Click to add title - Colorado Springs, Colorado

download report

Transcript Click to add title - Colorado Springs, Colorado

Mountain Metropolitan
Transit
Sustainability Committee
March 20, 2009
Presented By:
Sherre Ritenour & Tim McKinney
1
An Effective
Mountain
Metropolitan Transit
Effective Customer Service
Programs
Minimal stops at peak hours
Serve the Pikes Peak region
User friendly downtown station
Incorporated with land use planning
More direct routes
Ready for rail connectivity
2
Mountain
Metropolitan Transit
(Today)
Attractive buses
7-day a week service
Friendly staff
Easy to use web site
Passes available on-line
Commuter buses
Clean buses/increased security
Park-and-rides
3
Transit Challenges

Governance
 CTAB, City Council, CAC, RTA Board, TAC, PPACG,
FTA, CDOT

Funding Sources
 City, FTA, RTA, State each with different restrictions on
the use of funds

Operations
 Serve the transit dependent as a social program

Additional Issues
 13C, Pension Fund, Paratransit and Human Service
Provider demand, Sales Tax
4
Governance Issues

No common vision for the future of public transportation
services

Municipal governance over regional program
 Multiple
boards with citizens and elected officials with
differing priorities
 Staff
time spent coordinating decision-making among
CTAB, Council, CAC, RTA, FTA, CDOT, TAC, PPACG
 General
Fund Transit services compete with other city
services for funding
5
Governance Issues-cont.

Sales Tax dependent

Revenues from operations shared based on
ridership between City and RTA

Expenditures shared based on fixed-route revenue
service hours

City Fare revenue to General Fund

RTA Fare revenue to Transit operations
6
Finance
7
Funding Issues


General Fund Priorities
Reduce General Fund subsidy for Transit Services

Maximize the use of grant funds to offset operating expenses

Attract choice riders

Ensure service to individuals with disabilities and the Transit
traditional rider
RTA Fund Priorities
Regional bus service

Funds not eligible for City staff

Equitable split
8
Funding Issues

Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Priorities Support
 Funds
primarily for capital assistance
 Ensure

and expand Transit
community investment/commitment
State Priorities Intermittent
 Programs
capital assistance
consistent with State-wide Transportation Plan
9
2009 City Revenue Budget
$13,459,973
($7,487,022 General Fund, $2,906,644 Grant Fund, $2,536,447 Transit Revenue, and
$529,861 Parking System s, )
GENERAL FUND
$7,487,022 56%
PARKING SYSTEM
ADMIN $529,861 4%
AMBILCAB FARES
$17,308 0%
PARATRANSIT FARE
REVENUE $266,818
2%
FIXED ROUTE FARE
REVENUE $1,669,803
12%
ADVERTISING
$196,429 1%
FTA GRANT FUNDS
$2,906,644 22%
CELL TOWER RENT
$18,379 0%
FOUNTAIN $367,710
3%
10
2009 CITY EXPENDITURE BUDGET
$13,459,973
($10,553,329 General Fund and $2,906,644 Grant Fund)
FIXED ROUTE FUEL
1,078,328 8%
FIXED ROUTE BUS
SERVICE 5,263,318
39%
PARATRANSIT
SERVICE $672,600
5%
HUMAN SERVICE
PROVIDERS $368,000
3%
MATCH FOR GRANTFUNDED SALARIES
AND SERVICES
$726,661 5%
GENERAL ADMIN
COSTS $635,398 5%
PENSION
CONTRIBUTION
$578,500 4%
SALARIES AND
BENEFITS $700,664
5%
DOWNTOWN
SHUTTLE $529,861
4%
GRANT FUNDED
SALARIES AND
BENEFITS $916,680
7%
GRANT FUNDED
PARATRANSIT
SERVICE $648,364
5%
GRANT FUNDED FIXED
ROUTE BUS SERVICE
$1,341,600 10%
11
2009 PPRTA REVENUE BUDGET
$9,177,963
($8,081,963 PPRTA and $1,096,000 Grant Fund)
PROJECTED 2009
TAX REVENUE
$7,102,500 75%
NON-TABOR
RESERVES FOR
HUMAN SERVICE
PROVIDERS $310,000
3%
RESERVES
APPROPRIATED IN
2008 PAID BACK IN
2009 ($210,909) 2%
ESTIMATED FARE
REVENUE $880,372
9%
FEDERAL GRANT
FUNDS $1,096,000
11%
12
2009 PPRTA EXPENDITURE BUDGET
$9,177,963
($8,081,963 PPRTA and $1,096,000 Grant Fund)
PARATRANSIT
MAINTENANCE
GRANT FUNDS
$376,000 4%
FEDERAL FUNDS
MATCH $488,296 5%
CONTRACTS/TEMPO
RARY PERSONNEL
$754,909 8%
GRANT FUNDED FIXED
ROUTE BUS SERVICE
$720,000 8%
FIXED ROUTE BUS
SERVICE $3,199,470
36%
HUMAN SERVICE
PROVIDERS $310,000
3%
ADA PARATRANSIT
SERVICE $1,550,717
17%
FREX OPERATING
EXPENSE $500,000 5%
FUEL $1,278,571 14%
13
REVISED ANNUAL FIXED-ROUTE SERVICE HOURS
RTA
CITY
Total System
2008 fixed-route (FR) service hours
80,371
101,131
181,502
2009 budget reductions in FR hours
4,490
21,312
25,802
75,881
79,819
155,700
2,607
20,235
22,842
Revised annual service hours
73,274
59,584
132,858
Percent change from 2008 service
level
-8.83%
-41.08%
26.80%
2009 FR hours as of Jan. 1, 2009
Reduction in annual service hours based
14
Operational Issues
15
Operational Issues

Increased demand in both fixed-route and paratransit
services (linked)

Decreased Public Transportation counter to National
Green Effort

Aging population requires alternative modes

Increased fuel costs

Highest demand in 50 years and greatest budget
challenges
16
System Wide Improvements
Pre November 2005 (Blue)
118,562 hours
Post March 2008 (Green)
181,502 hours
April 2009 (Red)
132,858 hours
Areas of Reduction
fixed-route and paratransit
does not include FREX, Ute Pass, DASH
17
8
Service Quality
Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual
Measure
Level of Service A
Level of Service C
Mountain
Metropolitan 2008
Headways < 10 minutes
Headways 15-20
minutes
F (70-90 min.)
Hours of Service
19-24 hours of service
per day
14-16 hours of service
per day
C (17 hours per day on
one route)
Transit Support
Area Covered
Serve all major origins
and destinations
¾ of higher density areas
served
F (primarily within City
limits)
Load/Standing
Area
No passenger need sit
next to another
All passengers can sit
C or better (no crowding)
On-Time
Performance
Service provided like
clockwork
Vehicles often off
headway
C or better
Travel Time
Faster by transit than by
auto
Not quite as fast as by
auto but tolerable for
choice rider
F (avg. trip time is 2 ½
times personal vehicle)
Frequency of
Service
Source: Transit Cooperative Research Program Report 100.
18
City Transit Employees vs. Service Hours
25
300,000
23
18
17
Employees
200,000
15
13
12
12
12
150,000
10
9
10
100,000
5
Service Hours Operated
250,000
19
20
50,000
1
General Fund Employees- 100%
0
0
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Years
Total Staff
33
31
30
29
22
(Private Sector) Management Contract
General Fund Employees- 100%
Grant Funded Employees- 20%
# of Service Hours
Ridership
19
Additional Challenges

13C required for Federal Funds

Pension Fund- all liability no control $600$800k per year

Paratransit and Human Service Provider
increased demand

Sales Tax dependent
20
“The Perfect Storm”
Increased Demand
Need for Green
Increased Costs
Reduced Service
Reduced Resources
21
Conclusion

Community must decide what the role of Public
Transportation in the future of the Pikes Peak
region will be.

Is it a fully integrated multi-modal system that
meets the transportation needs of everyone? Or

Is it going to continue to be a town of “my horse
and my five acres”?
22
Questions
23