The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 09142004 - SD4 ......._. ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... .._...._. _ _......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ........ ......... ......... .......... ........ _ _ .... ......... Contra i fO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 1 FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Costa GATE: AUGUST 16, 2004 County SUBJECT: UPDATE ON COUNTY'S EXPERIENCE WITH 3>04 THE PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT SPECT#C REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AM JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS 1. ACCEPT report from the County Administrator, General Services Director, and Public Works Director on experience thus far with the County's policy requiring Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) on construction projects costing in excess of$1 million. 2. RECOGNIZE that due to fiscal constraints, the PLA policy has been applicable to only nine prcqects since January 2002 and that the Board of Supervisors ultimately waived the policy on three of the nine projects due to concerns related to the core workforce provision of the original PLA policy. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: S�� RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 1--f COMM A OF BOARD COMMITTEE - 3VE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ,- - --'- GAYLE B;,It A,CHAIR MARK DeSAtlLNIER ACTION OF BOARD ON c APPROVE AS RECOMMENDED: QT1WER ACCEPTED the report and APPROVED the recommendations with a modification to to include sbbUontr'atore-data in the future. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AC'T'ION TAKEN AND ENTERED UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN AYES: NOES: ATTESTED: SEPTEMBER 14,2004 ABSENT. ABSTAIN: JOHN SWEETEN,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CONTACT: JULIE ENEA(925)335-1077 BY ,DEPUTY CC: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE STAFF BARTON J.GILBERT,GYRAL.SERVICES DIRECTOR MAURICE StVU,PUBLIC WORKS LECTOR LAURA LOCKWOOD,CAPITAL.FACILITIESIDEBT MGMT DIRECTOR ......... ......... ......... ............... . ...................._... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... __. ._.... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ... . ........................................................................................... ........................................ ,.SS's Project Labor Agreement Policy Update August 16, 2004 Internal Operations Committee Page 2 3. With respect to the nine projects advertised for bid under the PLA policy, FIND that: ■ the County did not experience a noticeable diminishment in the number of bids submitted for PLA projects as compared to non-PLA projects; • bid prices for six of the nine projects were lower than the architectiengineer cost estimates; • with the exception of one project, the length of time from bid opening to bid award did not increase for PLA projects as compared to non-PLA projects; • bids from non-union contractors were received on all but three of the projects; ■ the lowest responsive and responsible bidders on all nine projects were union contractors, and • one of the nine projects prompted a wage violation 1 dispute between the Electricians' Union and the electrical subcontractor to which County is not a party and which has not affected the daily operations of the project. 4. DIRECT the County Administrator to report back to the IOC in one year with an update on performance under the PLA policy, and that the report include data on project completion dates and finalproject costs for all construction projects since the inception of the PLA polcy. BACKGROUND In January 2002, the Board of Supervisors adopted a policy requiring the use of Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) on all'County construction projects costing in excess of$1 million. This policy was modified in August 2003 to incorporate a standardized PLA format and to clarify that the$1 million threshold applies to the actual construction cost of a project, not simply the estimated cost. The Board of Supervisors directed the County Administrator to report to the Internal Operations Committee (IOC) in one year regarding the County's experience implementing and administering the PLA policy. At its August 16, 2404 meeting, the IOC met with staff from the County Administrator's Office, and General' Services and Public Works departments to review the construction projects since the inception of the PLA policy to determine the impacts of the policy. In addition to the matters described in the recommended findings, our Committee discussed with staff project completion dates and final project costs as compared to early estimates, which were not reflected in the staff reports. Staff indicated that there are numerous factors affecting completion dates and final project costs so as to make it difficult to know how much project delay or cost overruns, if any, is attributable to the PLA policy. Recognizing that difficulty, our Committee decided that Project Labor Agreement Policy Update August 16,2004 Internal Operations+Commtttere Page 3 project completion dates and final project costs are valuable information irrespective of the PLA policy and requested staff to include that information in all subsequent reports. In addition, the Committee requested the next report to be cumulative, showing all construction projects since January 2002. .................................. ........................... ...... ...... .................... JZ1 COUNTY OF CONTRA CosrA OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISMTOR MEMORANDUM DATE: August 9, 2004 To: Internal Operations Committee FROM: John Sweeten,County Administrator Laura W. Lockwood,Director,Capital Facilities and Debt Manageme SUBJECT: UPDATE ON PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT POLICY In January 2002,the Board of Supervisors adopted a policy requiring the use of Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) on all County construction projects in excess of$1 million. This policy was later modified to incorporate a standardized PLA format and to clarify that the $1M threshold applies to the actual construction cost of a project,not simply the estimated cost.The Board also directed the CAO to report back in one year to the Internal Operations Committee regarding the County's experience implementing and administering the revised PLA policy. Please find attached reports from the Directors of Public Works and General Services regarding their departments'experiences with PLAs on County construction projects. From May 2002 through December 2003, there were six County construction projects awarded to bidders that included PLAs, collectively totaling$11.6 million in value.Thus far, the County has not seen a diminishment in the number of bids submitted for PLA projects versus non- PLA projects,although the length of time from bid opening to bid award did increase for a Public Works project subject to the PLA policy as compared to the department's non-PLA projects. To date,there has been one reported wage violation/dispute under the standardized PLA format.The Electricians' Union (IBEW) is using the arbitration provisions of the Agreement to resolve a dispute with an electrical subcontractor regarding hiring through the IBEW hall and payment of union wages and benefits on the Iron Horse Greenway project.The County is not a party to the arbitration and the dispute has not affected the daily operations of this project. I'M OSTA COUNTY epartment Barton J.Gilbert Director RVICES Mickey Davis �0 Deputy Director Michael J. Lango P Y De ut Director Davida Arnenta Administrative Services Officer DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: John Sweeten, County Administrator FROM: Hart Gilbert, Director of General Services SUBJECT: PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT REPORT(MAY 2002 -- NOVEMBER 2003) BACKGROUND This report summarizes our experience with implementing and administering the County's Project Labor Agreement (PLA) policy. The policy was initially adopted by the. Board of Supervisors in January 2002 and later revised in August 2003. At the time of adoption, the Board directed that an annual report of the PLA program be prepared and presented to the Internal Operations Committee. This report Is provided to you for that purpose. SUMMARY OF PLA PROIECTS During the reporting period, there were 8 projects advertised for bid subject to the PLA policy totaling $22,969,036. Due to objections to the core workforce provision of the original policy by the Contra Costa Building and Construction Trades Council, the Board of Supervisors waived the PLA requirement for the first 3 projects totaling $13,317,200. The policy was subsequently amended in August 2003 to address the Trade Councils' concerns. Therefore, since the PLA policy was adopted, there have been 5 projects awarded with an executed PLA totaling $9,651,836. A summary listing of the PIA projects that have been advertised and awarded is included in the attachment to this report. This information includes the architect's estimate of probable cost, the amount of the low bid, the amount of the contract award, the number of bids received and how many of the bids were submitted by union and non-union contractors. 1220 Morello Avenue, Suite 100 • Martinez, CA 94553 (925) 313-7100 Phone • (925) 313-7108 Fax SUMMARY OF PLA PROIECT BID AND CONTRACT AWARDS All 8 projects advertised for bid subject to the provisions of the PLA policy were awarded to union contractors. The number of bids received per project averaged 7.75 with a low of 4 and a high of eleven. Of the 62 bids received, union contractors submitted 44, 15 were submitted by non-union contractors, and three bids were non-responsive. ARCHITECT/ENGINEER COST ESTIMATES AND PLA CONTRACT AWARDS PLA bid amounts deviated from architect/engineer base bid cost estimates by an average of $194,890 with a percentage variation between 2.11% and 12.96%. Architect/engineer cost estimates were $328,000 lower to $324,000 higher than base bid amounts. Bids for five of the eight projects subject to the PLA policy were lower than the architect/engineer cost estimate. REPORTED WAGE VIOLATIONS AND DISPUTES There has been one reported wage violation/dispute relative to the five Project Labor Agreements. The dispute involves a request by the electrical union (IBEW) to arbitrate a disagreement between the union and a subcontractor in relation to payment of union wages and benefits and the hiring of electricians for the Ironhorse Greenway Project. The County is not a party to the arbitration as stipulated in the PLA. c: Mike Lango, Deputy General Services Director Rob Lim, P.E., Capital Projects Division Manager Laura Lockwood, Director of Capital Facilities and Debt Management LOONTRA, M I"A CIfUNITY RCCEIVED a Vv O OF o C C C 7 �4G 6q ioq fioc) Gq A W c ra rrON cv rn A d i r i n o U �1 o C14 C) 0 W ar a o W)CIT C4 Et U W601, z Q o a o q o p o p a 0 .a � � a .a � cy a .a � G7Ga � "aaa •a aas ,--4 �D c, r- ; en E ° ' ' > -,C .O as cl G7 C7 ci o cs LJC� t�4Ua pU ,. aHUU HUU C#4) 0 aha c� as o eA ;u C4 ay . 00. via ¢ ; waw � xazwa� , _... .. .. ......... ......... ..........................._... ... ......... ......... ......... ......... ..................................................................................................................... CIA o 78 a UW � H S ' � C � o �s �t' � o • �'' _....... ......... ......... ......... __..._... 111.1 ....... .............. ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ........ .................. ......... ......... ......... .......... ..................................... `�'� Maurice M.Shiu'�� Contra` Public c i'�'=�Torks Department Public Works Director Costa 255 Glacier Drive R.Mitch Avalon County Martinez,CA 94553-48255 Deputy Director `J' Telephone: (925)313-2000 Julia R.Buereri FAX: (925)313-2333 Deputy Director Web site:www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/depart/pw Date: July 28, 2004 Patricia R.McNamee Deputy Director To: John Sweeten, County Administrator W4,4-1- From: Maurice Shiu, Director of Public Works N Subject: Project Labor Agreement Report (May 2002 — December 2003) Background This report summarizes our experience with implementing and administering the County's Project Labor Agreement(PLA)policy. The policy was initially adopted by the Board of Supervisors in January 2002 and later revised in August 2003. At the time of adoption, the Boarddirected that an annual report of the PLA program be prepared and presented to the Internal Operations Committee. This is provided to you for that purpose. Summary of PLA Proects During the report period, there was one project, Parker Avenue Utility Undergrounding, advertised by Public Works for bid subject to the PLA policy totaling $1,964,533. The County received five bids for this project. The bid's ranged from a low of $1,964,533 to a high of $2,421,386. The engineers estimate for the project was $2,265,795 or 15% higher than the lowest bidder. The low bidder is a union contractor. Summary of PLA Proiect Bid and Contract Awards The one project advertised for bid subject to the provisions of the PLA policy was awarded to a union contractor. The award of the contract occurred 100 days after the bid opening. For projects without a PLA requirement(less than $1,000,000)the average turn around time from bid opening to award is 37 days. Reported ti'U`age Violations and Disputes There has been no reported wage violation/dispute relative to the one Project Labor Agreement. Mcktb G:1GRPOATAICONST1coRRES120041PARKERAVEUN DERGROUNDING\MEMO-MC-Pf2OJECTLABORAGREEMENT.DOC CC: K. yo >"< d zrad c m a� ter" ' 8 CN 00 c> v, 00 00 c> v, c;� c� :' �cq m 000 »�- � .� kn 00 M � t-o r. cry m 00 t .,� m cry .-.� kA t.,, U � t"V r4 lr� 1014 601s kn ON t1l; 96ora to qr �1 ry ry 1*0 0 'tTrll�r 00 00 cq ss l � � s � 64, 61� C4 cq oC14 rq a cq"Ir rq CN Q 00 CO t> rn p `� ,�-. tit? 44 O C4 CA Q7 ," LG } ray M 'o .Sr C/ f„ = 0 § A a of , •c RiycC 7 55 � � r X91 a � �. o 0 0 � c"�" rvr C q r, ac> r� c"a va ` <= C C> rpt c cc tn 00 eq C14 CN m C14 cn W) It C9 C*q 00 00 C c� C� 0 o cr e> t^ coo Gl 00 c» v7 t� M 00 � o M ca CJ M M �,� M M r*s M M CMS a C3 C� � ry cv CJ .o Ile rfi r' vi csci �9 eq CT rr c 06 rvv ` •" o a; cri Sao �t 4r)�t d v1 Ch r� o C4 000M1 M W CMs n M N00 C4 c� M ,-r M C – d: M bra bq � � M Cd } k 'n ;; yet c Com`I � 6sCOS &OS os doON v? C� Cr 0 0 C7 G> C) � c*r CV Tr' CRa ww Cj .. M 6 47 w-.� O M m Gly 9 .� W) YIY V) <14 C4 V S M kn C14 t!1 to M k j p 00 C14 kn 5R 59 bC! 5bra q M r- 8 g Ch cp tit? t+5 00 N t 06 C Crq Q * CJ s :. tu�� C7 +C•c7� chi LV td tl} C rn tt3 CU 9z dJ v� d3S t� in 7� �+ M� CLCOO L) Oldr 0 c-4 M M M 0 *^ N N C C`y CJ CSO + Ci ItC14 Cq `I � � tC N N N N N tV N N N G7 Cd Ca LC st? � t`» tip to �? d C� O C7 C� G7 C> C7 C7 . tvIl£3 ...................................................................................................................... . ..................................................................................... .............. ON rn en C> O CDC> CD C> m 0 0 CD C1 0 4 C) C> 0C� 0 C14 0 C)C> 'Ir rz >N 0 0 C) CS N M 00 M N C7 C> 0 C14 m V) W) 00 oe Cq IK 06 tr� �6 t- r- cl� (N CD 00 oh� It N IRt CN m cq 69 4A 69 6946S 60q 604 164 609 6s r- 0 tiJ kill N C14 W) 0 C> � 0 C7 C) CJ v: t- CD C cq vi ItT 6 m m N C7 C> V1 C) 'IT N iS0 CO t- t 7 V) 00 W) W) 00 06 EK cq tK in 0 00 kr) 110 M tl- �o C14 00 ON .c ty C14 (N .-+ tl01) S'S 613 ioq 6&1 �6s 69 64 m C> C� m m mC> Q 0 C� m C) 0 N0 06 C> C7 d N cq oe CZ O 41 "t� 1 0 0 fi, OL-4 coo 0 C4 C4 0 g I 1 -9 r—A 00 14D C4 tn 'a kn m C) 00 t/t V1 Wi 00 00 a,\ 1.0 1 C9 2 w 0 66 �o 00 r- C14 tf) C> 0 C) ...................... 925 829 5743 Sep X3` 04 0-4'. 32P925 829-5743 p• Associated Builders and Contractors IRBIL Golden Gate Chapter A$50CIAMP UUMDER-5 AND CCWTRACTQR„,INC. 0.01VEMGATLCHAi Ftff Scptember 10, 2004 To: Patty, Clerk's Office From: Kevin Dayton, Vice President of Government A1'Tairs Re: Letter for Board of Supervisors — Agenda Item D-4 Number of Wages, including this page- 3 .As discussed. 4345 Hociondn Drive, Suite: 500 • Pleosonton, California 94588 Tel {925) d74-1300 * Fax (925) A74-1310 www,obc.org/grate Sep, 10,104 04; 32p 825 829-5743 F. 2 Ali, r sociated Builders and Contractors Golden Gate Chapter AssracrAMP AIJIL Oft AN&CONTRACrOgs.WC, cotvea a r +CHAFrEm !J September 10, 2004 Agenda Win Sl)-4 Contra Costa Board of Supervisors August 16, 2004 Meeting 651 Pine St. Martinez, CA 94553 Re: Analysis of the August 1.6, 2004 Contra Costa County Project Labor Agreement Policy Update Dear Supervisor. Here aro the comments of the Golden Gate Chapter of Associated Builders and Contractors on the A,ulruust 16, 2004 "Update on County's Experience with the Project Labor Agreement." The county cannot accurately deter-nine if the PLA policy cut competition or raised casts:because there is no control group in the analysis. The county needs tof take bids, on pry ecsts bath with a PLA; and without a PLA to detennine the true effect of the ILA on competition and costs. The update states that union general contractors worn all eight projects and comprised rised 75%of the responsive bidders. The average cast of the projects was about x+2.9 million--a project cast at which non-union companies typically have a significant share of the bids on last Bay public works. Obviously the number of bidders and low bidders is skewed toward union contractors. Subcontractors were not included in the analysis. This would have been useful, especially for the electrical trade, where competition between union and nort-union contractors is particularly keen. • Associated Builders and Contractors is interestod in seeing;the county's list of bidders and their identified status as union or non-union contractors so we can provide an independent confirmation of their status. flaw did the county determine whether a company was union or non-union? Sometimes contractorti are "double-breasted" companies with a union and a non-union shop. A309 Hacianda Drivc, Suite SOO . Plea:,onton, California 94588 V (9251 474 1300 - Prix (925) A74-13 TO ` www_a6c.org/gate Sep 10,104 04: 32p 925 829-5743 p. 3 3 -2- Associated Builders, and Contractors suspects that some of the smaller non-union bidders on these projects were net awe of the implications of sighing a PLA, since the vast xnajority of'pubhc works and private construction in Northern California is performed without requiring contractors to sign PLAs with unions. In addition, the threshold for the county PLA policy is exceptionally low. This would be the first encounter with a PLA for many small bidders. In conclusion, the update docs not provide any information that shows the board of Supervisors made an appropriate policy decision to adopt a Project Labor Agreement policy. Associated Builders and Contractors urges the Board of Supervisors to increase the threshold of the policy to $20 million, or eliminate the unnecessary policy altogether. Sincerely, Ain �C. Dayton Vice President cifGovernment Affaiirs