TAC Presentation May 2015 Minutes

7/18/2019 TAC Presentation May 2015 Minutes

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tac-presentation-may-2015-minutes 1/8

Wednesday, April 1 2015 11:00 AM

MINUTESLong Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) UpdateTAC Working Group Meeting #6

Mulholland Conference Room15th Floor

Attendees:

Please see attached sign-in sheet.

Items Reviewed:

1.

Schedule

2.

Mobility Matrices Update

3.

Polling/Research Update

4.

Community Outreach Update

5.

LTSS Motion and Tier 2 Operators’ Letter

6. Transit Funding



2

Discussion Highlights:

1.

Schedule

General public polling results will be available to share with the COG Executive Directors at

their mid-April meeting. The polling results will support the Executive Directors in identifyingCOG project/program priorities, which are due to Metro by May 22.

Using COG project/program priorities input received by the end of May and non-COG

stakeholder input on projects/programs received by early June, Metro will develop an

Expenditure Plan Framework during June for COG Executive Director and Metro Board

consideration in July.

Following approval of the Expenditure Plan Framework, Long Range Transportation Plan

(LRTP) Update processes will accelerate. Analytical work, community outreach workshops, and

stakeholder briefings will be carried out through April 2016.

Another round of polling will be conducted in May 2016. The results from this poll will help

inform the Metro Board’s go/no go decision on the ballot measure in June 2016.

2.

Mobility Matrices Update

The Mobility Matrices are complete. Each COG has either accepted, acknowledged or

approved the final report. The Metro Planning and Programming Committee is scheduled to

receive and file the final report in April.

o

Mobility Matrices reports will be posted on the Metro website on the LRTP Update page.

The Mobility Matrices projects, cost estimates, and summaries have been compiled into a

Briefing Book to share with the COG Executive Directors. Since then, there have been some

updates which will be incorporated into a revised Briefing Book that will be shared with the

TAC Working Group.*

3.

Polling/Research Update

LRTP Public Opinion Research was completed on March 29. Data and results will be shared

with the COG Executive Directors at their mid-April meeting.

4.

Community Outreach Update

Stakeholder and community outreach has been ongoing. The Metro Community Relations

team has been going out into the community with high level presentations. Other groups inMetro are working on marketing, media, and web outreach strategies.

Like in the last LRTP Update, we will be doing workshops around the County. There will be

about a half dozen workshops which will be opportunities for us to talk and listen to the

public.

We have a draft outreach plan prepared, and will share it at a later date after it’s presented to

the Board staff.



3

5.

LTSS Motion and Tier 2 Operators’ Letter

We have started the discussion on geographic equity, and the work is still ongoing. While this

discussion includes understanding subregional boundaries and needs, it also includes

balancing capital and operations and maintenance needs. The Local Transit SystemsSubcommittee (LTSS) and Tier 2 Operators have both developed proposals that focus on the

operations and maintenance side of this discussion.

At their March meeting, the LTSS developed a motion to recommend dedicated operating

funding from the potential sales tax.

Sebastian Hernandez, Chair of LTSS, stated that there are more than thirty Local Transit

Systems comprising LTSS that collectively carry more than 25 million trips annually. These are

not municipal operators, and so do not receive dedicated funding through the Formula

Allocation Procedure (FAP). The services are primarily funded from Local Return. These

services have evolved over time, so they serve many regional trips. The LTSS proposes

requesting $15 million annually (2% of a half-cent sales tax) for operating and capital to bededicated to these operators. This would allow for LTSS to work with Metro to identify

priorities and provide thresholds to ensure productivity with enhancement of services.

In a March 24, 2015 letter, the Tier 2 Operators addressed the need for dedicated funding for

bus operators from the potential sales tax.

Jim Lefton, City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation, stated that there is a clear need

for dedicated operating funds because LTSS and Tier 2 operators do not have a dedicated

funding stream though the four Tier 2 operators are larger than all but 2 or 3 of the operators

that receive funds through the FAP. There are few grant opportunities for operations. The Tier

2 Operators propose allocating about 20% for FAP operators and an additional 5% for LTSS

and Tier 2 operators in order to lessen the competition for limited funds.

6.

Transit Funding

Tim Mengle of Metro Office of Management and Budget presented Local Return and FAP as

examples of how local sales tax revenues are allocated.

Carlos Vendiola of Metro Local Programming provided an oral snapshot of LA County’s transit

funding.

LA County’s transit needs total approximately $3 billion in operations and capital expenses in

the following modes:

o

65% bus

o

17% rail o

9% Metrolink

o

9% paratransit

o

The average capital cost over the past 5 years is $1 billion

Fares net about $500 million.

Dedicated local, state, and federal fund sources provide less than $1.5 billion in funds for

transit.



4

The remaining $1 billion of need is funded from various non-dedicated funds or one-time

grants and state and federal programs. Non-dedicated funds can be used on both transit and

streets and freeways. Use of the funds on transit operations and capital would be to the

detriment of streets and freeways, and vice versa.

Operations needs are growing at a rate of 4%, outpacing the growth of sales tax revenue

(approximately 1.8%). The overall funding picture is not promising moving forward. Metro Operations is projected to

face a deficit in FY 18 and it is only a matter of time before operators from the municipalities,

LTSS, and Tier 2 follow.

7. Responses to TAC Working Group Members’ Questions and Concerns

Larry Stevens, City of San Dimas, asked what is expected from the COGs in terms of next steps

for the Mobility Matrices.

o

We are asking the COGs to provide their prioritized projects/programs by May 22nd for the

potential ballot measure.

Larry Stevens asked whether specific projects will be included in the next phone survey as

feedback on specific projects will assist COGs in prioritizing projects and programs.

o

Yes, that is the intent.

Hector Rodriguez, Access Services, asked whether the TAC Working Group would receive a

copy of the phone survey.

o

The TAC Working Group will receive summary information that presents top line results of

key survey questions and the wording of those key survey questions will be included. These

results will be fairly optimistic because this was a random digit dial survey.*

Linda Taira, Caltrans, asked whether Metro would provide the TAC Working Group with the

presentation being presented at the stakeholder meetings.

o

There is a general presentation that is tailored for each stakeholder group. We will review the

general version of the presentation and share it with the group.*

Kathryn Engel, City of Glendale, asked that Metro inform cities at each key point in the

process. Cities can play a role in outreach, so it would be beneficial for Metro to keep the cities

in the loop so that cities can update Councils and other city groups.

o Yes, this is a good idea. We will be sure to do this when the outreach plan is rolled out. Feel

free to suggest groups that should be included in this outreach so that we can facilitate

discussion sooner rather than later.*

Marianne Kim, Automobile Club of America, asked whether the LTSS motion’s proposed 2%

for operators is for operations only, or operations and capital.

o

Both. Larry Stevens asked what kinds of operators are included in LTSS.

o

There are more than 30 Local Transit Systems operators including fixed route and

paratransit operators.

Marianne Kim asked whether any operator could be in LTSS.

o

Yes, operators with service not eligible to receive funds through the FAP can be part of the

LTSS.



5

Patrick DeChellis, County of Los Angeles, stated that operations funding is part of the Local

Return issue, not a set-aside issue. Each jurisdiction has its own priorities and should be able

to use Local Return according to those priorities.

Robert Beste, City of Torrance, stated that local priorities need to direct how Local Return is

used. To do this, Local Return needs to be a bigger share of the sales tax.

David Kriske, City of Burbank, stated that there is a regional influence on transit operations.Local operators have shouldered a regional connection/network, so funding cannot come from

Local Return only.

Dana Pynn, Long Beach Transit, stated that as a municipal operator, she believes LTSS and

Tier 2 operators provide important first/last mile connections, and need dedicated funding.

Not every city recognizes the role of or prioritizes transit operations.

Larry Stevens stated that discussing dedicated funding for transit operations, and in general,

how to slice up the sales tax pie, is premature because the ballot measure is still only a

potential funding source. When and if the time comes for the ballot measure to go forward,

there will be many groups fighting for a slice of the pie.

o

We just want to gather as much information as possible now. It is important to capturethese ideas and needs as the Mobility Matrices may not have captured this level of detail on

operations funding.

Justine Garcia stated operators must compete for Local Return funds with various city

priorities and other local needs such as active transportation and complete streets. It becomes

hard to justify where money goes when there are so many hands in the pot. It is important to

have voices heard as early as possible.

Dan Mitchell, City of Los Angeles, asked whether the FAP allocation is Metro Board policy.

o

It is Metro Board policy and is reflected in State law.

Dana Pynn stated that FAP operators support over 600 million boardings annually and

securing money for these operations is difficult. There are few grants for transit operations and

they are often one-off, leaving continued operations needs unmet. Because of this, transit

operations rely heavily on sales tax money. Transit operators are being called upon to provide

more frequent, far reaching service to connect with rail, take over Metro routes, and help reach

greenhouse gas reduction goals. There is a greater demand for bus transit and less money to

go around.

Kathryn Engel stated that the intent is not to pit capital against operations, but it should be

recognized that operations money is necessary to make use of new capital projects and that

we need to consider what we can afford to operate.

Patrick DeChellis stated that the 2014 Local Street and Roads Needs Assessment estimated

$10 billion in unfunded streets needs in Los Angeles County. Streets provide for all modes, so

rather than focusing on one mode, a more holistic approach needs to be taken whendetermining funding allocations.

Roderick Diaz, Southern California Regional Rail Authority, stated three themes of the

discussion.1) Operators want credit for their expanding services. 2) Many operators provide

complementary and coordinating services, so there needs to be incentives to work together

and not cannibalize each other. 3) Independent of a new funding source, the priority setting

process for local jurisdictions on how bus operations money is allocated is difficult.



6

Additionally, funding allocations should be made to operators with consideration of their

contributions in terms of ridership and also how they generate revenue for the County.

Action Items*:

Metro staff to provide Mobility Matrices Results Briefing Book.

Metro staff to provide summary of results of key questions from LRTP Public Opinion

Research poll.

Metro staff to provide stakeholder outreach general presentation.

Metro staff to inform cities at key points in the ballot measure/LRTP update process.

Next Meeting Dates:

The group generally meets on the first Wednesday of each month at 11:00am following TAC

meetings. However, the next meeting will precede the TAC meeting.

The next TAC Working Group meeting will be on Wednesday, May 6, 2015 from 8:00am to

9:00am in the Mulholland Room, Metro 15th floor.

The purpose of the time change is so the meeting does not hinge upon the conclusion of the

TAC de-obligation appeals process.





Documents

TAC Presentation May 2015 Minutes