rail management committee meeting · 2020. 1. 15. · rail management committee meeting minutes...

RAIL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING

DECEMBER 3, 2008 1:30 P.M.

101 NORTH FIRST AVENUE 13TH FLOOR – BOARD ROOM

PHOENIX, AZ 85003

November 24, 2008 To: Chairman Fairbanks and Members of the Rail Management Committee From: Richard J. Simonetta, Chief Executive Officer Date: December 3, 2008 Time: 1:30 p.m. Location: METRO 101 N. First Ave., 13th Floor Board Room Phoenix, AZ 85003 Please park in the garage in the US Bank Building (enter from Adams Street) and bring your parking ticket to the meeting as parking will be validated. Bus passes will be provided to those using transit. For those using bicycles, please lock your bicycle in the bike rack in the garage. Rail Management Committee members may attend the meeting by teleconference. If you have any questions or need additional information regarding attendance by teleconference, please contact Gina Frackiewicz at (602) 322-4455.

Item Action Requested

1. Call to Order

Call to the Audience Information 2.

A 15-minute opportunity will be provided to members of the public at the beginning of the meeting to address the Rail Management Committee (RMC) on all agenda items. The Chairman may recognize members of the public during the meeting at his/her discretion. Up to three minutes will be provided per speaker.

3. Minutes Action

Summary minutes from the October 1, 2008 RMC are presented for review and approval.

Chief Executive Officer’s (CEO) Report Information 4.

Rick Simonetta will brief the RMC on current issues and project status.

Rail Management Committee Agenda November 24, 2008 Page 2 of 3


Consent Agenda

5. Approval of Consent Agenda Action

The RMC is being requested to take action on the Consent Agenda. Committee members may request that items be removed from the Consent Agenda.

Items Proposed for Consent Agenda

5a. Master Funding Agreement Consent

Staff is requesting that the RMC recommend that the Board authorize the CEO to execute the Light Rail Transit Operations Master Cooperative Funding Agreement (Master Agreement) with the cities of Phoenix, Tempe, and Mesa. Please see information attached for Agenda Item 5a for additional information.

5b. Planning, Conceptual Engineering, and Environmental Studies Consultant for the I-10 West and Glendale High Capacity/Light Rail Transit Corridors

Consent

Staff is requesting that the RMC recommend that the Board authorize the CEO to execute an amendment to an existing contract with URS Corporation, LRT-07-077A-PCES. This contract is for Planning, Conceptual Engineering, and Environmental Studies for the I-10 West and Glendale High Capacity/Light Rail Transit Corridors. Please see information attached for Agenda Item 5b for additional information.

5c. Regional Fare Policy Information

Staff is providing information to the RMC related to public hearings associated with the regional fare policy. Please see information attached for Agenda Item 5c for additional information.

Regular Agenda

6. Section 5309 Project Budget Adjustments

Staff is requesting that the RMC recommend that the METRO Board authorize project budget contingency adjustments for cost increases and savings to line item budgets within the Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) project. Please see information attached for Agenda Item 6 for additional information.

Action

Rail Management Committee Agenda November 24, 2008 Page 3 of 3


7. Advertising Policy Update

Staff will update the RMC on activities related to the sale of advertising displays on the METRO system and provide information that may result in action to recommend that the Board adjust the METRO advertising policy. Please see information attached for Agenda Item 7 for additional information.

Information and

Possible Action

8. Art Program Overview Information

Staff will present an overview of the METRO public art program incorporated into the Central Phoenix/East Valley Light Rail Transit Project. A presentation will be provided at the meeting. No additional information is included.

9. Light Rail City Ordinances

Staff will provide information to the RMC on the recent adoption of ordinances in Phoenix, Tempe, and Mesa related to individual conduct required of persons riding the light rail passenger system. Please see information attached for Agenda Item 9 for additional information.

Information

10. Owner Controlled Insurance Program (OCIP) Update

Staff will provide an update to the RMC regarding the METRO Risk Management Program. Please see information attached for Agenda Item 10 for additional information.

Information

11. Future Rail Management Committee Agenda Items Information

The RMC may request consideration of future agenda items. No additional information is attached.

12. Adjournment Action

With 24-hours notice, special assistance can be provided for persons with sight and/or hearing impairments. Call 602-254-7245 (voice) or 602-261-8208 (TTY) to request accommodations. If you require information about this meeting in alternate formats, please call the METRO hotline at 602-254-RAIL.

AGENDA ITEM 3

Minutes

October 1, 2008

101 North First Avenue 13th Floor – Board Room

Phoenix, Arizona Management Committee Members Present Frank Fairbanks, City of Phoenix Glenn Kephart, City of Tempe Mike James, City of Mesa Terry Johnson, City of Glendale Mike Normand, City of Chandler David Moody, City of Peoria Mary O’Connor, City of Scottsdale Dave Boggs, Regional Public Transportation Authority

1. Call to Order

Chairman Frank Fairbanks called the meeting to order at 1:32 p.m.

2. Rail Management Committee (RMC) Officers

Mr. Mike Ladino, General Counsel, stated that the METRO Board at its September meeting elected officers for the new fiscal year; Councilman Tom Simplot as Chair and Mayor Hugh Hallman as Vice Chair. He also added that RMC Chair and Vice-Chair is consistent with the METRO Board of Directors.

IT WAS MOVED BY MIKE JAMES AND SECONDED BY MARY O’CONNOR AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO ELECT FRANK FAIRBANKS AS RMC’S CHAIR AND GLENN KEPHART AS RMC’S VICE CHAIR.

3. Call to the Audience

There were no public comments.

4. Minutes

IT WAS MOVED BY GLENN KEPHART AND SECONDED BY TERRY JOHNSON AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 3, 2008 MEETING MINUTES.

Rail Management Committee Meeting Minutes October 1, 2008 Page 2 of 6 5. Chief Executive Officer’s (CEO) Report

System Testing Update: Progress is being made with continual train testing that has been extended into downtown Phoenix. It is anticipated that testing will be extended to the end of the line at Christown Mall. The rail car operator training is ongoing and will conclude in late November.

United Way Campaign: METRO and the Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA) has teamed together to run a joint campaign which is currently underway and will conclude in late October.

Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting: METRO has received the certificate from the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada. Mr. Simonetta and Chairman Fairbanks congratulated Mr. John McCormack, Director of Finance and Administration, and staff for their financial reporting diligence.

Baltimore Delegation Visit: METRO hosted a delegation from Baltimore to discuss how METRO dealt with community outreach and business involvement during construction. Mr. Simonetta thanked Mr. Howard Steere, Public Involvement Manager, for his assistance in providing information and a tour of the alignment. City of Phoenix, City of Tempe, and City of Mesa staff were also involved in the orientation and their efforts were also recognized and appreciated by the delegation.

Hours of Operation: The METRO Board approved an operating plan which calls for operating hours consistent with the regional bus system. A Phoenix City Council Subcommittee requested that METRO provide information about extending its hours of operation. This issue may be further discussed at regional levels, as well as at the Board levels in the near future.

Safety Slogan: Casey Newton, Arizona Republic, spearheaded a blog for METRO’s safety campaign slogan. A number of entries have been submitted and a short list will be submitted to METRO.

100-Day Giveaway: At the 100-Days before the Grand Opening Celebration METRO event, METRO kicked off a program giving away 100 three-day passes over the final 100 days to those that enter the contest. The response has been positive and METRO continues to receive entries daily. Seven winners are announced every Friday and the first winners were announced last Friday.

Staff Update: Wulf Grote formerly a City of Phoenix employee on loan to METRO as the Director of Project Development is now filling that position as a METRO employee.

Driver Safety Video: This video introduces drivers to the light rail system, new traffic signals and signs, as well as new curb and lane markings. The DVD includes both a closed-caption version and one with Spanish subtitles. Starting today, the video will be sent to all driver safety education programs in schools

Rail Management Committee Meeting Minutes October 1, 2008 Page 3 of 6

and commercial programs, City Channel 11’s, and METRO partner city communications staff for further distribution. Additionally, we are developing a list for fleet vehicles in the private sector (e.g., restaurant supply delivery, express delivery, etc.). The video, about four minutes in length, was shared with the Committee. Mr. John Farry, Director of Community and Government Relations, thanked Ms. Marty McNeil, Marketing Manager, for her hard work in putting the video together.

Chairman Fairbanks stated that the video was very well done.

Mr. Glenn Kephart inquired about the system testing and if the wheel slip has been remedied. Mr. Jay Harper, Director of Operations and Maintenance, stated that the break and propulsion manufacturer has been assessing the problem. Consideration is being given to adjusting the acceleration and declaration rates to address the issue; however, METRO will not compromise the braking rates or acceleration rates as part of the process. The software package to repair the problem will arrive next week and METRO is confident it will fix the problem.

Project Update: As of August 31, METRO has used 84.0% of allocated contingency funds and 95.7% of unallocated project reserve. The project is 91.7% complete.

Project Budget Status and Budget Summary Report: The reports display the current budget status, where the project is with the design and construction and also finance costs. The summary reports the expenditures to date and the forecast cost to complete. The project is on budget.

6. Approval of Consent Agenda

6a. Armored Car and Cash Management Services Contract IT WAS MOVED BY MARY O’CONNOR AND SECONDED BY DAVID MOODY AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD AUTHORIZE THE CEO TO EXECUTE A ONE-YEAR CONTRACT WITH BRINK’S U.S. FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $239,000 WITH TWO ONE-YEAR OPTIONS NOT TO EXCEED $546,000 FOR ARMORED CAR AND CASH PROCESSING SERVICES.

Regular Agenda

7. Section 5309 Project Budget Adjustments

Mr. John McCormack, Director of Finance and Administration, and Mr. Brian Buchanan, Director of Design and Construction, presented information regarding Section 5309 contract budget adjustments to various project elements. They reported on the specific cost savings in certain budget areas being transferred to cover other project costs. The overall project budget remains within the overall Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) budget.


Mr. Kephart asked if there is still additional capacity in the Program Management and Administration line item if it is needed? Mr. McCormack stated that there will be additional expenses; however, the proposed budget is forecast to be sufficient to complete the project. Also, METRO is doing everything they can to control the soft costs. The increases in the commodities have been significant, but the budget numbers speak well for the project. IT WAS MOVED BY MIKE JAMES AND SECONDED BY TERRY JOHNSON AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD AUTHORIZE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES TO THE SECTION 5309 PROJECT BUDGETS:

• INCREASE THE LINE SECTION 1 CONTRACT CONTINGENCY BY $2,000,000 TO $11,213,056;

• INCREASE THE LINE SECTION 3 CONTRACT CONTINGENCY BY $3,300,000 TO $23,648,232;

• DECREASE THE MISCELLANEOUS CONSTRUCTION BUDGET BY $750,000 TO $850,659;

• DECREASE THE WHEEL PROFILING MACHINE BUDGET BY $100,000 TO $980,107;

• DECREASE THE OWNER FURNISHED EQUIPMENT BUDGET BY $379,096 TO $33,460,104;

• DECREASE THE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION BUDGET BY $2,500,000 TO $61,109,298 AND;

• DECREASE PROJECT RESERVE BY $1,570,904 TO $1,071,593.

8. Light Rail Service Launch

Mr. Harper presented information regarding the light rail service launch. The Grand Opening will include free rides on December 27 and 28 with revenue operations beginning on December 29, 2008. Historically Valley Metro/Regional Public Transportation Authority (VM/RPTA) has offered free service during the first week of new routes. This practice would allow the public to try METRO for free and create an incentive for participants to ride the light rail during special events. In addition, if VM/RPTA offers free service in conjunction with METRO’s Grand Opening’s free ride days, it will create a consistency in fare collection and encourage the public to try METRO.

By charging fares at the inception of the system’s operations, fares would provide instant revenues and implementation of fare enforcement would be established at the


beginning of operations. METRO estimates between $50,000 to $200,000 in revenues might be achieved if fare implementation began on December 29.

RMC members also noted that delaying the implementation of fare collection could serve as an additional incentive for people to try the system and result in a positive exposure of light rail for the first week. It was also noted that light rail and the bus rides should be consistent with each other giving the public an opportunity to ride the transit systems for free during the trial period. Finally, the large special event management on New Year’s Eve might be a concern for revenue collection and fare enforcement.

IT WAS MOVED BY GLENN KEPHART AND SECONDED BY MIKE JAMES AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD APPROVE FREE LIGHT RAIL SERVICE FOR 2008 AND BEGIN COLLECTING REVENUES ON JANUARY 1, 2009, PENDING VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH ANY FEDERAL GUIDELINES ASSOCIATED WITH THE FULL FUNDING GRANT AGREEMENT.

9. METRO Grand Opening Update

Mr. Farry introduced Ken Koziol with Entertainment Solutions, Inc. (ESI) who has been involved in the Grand Opening activities. Mr. Farry noted that METRO’s goals for the Grand Opening are to celebrate the arrival of the first light rail in the Valley, educate the community on how to ride and most importantly how to be safe around the light rail. In order to make this event a memorable and positive experience, the Grand Opening Team was comprised of staff from METRO, member cities, VM/RPTA, and consultants associated with the opening. The team is charged with carrying out all activities of the Grand Opening.

Mr. Koziol described the details and locations of the various events that will occur over the opening weekend, including a Preview Pass Event, an Appreciation Dinner, the Ribbon Cutting and Grand Opening Celebration itself and the Station Celebrations that follow. A number of elected officials, dignitaries, and special guests have been invited and most will be attending the celebrations.

10. Park-and-Ride Contingency Plan

Mr. Jim Mathien, Planning Project Manager, presented information on a contingency plan for park-and-rides. Currently there will be 3,513 spaces available on opening day. Other transit agencies have experienced a greater demand in parking than originally anticipated. Land use densities have increased in downtown Phoenix, including ASU’s parking policies which has decreased parking by 5000 spaces at the University while promoting free shuttles between campuses.

With these changed conditions, a greater number of parking spaces may be necessary. The focus for added parking has been in three general areas: near


Camelback and 19th Avenue, in the East Washington Corridor, and near the end-of-line on Apache Boulevard/ Main Street area.

Chairman Fairbanks asked if the need for these additional parking spaces is for the Grand Opening or for future use? Mr. Mathien stated that the need is ongoing.

Mr. Simonetta stated this approach is necessary for the potential need for overflow parking as the public will find parking in local shopping malls and/or less desirable locations like neighborhoods. The long-term plans will be evaluated and reported back to the RMC and Board.

Mr. Kephart stated that if the situation occurs, short-term leases could be secured to address the issue until any long-term solutions could be determined.

Chairman Fairbanks commended staff for evaluating the situation and being proactive in planning ahead. The Grand Opening should be one of the first events to be considered. Mr. Simonetta added that there are funds in the budget to address these issues on a short-term basis.

11. Future Rail Management Committee Agenda Items

Mr. Simonetta stated the agenda item addressed by the Board at the last meeting regarding the METRO and RPTA merger can be discussed at the RMC level should the Committee desire. Chairman Fairbanks stated that in general, Board agenda item should also be discussed at the RMC. Mr. Simonetta added that METRO’s current focus is on the Grand Opening.

12. Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 2:52 p.m.

AGENDA ITEM 5A

Master Funding Agreement

AGENDA ITEM 5A

To: Chairman Fairbanks and Members of the Rail Management Committee

Through: Richard J. Simonetta, Chief Executive Officer

From: John P. McCormack, Director of Finance and Administration

Date: November 24, 2008

Re: Master Funding Agreement

PURPOSE

The purpose of this item is to request that the RMC recommend that the Board authorize the Chief Executive Officer to execute the Light Rail Transit Operations Master Cooperative Funding Agreement (Master Agreement) with the cities of Phoenix, Tempe, and Mesa. Individual city councils have approved the agreement.

BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION

The Master Agreement establishes the fiscal policies for cost sharing and fare revenue distribution for the light rail transit (LRT) passenger services operational costs. A summary of the agreement provisions are as follows:

Cost Sharing: Base Operational costs are paid by the member cities based on the ratio of route miles in service. For example, in fiscal year 2009, the cities of Phoenix, Tempe, and Mesa will fund the operations as follows:

Base costs include all costs to maintain and operate the system with the exception of local security costs, which include fare inspection and security costs located within each city to protect stations and park-and-ride lots. Local security costs are allocated and funded based on actual costs incurred in each jurisdiction.

Rail Management Committee Memo November 24, 2008 Page 2 Cash Flow: By the first day of each month, the cities fund the planned monthly cost of operations by payment to METRO. Throughout the month, fare revenues are collected by METRO and deposited with the City of Phoenix Public Transportation Department regional fare revenue operation. METRO works cooperatively with Phoenix to summarize fares collected during the month and distribute the fare revenues to each member city. The fare revenue distribution method is structured to operate in the same manner as the current bus fare revenue distribution system.

Annual Budget: The Annual Budget establishes the hours of operation, service frequency, light rail vehicle miles to be delivered and corresponding operational costs. In addition, a schedule of planned special events is included which will be served during the fiscal year. A preliminary budget is delivered by METRO in October for member city planning purposes and the final budget is presented for Board approval in May (fiscal year runs July 1 thru June 30).

The budget is presented with a zero-base detailed approach showing staff by position, contractor costs, materials, utilities, and insurance. A contingency not to exceed three percent (3%) is established for unexpected costs to be incurred during the fiscal year. The cities fund the monthly costs based upon the approved budget. Actual costs are tracked, reported monthly, and cash flow adjustments are made at mid-year and year-end to reconcile actual member city contributions to actual member city share of expenditures.

Fare Revenue Sharing: The Regional Fare Policy serves as basis for LRT and Bus Fares collected from passengers. Total regional monthly fares collected are summarized and allocated to bus and rail on the basis of passenger boardings by mode. Rail Revenues are allocated to member cities based on passenger boardings recorded at LRT stations located within the city boundaries.

Other Revenue: In the course of operating the LRT System, METRO may generate revenues other than fare revenue for board-approved activities. METRO will record Other Revenue in separate accounts and report monthly revenue generated. Distribution of such revenue to Member Cities will be based on recommendation of the RMC and the METRO Board as appropriate.

FISCAL IMPACT

The cost sharing and revenue distribution principles incorporated into the Master Agreement have been utilized to develop the Board-adopted Fiscal Year 2009 rail operations budget and the Board-accepted Five-Year Operating Forecast. Fiscal impacts to the member cities have been disclosed in the budget and five-year plan documents.

RECOMMENDATION

Staff is requesting that the RMC recommend that the Board authorize the CEO to execute the Light Rail Transit Operations Master Cooperative Funding Agreement (Master Agreement) with the cities of Phoenix, Tempe, and Mesa.

AGENDA ITEM 5B

I-10 West and Glendale High Capacity/LRT Corridors Consultant

AGENDA ITEM 5B



From: Wulf Grote, Director, Project Development


Re: Planning, Conceptual Engineering, and Environmental Studies Consultant for the I-10 West and Glendale High Capacity/Light Rail Transit Corridors

PURPOSE The purpose of this item is to request that the Rail Management Committee (RMC) recommend that the Board authorize the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute an amendment to an existing contract with URS Corporation, LRT-07-077A-PCES. This contract is for Planning, Conceptual Engineering, and Environmental Studies for the I-10 West and Glendale High Capacity/Light Rail Transit Corridors. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) for the Phoenix Metropolitan Area extends the high capacity/light rail transit system to 57 miles by 2026 The I-10 West Corridor is included in the adopted RTP and is scheduled for completion in 2019. The METRO Board approved the URS contract and scope of work for Phase 1 of the I-10 West study on February 14, 2007. The purpose of the contract amendment is to implement Phase 2 of the I-10 West Corridor study. On August 17, 2006, METRO issued a Request for Qualifications (LRT-07-077-PCES) from qualified professional firms for two contracts for Planning, Conceptual Engineering, and Environmental Studies for Future Light Rail Extensions. At the conclusion of the evaluation process, the URS offer was determined to be responsive and responsible, and the “best value” to METRO to undertake studies in the I-10 West and Glendale Corridors. Negotiations were then conducted with URS Corporation for the initial study effort (Phase 1) for the I-10 West corridor. The work contemplated by Phase 2 has been negotiated with URS Corporation and would be covered by the contract amendment, following the presentation to the Board for approval. Phase 1 of the project was to develop Alternative Analysis and a Definition of Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Phase 2 consists of two sections: (1) Phase 2A, Identification and Refinement of Preferred Alternate, Environmental Studies, and FTA Submittals; and (2) Phase 2B, LPA Refinement, Environmental Studies and FTA Submittals.

Rail Management Committee Memo November 24, 2008 Page 2 The planning effort for the I-10 West Corridor project is being accelerated for three reasons.

• First, it will be advantageous to provide coordination with the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT). ADOT plans to complete freeway improvements for the I-10 West project in 2012. It is imperative that METRO provide an adequate design envelop and engineering detail so ADOT can proceed with the design of the freeway improvements. This will preclude the need for redesign and construction of critical elements at the time of construction of the high capacity transit improvements.

• Second, we are learning that the process is taking longer. There is increased

Federal Transit Administration (FTA) involvement and requirements, particularly for larger projects. For example, the planning process now requires a risk assessment prior to entry into preliminary engineering.

• Third, the Community process is taking longer because of technical and

community challenges in selecting a state capital/downtown connection.

Given these issues, it is important to move into the next phase of the contract in order to maintain the 2019 project completion schedule. Under Phase 2, the locally preferred alternative will be adopted, the environmental process will begin with the preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement, the Section 5309 New Starts Report will be developed and the Economic Development Study/Station Area Market Analysis undertaken. The City of Phoenix Equal Opportunity Department determined a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) goal of 13.4 percent for this contract. The URS Corporation committed to 13.88 percent DBE participation Phase 1 of the I-10 West corridor scope of work. URS will need to submit a revised Proposed DBE Utilization Form in addition to executed Letters of Intent to Perform before an amendment for Phase 2 can be executed. Additionally, URS has not demonstrated compliance with DBE requirements for Phase 1. URS will be required to provide documentation related to Phase 1 compliance prior to execution of an amendment for Phase 2. The contract documents and amendment are not attached to this Memo. The basic contract terms and conditions for this contract and the amendment are standard and are included in the Request for Qualifications. These provisions were reviewed by the respective cities’ legal staff with METRO's General Counsel. Legal staff concurred with the documents and indicated that they expected the accuracy and completeness of each contract would be the responsibility of METRO staff and General Counsel, and they would only review the documents in the event of substantive changes to the terms and conditions.

Rail Management Committee Memo November 24, 2008 Page 3 FISCAL IMPACT This procurement is funded by advancing City of Phoenix funds for the planning effort in the I-10 West Corridor to be repaid from the regional Public Transportation Funds from Proposition 400 in FY 2011-13; and through FTA FY 2008 Section 5339 Alternative Analysis Program funding. RECOMMENDATION Staff is requesting that the RMC recommend that the Board authorize the CEO to:

1. Execute a contract amendment with URS Corporation to implement Phase 2 scope of work of the study, for Planning, Conceptual Engineering, and Environmental Studies for the I-10 West High Capacity/Light Rail Transit Corridor.

2. The amendment to implement Phase 2 would be for a not to exceed amount of

$4,198,216. Future Board approval will be sought for future project phases for the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the I-10 West corridor; and to perform planning, conceptual engineering and environmental studies for the Glendale corridor.

AGENDA ITEM 5C

Regional Fare Policy

AGENDA ITEM 5C


From: Richard J. Simonetta, Chief Executive Officer


Re: Regional Fare Policy

PURPOSE The purpose of this item is to provide information to the Rail Management Committee (RMC) related to public hearings associated with the regional fare policy. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION Due to significant increases in operating costs for the regional bus system and the significant reduction of tax revenue, Valley Metro bus service providers are evaluating service reductions and fare increases. Without the fare increase, Valley Metro bus service providers may be forced to implement significant service reductions. Although a fare increase will reduce the level of service reductions, it will not eliminate the need to reduce service. Attached you will find a Valley Metro/Regional Public Transportation Authority (Valley Metro/RPTA) memo and accompanying presentation recommending that its Board authorize public hearings related to a fare policy change scenario. The Valley Metro/RPTA Board approved this action on November 20, 2008. As a result of this action, Valley Metro/RPTA is expected to conduct public hearings in January 2009 and any new fare policy would be implemented by July 2009 or earlier. METRO fares are integrated with the regional fare policy and any changes to that policy will impact light rail fares. RECOMMENDATION This item is for information only and no action is requested.

1

Regional Public Transportation Authority302 N. First Avenue, Suite 700, Phoenix, Arizona 85003

602-262-7433, Fax 602-495-0411

Board of Directors Information Summary

Agenda Item #2

Date November 13, 2008 Subject Regional Fare Policy Program Summary In 2007, Valley Metro conducted a fare policy study which resulted in a recommended regional integrated fare structure that was adopted by the City of Phoenix and the Valley Metro Board. The new fare structure was implemented in December 2007. Due to the current economic condition of increasing costs and decreasing revenues, RPTA has launched a study to consider fare policy adjustments. The new rail service presents opportunities to consider fare policies to attract additional riders to both bus and rail while providing benefits for Valley Metro and METRO light rail operations. Valley Metro/RPTA’s purpose in undertaking this study is to evaluate and recommend fare policies (including pricing) to streamline transit use by developing:

A policy for large volume users (e.g., universities/colleges/technical schools, employers, and conventions)

A program for major sports/cultural events along the rail line A policy that will meet the Board approved 25% farebox revenue recovery target

Booz Allen Hamilton has been contracted to work with Valley Metro to identify and recommend fare policies that achieve these objectives. The Booz Allen proposed scope of work, staffing, schedule and budget was presented to the VMOCC for informational purposes on September 16, 2008. With the recent large increases in operating costs, Valley Metro service providers are evaluating service reductions and fare increases. The City of Phoenix has requested RPTA’s assistance in modeling pricing changes to existing fare products available to the general public, in anticipation of a fare adjustment in July 2009. RPTA worked with the Valley Metro Fare Policy Committee to discuss proposed fare changes and to obtain their input on the alternatives to be modeled. This meeting took

2

place on October 14. Based on the committee input, the recommended fare policies and pricing strategies were presented to the VMOCC and FOAC for consideration. The FOAC recommended moving forward the Fare Policy Program proposal to the Transit Management Committee (TMC) with several modifications. The TMC reviewed the revised program proposal and made additional modifications to reflect comments by several members. The TMC has approved moving forward to the Valley Metro Board the revised proposal for review and approval to take the proposal through the public hearing process in January 2009. If the Board approves, the public hearing process will take place and the results will be brought back to Valley Metro committees and the Valley Metro Board for final approval of the Fare Policy adjustments in February 2009. The following outlines the schedule and process to implement a fare change by July 2009 or earlier. 1. RPTA and City of Phoenix staff jointly develop proposed fare policy scenarios –

early October

2. RPTA convenes the Regional Fare Policy Committee to discuss proposed alternatives – October 14, 2008

3. Booz Allen to run fare policy model scenarios based on input from the Regional Fare Policy Committee – October 15-20, 2008

4. Valley Metro Operations and Capital Committee (VMOCC) and FOAC considers recommended fare policy scenario – October 21, 2008

5. Valley Metro Transit Management Committee considers recommended fare policy scenario – November 5, 2008

6. Valley Metro Board considers the regional fare policy scenario and directs staff to conduct public meetings on the proposed fare policy – November 20, 2008

7. Public hearing process – January 2009 (The Federal Transit Administration requires 30-day advance public notice prior to convening the public hearings)

8. VMOCC is apprised of public hearing process input – January 2009

9. Valley Metro Transit Management Committee considers public hearing input on proposed fare policy – February 4, 2009

10. Valley Metro Board of Directors considers approval of new fare policy – February 19, 2009

11. Scheidt Bachman, a regional fare system vendor, re-programs the fare tariff – February thru May 2009 (Scheidt Bachman has indicated that a complex fair change could require up to four months to program and roll out to buses and fare vending machines throughout the region.)

12. Conduct public information campaign and order new fare media if required.

13. Implementation of new fare policy – July 2009 or earlier

3

Fiscal Impact The investment to conduct the study and recommendations to implement a policy for large volume users (e.g., universities/colleges/technical schools, employers, and conventions) and a ticketing program for major sports/cultural events along the rail line is $49,999. The costs are to be paid evenly by METRO and RPTA. The cost to model and recommend fare pricing changes is not to exceed $22,900. RPTA budgeted funds will be transferred from the remaining consultant funds for the financial system to Regional Marketing. This will be funded with Regional Area Road Funds (RARF). Considerations Due to large increases in operating costs and the significant reduction of tax revenue, Valley Metro service providers are evaluating service reductions and fare increases. Without the fare increase, Valley Metro service providers may be forced to implement significant service reductions. Although a fare increase will reduce the level of service reductions, it will not eliminate the need to reduce service. With committee, and Board approvals by November 2008, RPTA can conduct public hearings in January 2009 and implement the new fare policy by July 2009 or earlier. Committee Action Process • VMOCC tabled the original proposal – June 25, 2008 • VMOCC informational presentation – September 16, 2008 • Fare Policy Committee review and input – October 14, 2008 • VMOCC: On October 21, 2008, the VMOCC motioned to recommend the fare policy

change scenario and to forward the item to the TMC. The motion failed with a vote of 5 in favor and 7 against.

• FOAC: On October 21, 2008, the FOAC motioned to recommend the fare policy change scenario and to forward the item to the TMC with changes. The motion was approved by a vote of 7 in favor and 6 against. The changes were:

o Exclude recommendations for ASU, Special Events and Conventions o Increase 31-day pass to $50 for local and $76 for express

• TMC: On November 5, 2008 the TMC motioned to recommend the fare policy change scenario and to forward the item to the TMC with changes. The motion was approved by a vote of 7 in favor and 6 against. The changes were:

o Implement the first phase adjustment July 2009 or earlier. Monitor conditions and implement the second phase if necessary.

o ADA paratransit strategies remain within each jurisdiction. • Board for consideration – November 20, 2008 • VMOCC apprised of public hearing process input – January, 2009 • TMC for consideration – February 4, 2009 • Board for consideration – February 19, 2009 Recommendation It is recommended that the Board approve the recommended fare policy change scenario only for the purpose of authorizing the Executive Director to hold public hearings regarding the fare policy change. The public comments will be returned for Board consideration in advance of any approved fare change.

4

The fare policy recommendation is included in the attached Regional Fare Program presentation by Booz Allen Hamilton. Contact Person Mario Diaz Chief Marketing Officer 602-534-7391 Attachments Regional Fare Policy Program presentation by Booz Allen Hamilton which includes the fare policy recommendation.

0

PhoenixNovember 20, 2008

Valley Metro Board of Directors

Regional Fare Policy ProgramNew slides: 9, 10, 11, 16Revised slides: 17, 18

This document is confidential and is intended solely for the use and information of the client to whom it is addressed.

1

Contents

Regional Fare Study Objectives

Regional Fare Policy Proposal

Next Steps and Program Schedule

Appendix – Peer Data

2

Regional fare study objectives

Overall goal: Recommend fare policies that facilitate boarding and partner with Valley businesses to encourage transit use, while maintaining or exceeding Board-adopted average farebox recovery target [25%]

Develop and recommend regional pricing strategies for a fare change by July 2009 or earlier

Establish regional fare policies for ADA Paratransit services

Revise fare pricing strategies for Rural Route services

Define fare policies for large volume users:– Employers– Universities/colleges/technical schools– Ticketing for major sports/cultural events and venues, conventions

Fare Policy Committee, Finance Oversight Advisory Committee, Valley Metro Operations and Capital Committee, and Transit Management Committee provided input to finalize recommendations

Regional Fare Study Objectives

3

The regionwide farebox recovery ratio is projected to decline

In 2007, the Board adopted a regionwide 25% farebox recovery target

With the 2007 fare change and ridership growth, farebox recovery is projected to approach the target in FY 2009. In subsequent years, farebox recovery is projected to drop annually

Annual cost growth assumptions: 5% for bus, 4% for rail


Farebox Recovery Ratio

22.4%

24.0%

22.6%22.8%23.1%

22.1%22.0%

22.5%

23.0%

23.5%

24.0%

24.5%

25.0%

25.5%

FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13

Target (25%)

4

Ridership and fare revenue by fare type

Single Ride9.2%

1-Day Pass

44.4%31-Day Pass

23.2%

ASU Student

Pass2.4%

Platinum Pass

13.5%

Other1.5%

Free5.8%

Single Ride

13.8%

1-Day Pass

40.5%

31-Day Pass

23.6%

ASU Student

Pass2.7%

Platinum Pass

17.3%

Other2.1%

Ridership

Fare Revenue

Source: Valley Metro/RPTA and City of Phoenix. Based on data from after the Dec 2007 fare change, through Sep-08.“Other” includes the 3-Day Pass, 7-Day Pass, and Semester Pass

Since the Dec 2007 fare change, Day Pass ridership increased from just 0.9% of ridership to 44.4% of ridership – making it Valley Metro’s most popular fare instrument. About 90% of Day Pass sales currently take place on-board the vehicle


5

Valley Metro fixed route fares are low compared to 11 peers

Valley Metro Peer Average / RangeLocal Cash Fare $1.25 $1.84

Range: $1.25 - $2.25Express Premium $0.50 $1.36

Range: $0.00 - $2.751-Day Pass $2.50 $4.73

Range: $2.50 - $6.001-Day Pass breakeven 2.0 trips 2.6 trips

Range: 2.0 – 4.0 trips31-Day Pass $45.00 $66.07

Range: $40.00 - $85.0031-Day Pass breakeven 36.0 trips 36.2 trips

Range: 28.4 – 49.6 trips


Additional peer data available in the appendix

6

Recommendations: Phased increases FY10, and FY11 if necessaryBase fare is a cash fare valid for a single local boardingFY10 fare increase implemented by July 2009. The FY11 increase recommendation will be part of FY11 budget processBase fare is $1.50 in FY10 and if necessary, $1.75 in FY11 Express cash fare is base fare + $1.00 premiumReduced cash fare is one-half the local cash fare, rounded down to the nearest $0.051-day pass:– Local: 3.0 times the base fare, rounded down to the nearest

$0.25 (except in FY11, when the price is $5.00)– Express: $2.00 premium over local day pass– Reduced: one-half the local day pass, rounded down to the

nearest $0.25– Off-board sales provide $0.75 discount on local 1-day

passes, $0.50 on reduced 1-day passes3- and 7-day passes are 2.5 times the base fare, times number of days of validity (i.e., 3 or 7)31-day pass:– Local: $50 in FY10 and $55 in FY11– Express: $76 in FY10 and $85 in FY11– Reduced: one-half the local 31-day pass, rounded down to

the nearest dollar


Fare Element CurrentFY2010

(July 2009)FY2011

(July 2010) *Local

Cash $1.25 $1.50 $1.751-Day $2.50

On-board N/A $4.50 $5.00Off-board N/A $3.75 $4.50

3-Day $7.50 $11.25 $13.007-Day $17.50 $26.25 $30.5031-Day $45.00 $50.00 $55.00

ExpressCash $1.75 $2.50 $2.751-Day $3.50


3-Day N/A N/A N/A7-Day N/A N/A N/A31-Day $68.00 $76.00 $85.00

ReducedCash $0.60 $0.75 $0.851-Day $1.25


3-Day $3.75 $5.50 $6.507-Day $8.75 $13.00 $15.2531-Day $22.50 $25.00 $27.00

Semester PassSpring, Fall $160.00 $175.00 $195.00Summer $105.00 $115.00 $125.00

* FY2011 fare change to be implemented only if determined to be necessary

7

Estimated ridership and revenue effect


FARE STRUCTURE ALTERNATIVE FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013Baseline: No Fare ChangeRidership (# of Trips) 53,450,000 64,185,000 70,008,000 72,457,000 74,993,000 77,617,000Annual Change, % 20.1% 9.1% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5%Fare Revenue $39,046,000 $47,739,000 $52,069,000 $53,891,000 $55,777,000 $57,728,000Annual Change, % 22.3% 9.1% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5%Farebox Recovery 22.4% 24.0% 23.1% 22.8% 22.6% 22.1%Average Fare per Trip $0.73 $0.74 $0.74 $0.74 $0.74 $0.74SINGLE CHANGE: $1.50 Base Fare, Day Pass at $4.50 ($3.75 off-board), $50 31-Day PassRidership (# of Trips) 53,450,000 64,185,000 64,248,000 66,497,000 68,825,000 71,234,000Annual Change, % 20.1% 0.1% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5%Fare Revenue $39,046,000 $47,739,000 $66,850,000 $69,173,000 $71,602,000 $74,108,000Annual Change, % 22.3% 40.0% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5%Farebox Recovery 22.4% 24.0% 29.7% 29.3% 29.0% 28.4%Average Fare per Trip $0.73 $0.74 $1.04 $1.04 $1.04 $1.04PHASED: $1.50 in FY2010, $1.75 in FY2011: Day Pass at $5.00 in FY2011 ($4.25 off-board), $55 31-Day PassRidership (# of Trips) 53,450,000 64,185,000 64,248,000 64,359,000 66,612,000 68,943,000Annual Change, % 20.1% 0.1% 0.2% 3.5% 3.5%Fare Revenue $39,046,000 $47,739,000 $66,850,000 $74,390,000 $76,985,000 $79,679,000Annual Change, % 22.3% 40.0% 11.3% 3.5% 3.5%Farebox Recovery 22.4% 24.0% 29.7% 31.5% 31.1% 30.5%Average Fare per Trip $0.73 $0.74 $1.04 $1.16 $1.16 $1.16

Ridership and revenue results will be monitored in FY2010 to assess the need for an additional fare change in FY2011

8

Farebox recovery ratios with the recommended fare policies

Farebox Recovery Ratios

22.1%

28.4%

30.5%

22.6%22.8%23.1%

22.4%

29.0%29.3%

24.0%

31.1%31.5%

29.7%

20.0%

22.0%

24.0%

26.0%

28.0%

30.0%

32.0%

FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13

Target(25%)

Baseline

PhasedFare Change

One-TimeFare Change

Note: City of Tempe and RPTA farebox recovery ratios are lower than the regional average.


9

City of Phoenix fare objectives

Generate revenue to help restore eliminated service by January 2010 and to continue service expansion

Move from 25% to 30% farebox revenue recovery target, as a minimum

Regional Fare Study Objectives ADDED 11/20/2008

10

Additional fare alternatives: base fares of $2.00 and $2.25Multiple base fare options, including:– Increasing the base fare by up to $1.00 in

July 2009– An increase to the base fare again in July

2010, by up to $0.50, but not to exceed $1.00 over two years

Express fare premium increased from $0.50 to $1.00

Reduced fare discounts remain at 50%

Passes priced at multiples of base fare:– 1-Day Pass at 3.0 x base fare– 3- and 7-Day Passes at 2.5 x base fare x

number of days of validity (i.e., 3 or 7) – 31-Day Pass at 31-33 x base fare


Fare Element Current $1.50 $1.75 $2.00 $2.25Local

Cash $1.25 $1.50 $1.75 $2.00 $2.251-Day $2.50On-Board N/A $4.50 $5.00 $6.00 $6.75Off-Board N/A $3.75 $4.25 $5.25 $6.003-Day $7.50 $11.25 $13.00 $16.00 $18.007-Day $17.50 $26.25 $30.50 $37.00 $42.0031-Day $45.00 $50.00 $55.00 $63.00 $70.00

ExpressCash $1.75 $2.50 $2.75 $3.00 $3.251-Day $3.50On-Board N/A $6.50 $7.00 $8.00 $8.75Off-Board N/A $5.75 $6.25 $7.25 $8.0031-Day $68.00 $76.00 $85.00 $93.00 $100.00

ReducedCash $0.60 $0.75 $0.85 $1.00 $1.101-Day $1.25On-Board N/A $2.25 $2.50 $3.00 $3.25Off-Board N/A $1.75 $2.00 $2.50 $2.753-Day $3.75 $5.50 $6.50 $8.00 $9.007-Day $8.75 $13.00 $15.25 $18.50 $21.0031-Day $22.50 $25.00 $27.00 $31.00 $35.00

Semester PassSpring, Fall $160.00 $175.00 $195.00 $220.00 $245.00Summer $105.00 $115.00 $125.00 $145.00 $160.00

FY2010 (July 2009)

ADDED 11/20/2008

11

Estimated ridership and revenue effects of new alternativesFARE STRUCTURE ALTERNATIVE FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013

Phased Fare Change: $1.50 (Jul-09) / $1.75 (Jul-10)Ridership (# of Trips) 53,450,000 64,185,000 64,248,000 64,359,000 66,612,000 68,943,000Annual Change, % 20.1% 0.1% 0.2% 3.5% 3.5%Fare Revenue $39,046,000 $47,739,000 $66,850,000 $74,390,000 $76,985,000 $79,679,000Annual Change, % 22.3% 40.0% 11.3% 3.5% 3.5%Farebox Recovery 22.4% 24.0% 29.7% 31.5% 31.1% 30.5%Average Fare per Trip $0.73 $0.74 $1.04 $1.16 $1.16 $1.16$1.75 Base FareRidership (# of Trips) 53,450,000 64,185,000 62,261,000 64,441,000 66,697,000 69,031,000Annual Change, % 20.1% -3.0% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5%Fare Revenue $39,046,000 $47,739,000 $72,003,000 $74,521,000 $77,129,000 $79,829,000Annual Change, % 22.3% 50.8% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5%Farebox Recovery 22.4% 24.0% 32.0% 31.6% 31.2% 30.6%Average Fare per Trip $0.73 $0.74 $1.16 $1.16 $1.16 $1.16$2.00 Base FareRidership (# of Trips) 53,450,000 64,185,000 59,775,000 61,868,000 64,034,000 66,275,000Annual Change, % 20.1% -6.9% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5%Fare Revenue $39,046,000 $47,739,000 $80,578,000 $83,395,000 $86,314,000 $89,335,000Annual Change, % 22.3% 68.8% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5%Farebox Recovery 22.4% 24.0% 35.8% 35.3% 34.9% 34.2%Average Fare per Trip $0.73 $0.74 $1.35 $1.35 $1.35 $1.35Phased Fare Change: $1.75 (Jul-09) / $2.25 (Jul-10)Ridership (# of Trips) 53,450,000 64,185,000 62,261,000 59,699,000 61,789,000 63,952,000Annual Change, % 20.1% -3.0% -4.1% 3.5% 3.5%Fare Revenue $39,046,000 $47,739,000 $72,003,000 $89,416,000 $92,561,000 $95,801,000Annual Change, % 22.3% 50.8% 24.2% 3.5% 3.5%Farebox Recovery 22.4% 24.0% 32.0% 37.9% 37.4% 36.7%Average Fare per Trip $0.73 $0.74 $1.16 $1.50 $1.50 $1.50$2.25 Base FareRidership (# of Trips) 53,450,000 64,185,000 58,029,000 60,062,000 62,164,000 64,340,000Annual Change, % 20.1% -9.6% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5%Fare Revenue $39,046,000 $47,739,000 $87,195,000 $90,243,000 $93,402,000 $96,671,000Annual Change, % 22.3% 82.6% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5%Farebox Recovery 22.4% 24.0% 38.7% 38.2% 37.8% 37.1%Average Fare per Trip $0.73 $0.74 $1.50 $1.50 $1.50 $1.50

ADDED 11/20/2008

12

ADA paratransit fares

ADA regulations allow providers of ADA complementary paratransit services to charge up to 2.0 times the cash fare for a comparable fixed route trip

ADA fares are currently $2.00 and $2.50 in the Valley Metro service area, varying by community


Area Paratransit Fare Fixed Route Bus Fare

ADA Fare /Cash Fare

East Valley DAR $2.00 $1.25 1.6

Phoenix DAR $2.50 $1.25 2.0

Northwest Valley $2.00 $1.25 1.6

Among peers, the ADA fares average 1.7 times the cash fare. Four of nine are at the ADA-allowed 2.0

The Valley Metro ADA Paratransit Study recommended increasing ADA fares regionally to 2.0 times the cash fare

13

Recommended changes to Phoenix and East Valley ADA paratransit fares

TMC recommended that ADA fares should be decided by each community

Staff recommendations:– Increase the Phoenix and East Valley ADA paratransit cash fare by $0.50, effective July

2009 – Communities with fares less than twice the local bus fare should increase their fares by

$0.25 per year until all areas have the same fare and the fare is twice the fixed route local cash fare

– Phoenix should consider raising the price of the ADA paratransit monthly pass price to a minimum of 20.0 times the ADA cash fare ($60, effective July 2009)

The four peers that do have ADA monthly passes price them at 25 to 40 times the ADA cash fareThe Phoenix paratransit monthly pass is currently priced at 13.6 times the cash fare

– If an in-person eligibility determination process is implemented, provide a bus and rail pass for conditionally eligible ADA paratransit riders to use fixed route transit at no cost to the pass holder (needs program oversight finalization)


14

Recommended changes to Rural Route faresAjo/Gila Bend Route 685 fares have remained the same since 1999 (Wickenburg Route 660 based on the 685)

Labor and fuel costs have increased sharply for both routes

Increasing fare would simplify the fare structures and enable the sale of prepaid fare media

REGULAR FARES Wickenburg Surprise Glendale

Wickenburg -------- $3.00 ($4.00) $3.00 ($4.00)

Surprise $3.00 ($4.00) -------- $1.25 ($2.00)

Glendale $3.00 ($4.00) $1.25 ($2.00) --------


REGULAR FARES Ajo Gila Bend Buckeye Avondale Goodyear Tolleson Phoenix

Ajo ----- $3.00 $5.00 ($6.00) $6.00 ($7.00) $6.00 ($7.00) $7.00 ($8.00) $7.00 ($8.00)

Gila Bend $3.00 ----- $2.00 ($3.00) $3.00 ($4.00) $3.00 ($4.00) $4.00 ($5.00) $4.00 ($5.00)

Buckeye $5.00 ($6.00) $2.00 ($3.00) ----- $1.25 ($2.00) $1.25 ($2.00) $2.00 ($3.00) $2.00 ($3.00)

Avondale $6.00 ($7.00) $3.00 ($4.00) $1.25 ($2.00) ----- $1.25 ($2.00) $1.25 ($2.00) $1.25 ($2.00)

Goodyear $6.00 ($7.00) $3.00 ($4.00) $1.25 ($2.00) $1.25 ($2.00) ----- $1.25 ($2.00) $1.25 ($2.00)

Tolleson $7.00 ($8.00) $3.00 ($5.00) $2.00 ($3.00) $1.25 ($2.00) $1.25 ($2.00) ----- $1.25 ($2.00)

Phoenix $7.00 ($8.00) $4.00 ($5.00) $2.00 ($3.00) $1.25 ($2.00) $1.25 ($2.00) $1.25 ($2.00) -----

Route 685- Gila Bend/Ajo Fare Structure - Current fare (Proposed fare)

Route 660 - Wickenburg Fare Structure - Current fare (Proposed fare)

15

Summary of fare policy recommendations:FY 2010 fare change = July 2009 or earlier; FY 2011 fare change (if necessary) = July 2010 or earlier

Results of FY10 fare increase will be monitored and a recommendation on the FY11 increase will be part of the FY11 budget process

Base fare is $1.50, effective FY 2010, and $1.75, effective FY 2011

Express cash fare is base fare + $1.00 premium

Reduced cash fare is one-half the local cash fare, rounded down to the nearest $0.05

Pass prices:

Adopt the recommended changes to the ADA paratransit fares (i.e., maintain the ADA cash

Adopt the recommended changes to rural route fares


FY2010 FY2011 FY2010 FY2011 FY2010 FY20111-Day

on-board $4.50 $5.00 $6.50 $7.25 $2.25 $2.50off-board $3.75 $4.50 $5.75 $6.50 $1.75 $2.00

3-Day $11.25 $13.00 N/A N/A $5.50 $6.507-Day $26.25 $30.50 N/A N/A $13.00 $15.2531-Day $50.00 $55.00 $76.00 $85.00 $25.00 $27.00

ReducedPasses

Local Express

16

Fare policy alternatives for public hearings

Multiple base fare options, including:– Increasing the base fare by up to $1.00 in July 2009– An increase to the base fare again in July 2010, by up to $0.50, but not to exceed $1.00

over two years

Express fare premium increased from $0.50 to $1.00

Reduced fare discounts remain at 50%

Passes priced at multiples of base fare:– 1-Day Pass at 3.0 x base fare– 3- and 7-Day Passes at 2.5 x base fare x number of days of validity (i.e., 3 or 7) – 31-Day Pass at 31-33 x base fare

Adopt the recommended changes to the ADA paratransit fares

Adopt the recommended changes to rural route fares

ADDED 11/20/2008

17

Next steps and program schedule:

Continue discussions with ASU and special events/venues

January 2009: Public hearings and report to VMOCC

February 2009: City of Phoenix Council and Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee

February 4, TMC: Consider public hearing input

February 19, Valley Metro Board: Consider fare policy approval

February thru May, Scheidt & Bachmann programs the new fare tariff

Conduct public information campaign and order new fare media if required

July 2009 (or earlier): Implement fare policy and pricing changes

Next Steps REVISED 11/20/2008

18

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the Board approve the recommended fare policy change scenario only for the purpose of authorizing the Executive Director to hold public hearings regarding the fare policy change.

It is also recommended that the Board approve the additional fare policy scenarios to be presented during the public hearings.

In advance of requesting approval, the public hearing results and fare policy recommendations will be presented for committee, city of Phoenix, and Board consideration.

Next Steps REVISED 11/20/2008

19

Additional slides

20

Farebox recovery rates vary by operator and service type

FY08 regionwide farebox recovery ratio: 22.4%

Regionwide farebox recovery by service type:– Local services: 22.5%– Rapid/express services: 18.2%

Farebox recovery by operator:– Tempe: 14.6%– RPTA: 18.2%– Phoenix: 24.8%

Gross Cost Fare RevenueFarebox

RecoveryTempe

Local $21,841,312 $3,195,584 14.6%Rapid/Express $601,353 $82,595 13.7%Total $22,442,665 $3,278,179 14.6%

RPTALocal $26,121,227 $4,973,800 19.0%Rapid/Express $3,933,905 $503,191 12.8%Total $30,055,132 $5,476,991 18.2%

PhoenixLocal $117,133,350 $29,132,079 24.9%Rapid/Express $5,069,619 $1,158,378 22.8%Total $122,202,969 $30,290,457 24.8%

Regionwide Gross Cost Fare RevenueFarebox

RecoveryLocal $165,095,889 $37,301,463 22.6%Rapid/Express $9,604,877 $1,744,164 18.2%Total $174,700,766 $39,045,627 22.4%


21

Annual ridership and fare revenue for Phoenix


Projections assume the ridership and fare revenue share for Phoenix remains steady at about 77.6%

FARE STRUCTURE ALTERNATIVE FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013Ridership 41,477,000 49,808,000 54,326,000 56,227,000 58,195,000 60,231,000Fare Revenue $30,300,000 $37,045,000 $40,406,000 $41,819,000 $43,283,000 $44,797,000Ridership 41,477,000 49,808,000 49,856,000 51,602,000 53,408,000 55,278,000Fare Revenue $30,300,000 $37,045,000 $51,876,000 $53,678,000 $55,563,000 $57,508,000Ridership 41,477,000 49,808,000 49,856,000 49,943,000 51,691,000 53,500,000Fare Revenue $30,300,000 $37,045,000 $51,876,000 $57,727,000 $59,740,000 $61,831,000Ridership 41,477,000 49,808,000 48,315,000 50,006,000 51,757,000 53,568,000Fare Revenue $30,300,000 $37,045,000 $55,874,000 $57,828,000 $59,852,000 $61,947,000Ridership 41,477,000 49,808,000 46,385,000 48,010,000 49,690,000 51,429,000Fare Revenue $30,300,000 $37,045,000 $62,529,000 $64,715,000 $66,980,000 $69,324,000Ridership 41,477,000 49,808,000 45,031,000 46,608,000 48,239,000 49,928,000Fare Revenue $30,300,000 $37,045,000 $67,663,000 $70,029,000 $72,480,000 $75,017,000

$2.00 Cash Fare in FY2010


Baseline: No Fare Change


Phased Approach: $1.50 in FY2010, $1.75 in FY201


22

Appendix – Peer Data

23

Peer ADA paratransit pricing strategies

Paratransit ServiceValley Metro

Las Vegas

Los Angeles (1) Dallas

San Jose Denver

San Diego Sacramento Salt Lake (2) Portland Reno Minneapolis (5)

Cash Fare $1.25 $1.25 $1.25 $1.50 $1.75 $1.75 $2.25 $2.00 $2.25 $2.00 $2.00 $2.25ADA Fare $2.50 $1.50 $1.80 $2.75 $3.50 $3.50 $4.50 $4.00 $2.75 $1.80 $1.75 $4.00ADA Fare / Cash Fare 2.0 1.2 1.4 1.8 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.2 0.9 0.9 1.8ADA 31-Day Pass $34.00 $60.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $100.00 $92.00 $50.00 N/A N/A

24

Eleven peer agencies were reviewed

Nine agencies operate local bus and light rail services; two have traditionally been the region’s bus peers (Las Vegas, Reno)

Nine of the agencies’ ADA paratransit fares were also reviewed

Agency Fixed Route Services ADA paratransit serviceDART (Dallas, TX) Bus, Light Rail √

LACMTA (Los Angeles, CA) Bus, Light Rail √

Metro Transit (Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN) Bus, Light Rail √

MTS (San Diego, CA) Bus, Light Rail √

RT (Sacramento, CA) Bus, Light Rail √

RTC (Las Vegas, NV) Bus √

RTC (Reno, NV) Bus

RTD (Denver, CO Bus, Light Rail √

SCVTA (San Jose, CA) Bus, Light Rail √

Tri-Met (Portland, OR) Bus, Light Rail

UTA (Salt Lake City, UT) Bus, Light Rail √

25

Framework for peer comparisons

AgencyFixed Route

Services

Revenue Service

Hours (000)Boardings per RSH

Median Income

Cost of Living

DART (Dallas, TX) Bus, Light Rail 2,222.6 33.8 $54,730 -10%

LACMTA (Los Angeles, CA) Bus, Light Rail 8,206.2 58.8 $58.047 +48%

Metro Transit (Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN) Bus, Light Rail 2,025.9 36.2 $63,898 +9%

MTS (San Diego, CA) Bus, Light Rail 1,309.2 44.9 $61,794 +40%

RT (Sacramento, CA) Bus, Light Rail 919.8 34.0 $59,694 +25%

RTC (Las Vegas, NV) Bus 1,474.8 40.6 $55,996 +10%

RTC (Reno, NV) Bus 279.8 31.2 $54,322 +8%

RTD (Denver, CO) Bus, Light Rail 2,961.9 28.8 $58,875 +3%

SCVTA (San Jose, CA) Bus, Light Rail 1,453.2 27.5 $83,793 +55%

Tri-Met (Portland, OR) Bus, Light Rail 2,209.6 45.5 $55,387 +20%

UTA (Salt Lake City, UT) Bus, Light Rail 1,140.0 32.3 $57,294 -1%

Valley Metro (Phoenix, AZ) Bus 2,000.8 31.1 $54,250 base

Sources:Revenue service hours and boardings from National Transit Database for FY2006, the most recent data currently availableMedian Household Income: 2007 Community Survey for Metropolitan Statistical AreasCost of Living: Pay Scale Cost of Living Calculator based on American Chamber of Commerce Researchers Association data

26

Seven peers have increased fares since 2006, or plan increases in January 2009 –

two have done both

AgencyFixed Route

ServicesFare in Dec-06

Fare Change

since 2006

Current Cash Fare

Planned Fare

Change/sDART (Dallas, TX) Bus, Light Rail $1.25 $0.25 $1.50

LACMTA (Los Angeles, CA) Bus, Light Rail $1.25 $1.25

Metro Transit (Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN) Bus, Light Rail $1.50 $0.75 $2.25

MTS (San Diego, CA) Bus, Light Rail $2.25 $2.25

RT (Sacramento, CA) Bus, Light Rail $1.75 $0.25 $2.00 $2.25

RTC (Las Vegas, NV) Bus $1.25 $1.25 $1.75/$2.00

RTC (Reno, NV) Bus $2.00 $2.00

RTD (Denver, CO Bus, Light Rail $1.25 $0.50 $1.75 $2.00

SCVTA (San Jose, CA) Bus, Light Rail $1.75 $1.75

Tri-Met (Portland, OR) Bus, Light Rail $1.70 $0.30 $2.00

UTA (Salt Lake City, UT) Bus, Light Rail $1.50 $0.75 $2.25

Valley Metro (Phoenix, AZ) Bus $1.25 $1.25 $1.50/$1.75

27

Peer fixed route pricing strategiesValley Metro

Las Vegas

Los Angeles

(1) Dallas San Jose Denver (3) San Diego SacramentoSalt Lake

(4) Portland RenoMinneapolis

(5)Local ServiceCash Fare $1.25 $1.25 $1.25 $1.50 $1.75 $1.75 $2.25 $2.00 $2.25 $2.00 $2.00 $2.25All Day Pass $2.50 $2.50 $5.00 $3.00 $5.00 $5.25 $5.00 $5.00 $5.50 $4.75 $5.00 $6.00Day Pass breakeven 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.9 3.0 2.2 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.5 2.731 Day Pass $45.00 $40.00 $62.00 $50.00 $61.25 $60.00 $64.00 $85.00 $74.50 $75.00 $70.00 $85.0031-Day Pass breakeven 36.0 32.0 49.6 33.3 35.0 34.3 28.4 42.5 33.1 37.5 35.0 37.8

Express/RAPID ServiceCash Fare $1.75 N/A $1.85 $2.50 $3.50 $3.00 $5.00 $2.00 $5.00 N/A N/A $3.00Express Premium $0.50 N/A $0.60 $1.00 $1.75 $1.25 $2.75 $0.00 $2.75 N/A N/A $0.75All Day Pass $3.50 N/A $5.60 $5.00 $10.00 $8.25 $11.00 $5.00 $14.50 N/A N/A $6.00Day Pass breakeven 2.0 N/A 3.0 2.0 2.9 2.8 2.2 2.5 2.9 N/A N/A 2.031 Day Pass $68.00 N/A $80.00 $80.00 $122.50 $108.00 $90.00 $85.00 $175.00 N/A N/A $113.5031-Day Pass breakeven 38.9 N/A 43.2 32.0 35.0 36.0 18.0 42.5 35.0 N/A N/A 37.8

AGENDA ITEM 6

Section 5309 Project Budget Adjustments

AGENDA ITEM 6



From: Brian D. Buchanan, Director of Design and Construction

John P. McCormack, Director of Finance and Administration


Re: Section 5309 Project Budget Adjustments

PURPOSE The purpose of this item is to request that the Rail Management Committee (RMC) recommend that the METRO Board (Board) authorize project budget contingency adjustments for cost increases and savings to line item budgets within the Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) project. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The contingency budget enables funding of contract change orders, which arise as construction proceeds. Section 5309 contingency budgets affected are within the FFGA budget. Contract changes requiring use of contingency are reviewed by member city staff and approved by Change Control Committee prior to approval by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO). Total funding for the line section contracts include a combination of Federal Section 5309 funds included in the FFGA and locally funded Concurrent Non-Project Activities (CNPA’s). Today’s action pertains only to the section 5309 fund budget. Line Section Four (LS4): The current Board-approved LS4 5309 Budget is $53,107,081, which includes a contingency budget amounting to $5,862,188. This contract is in the final closeout phase. The reconciliation of change order amounts indicates approximately $700,000 of 5309 contingency budget will not be required. Today’s action will decrease the budget by $700,000 bringing the total to $52,407,081. Once closeout actions are final, the remaining budget is transferred to Project Reserve.

Rail Management Committee Memo November 24, 2008 Page 2 Park and Rides: The current Board-approved budget for Park and Rides is $23,638,792, which includes a contingency budget amounting to $1,343,525. The Park and Ride contracts are in various stages of closeout with minimal change order work remaining. The Resident Engineer has assessed remaining change order costs and recommends the contingency be reduced by $700,000 to $643,525. Archaeological Services/Hazardous Material Removal: The current Board-approved budget for these services is $7,572,689. There is an under-run of $200,000 for the PBS&J and PGH Wong portion of these services. The work is complete. Action request is to transfer $200,000 of these funds to the Construction Administration Services line item, thereby revising the budget to $7,372,689. Prior Right Utilities: The current Board-approved budget for Prior Right Utilities is $31,500,000. Work is complete and cost to date is $28,571,746. Close out and final invoicing is on going, but a review of expected costs at completion indicates that a reduction in contingency is warranted. Action request is to reduce the contingency by $500,000 establish a revised total budget of $31,000,000. Construction Administration Consultant: The current Board-approved Construction Administration Consultant 5309 Budget is $54,311,124. The CAC contract is amended each fiscal year based upon a level of effort assessment of the required professional services for the upcoming year. This request to transfer the costs required for the fiscal year 2009 CAC contract management, inspection, and quality assurance activities is based upon updated staffing and cost assumptions to complete FY 2009. Total projected 5309 CAC cost at completion for construction administration services is 56.3 million. Action request is to increase the CAC 5309 budget for construction administration services by $1,970,336 to $56,281,460. Project Reserve: The current Board-approved budget for Project Reserve is $1,071,593. This action will transfer $129,664 to establish a revised budget of $1,201,257.

Rail Management Committee Memo November 24, 2008 Page 3 FISCAL IMPACT The contingency budgets affected are within the FFGA budget. Changes to the budgets are shown in the tables on the attached pages. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is requesting that the RMC recommend that the Board authorize the following changes to the Section 5309 project budgets:

• Decrease the Line Section 4 budget by $700,000 to $52,407,081;

• Decrease the Park and Ride contingency by $700,000 to $22,938,792;

• Decrease the Archeological Investigations/Hazardous Material Removal element by $200,000 to $7,372,689.

• Decrease the Prior Rights utilities budget by $500,000 to $31,000,000;

• Increase the Construction Administration Services line item by $1,970,336 to $56,281,460;

• Increase the Project Reserve by $129,664 to $1,201,257.

Rail Management Committee Memo November 24, 2008 Page 4

CP/EV LRT Project

Sec 5309 Construction Project Budget Changes For December 2008 Board Action

Rail Management Committee Memo November 24, 2008 Page 5

CP/EV LRT Project Sec 5309 Project Budget Changes For December 2008 Board Action

AGENDA ITEM 7

Advertising Policy Update

AGENDA ITEM 7



From: John Farry, Director of Community and Government Relations


Re: Advertising Policy Update

PURPOSE This item updates the Rail Management Committee (RMC) on activities related to the sale of advertising displays on the METRO system and provides information that may result in action to recommend that the METRO Board (Board) adjust the METRO advertising policy. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION In May 2008, the Board discussed the possibility of allowing advertising on the METRO system on a temporary basis. The following issues associated to any change in the advertising policy were included in that discussion:

• Advertisers must meet the City of Phoenix policy definition of acceptable advertising;

• No more than 20 percent of fleet vehicles (10 vehicles) would be made available for wraps;

• Station display ads would be limited to the cities willing to permit them; and • Revenues generated within a jurisdiction should benefit that city.

The Board directed staff to gather additional information related to changing the advertising policy, including potential revenues, and report back to the Board. Advertising/Partnership solicitation. On September 2, 2008 METRO released a Request for Expressions of Interest (REOI) inviting blind-bid proposals for advertising partnerships. The REOI was distributed by the following methods:

• Posting on METRO website; • Mailouts to a list of advertising agencies and PR agencies (49 total); • Mailouts to individuals and businesses that had expressed interest in the past

(approx 10); and • Advertisement over two weekends in the Az Republic

Rail Management Committee Memo November 24, 2008 Page 2 of 3 The REOI was specific to seeking sponsors and cobranding partners of six months to a year with offers of exclusivity in product or service category. The REOI suggested minimum bids for advertising as follows: Vehicle wraps -- $8,000 per month Station display cases -- $500 per month per display case Ranking criteria was also called out in the REOI. Consideration would be given to the following ranking criteria in the event a selection was to be made: • Cash compensation for advertising displays – 55% • Compatibility of sponsor with METRO mission objectives, ridership and brand image

goals – 20% • Commitment to a six-month or one year advertising and partnership program – 15% • Other support the advertiser provides for METRO’s light rail safety, rider education

and ridership efforts – 10% Responses. Five proposals were submitted in response to the REOI. Three of the proposals included offers to wrap vehicles. Table One is a general summary of the proposed level of commitment and net revenues proposed to METRO for vehicle wraps.

Table One - Vehicle Wrap Proposals

Proposer Time

Commitment # of vehicles Bid per vehicle

A 1 Year 4 $120,000

B 1 Year 1 $114,000

C 6 months 1 $48,000 Based on the information included in Table One, the REOI process indicates a level of interest to wrap up to six vehicles for up to a one-year period with three separate advertisers for total revenues of $640,000. Interest in advertising at display cases on station platforms was also expressed in the proposals. Potential annual revenues proposed were $171,000 with three proposers expressing interest. Two were interested in six-month commitments and one proposer was interested in a one-year commitment. Proposers B and C in Table One expressed interest in both vehicle wraps and display case advertising. While the proposed advertising revenues associated with proposals received from this REOI exceed $800,000 per year, it is important to note that the revenues are derived from multiple advertisers rather than one or two sponsors. If this were to be the long-term situation, additional staff resources would likely be necessary to sell and manage the advertising and to oversee the placement and maintenance of advertising on the system. An alternative to in-house management of advertising would be to

Rail Management Committee Memo November 24, 2008 Page 3 of 3 contract with a vendor to manage the advertising effort, however this option would significantly reduce the advertising revenues to METRO. Given that METRO has not yet begun operations, the effort to develop one or two advertising sponsors/partners may be premature. Additionally, the acceptance of advertising on the METRO system by the community is also an unknown at this time. For instance, an individual involved with the design of the METRO project expressed concern with vehicle wraps at the September Board meeting. Additional Interest. The National Basketball Association (NBA) All Star game will occur in February 2009 at U.S. Airways arena. The NBA and representatives of the Phoenix Suns have contacted METRO staff expressing interest in advertising on METRO for a four to six week period prior to the All Star game. The NBA would like to wrap three trains and advertise at the 3rd Street/Jefferson and the 3rd Street/Washington station platforms. The NBA proposal would be an opportunity to test system advertising on a very limited basis. The community at large would have an opportunity to react to system advertising and the potential market for future advertising might also be recognized once the advertising has been placed. FISCAL IMPACT The REOI process indicates initial revenues associated with advertising to be approximately $800,000 per year. Additional analysis would be required to determine staff resources associated with system advertising. RECOMMENDATION This item is for information, discussion and possible action to recommend that the Board take one of the following actions:

a) Retain the current restriction on advertising; b) Direct staff to negotiate with the NBA and Phoenix Suns to advertise on the

METRO system at market rates by wrapping three trains and at the 3rd Street/Jefferson and the 3rd Street/Washington station platforms for up to a six week period as a trial advertising period.

c) Direct staff to proceed to convene an advertising evaluation committee to negotiate advertising agreements with one or more of the respondents to the REOI and return to the RMC and Board to alter the restriction on advertising and consider an advertising contract;

d) Direct staff to investigate the option of hiring a vendor to conduct advertising sales and placement based on a traditional first-come/ first-served, fixed-price approach.

AGENDA ITEM 9 Light Rail City Ordinances

AGENDA ITEM 9


Through: Michael J. Ladino, General Counsel and Lawrence M. Engleman, Director of Safety, Security and QA

From: Richard J. Simonetta, Chief Executive Officer


Re: Light Rail City Ordinances

PURPOSE The purpose of this item is to inform the Rail Management Committee (RMC) of the recent adoption of ordinances in Phoenix, Tempe, and Mesa related to individual conduct required of persons riding the light rail passenger system. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION On August 14, 2008, the City of Tempe City Council approved Ordinance No. 2008.36, which amended Chapter 22 (Miscellaneous Offenses) of its City Code by adding a new Article VIII relating to Transit, and amending Chapter 26 (Police) by amending Section 26-1 and adding a new Section 26-5 relating to Transit Enforcement Aides. On October 15, 2008, the City of Phoenix City Council approved Ordinance No. G-5252 which amended its City Code, Part II, Chapter 36 by adding a new Article XVI pertaining to Transit Vehicles, Property and Facilities. On November 3, 2008 the City of Mesa City Council approved Ordinance No. 4889 amending the City Code by adding Title 12 (Transit) and adding a new Chapter 1 (General Regulations relating to Public Transit Vehicles) to that Title. A comparison of the three enacted Ordinances reveals some minor textual and formatting differences, but no matters of substance. SPECIFIED UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES A) FARE PAYMENT AND ENFORCEMENT

The ordinances require passengers to provide proof of fare payment when requested and to conform to any lawful regulation of the ordinance. Passengers who do not have or fail to provide proof of payment may be removed from the vehicle by the fare inspector and given a citation.

Rail Management Committee Memo November 24, 2008 Page 2 B) PROHIBITED CONDUCT ON TRANSIT VEHICLES, FACILITIES & PROPERTIES

The three ordinances prohibit certain public behavior while riding a transit vehicle, including, but not limited to: carrying or consuming an alcoholic beverage; carrying flammable, explosive or hazardous substances; walking between coupled, light-rail vehicles; throwing objects from a train; placing objects on the guideway; playing loud music; placing one’s feet on seats; smoking or using tobacco products; defacing transit property in any manner. Pets must be carried in secured cages or carrying cases.

C) USE RESTRICTIONS

The ordinances deny ridership privileges to fare evaders and those persons posing a serious risk to the public or to the METRO fare inspectors.

PENALTIES The ordinances make the violation of the ordinance a civil offense where the violator is subject to a sanction of not less than $50 but not more than $500 (plus surcharges, costs and fees as set by law). FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact to METRO by virtue of the passage of the Ordinances. RECOMMENDATION This item is for information only. No action is requested.

AGENDA ITEM 10 Owner Controlled Insurance Program

(OCIP) Update

AGENDA ITEM 10



From: Michael J. Ladino, General Counsel


Re: Owner Controlled Insurance Program (OCIP) Update

PURPOSE The purpose of this memorandum is to provide an update to the Rail Management Committee (RMC) regarding the METRO Risk Management Program. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION An integral part of the METRO Risk Management Program is the Risk Management Committee, comprised of the Risk Managers from the cities of Phoenix, Tempe, Mesa, and Glendale. The Committee has been meeting on a regular basis to review and comment on the on-going development of METRO’s risk management program. The Committee ensures that there is adequate coordination between METRO’s risk management program and each city’s individual risk management program. METRO and its Risk Management Committee determined that as METRO moves forward into revenue service an Owner Controlled Insurance Program (OCIP) should be procured to protect METRO, the Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Maintenance Contractor, the Transportation Services Contractor, the Landskeeping Contractor, the Systems and Facilities Contractor, the Cleaning Contractor, and the member cities from adverse third-party liability losses. The METRO Board (Board) approved this concept in October 2006. Contractual agreements with Union Pacific Railroad, and the member cities set the minimum limit of liability at $100,000,000 per occurrence. A survey of similar transit systems confirms that this is a reasonable limit and a self-insured retention (SIR) between $250,000 and $500,000 is prudent.

Rail Management Committee Memo November 24, 2008 Page 2 METRO, in conjunction with its Risk Management Consultant, Ashton Tiffany, LLC is seeking quotes from numerous markets for liability coverage. The coverage will be procured on an annual basis. In addition to the liability portion of the risk management program, insurance will be purchased to cover the physical assets of METRO including the buildings, light rail vehicles, motorized vehicles the Tempe Town Lake Bridge, as well as insurance for crime losses, workers’ compensation, and environmental exposures. Policies to be Purchased The following insurance coverages will be purchased:

Coverage Limit Proposed SIR/Deductible

Primary and Excess Liability $100,000,000 $250,000 to $500,000

Property Insurance $68,000,000 $10,000 except flood $100,000

Inland Marine/Light Rail Vehicles $150,000,000 $100,000

Inland Marine/Town Lake Bridge $ 22,581,224

scheduled property$5,000,000 flood

$100,000

Excess Flood and Earth Movement/Town Lake Bridge $15,000,000 $5,000,000

Crime $1,000,000 $10,000

Worker’s Compensation/Employer’s Liability Statutory/$1,000,000 $0

Environmental $5,000,000 $25,000

FISCAL IMPACT The full fiscal impact cannot be determined until all insurance quotes are obtained, but the premiums plus any required funding of the $250,000 to $500,000 self-insured retention (SIR) have been included METRO’s FY 2009 Annual Operating and Capital Budget. RECOMMENDATION This item is for information only.

Cover.docAgenda RMC 12-03-08-fin.docDividers.docRMC Minutes 10-01-08-fin.docDividers.docMemo - Master FundingV2-fin.docDividers.docMemo - I-10 West Contract Phase 2-fin.docDividers.docMemo - Regional Fare Policy-fin.docRPTA Fare Policy.pdfBoard Nov 02 - Regional Fare Policy 11 10fValley Metro Board Fare Program phx rev f 11.20.08Slide Number 1Contents Regional fare study objectivesThe regionwide farebox recovery ratio is projected to declineRidership and fare revenue by fare typeValley Metro fixed route fares are low compared to 11 peersRecommendations: Phased increases FY10, and FY11 if necessaryEstimated ridership and revenue effectFarebox recovery ratios with the recommended fare policiesCity of Phoenix fare objectivesAdditional fare alternatives: base fares of $2.00 and $2.25Estimated ridership and revenue effects of new alternativesADA paratransit faresRecommended changes to Phoenix and East Valley ADA paratransit faresRecommended changes to Rural Route faresSummary of fare policy recommendations:Fare policy alternatives for public hearingsNext steps and program schedule:Recommendation:Additional slides Farebox recovery rates vary by operator and service typeAnnual ridership and fare revenue for PhoenixAppendix – Peer Data Peer ADA paratransit pricing strategiesEleven peer agencies were reviewedFramework for peer comparisonsSeven peers have increased fares since 2006, or plan increases in January 2009 – two have done bothPeer fixed route pricing strategies

Dividers.docMemo - 5309 Budget Adj-Dec 2008-fin.docDividers.docMemo - Adv Update-fin.docDividers.docMemo - Ordinance-fin.docDividers.docMemo - OCIP Update-fin.doc

rail management committee meeting · 2020. 1. 15. · rail management committee meeting minutes...

Documents