Detroit City Council Formal Session, 10 a.m. part 2
7:11PM Nov 22, 2022
Speakers:
President Sheffield
Keywords:
contract
service
member
chair
disability
paratransit
hear
vote
trans
director
requested
ddot
community
residents
move
bid
transit
city council
question
provide
I do understand that, you know, if we cut it down for three years we're going through another process. I in good conscience cannot I in good conscience cannot sacrifice 70% of the service or 700 rise but we shouldn't be here today having to make that decision if we would have done this adequately and reached out to the public so as a chair of the disability Task Force I am I'm talking to you Director OSB as well. And even to the administration we've got
to do better.
We have over 130,000 residents in the city of Detroit that deal with disabilities every day. And as reflected through our last budget priorities, which is the biggest increase in the Office of Disability Services. We are watching this council is watching. I'm not the only one at the table that feels this way. And so we've got to show better respect and do better I am going to vote on this contract today. I'm not going to vote no because I'm not going to sacrifice the service. But I wanted to make my statement be known that this can't happen again. And even through this contract, and to Director Stahl who I've spoken to, we are going to be looking at the performance because we still have the ability to come back as a city and terminate this contract if they're not performing up to service and we will be keeping a very close eye on that. I know I will from my office, I know the task force will as well. And we will also making recommendations for the disability task force that we meet with DDOT on a regular basis to examine those performance metric performance metrics of that contract. So we know where we are at for members of our disabled community. And with that amount of present that concludes my statement. Again, I'm not happy I have to support this today but I'm in a position where I cannot sacrifice this certain, you know, 700 rise. I can't I can't do that in good conscience. So thank you, Madam President. Thank you.
All right. Awesome. You have originally requested someone to come over here and I think the individual has joined us, Mr. Sam.
Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon, Director south. Thank you for joining us today. I don't know how much of what I said earlier you were able to hear or see but my question is, you know, I'll just say the residents, the disabled community, were hoping that when your office stood up, that they would have an advocate, an advocate on the inside. This issue has been brought to us numerous times. But at least at the community of the whole, we haven't heard your voice. Haven't heard or seen your input in this process. What is your commitment moving forward? To determine or to ensure to ensure working with your partner department, a DDOT that all the issues that we've had in the past that we don't have moving forward with this paratransit system that the voices of the disabled, the riders in particular, that there will be raised and ensure again that not just after the problems occur, but during the process while the monitoring is taking place? That their sentiments their concerns will be addressed in real time so that we don't have this issue at the end of a contract. If you can provide us some comments on just those statements. I would appreciate it and I think that it would help provide some additional insight into how folks may vote on this particular contract. Thank you.
I'm the director for the Office of database repair. To respond to your comments about the ODA role. I just connected with Michael Stanley, the paratransit manager. And I know my cow geography has shared with me his plan earlier in the year that you're planning to take the paratransit enhance, which is important because we have more control over the quality of the for the disability community. So I wouldn't try to cut down the service at that point. It's so important to keep it running. For the ODA, we will collaborate with the data and making sure that the database a community concern that occurred. I know Mike, Michael Stein informed me that he had put together a training program for the bus operator, and that's so important too. But moving forward. I'm working with data to make sure that the quality improve, and although we will involve their database community in the future, so I'm not sure if I answered your question. I hope
you thank you for that. So, the main crux as member Dr. Hall mentioned is the training which How are you going to infuse yourself into this training process to again ensure that the disabled community has a voice as it relates to how these drivers are trained and the service that's provided? I need to hear just a little bit more about that if you don't mind please.
Okay, I don't want to put my minecraft dynamic back but the trainee atop um, if you could, if you don't mind if I turn over to my colleague took the time to Miko stay, if that's okay with you.
Yeah, and I will certainly receive it from Mr. saili. But as the director we would I would like to hear from you as well. So we can certainly hear again from the sustainably based on council President's desire, but as the director of the person who we also want to hold accountable for this, want to look at hear from you as well what your commitment is
sustainable.
Yeah, I'm committed to representing the disability community and with the training and the paradigm that bought that, because I have received a lot of concern and I pat them on to do that. So I know what they're what the disability community is concerned about, you know, making sure that the lower for a person who have mobility, disability or getting on the boat and also the attitude of the bad driver, make sure they improve. So with the training, I will be embalmed and making sure that they cover a boiler them make sure that they plowed proper, especially if they're at a passenger I mean the rider is waiting for the band. Make sure that that are met that so there's a lot of it's just touching the open question but I want to let you know that I'm I support they do plan to provide training for the driver and I will be there mixture covered Abelard them disability advocate and so on.
Thank you. All right. Thank you
through the Chair. Yes,
yes. I think the portion of the thing one thing that Mr. Sam was saying is that he's worked with Mr. Staley and a myriad of things that Mr. Staley could go over. If you'd like
when it pertains to training.
Right, Mr. scraggly
through the chair to President Pro Tem. Hey, the conversations that I've had with Mr. Sam had to do with what was what was in the request for proposal that was issued in the spring of 2022 as it relates to driver training. And just to give you a sense of some of the enhancements that were in that portion of the RFP there were a minimum of 31 hours of classroom training that was required under the new RFP. There are 11 training modules in that minimum of 31 hours of classroom training. And just to highlight two of them. There's a requirement that 10 hours of sensitivity training and passenger assistance technique is provided to every new hire, as well as two hours of training on various mobility devices and the use of the vehicle securement system in addition to the minimum requirement for 31 hours of classroom training, there's also a requirement for a minimum of eight hours of annual or refresher training for all drivers. And that would include four hours of sensitivity training and passenger assistance techniques, and also for hours of safe vehicle operation, focusing on the accessibility features of the vehicle and the proper use thereof. Perhaps most importantly, there is a provision in the request for proposal that remedial training for a minimum of one hour be offered in the event of an accident incident customer complaint that is at the discretion of DDOT in terms of how much remedial training will be provided by the for service providers based on the type of incident the seriousness of the incident, whether it's a first offense or beyond the first offense. And again DDOT also has the ability which it will exercise of removing the driver from service depending on the nature of the incident, unless and until that remedial training is provided.
Thank you so much. Member Johnson.
Thank you, Madam President. As we started this conversation, this afternoon, I don't believe I heard a complete response to what happens if this was to be voted down. There was some discussion about an extension of the current contract to be able to go back and negotiate a three year contract I believe directly all this we started responding to that and then started answering a different question or responding to a different statement.
Director always be here the
chair I'm sorry, let me be more clear. If the city does not approve this contract today, we'll be advising riders that we will only be able to take rides for 30%. That will begin on December 18. We'll be advising people that we currently can't take reservations beyond the 30 days. Then what we would do is we would have to rebid the 70% that is voted down. So rebid the contract, which means riders will be out would would be without full service during that timeframe. That timeframe as mentioned by Mr. Ms. You stall could take either three months plus but at least three months. So during that period of time, there would not be full service
Thank you through Madam President, to Director Oh, this be so are you also saying that we cannot extend the existing contract that trans they have currently has to allow that process to take place.
The existing contract was deemed terminated at the end of the year and we and our new structure will be taking over at the first of the year. So the option of extending trans of as is that people have been complaining about is not part of the discussion at this time. Anyway.
Okay. And then I do have a question about performance metrics. I know we've talked about it previously. Do we have performance metrics in the contract that speaks to on time, percentages as well as delivery? Error thresholds in making sure that we meet a certain percentage of either of those, and if we don't, then that being grounds for termination of the contract?
As requested by city council, it was a few meetings ago, we were told to go back and speak to the community that takes the service and to come up with a scorecard that they agreed to that we would come back and report not only to you as a council quarterly, but also to the local du Lac. And put it on our website for full transparency. We did that. It came back in the same condition the same format that we originally came to city council with and at the last meeting, we indicated that that was done so yes, there are a full book performance indicators we not only have a full PowerPoint to it, and Mr. Staley can also talk to it. But it was clear that the riders were happy with that as we move forward, and we bring this on a on a regular basis or a quarterly basis as requested. We will be reporting where things are and at that time, as you know, under the terms of the contract currently before Council, we can terminate at any time if we feel that the vendors are not providing adequate service. That could be after one year that could be after two year that could be after three years. So you have that ability. So I'm not going to say that it's linked directly to terminating trans dev because it's actually laid out to to manage and oversee trans Dev 70% and people's 30%. We're going to be applying this to both sides because we have to make sure that everybody is held accountable. To get people to where they need to go. So to this point, we provided the resolution that was asked for we provided the key performance indicators that was asked for we did the research on the years of the contract. And we've provided everything that we've been asked for to date I believe, as you stall wanted to add a little bit more.
Yes. Through the Chair, I want to add that written into the contract itself, our performance expectations. For example, the contractor shall meet 95% On time appointment and pick up performance standard. There also ADA guidelines that must be met on completion of all trips as scheduled and weekly metrics that the contractor will be providing to DDOT including total trips, total eight trips total no show trips total Miss trips on time performance and trips per hour. This information will be reviewed in our regular performance meetings between OCP DDOT and the vendor and published in the scorecard on a quarterly basis.
And through the Chair, if I could just add one more thing because I know it's a lot of information I forgot. Do I almost forgot what I was getting ready to say see that old age is something else, isn't it? If we go through this process, again, let's say we move forward with 30% and we go through this procurement process again, there's no guarantee that the exact same result may happen. And the reason why is because since Transdev is included but they're going to just provide insurance and assume assume really reliability for the smaller companies who are smaller minority owned businesses they need this umbrella in order to come forward. It is quite possible that in three to four months, we could be in the same position again. So I just wanted to kind of put it out there that we will move forward either way and we're going to provide the best service at 30%. Mr. staling.
Through the Chair, I just want to I want to re emphasize something that director unisol said and that is the service providers will be providing us operational data every day through the use of the mobile data terminal that's onboard the vehicle. We are in charge of the data. We will be tracking the data through the reservation process to the scheduling process and most notably through the dispatch process, but the data collection and the compilation of the data and then the reporting out of the data at whatever intervals are indicated but nothing less than on a monthly basis. And on a quarterly basis through the scorecard that will be handled by DDOT.
Thank you, Johnson.
Thank you, Madam President. So if we were to move forward with this today Do we have have we asked for the Auditor General to do performance audits, maybe by annually, so that council can be assured that performance has actually or the quality of service has increased? Director elbows be
through the chair. No, we have not done that.
Okay, I'd like to make that suggestion. If we do decide to move forward. I personally am not really interested in supporting a five year contract. I think if we could slow the process down take the time to extend the current contract recognizing that data is moving in a different row perhaps in a different row with people's just for initially until we can solidify another contract that allows us to move forward for the 70% of users, then it would make me feel so much more comfortable recognizing that at the end of the day, our focus is on providing quality quality service to our residents and not just providing anything and just saying that okay, we know that we are going to improve the quality of service because as Pro Tim indicated, I think it's important for all of us to make sure that Director Oh those be is the person who is responsive to the residents. Because we all know that everyone will come before this body to address any complaints that they have and just want to make sure that director OSB is aware that those will be referred directly to you because now you are taking on the responsibility of making sure that the service is going to be improved based on what has been provided to residents in the past
through the chair.
For the past 14 months, I've been moving forward with this process indicating that myself and DDOT will take responsibility. So that's extremely clear. I do I would like a little clarity on what you're asking because I was a little confused if you can extend the existing transitive contract that everybody's been complaining about in its current form. Until we move forward I'm kind of confused on that. The way that we have it set up now is that we indicated per the public and per city council to Transdev that they were going to end their contract as it stands, which includes scheduling, dispatch, customer service, all that they're going to end that at the end of the year. And we're going to take it over and doing that they then had to go to their subcontractors and let them know it's ending at the end of the year. Are you saying now to try to extend that one which would kind of throw things off so I'm trying to get some clarity if you don't mind?
Through you madam president to divert to Oh was B? Yes. I think what I'm hearing from community is they would prefer to extend this contract for let's say four months, five months, as opposed to moving into a five year contract, recognizing that we still don't know that service is going to improve
erector OSB
through the chair I that has so many complexities especially when it comes to procurement and to legal that's beyond my bailiwick to be able to even answer that directly but I don't know whether I'm as you still can help me out or not or whether illegal can get on but I really don't know that is a complete 360 From what we've been doing moving forward. But the way that it's formatted now is that we have before you a bid that we went out for for five years, two companies one one of them you gave five years, the one that was in first place, we're now trying to do this hybrid portion. I have not went to staff to try to find out how we could actually do that. The way that it is formatted is we can move forward what you've approved, and I'll run the best 30% that we can January 1 Because we've already canceled everything. We have 32 people that we're hiring 22 that we currently have in position. I was just downstairs yesterday talking to our new customer service reps, we've got everything ready to go to try to pause that and double pay also I don't know how we'd be able to do that.
Director star
through the chair. This isn't
the implications are operational. Technically. We could extend the contract, but that would be extending as director Oglesby said, the current mode of operation that has been the source of all of the complaints about the service.
I think we get that. We get that but I think the community is okay. With that temporarily until we get a shorter contract. I think that's where we are today. They're okay with I mean, it's not acceptable, unfortunately, but they're okay with that level of what they've been receiving right now. To allow us to go back and rebuild a shorter contract that gives them a longer you know, a greater sense of comfort to ability in the long term. So we understand that the service is still inadequate, but right now it allows us the opportunity to be able to be in a shorter contract. So is with member Johnson propose something that is an option at this time?
I do that through the chair. If I could answer I'm sorry. Sandra, if you can through the chair. I believe the answer is no. I believe the answer is simply no simply because if we tried to go back in a short period of time and go to transact it we're required transept to agree. So we're going back to transept to say, Okay, you want what we want you to do us a favor and extend with no guarantee that you're going to win again. I don't know how that will work, but that will require a negotiations and quite frankly, we're running out of time. I have to actually let the people know by December 18, that we'll be advising people that we're taking service at 30%. If they do say no. So I think that's a major risk. But again, I'll pass it back to procurement if they think that that makes sense. Then I'll pass it back
to procurement and member Johnson used to have the floor
through the chair through the chair the current contract before this honorable body is strong, it has strong performance requirements. It has the legal authority to terminate in the case of nonperformance not only in the regular articles and terms that are in every contract but also written in the scope itself. It is at a price that is that has been negotiated and much better than the price that was offered for a three year contract. This is the contract that we recommend for your approval today.
Alright, and I just have to say I can't stress how important it is to allow this body adequate time to deliberate on contracts of $49 million contract and we are in a very as Mirador Hall stated, unfortunate situation. If we vote this down, guarantee our offices will be flooded with costs, because lack of service to those who have disabilities. And so I would just urge again, the administration to miss Fulton and we have a $49 million contract coming before council to give counsel adequate time to do what we were put here to do. And that is to go back and forth to negotiate to add to amend and clearly we just haven't had the amount of time to do so. It doesn't sit well with me either that if if I voted down that 700 People will be out of service. So again, council was just you know, put in a bad situation. And it's unfortunate. It really is. So I just want to make sure again, that huge contracts like this $49 million, and I'm not sure the procurement process what needs to change that it comes before Council in enough time. That gives us the time for us to do our due diligence to go back and forth into advocate for those who have come before city council member Doha. And then I would like to kind of bring this to an end so we could take a break, and then come back. We still have a long agenda today.
And just member Doha. Thank you and just finally just just to clarify a couple of questions. It needs to be no I know we talked about extending the contract, the vendor would have to agree to extend it correct. Right so we can't make them extend it. So to that point, again, it is a terrible position to be put in and I think you're hearing that from all of the all of my colleagues and everybody's sitting at this table because you are you awesomely almost leave us no choice. And that to me, that's something that that we it cannot happen that way. It cannot happen that way. Also relative and you know, I know that is more of a legal question as well. We've already passed the 30%, which is a portion of what this new model would be. So it's like we're paying for the 30% and then, you know, if that were somehow possible, we'd be paying for 30% and then paying for what someone already does. So then it's like a waste of money because you can't incorporate them into the new model. So, again, these discussions is had to be be better. I again, I want to reiterate though that we will be closely monitoring this contract. And although you will come in front of the council, obviously quarterly. I would I would send I'm going to send out invitations for you to give quarterly or give reports to the disability Task Force as well. And that that is what I wanted to state Madam President. Thank you.
Thank you member waters.
Thank you, Madam President. Wow, you know, I'm so tired of being put in a situation ultimatums. You do it or you die. Those kinds of situations and this is one of those situations. See, I've been listening to the ad at a community because it's very important that I do that because they use the other ones that use the service. I don't understand why Transdev was allowed to bid again, since they provided such poor quality of service in the first place. That should not have been allowed to be so so here we are. At you know, I just can't in good conscience. Be supportive of Transdev getting this contract once again. The ADA community feels so extremely strong about it. Apparently the servers are so horrible that they have been they are willing to make various sacrifices in order to stop this poor quality of service that Transdev has been providing. So that's why I am Madam President. I just I need for those who use this service to be somewhat satisfied. And we're not there. And I don't know why we couldn't go back to the table. And do something. Meet the at a community somewhere halfway. You say you're putting all of these performance measures in place. I don't know why they weren't in place, you know in the beginning. But we still have to give them Transdev is what you're saying. That's all this the only option. Just give them Transdev again, Transdev once again gets what the heck they want. And the ADA communities still left out in the cold so to speak. So. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you through the chair,
Director staff,
um, through the chair. I do hear the concerns and in the challenges of this contract because of the vendor and I want to commit that OCP will be present at every meeting of the disability taskforce that remember Dr. Hall chairs to listen and help make sure in coordination with DDOT that this vendor is held accountable and I will just I will just I hear you loud and clear. And this we brought this contract up to Council at the beginning of October and it's now been six weeks and I any continuing meetings or discussions you any member of this body or the members of the disability community would like to have with OCP I'm committing to meet
all right thank you. Oh, President Roh Tim has caught the question. So that's the motion. Are there any objections? I object? Any other
objections? Objections.
Member Johnson, myself, immerse in general Maryland. Number such as a male
member Whitfield Callaway objection.
The motion does fail so that debate can continue. Member Johnson
Thank you, Madam President. I'm not sure I just wanted to make a motion actually for the Auditor General to conduct by annual performance audit on this contract, shall it move forward?
I like that. It's a great idea. I'm sure we all support that. Motion. So there's a motion on the floor. Are there any objections? Hearing none, that is approved and that was a memo requesting a resolution be drafted. Yes.
Okay. Mr. Whittaker be happy to undertake that.
All right. Great. Any additional comments and if I may have noticed this out the ordinary. I just want to ask really quick, Miss Franklin and maybe Richard really briefly. I know you all have advocated that we do not approve the contract as is representing two different organizations. Are you okay, with a 70% reduction in paratransit if we are to vote against this because you're asking us to do this and I just want to hear directly from you all today. Whether or not you are okay. With a 70% reduction if he could just be very brief please I just for my personal reasons. Thank you No, I just want as is was being presented if we were to vote no, we don't have another contract before us. Right so we don't have another contract before as I know everyone has advocated for a three year contract that is not what is before Council. What is before us is to vote down what is currently proposed which will reduce the services by 70%. And I just want to hear from you or you and also raise your briefly if that is what you are okay with.
I know you our back is against the wall to our back is against the wall too. I cannot stay in here and say that I agree to a 70% reduction of the service. What I say is we should not allow trans death to mistreat us for another five years. Now. If you all have to hold it over for three more months. Then we need to do that. Because we were promised that they would not be in the equation. After December. They know this and they knew this in May when they did the RFP process okay, so they had plenty of time the fact that they brought it to you in October. That's on the department.
Thank you. All right. Thank you, Richard, really briefly, again, just regarding the 70% reduction that will happen if we were to vote against the contract before us.
There's no way we're happy with that. And they've been for the past two weeks, they've been saying that they could do the three year contract just with cost overruns. They shouldn't be we should not have a 70% reduction. We should need to extend the other contract. Like Miss Johnson said we should approve the three year contract like what's worse before but if they put forward this No, I mean, excuse me if they reduced the service 70% Because under no circumstances should you vote for a five year contract. They're trying to force your hand into doing it don't do.
Thank you. Thank you, Richard. I just wanted to hear that because again, voting no has huge implications. We are as always city council, the mayor is put in a very, very unfortunate situation. And with that being said, we can move on I actually would like to if we could take a break before we move forward and then go ahead. We can we can vote on this and then we can take a quick break and move forward. Is there any other discussion on this particular line item? Right here? Sure.
Madam Chair, I do. I just have a quick two quick question. My first question is can we use opera dollars since we're in a emergency situation here to provide temporary emergency transportation services I see a lot of vans with that are handicap retrofitted. I don't know another word for it. And they produce they provide these services to their constituents. I see them out in Royal Oak. I see them out in Ferndale. They go to the house they pick up you know the resident and they take them to their appointments. So is there any way we can use Arbor dollars to hire these independent insured companies that provide these types of services? In the city of Detroit, wow, wow, for the next three months, so we don't have to suffer with 70% loss and services. So I'm wondering it, can we have a conversation about that? Now or maybe I don't know how the vote is gonna go. I know how I'm voting, which is a no vote. But it would be great if we could find out whether or not opera dollars can be used to hire independent companies to provide these type of transportation services.
Thank you Madam Chair. Thank you. Does anyone have a response to that?
No, I don't do the chair.
This is not a response about the ability to use ARPA dollars but I would imagine that there would be an administrative challenge to finding and working with various different providers on an emergency basis, and that was the that was the importance of having a runway to move, you know, to have new contracts in place.
Through the Chair, if I could add to that. I'm trying to think this is new, kind of thrown. I don't know how opera dollars would fit in. I will tell you that from a person that run paratransit and run transit for 30 years. It was a stretch to try to set up paratransit within 12 months we were taking over something monumental to try to put something together. Within a month period, I'd say from an administrative standpoint is impossible. I know that I don't have the ability to do it. But then if that's what the wish is to go back and look at, I can look at it but I can tell you that this service is so important. And there's so many elements in play from the FDA federal transportation administration. From the Department of Transportation from the ADA laws. I have no idea how what you're requesting would reflect that but I would tell you it would be a difficult task, coming up through Thanksgiving and then coming into the Christmas holiday losing actual real time days because you know, quite frankly, during those times, we sort of lose daylight, if you will.
Madam Chair, my last question, what I would like to know what other cities what other services do they all use? Transdev. And you know, Southfield, Grand Rapids, Lansing, what other what other services out there to provide this type of services. Our residents are the folks who use the service. Don't want it shall not be committing to a five year contract with the service that is has been providing bad poor services for the last six years. That means 11 years. If we if we vote this up, so I would like to see what other companies are being used in Metro Detroit or you know, in Ohio, what other other than trans debt and I think it's the French company, not that that matters. But um, you know, Madam Chair, I
don't have a chair if you'd like so thank you. Thank you the chair if you could answer Yeah, through the chair. I can answer yes, there are other organizations out there. I can spit them all off the top of my head right now if you'd like one is Keolis. The other one is mv transit. The other one is first transit you have Transdev. Then you have believe it's a Maruti group and it continues on and on. When we put the RFP out for a long period. of time. They did not bid on it because they're not interested. The only big company that was interested in this was Transdev portions of it may be simply because, you know, there's not a lot of big money that can come to the companies like that in our current structure. We took away the money portion we took away the scheduling, dispatch, customer service and eligibility. Those type companies really looking for an all inclusive take it completely over including vehicles, which which was very clear that wasn't wanted because we wanted to give local companies like some of these local minority subcontractor firms that are under the trans dev umbrella to be able to do it. In addition, I'd say one of the top two companies next to Transdev is first transit and I just found out that first transit just purchased them. So if we go back out for bid again, we can work I'm sure we'll get some bids. But as far as one of the big companies, I just don't see it happening. We can go for it again. We pushed for an open bit and open process. At the very beginning. Everybody sat down with trans Dev, so we put an RFP out expecting to get a lot of bids to bid on and we ended up with two bids. That's just factual. We can't change it. One was 30% one was 70%. So the option moving forward again on the no vote is very simple. We would accept that and move forward and run 30% of the transit while we go back out and hopefully get a different result from the same process that we just put in place.
All right. Thank you. Thank you. We're going to move forward. Now. There was a member of Santiago Romero. When did you move this for approval or just discussion?
I moved it for discussion. That is correct, Madam President. I can motion for approval if everyone is ready. Just really want to echo the frustrations, the heartache that we are all feeling because as I mentioned last week, I do not feel comfortable moving forward with this and now understanding that we are being given ultimately this ultimatum. It is difficult to not support this in order to ensure that we do have services for our residents. But to be completely honest, I'm a little worried. I'm a little worried. I am grateful that we're bringing this in house. I am so grateful for member Johnson and the oversight, the added oversight that we're asking, but I just want to ensure that bringing this in house and that having this contract will ensure quality services and it's it's hard to believe just hearing over and over what we're hearing right now with our bus transportation. So this is just really really hard to accept to to accept that we will provide better services in house I'm really hoping that we do. I'm hoping that we will with these accountability measures and metrics that we are able to pull this contract cancel the contract, if it's not meeting our needs. But this is this is very difficult. And I wholeheartedly agree that we need more time. We need to be able to deliberate this more before it gets to this point where we're really left with no choice. With that, Madam President, I was going to make a motion to approve llandinam 16.2.
Most do you want discussion? Remember young discussion.
Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Oglesby. I just wanted to say and I want to echo the sentiments of my colleagues here, this is extremely disappointing. And this is the Do or die situation. And the problem with this is that we're playing with people's lives here. And we're playing people's lives who are the most vulnerable, the least of these the most peep the people who we should really be going out of our way. We should be willing to give the shirt off our backs and make sure that they have and it's disappointing. It's frustrating. It's infuriating, and I've gone back and forth in this in my mind, and I like to pride myself as a man who's extremely decisive. But I think we have got like, you know, members, hurrah, said we got to do better than this. The question I want to ask was, was there ever a conversation where we talked to a lot of small companies, and they could pool their resources together to be able to provide the service. So you would expand, you know, the contracts of multiple small companies and then they would kind of form an organization and pool their resources gather to be able to make a bid on this contract? Was that ever discussed at all?
I believe procurement can speak to that, but I can say that the way that the RFP was written, it gave the opportunity for all companies to bid, especially local companies and companies that are currently providing service under TransTech. They all have the ability to bid. Once we put the RFP out, we're in a position that we can't reach out and do anything other than to accept the bids. We can't start formulating groups and loading the bed or anything like that. So we sit back and we wait for it, we minimize conversation, and we wait until we get the bids that come in. I think one thing that is extremely important, and I've heard it over and over again, is that once those bids came in and the RFP RFPs came in to the level that they were because we already had the structure. We attempted to come to city council so I did bring it to public health and it was punted the first week. And then when I went to public health the second week, it was looked at and approved to go to formal not the following day, but the following weeks was punted the third week. Then I showed up in person and presented it in which it was punted again because we were told we needed to create KPIs. We created the KPIs and talked to the community came back presented the KPIs on a resolution and and and city council said that they didn't like the fact that a resolution came forward in a short notion, which was just adding to it. We were adding more and more just to make everyone feel comfortable. And then it was put punted another week and then we've come back we're on week six. So we have been coming to city council, the moment that the RFP process had ended and it started coming in. So when I hear there needed to be more time perhaps that is true, but I will tell you and you can go back and look at the tapes. The sense of urgency that I'm speaking to you now is the same sense of urgency that I speak to whenever I get in front of city council as far as the procurement portion was used.
Yes through the chair. Companies are welcome to come up with their proposals, but it would not be in compliance with our policy to suggest how they should propose their bid.
Okay, I just want to say the army I'm not on a public health committee. I'm sure the chairwoman can more than capable speak for itself. But I just want to say my concern, primarily was not so much with the time but so much with the other bidders. I just think that there was a real opportunity here for us to find someone else knowing the reputation that trans Dev has, I mean, everywhere it's rare. Well, you went everywhere you go, everybody says the same thing. But everybody has said the same thing is a noun or verb and I don't like transit. You understand what I'm saying to you. So it's like for the city for the administration not to be able to do all that they can and make sure that we have an alternative option, I think to me is a failure. And I think that we can do better and I think that the residents deserve better. So I'm not questioning the time and I'm not questioning any of that. I understand the situation that we're in and we're going to have to make a decision. But what I'm trying to say is, I just don't feel like there was any real intensity or there was any real desire to find anyone else to do this contract. That's really what this is. I don't think it's the timing. I don't think it's I think it's the fact that we have trend even though I understand the city is taking up all the everything they're taking over. Every other operation except services. I get that. And I get the yeoman's work that you've done to make this better. I understand it to get this across the finish line. But I think it's just that trans to it. I understand that it was the other providers Metro live bright. They were really bad actors. They were really the ones that were bad actors and transit fell asleep at the switch because they didn't do their job to hold them accountable. But I think that the trans dev name is so incredibly toxic. You're saying is just so incredibly poisonous and venomous at this point, that we're not gonna be able to move anything. And that's why I told you earlier about the three year deal. Now look, I understand you have some problems with that. But you know, look, it's like football. Sometimes you just gotta take what the defense has given you. And I'm telling you, I just don't see this going through without some sort of compromise here.
Thank you. All right.
All right, colleagues, I would like to move forward with us voting. I just want to say really quickly that our office didn't request the quarterly monitoring, performance matrix monitoring to be submitted to city council. And just lastly, stress that we can as a council as a body collectively cancel this contract based on convenience and performance. And I stand ready and willing to exercise that option if objectives are not met. And customer satisfaction, improvements are not met as well. So I just want to state that again for the record. And then Mr. Whittaker and then I would like to move forward with voting yes.
Just wanted to say, Madam President, did the city have that option? But the city council doesn't, right. Well, we I think you can put a lot of pressure on the administration to act to take to take that course. Should the evidence presented itself
Thank you for clarifying that. And City Council has the ability to use this platform to allow public dialogue regarding any unsatisfaction with the services and to use this platform to allow that conversation to take place and I plan on using this seat in this position. To do so if in fact it is not adequate to the residents who are utilizing the services so we can bring the contract back before us and have discussion and urge the administration to cancel based on performance in convenience as well. Alright, so, Member Santiago Ramiro. Did you make a motion? Or would you like to make a motion?
I can. Just one quick question. Madam President. Are you saying that the success metrics will be shared here in formal or I also did talk with the administration about those being shared at PHS. So which one would you like? Can people pick up above? Okay. Just wanted to get that clarity. Thank you, Madam President. With that I motion to approve on that. I'm 16.2
Roll Call. Roll Call.
vote. The motion was made to vote. Okay, so the motion was made to vote Pro Tem then also requested a motion to call the question
that's exactly what's happening. Okay.
So just move on to make sure.
And then I also heard roll
call yet roll call requested Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
Councilmember waters?
No.
Councilmember Winfield.
Katelyn. No.
Councilmember young? Yes. Council President Sheffield.
Yes with the statement.
Councilmember Daryl Hall.
Yes. What a statement.
Councilmember Johnson?
No with the statement as a member
Santiago with Merrill.
Yes, with the statement.
Also, President potentate? Yes. Five yeas, three names.
Right. That resolution is approved. And again, looking forward to the ongoing dialogue with all of the individuals that were here throughout this process through member door hos Task Force and with the director of DDOT as well. Alright colleagues, there is a request for us to take a quick pause. How was 15 minutes how long do you all want it to sound good? Alright. Alright, so we'll take a 15 minute pause and come back at 320 Yeah, I'm gonna I was gonna mention recess yet. We will recess for 15 minutes
Whoa, are going to learn learn everybody know we're very young. I'm just the last time I set the time because I can hide you know, you know, whatever we do. Okay.
I'll probably be nervous like trying to get an answer and you know how to be okay, yeah. Hey, look, I want to get up here pretty safe. But we didn't last I wrote rules and everybody tells me Okay, now I got Sunday care in some ways we. Don't want to say good up, John. Oh, no.
