AC Transit Directors Slow Drive Toward Van Hools
The AC Transit Board of Directors temporarily put the brakes on the
district’s recent push to transform a large portion of its fleet into
buses made by Belgian bus manufacturer Van Hool, rejecting a request by
District Manager Rick Fernandez to replace 30 retiring 60-foot buses
made by New Flyer with 19 new buses made by Van Hool.
Instead, on a 2-4-1 vote (Chris Peeples and Jeff Davis yes,
Greg Harper, Elsa Ortiz, Rocky Fernandez, and Rebecca Kaplan no, Joe
Wallace abstaining), the seven-member board voted to put the contract
for the 19 new buses up for competitive bidding.
It remains to be seen whether Wednesday’s vote was merely a
symbolic response to political pressure and media and public
attention—three board members are up for re-election in November—or
whether AC Transit’s love affair with Van Hools is actually coming to
an end. The decision does not mean a rejection of the Van Hool buses,
but only that the Belgian bus manufacturer must now bid competitively
on the 19-bus purchase in competition with other manufacturers for the
first time since its original contract with AC Transit in 2002.
Prior to the voting, AC Transit General Manager Rick
Fernandez, who has led the district’s turnover of its bus purchasing to
Van Hool, and has called AC Transit’s relationship with the bus
manufacturer a “partnership,” warned board members that not approving
the Van Hool purchase is “... probably the worst decision we have ever
made...To have 19 buses out of our entire articulated fleet supplied by
a different manufacturer, needing different parts, is insane. It makes
absolutely no sense.” (The general manager should not be confused with
Rocky Fernandez, the board member.)
But also speaking to board members just before the vote,
Oakland architect and public transit advocate Joyce Roy said that the
Van Hool decision was “a sort of test to show riders that you are
fiscally responsible and will listen to them. I hope you make a
decision that makes it easy for me to convince people to go out in
November and vote for the parcel tax.”
In the last several weeks, AC Transit has been moving forward
with a proposal to put on the November ballot renewal of a parcel tax
that provides supplemental funds for the transit district, which
anticipates cutting staff and service sometime in the future if
additional funds cannot be found.
Roy, who has announced that she will be running against AC
Transit Board President Chris Peeples in the November election for one
of the board’s two at-large seats, called the decision “a victory for
riders” in an email announcing the board vote. Roy has led opposition
to the Van Hool buses.
There is considerable controversy over the popularity of the
Van Hools. AC Transit staff representatives and some board members have
said that the European-style buses are popular with both passengers and
drivers, while some drivers—and a vocal group of AC Transit bus
riders—have been loudly critical of the buses. The Van Hool buses and
the relationship between AC Transit and the Belgian bus manufacturer
have been the subject of a series of critical articles both in the
Berkeley Daily Planet and in the East Bay Express.
Wednesday night’s Van Hool decision was a carryover from the
May 14 meeting, in which the board deadlocked 3-3 (Peeples, Wallace,
and Davis yes, Harper, Ortiz, Fernandez no) on the proposed purchase.
Kaplan, who is running for the At Large Oakland City Council seat, had
been present for part of the May 14 meeting, but left for a campaign
event before the Van Hool vote that night.
In his recommendation to the board for the proposed Van Hool
purchase, Fernandez wrote in his staff memo that “As a result of this
recommended procurement, the District’s entire articulated fleet will
be from one bus manufacturer,” Van Hool.
The 60-foot articulated buses (known by their trademark
accordion-type joint that joins the two separate halves of the buses
together) are expected to be the backbone of AC Transit’s proposed Bus
Rapid Transit (BRT) line, which the district wants to run in set-aside
middle-of-the-road bus lanes down E. 14th Street, International
Boulevard, and Telegraph Avenue between either Hayward or San Leandro
and the southern edge of the UC Berkeley campus.
General Manager Fernandez said Wednesday before the board
vote that the $547,739 per bus proposed purchase price for the 19 Van
Hools is “fair and reasonable,” and rejected assertions that comparable
buses by other manufacturers could be purchased for a cheaper price. In
addition, Fernandez said that if Van Hool eventually won the contract
after competitive bidding, it is likely that inflation over the time of
the extended bidding and contract award process would drive up Van
Hool’s price.
But while board members gave widely varying reasons for
rejecting the Van Hool proposal Wednesday night, at least three members
said that a lack of detailed information provided by staff factored
into their decision.
Kaplan said, “I don’t feel comfortable with our internal
analysis of how many articulated [60-foot] buses we need. I see too
many ‘artics’ on routes that clearly don’t need them. I’m not convinced
that we need as many articulated buses.”
Ortiz said that she wanted to open a bid for the bus
purchase “because we need to make an informed decision,” and Harper
said that because of criticism by the public and in the media of past
Van Hool purchases, “we need to have something to hand out to people
that tells in detail the true cost of this purchase.” Harper said such
a “true cost” analysis was not currently present in detail in the staff
analysis of the proposed Van Hool purchase.
Other board members felt that the cost issue of the purchase
had been “adequately addressed” (Jeff Davis), and some used the vote as
an opportunity to take shots at the media and citizen opponents of the
Van Hools.
Wallace said the he was “tired of the crap in the press and
the private vendetta of some bus riders about the Van Hools. It’s
insulting to me, and it should be insulting to our bus riders.”
Board President Peeples added, “Like Joe, I am offended by all the misinformation in the public and the press.”
He said that the district “should not reward that
misinformation by not making this purchase ... I am convinced to the
extent that there have been legitimate concerns about the way the Van
Hools have been manufactured—and there were—we’ve done everything
possible to meet those concerns.”
- Login to post comments
