Yes Lottery No, w/ exceptions

Veteran Yes Yes Yes Lottery No, w/ exceptions

Special Needs

(i.e., homeless,

recently

emancipate

youth)

Yes Yes Yes Lottery No, w/ exceptions

*Funding is restricted to the specific low-income housing product.

**Tenant services targeted to residents may include: job training, counseling, mental health, financial education

***Lottery due to more tenant demand than units available. Potential tenant must meet criteria (many times

Including verifiable source of income), complete application and hope to be objectively selected.

****Units leased entirely to full-time students do not qualify as low-income units, with certain exceptions.

IRS Chapter 17, Category 11l, Low Income Units Occupied by Non-Qualified Full-Time Students.


LOW INCOME UNITS & FULL TIME STUDENTS* Units comprised of full-time students do not qualify as low-income units, unless

• It is occupied by an individual who – Is receiving assistance under Title IV of SSA;

– A student was previously under the care and placement responsibility of the Sate agency for administering a plan under part B or part E of title IV of the Social Security Act; or

– A student enrolled in a job training program receiving assistance under the Job Training Partnership Act or under other similar Federal, State or local laws

• It is occupied entirely by full-time students, if such students are – Single parents and their children and such parents are not

dependents of another individual and such children are not dependents of another individual other than a parent of such children; or

– Married and file a joint return

*IRS Chapter 17, Category 11l, Low Income Units Occupied by Non-Qualified Full-Time Students

Building for tomorrow’s leaders 10 10

STUDENT HOUSING

Columbia College

Cerro Coso Community College Mammoth Campus

Feather River College

Lassen College College of the Redwoods

H O U S I N G A T C O M M U N I T Y C O L L E G E S I N C A

Reedley College

Shasta College

Sierra College

College of the Siskiyous

Taft College

West Hills College Coalinga


California Community Colleges Offering

Student Housing

College Land

Ownership

Project

Ownership

Management Number of

Beds; cohorts

Year Built Other Information

Cerro Coso Third Party Third Party

Third Party

No dorms, operated as student housing by 3rd

party unaffiliated with campus; No direct financial

benefit; helps with enrollment; 3rd

party set- up

paperwork and pricing.

College of

Redwoods College College College 150 beds Convenience store in cafeteria.

College of

Siskiyous College College College 144 beds No cooking or kitchen on campus.

Columbia College College Third Party Third Party 1970’s College owns and manages the parking.

Feather River

College

Third Party

Lassen College College College College 85% athletes 30 years ago

Reedley College College College 140: beds (100

men & 40

women)

7 year ago Self-sufficient; wait-list; no convenience store on

campus, dollar tree, fresh & easy and CVS

across the street.

Shasta College

Sierra College College College Third Party

121 beds; set-

asides for int’l

students,

athletes & foster

youth

1960’s,

remodeled

1980’s

Self-sufficient; wait list; local restaurants

participate in dining program.

Taft College College College 135 beds, most

athletes

Long time ago Meal program generates own revenue, meal is

the largest expense; rent is very low which is

needed to attract students.

West Hills College College College College 199 (151 men;

48 women)

1960’s &

1970’s

Yuba College Dorms closed.

Butte College Third Party

Third Party

Third Party

No dorms, housing affiliated with campus.

* Information collected 2014, confirmation process on-going


STUDENT HOUSING- Sample Models &

Preliminary Impacts on LACCD

Student

Housing

Model

Land

Ownership

Project

Ownership

Project

Construction

& Soft Cost

Investment

Management Balance

Sheet

Impact on

LACCD

Liability

Impact on

LACCD

Built by

LACCD

LACCD LACCD LACCD LACCD

Yes Yes

Fee

Developer

LACCD

LACCD

LACCD pre-

construction/

third party

construction

LACCD

Yes Yes

Outsource

Management

LACCD LACCD LACCD Third Party

Yes Yes

Ground

Lease* to

Third Party

(Example:

New Entity,

Foundation,

Student

Housing

Developer)

LACCD Third Party;

end of lease

LACCD

owns

LACCD

(amount

depends on

procurement

direction &

CEQA status);

Third Party

Third Party Maybe,

Depends on

Financing

and

Agreement

Yes &

Depends on

Agreement

Yes &

Depends on

Agreement

*Ground Lease terms can vary greatly depending on LACCD’s mission and needs, i.e. uses, management, prevailing wage, DSA, liability.

Restrictions may impact ground rent and therefore lender or investors must agree.

Project will be subject to local zoning if procured under Education Code 81397, limited to 66 year ground lease and require developer to build LACCD Joint-Occupancy Space.


FINANCIAL INVESTMENT & PROJECT

CONTROL

LACCD Investment (i.e., soft-costs, hard-

costs, personnel, student life)

LACCD Risk

(i.e. credit rating, management, liability)

LACCD

Greater Control

Third Party Investment

(i.e., soft-costs, hard-costs, management, student life)

Third Party Risk

(i.e., entitlement, financial, market, liability)

Third Party

Greater Control


OTHER CONSIDERATIONS FOR LACCD

Cost

• Residential Services/Student Life

• Office on campus

• Amend Master Plans and designate location

• Increase library hours

• Health services

• Counseling services

• Food Service

• Security

• Facilities: upkeep, utilities, insurance

• Debt service

• Feasibility Study

Personnel

• Salaries and Benefits to Full-Time Staff

• Custodial

• Residence Hall Directors

• Dispute Resolution Counselors

• Security

• Part-Time wages

• Monitor lease breaches

Student Residents & Rents

• Rents at/below market

• If subsidized, by who and how much

• Set aside for cohorts

• Int’l Students

• Student Athletes

• Student Veterans

• Lease Obligations & Linkage to College

• Issue diploma if breach of lease?

• Evict students on academic probation?

• Age/class restricted

LACCD Program Management 1055 Corporate Center Drive Monterey Park, California 91754 www.build-laccd.org 323.981.7200 tel

Building for Tomorrow’s Leaders

DATE: February 15, 2017

TO: Tom Hall, Interim Chief Facilities Executive

FROM: Paul Steinke, Program Director

SUBJECT: FEBRUARY 22, 2016 FMP&OC AGENDA ITEM IV. B. POSSIBLE FUTURE BOARD

ACTION PERMITTING MASTER AGREEMENTS TO BE FUNDED FROM MEASURE

CC BOND FUNDS

On April 15, 2009 (Com. No. FPD1), the Board of Trustees approved a request to allow

agreements that were previously approved under Propositions A/AA, which only

accepted funding through Propositions A/AA, to also be funded through Measure J Bond

proceeds.

Subsequent to the approval of Measure CC by a vote of the people on November 8,

2016, it may be similarly necessary for the Board to consider approving certain existing

master agreements that were previously approved to be funded through Propositions

A/AA, Measure J, and/or through General Funds to now also be funded through Measure

CC.

The Program Management Office is reviewing this matter with the Facilities Planning and

Development Department. Further information is anticipated to be brought to FMP&OC

for review in the near future.

1

To: Trustee Mike Eng, Chairman FMPOC

From: John P. Dacey, Lead Construction Counsel

Cc: Francisco C. Rodriguez, Chancellor

Tom Hall, Interim Chief Facilities Executive

Paul Steinke, Build-LACCD Program Director

Brent Hurwitz, Build-LACCD and FMPOC Agenda Coordinator

Date: February 7, 2017

Re: Implementation of Measure CC Bond Funded Projects and Completion of

Current Build-LACCD Bond Program – Update for February 22, 2017

FMPOC Committee Meeting

I. BRIEF BACKGROUND

Various efforts have been instituted and are underway regarding remaining A/AA and J bond

funds and newly approved Measure CC Bond Funds.

Beginning in approximately December 2016, logistically, those efforts have included to date:

(1) Program Management Office review and assessment of all remaining and/or deferred A/AA

and J related bond fund projects;

(2) standard Program Management Office Risk Modeling for June thru December 31, 2016;

(3) Program Management Office “deep dive” (review and assessment) of each Colleges “College

Reserve” and “Project Contingencies” (the latter two both at the College Funding Level Only);

(4) meetings involving the Chancellor, Executive Staff, the College Presidents, and Lead

Construction Counsel;

(5) a meeting with the Bond Steering Committee;

(6) Coordination Meetings between the Chancellor, Senior District Administration and FPD

personnel, Senior PMO personnel, and Lead Construction Counsel;

(7) a Facilities Planning and Development Measure CC training meeting presented by Tom Hall

to approximately 34 College representatives (all 9 Colleges had representatives present); and

(8) an initial discussion with the Facilities Master Planning and Oversight Committee

(“FMPOC”) of the Board in January.

2

II. NEXT ANTICIPATED AND CURRENTLY PLANNED STEPS

Now that the Program Management Office has completed its:

(1) review and assessment of all remaining and/or deferred A/AA and J related bond fund

projects; the Risk Modeling for June thru December 31, 2016; and

(2) the “deep dive” (review and assessment) of each Colleges “College Reserve” and “Project

Contingencies”.

Looking forward from the date of this Memorandum, the following logistical efforts are

scheduled to be undertaken1:

(1) further Coordination Meetings between the Chancellor, Executive Staff, Senior PMO

personnel, and Lead Construction Counsel (one took place on February 7, 2017, and will occur

monthly thereafter;

(2) The Program Management Office’s efforts and information (developed from the reviews and

assessments described above) are being distributed today to all of the College Presidents;

(3) potential criteria for project approval consideration was taken from Measure CC Ballot

Language, past FMPOC and Board comments, State reported information, the District’s Blue

Ribbon Security Panel Report, etc., and distributed to the Chancellor, Executive Staff and the

College Presidents on February 3, 2017 for their review and comment on a “for discussion only”

basis;

(4) the potential criteria for project approval consideration will be discussed with FMPOC

Chairman and Board Member Mike Eng on Thursday, February 9, 2016 and also provided to the

FMPOC Committee at its February 22, 2017 Committee Meeting;

(5) the College Presidents will be reviewing the Program Management Office’s project

information with their Campus constituents against the “project lists” each College had

previously submitted for the July 20, 2016 Facilities Needs Overview presented to FMPOC and

the Board and reporting back to the Chancellor and alterations thereof, taking into consideration

the potential criteria referenced in items “3” and “4” above;

(6) return meetings with the Chancellor, Executive Staff, the College Presidents, and Lead

Construction Counsel are scheduled for February 15 an March 3, 2017;

(7) a briefing on these efforts is anticipated to be presented to FMPOC for its February 22, 2017

Committee Meeting; and

1 Not every effort that will be undertaken is recorded herein. The information is presented in “Executive

Summary” fashion, versus minute detail.

3

(8) it is the intention to have a further status update and a definitive recommendation before

FMPOC at is March 2017 Meeting.

A draft for “for discussion only” of the potential project criteria which was handed out at the

February 3, 2017 meeting of the Chancellor, Executive Staff, the nine College Presidents, and

Lead Construction Counsel regarding Measure CC is sent herewith as “Attachment A”.

Attachment “A” contains three categories (i.e., “A”, “B”, and “C”), in no order or priority, and

track the categories outlined in the July 2016 Facilities Needs Overview for “Option B” at $3.3

Billion presented to FMPOC and the Board.

III. ADDITIONAL TOPICS FOR CONSIDERATION

A. Current Measure A/AA/J Central Reserve Evaluation

As part of the ongoing efforts to date, and as mentioned above, the Program Management Office

has completed its Risk Modeling Evaluations at the Program and College levels and also its

“Deep Dives” into the funds remaining in the College “Owner Reserves” (read “College Level”)

and Project Contingencies (also at the College Level), among other funding line items for

A/AA/J bond funds, through December 31, 2016.

The Program Management Office results from the foregoing efforts have disclosed that the

current overall risk exposure to the Measure A/AA/J Bond Program through December 31, 2016

is calculated at a projected $120.02 Million against a current central Program Reserve of $130.87

Million. Accordingly, Executive Staff, the PMO and Lead Construction Counsel do not

recommend any draw down from current central Program Reserve.

A draft “for discussion only” of the Program Management Offices reviews and assessments is

sent herewith as “Attachment B”.

B. Current Amended Project Labor Agreement and Measure CC Bond Funded

Projects

The current Amended Project Labor Agreement for the District that became effective in August

of 2015 does not include Measure CC bond funded projects. As such, Executive Staff, the PMO,

and Lead Construction Counsel recommend that FMPOC take up consideration as to whether the

current Amended Project Labor Agreement be further amended to include Measure CC projects

and to pass its’ recommendation to the full Board of Trustees for consideration and action.

The Chancellor has requested that you consider making this an item for the February 22, 2017

FMPOC Meeting Agenda.

4

C. Program Management Office Contract Re-Compete

The current Program Management Contract expires, based on a 5 year statutory and contractual

requirement, at the end of the first quarter of 2018. Executive Staff, Lead Construction Counsel,

and outside legal counsel intend to brief you on a suggested time-line to implement this

procurement at our meeting on February 9, 2017, without any current Program Management

Office personnel present as the current firm holding that position will need to be excused for that

portion of the February 9, 2017 preparatory meeting at such time. Further detail and a proposed

procurement time-line will then be presented to you at the February 9, 2017 Meeting.

[End of Memorandum]

ATTACHMENT A

Remaining Funding Criteria for Bond Program Projects

A. State Requirements (Basically State Facilities Condition Index (“FCI”) driven): 1

Replacement/Renovation of:

1. Interior infrastructure systems and components based on useful life expectancy

2. Exterior infrastructure systems and components based on useful life expectancy

3. Building envelope

4. Building Structural components

5. Water and Power Facilities/Systems

6. Utility capacity

7. Elevators

8. Fire Protection and Suppression systems

9. Security Systems (site and cyber)

10. Heating and Air Conditioning

11. Plumbing

12. Energy and Lighting Controls

13. Electrical and Data Communications

14. Carpeting; Painting; Sidewalks and Roads;

15. Other replacement projects falling within Measure CC requirements

16. Others?

B. District-wide Projects (Requirements):2

Needed to reach uniform Minimum Standards District-wide:

1. American with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) projects

2. Security, including communication, cyber, physical surveillance systems and lock down capabilities

3. Health & Safety

4. Storm Water

5. Water Conservation

6. Drought resistant landscaping

7. Demolition of old structures

8. Improved and Collaborative Workspace Environments (Students, Faculty, Administrative Offices)

9. Improved Space Utilization –Multi-purpose classrooms, etc.

10. Technology Infrastructure

11. Future Expansion (based on FTES and projected FTES growth)

12. Housing Needs

13. Other Minimum District Standard projects falling within Measure CC requirements

14. Major Renovations, especially for older buildings near end of lifecycle usefulness

15. All of the foregoing and any other project types not listed above must comply with Measure CC Bond Language

16. Others?

1 The listing and assigned numbers are for reference only and do not indicate a suggested order of priority among

criteria listed. 2 The listing and assigned numbers are for reference only and do not indicate a suggested order of priority among

criteria listed.

ATTACHMENT A

2

C. New Projects (Suggested Criteria for Project Approval):3

1. Project supports Current Educational Master Plan

2. Currently in the College Facilities Master Plan

3. Within the current Environmental Assessment Reports

4. Capacity Load Ratios

5. Future Expansion (based on current FTES and projected FTES growth)

6. Need for Classroom/Labs/Offices Space

7. Projected Growth in student population

8. Facilities Condition Index

9. To replace non-permanent/temporary structures (e.g., bungalows and modular)

10. Lifecycle Operating Costs of the renovated/newly constructed Facility

11. Projected revenue to support increased operation costs

12. Whole Campus Concept: Food service; Student Union; Other Classroom Support Facilities)

13. Need for Classroom/Labs/Offices Space

14. Type of project permitted by Measure CC (list examples)

15. For vocational training related projects, is the nature of the project supported by market demand/projections

16. Change in Educational Programming needs driven by demand

17. Complete and existing project

18. Needed funding to complete Started-District required project

19. Safety/Security beyond what is funded by Started-District required project

20. All of the foregoing and any other project types not listed above must comply with Measure CC Bond Language

21. Others?

Overall Note:

FPD and Lead Construction Counsel recommend for consideration the following additional criteria factors and

approach for each College to consider: (1) for A/AA and/or J funded projects that are currently in construction,

assure that adequate funding exists from remaining A/AA and/or J funding sources for construction and project

contingencies; (2) for A/AA and/or J funded projects that have either completed design and/or which are in design,

assure that such projects remain a priority, are in compliance with criteria outlined above, and if cancelled or

redesigned, assess potential waste of prior bond funds expended; (3) for A/AA and/or J funded projects that have

not started design, assess whether such previously identified projects are still required and a priority; (4) for

previously identified projects and/or newly proposed projects, each College should assess whether such projects

can be funded from Measure CC funds per the language of Measure CC and which fall within: (i) the category of a

“State Requirement” type project (Section “A” above); or (ii) the category of “District-wide Requirement” type

project (Section “B” above); and (5) for those projects that would not fall within any of the foregoing, and that

would be “new” projects within Section “C” above, whether previously identified or not for the July 2016 Facilities

Needs Overview presentation to the Board, identify those “new” projects that meet the criteria of Section “C”

above and or the criteria for Section “C” as may otherwise get established.

3 The listing and assigned numbers are for reference only and do not indicate a suggested order of priority among

criteria listed. These are projects that have not been previously identified and otherwise meet the final criteria established.



PROGRAM MANAGEMENT SERVICES

December 2016 Risk Model Results

February 7, 2017

“Attachment B” for FMPOC 2-22-17 Meeting

Building for tomorrow’s leaders

Risk Management Program Background

On May 23, 2012, a Board Ad Hoc Committee recommended that the LACCD Board

of Trustees (“Board”) adopt a policy for the funding of the District’s Bond Program

Reserve (“Program Reserve”). The set aside for the Program Reserve was

determined to be $160M, which was adopted by the Board.

Golder Associates Inc. was retained on May 24, 2012 to conduct a baseline Risk

Assessment to identify the probability of completing the LACCD Bond Building

Program as planned at June 2012 with the available bond funds as well as confirm

the level of certainty of completing the Program with the $160M set-aside to fund

those risks eligible for the District Bond Program Reserve.

The Golder Report, issued May 2013, established that the Program Risks would not

exceed $257.4M at an 80% confidence level. However, it recommended

maintaining the $160M Program Reserve amount in conjunction with proactive risk

management.

LACCD’s Risk Management Program was implemented June 2013 to identify,

manage, and lower program-wide risk exposure. Since that time, the Program

Reserve has been reduced to $130M while the Program risk exposure as of the

December 2016 risk model cumulatively totals $120M.

Building for tomorrow’s leaders

Program & College-Level Results

• Confidence level of 80% used for risk exposure analysis

• Using @Risk Software

• Data as of December 2016

• Program Level

– Program Management Office level risks modeled

– Analysis based on risk exposure compared to Program Reserve remaining

• College Level

– College project risks modeled for all active projects; excluding 40J projects

– Analysis based on risk exposure compared to College’s remaining project

contingency and owner’s reserve remaining


LACCD Risk Exposure

CONFIDENTIAL – For Internal Use Only

PMO Risk $63.71M

40J Risk $3.05M

Colleges Risk $53.26M

Program Reserve $130.87M

$-

$20,000,000

$40,000,000

$60,000,000

$80,000,000

$100,000,000

$120,000,000

$140,000,000

December 2016 Risk Exposure Program Reserve

Additive December 2016 Risk Exposure Against Program Reserve

Total: $120.02M

Report Date: February 7, 2017 FMPOC: Active Construction Projects Page 1 of 3

# Project # Project NameContract

Type 8

Current

Construction

Funding

Total 1,2

Current

Construction

Total

EAC 5

Current

Total

Contingency

Available

Variance = Current

Construction Funding

- EAC

Variance =

Current

Construction

Funding - EAC %

Total Change to

Date 4

Current

Cost Risk 6

Current

Substantial

Completion

Current

Academic

Occupancy

Current

Schedule

Risk 6,7

Comments

Los Angeles City College

1 01C-173.03 RWGPL - Traffic Mitigation (Red-Line) DBB $6,821,948 $6,821,948 $302,188 $0 0% $528,408 May-17 May-17

East Los Angeles College

2 02E-222.05 Science Career Mathematics Building (G8) (Earth Sciences) DB $15,584,076 $15,584,076 $1,111,199 $0 0% $8,564,210 Feb-18 Jun-18

3 40J-202.01 ADA Compliance Phase 1 - Exterior DBB-P $5,327,882 $5,276,510 $535,635 $51,372 0.96% $297,545 Jul-17 Aug-17

4 02E-222.07Site Restorations at Bungalow Complexes (Phase 1: Bungalows

B1s ( 8 Trailers))PQSP $2,037,368 $1,967,723 $162,488 $69,645 3.42% $0 Mar-17 Mar-17

5 40J-209.01 East Stormwater-West and Central Section of Campus DB $2,516,716 $2,511,753 $218,698 $4,963 0.20% $0 Apr-17 Jun-17

6 02E-203.01 Plant Facilities Bldg. Fire Lane PQSP $278,071 $278,071 $13,726 $0 $0 $0 Feb-17 Feb-17Schedule extension due to

inclement weather.

Los Angeles Harbor College

7 03H-350.03 S.A.I.L.S - Infrastructure/ Land & Hardscape/ Security DB $19,046,932 $15,934,596 $0 $3,112,336 16.34% -$473,991.24 Apr-19 May-19

8 03H-350.01 SAILS Student Union2 DB $48,161,013 $60,936,594 $3,395,233 -$12,775,581 -26.53% $15,166,367 Jul-18 Aug-18

9 03H-338.01 Campus Wide ADA Transition DB $1,142,637 $1,689,344 $433,075 -$546,706 -47.85% $619,813 Oct-17 Oct-17

10 40J-302.01 Harbor - Trans and Accessibility Improvements DB $2,282,689 $2,282,689 $20,403 $0 $0 $0 Oct-17 Oct-17

Los Angeles Mission College

11 04M-405.00 Media Arts Center DBB $26,870,963 $27,170,424 $0 -$299,460.69 -1.11% $4,353,997 May-17 Aug-17Elevated cost and schedule risks

due to field changes.

Los Angeles Pierce CollegeNorth of Mall (NOM) - Phase #1 $74,851,786 $74,851,786 $5,373,617 $0 0% $4,891,213

12 05P-502.00 NOM: Life Science, Chemistry, Physics Building LLB $16,735,473 $16,735,473 $1,134,094 $0 0% $1,339,914 Feb-17 Feb-17Chemistry Bldg. occupied in

February ahead of schedule.

13 05P-505.02 NOM: Phase II Renovations - Admin Build. - Int/ Ext. LLB $8,514,794 $8,514,794 $248,366 $0 0% $519,803 Feb-17 Feb-17

14 05P-507.00NOM: Phase II Renovations - Computer Science and Computer

Learning (Phase 1)LLB $8,365,055 $8,365,055 $773,239 $0 0% $185,147 Feb-17 Feb-17

15 05P-510.00 NOM: Phase II Renovations - Behavioral Science, Social science,

Mathematics, and English Buildings (Phase 1)

LLB $16,137,731 $16,137,731

$1,708,582

$0 0%

$141,061

Feb-17 Feb-17

16 05P-530.01 NOM: Campus Center (Existing) - General LLB $2,019,154 $2,019,154 $0 $0 0% $0 Feb-17 Feb-17

PROJECT CHANGE

DD: 30 NOV 16 COST

3

DD: 31 JAN 17

Occupied in February 2017.

Elevated cost risk due to field

changes and cost escalation on

Phase II.

Potential time extension, due to

inclement weather, to be

determined.

SCHEDULE

DD: 31 JAN 17



Type 8

Current

Construction

Funding

Total 1,2

Current

Construction

Total

EAC 5

Current

Total

Contingency

Available

Variance = Current


- EAC

Variance =

Current

Construction

Funding - EAC %

Total Change to

Date 4

Current

Cost Risk 6

Current

Substantial

Completion

Current

Academic

Occupancy

Current

Schedule

Risk 6,7

Comments

PROJECT CHANGE

DD: 30 NOV 16 COST

3

DD: 31 JAN 17

SCHEDULE

DD: 31 JAN 17

17 05P-535.07 NOM: SLE Faculty Center/Campus Center LLB $3,668,065 $3,668,065 $457,880 $0 0% $487,457 Feb-17 Feb-17

18 05P-535.02 NOM: SLE - Classroom Mod/Tech/Low Voltage (PH 1) LLB $7,479,734 $7,479,734 $256,498 $0 0% $113,725 Feb-17 Feb-17

19 05P-542.06 NOM: SLE - ADA/Landscaping (Phase 1) LLB $11,931,780 $11,931,780 $794,958 $0 0% $2,104,106 Feb-17 May-18

Other Projects

20 05P-535.05 Community Services / Ag. Science Building Renovation LLB $6,549,668 $6,549,668 $899,718 $0 0% $121,078 May-17 Aug-17Cost risk due to subsurface

conditions.

21 05P-527.01 Physical Education Facilities General PQSP $18,186,944 $18,186,944 $38,258 $0 0% $41,924 Aug-17 Aug-17

Potential cost risk escalation due

to unforeseen conditions in

hallway.

22 05P-536.00 Expanded Auto and New Tech Ed (Demo Scope Only) PQSP $28,397,560 $28,397,560 $2,768,503 $0 0% $0 Apr-17 Apr-17

Los Angeles Southwest College

23 06S-663.00 Campus-wide Infrastructure Upgrades/ADA Phase II PQSP $624,106 $624,106 $92,104 $0 $0 $0 Feb-17 Mar-17

24 40J-602.01 40J-ADA PQSP $538,533 $538,533 $0 $0 $0 $0 Feb-17 Mar-17

Los Angeles Trade Tech College

25 07T-720.01 East Parking Structure DB $37,823,504 $37,730,533 $146,200 $92,971 0.25% -$43,839,548 Apr-17 Oct-16

Occupied October 2016. Cost

variance due to Construction

Trades Bldg. project de-scoping.

26 40J-701.05 East Parking Structure Additional PV DB $1,041,515 $1,040,390 $0 $1,125 0.11% $1,040,390 Apr-17 Dec-16

27 07T-720.03 East Campus Grounds Improvements DB $1,560,363 $1,542,964 $27,601 $17,399 1.12% $136,458 Apr-17 May-17Elevated cost risk due to soils

contamination.

28 07T-772.06 East Campus Substation and Electrical Distribution System DB $6,753,527 $6,753,527 $175,674 $0 0% $4,833,764 Apr-17 May-17Elevated cost risk due LADWP

requested changes.

29 40J-702.01 ADA Transition and Accessibility Requirements DBB-P $5,863,824 $5,863,824 $783,590 $0 0% $0 Nov-17 Feb-18

Los Angeles Valley College

30 08V-801.00 Media & Performing Arts Center (VACC) LLB $86,625,036 $86,625,035 $4,614,868 $0 0.00% $0 Jan-19 Jun-19

Substantial completion date was

adjusted to account for dry-out

days. Final time extension, due to

inclement weather, to be

determined.

West Los Angeles College

Occupied in February 2017.

Elevated cost risk due to field

changes and cost escalation on

Phase II.



Type 8

Current

Construction

Funding

Total 1,2

Current

Construction

Total

EAC 5

Current

Total

Contingency

Available

Variance = Current


- EAC

Variance =

Current

Construction

Funding - EAC %

Total Change to

Date 4

Current

Cost Risk 6

Current

Substantial

Completion

Current

Academic

Occupancy

Current

Schedule

Risk 6,7

Comments

PROJECT CHANGE

DD: 30 NOV 16 COST

3

DD: 31 JAN 17

SCHEDULE

DD: 31 JAN 17

31 09W-979.34 Central Plant Phase 2 PQSP $1,263,193 $1,266,962 $103,949 -$3,769.09 -0.30% $0 Feb-17 Feb-17

Elevated schedule risk due to

extended DSA review period. PMO

meeting with DSA weekly.

Active Construction Total $400,149,854 $410,425,560 $21,216,727 -$10,275,706.20 -2.57% -$3,718,372

Notes

2. Los Angeles Harbor College SAILS Student Union started Contract Construction Work in October 2016.

3. Construction costs includes Construction new, renovation, temporary facilities, and inspection and testing.

4. Total approved change orders and change order proposals as of 12/1/2016; excludes notice of changes

5. Estimate at Completion (EAC) includes all changes; NOC, COP, CO

6. Current cost and schedule risk colors and comments are updated on a weekly basis based on current project progress and events.

7. Current schedule risk is forward looking risk relative to Academic Occupancy.

8. DBB = Design-Bid Build DB = Design-Build LLB = Lease Leaseback PQSP = Prequalified Service Providers DBB-P = Design-Bid-Build - Prequalified

1. "Current Construction Funding Total" includes design cost for Design-Build contracts.

LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT … · projects that agree to be bound ... Harbor...

Documents

Transcript of LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT … · projects that agree to be bound ... Harbor...