HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1998 0617 CC REG ITEM 10K,� 77, �a-
ITEM 10 • K•
CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
City Council Meeting
of to ' 1-1 cig
ACTION:
N of f� a ✓td „5, t c co�+�►mendatton
City of Moorpar
BY:
AGENDA REPORT
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: John Brand, Senior Management Analystgl�
DATE: June 10, 1998 (CC meeting of June 17, 1998)
SUBJECT: Consider VCTC Adopted Metrolink Funding Formula
BACKGROUND
As the Council knows, local Transportation Development Act (TDA) funding from a t/4 cent of State
sales tax is apportioned to jurisdictions on per capita basis. TDA is restricted in use for mass transit
first, (this is the revenue source for the Moorpark City Bus), and the remainder may be used for
street and roads. Since Metrolink came to Ventura County in 1992, local TDA has been used to pay
for the local share of Metrolink costs.
The Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC) approved its original Metrolink cost
sharing formula several years ago. There has always been considerable discussion on how to refine
the formula for further consideration in future years. It is commonly recognized that there are merits
and inequities inherent in any cost allocating formula. In the past, the Commission has identified a
number of factors that might, or should, be figured into any new equation. Among those factors
discussed by the Commission were: accurate ridership information with seasonal adjustments; station
maintenance & lost revenue costs; the number of trains per day; the miles of track; and weighing the
weight given to these various cost sharing factors.
The original formula used to share Metrolink costs among the Ventura County jurisdictions was 50%
per capita and 50% "time." "Time" is defined as the population which lives within 15 minutes of a
Metrolink station. At the request of the Commission, VCTC staff developed a number of alternatives
for VCTC to consider. Western County cities proposed a new formula known as "Alternative 6,"
which, if it had been adopted, would have added the results of a one -day ridership survey based on
Zip Codes to the formula. Zip Code boundaries are not co- terminus with City limits, and a one -day
CAMy Documents\M\Moorpark \City Council \CC Agenda Staff Reporls\Metrolink TDA Apportionment .wpd
000100
CC Meeting of June 17, 1998
Metrolink Funding Staff Report
Page 2
survey may not reflect year -round usage. As a result, the "Alternative 6" formula would have
approximately doubled Moorpark's contribution in TDA funds for Metrolink.
The Ventura County Transportation Commission met on June 5t1i. At this meeting, the Commission
reversed its decision, made in May, to retain the current cost sharing formula for local Metrolink
costs. After considerable rancor over procedures, and several failed attempts to adopt various
alternatives, the Commission adopted a "weighted" version of the original current formula. The new
formula weighs "per capita" and "time" by the number of trains, or the frequency of service.
The approved formula, known as "Alternative 3," (50% weighted per capital & time) won passage
after unsuccessful attempts to pass "Alternative 6," (33% per capita, time, ridership) - Oxnard &
Ventura's favorite, or to retain the Current Formula (50% per capita & time). A vote to adopt the
State standard method, "Alternative 4" (100% per capita) also failed.
The bottom line is that there will be a $12,326 reduction in the amount of TDA funds available to
Moorpark for streets and roads in the new fiscal year. The revised FY 1998/99 apportionment
indicates that Moorpark can anticipate $639,303 in TDA revenue. See the attached VCTC Local
Transportation Fund Fiscal year 98/99 Apportionment sheet. The new formula differs from the
current one only in that it weighs "per capita" and "time" by factoring the number of trains per day.
Note, that when Metrolink service expands and more trains are added to Oxnard, then Moorpark's
relative share will decrease under the newly adopted formula.
There is some question as to whether or not TDA guidelines require that rail costs be shared on a per
capita basis. The City of Simi Valley has apparently requested that Caltrans Headquarters in
Sacramento review the Metrolink cost sharing formula adopted by VCTC, and to rule on its validity.
Additionally, they are requesting that Caltrans to consider imposing the default formula based totally
on per capita. Going to the state's 100 per capita formula would result in about a $1,000 decrease
in Moorpark's share of Metrolink's costs.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council direct that a letter be drafted to Caltrans requesting a review
of the Metrolink cost sharing formula adopted by VCTC.
C:\My DocumentsMMoorparklCity Council\CC Agenda Staff ReportsWetrolink TDA Apportionment .wpd W(ALOIL
.
c r i 1 I J JU i Z: e i rri r KUM V L I L, 60b b4;e 46bW N i
VENWRA.COUNW
In
ANSPORTATION COMMISSION
950 County Square Onve suite 207
Venturi. CA 93003
(805) 654 -2488
(805) 642.1591
FAX (86S) 64;-4S60
June 8, 1998
MEMO TO: ALL CITY MANAGERS, TRANSIT AND PUBLIC WORI S ]DIRECTORS
FROM: GINGER GHERARDI
SUBJECT: RAIL FUNDING FORMULA 1 FY 98/99 TDA APPORTIO , MENT
The Metrolink Rail Funding Formula was reconsidered by VCTC at the June 1998 meeting, at
the request of Commissioner Jack Tingstrom. The Commission, on a split vot4 j selected
Alternative #3 (50% weighted per capita / 50% weighted time),, meaning that t D th factors are
weighted by the number of trains run in each area.
As you know the final FY 1998/99 TDA Apportionments which must be adop prior to June
30, 1998, were also on the Commission's agenda and scheduled for adoption. n order to avoid
holding a special meeting, VCTC staff was asked to calculate the new apportic unents during the
meeting and they were subsequently adopted by the Commission before adjouiPment.
Attached to this memo, marked FINAL in large print, is the FY 1998/99 TD Apportionment
which was approved by VCTC on June 5, 1998. For comparison purposes on , I am enclosing
a copy of the original agenda item, based on the existing rail formula which ha. een in effect for
several years.
I would be remiss if I didn't mention that several cities were unhappy with the - evised formula
and indicated they intended to pursue the matter with Caltrans. As a reminder, VCTC staff has
consistently indicated that the TDA Rail dollars are Priority #4 and should bet Lken off the top of
TDA, similar to Bicycles and Pedestrians ( Prioity #3) or the Senior Nutrition ograzn under
Article 4.5 (Priority #6). Several years ago, Caltrans indicated a willingness t ; "permit" VCTC
to use an alternative formula, as along as we.could agree on one.
000102
JUN 11 '98 12:47 805 642 4860 PAGE.01
VENTURA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
Local Transportation Fund
Fiscal Year 98199 Apportionment, FINAL approved 6/5/98
N
m
w
c�
a
a
_ —_ Est]mated Ua,I11J n rtion _ .Camda — Q ___ _ _ _ m ka
Estimated Annual LTF Receipts 17,754,000 — —�
Total Funds Available 17,754,000
Auditor's Administrative Costs
10,000
VCTC Administrative Costs
355,000
VCTC Planning Costs
355,080
Subtotal
17,033,920
Article 3 Bikeway /Pedestrian Fund
340,678
Subtotal
16,693,242
Article 3 Commuter Rail
400,000
Subtotal
16,293,242
Article 4.5 Community Transit
0
Total to be apportioned
16,293,242
LTF APPORTIONMENTS
FINAL
Z
h
ry
v
ao
FY 98/99
FY 98 /99'Rail
Total
Agency
Population
Pop % Apportionment
Adjustment Apportionment
Camarillo
60,200
8.24°%
1,375,020
(24,940)
1,350,080
Fillmore
13,050
1.79%
298,073
(2,446)
295,627
Moorpark
29,300
4.01%
669,237
(29,934)
639,303
Ojai
8,150
1.12%
186,153
(1,528)
184,625
Oxnard
156,000
21.35%
3,563,174
(65,337)
3,497,837
Port Hueneme
22,550
3.09%
515,061
(9,424)
505,637
San Buenaventura
101,500
13.89°%
2,318,347
(32,392)
2,285,955
Santa Paula
26,900
3.68°%
614,419
(5,043)
609,376
Simi Valley
106,000
14,50°% .
2,421,131
(110,232)
2,310,899
Thousand Oaks
115,700
15.83°%
2,642,688
(87,755)
2,554,933
_Ventura County - Unincorporated
91,500
12.52%
2,089,939
(30,970)
2,038,969
Total
730,830
100.00°%
16,693,242
(400,000)
16,293,242
H- ,WLDOCSILTF9899.XLS]CityEsOmate
Z
h
ry
v
ao
6 -11 -1998 12:28PM FROM VCTC 805::642,4860
�r � -87-
A
May 13, 1998
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Item #{ 9 (c)
Action
VENTURA COL7M TRANSPORTATION
615198 MEETING
GINGER GHER RDI, EXECUTNE DIRECTOR
APPROVAL OF FINAL FY 98/99 TRANSPORTATION
ACT APPORTIONMENTS
RECON?MENDATION:
• Approve the attached final FY 98/99 Transportation
(TDA) apportionments (Attachment # 1).
DISCUSSION:
VCTC is responsible by law for developing estimates of revenues available
apportioning sales tax funds that accrue to Ventura County under the State'
Development Act (TDA). VCTC works with the County Auditor- Controllt
estimate; detailed information on the estimate was given to Commissioners
meeting when the draft FY 98/99 apportionments were approved.
The final apportionments differ from the draft figures in that these ;
on the FY 98/99 population figures which have recently been made
Department of Finance.
As was shown on the draft apportionment, the estimate of receipts for FY c
$17,754,000 and is slightly higher than the estimate for the current year of
expect that only $428,862 will remain in the fund at the end of this fiscal y+
as a modest contingency or as a "buffer" against unforeseen reductions in t
receipts. Other thaia the updating of the population numbers, there are no c
draft apportionments approved by the Commission at its March meeting.
By State regulation, FY 98199 apportionments must be adopted by July 1 st
t:= r- 188% W
P. 3
VENTURA COUNTY
>RTATION COMMISSION
950 County square Drivc swo 207
Wntura CA 93003
Act
annually
(805) 654.28ee
18051 642.1591
FAX 005) 642486C
to determine the
your March 6th
vents are based
by the State
99 is
7,380,000. We
which will act
estimated
nees from the
fiscal year.
000104
JUN 11 198 12:4? eas 642 4AAA pore az
t., .
VENTURA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
Local Transportation Fund
Fiscal Year 98/99 Apportionment - FINAL
m
w
0
a
Estimated Unappottioned Carryin
0
Estimated Annual LTF Recelpts
17,754,000
m
Auditors Administrative Costs
10,000
VCTC Administrative Costs
355,000
VCTC Planning Costs
355,080
G
Subtotal
17,033,920
OD
Article 3 Bikeway/Pedestdan Fund
340,678
Subtotal
16,693,242
Article 3 Commuter Rail
400,000
Subtotal
16,293,242
Article 4.5 Community Transit
0
Total to be apportioned
16.293,242
LTF APPORTIONMENTS
FY 98199
FY98/99 Rail
Total
Agency
Population
Pop %. Apportionment
Adjustment Apportionment
Camarillo
60,200
8.24%
1,375,020
(36,794)
1,338,226
Fiilmor�e
13,050
1.79%
298,073
(3,371)
294,502
Moorpark
29,300
4.01%
669,237
(17,778)
651,459
a
Ojai
8,150
112%
186,153
(2,230)
183,923
Oxnard
156,000
21.35%
3,583,174
(97,330)
3,465,844
Port Hueneme
22,550
3.09%
515,061
(14,031)
501,030
San Buenaventura
101,500
13.89%
2,318,347
(47,556)
2,270,791
Santa Paula
26,900
3.68%
614.419
(7,361)
607,058
H
Simi Valley .
106,000
14.50%
2,421,131
(66,327).
2,354,804
Thousand Oaks
115,700
15.83%
2,642,688
(66,342)
2,576,346
Ventura County. Unincorporated
91,500
12.52%
2,089,939
(40,680)
2,049,259
Total
730,850
100.00%
16,693,242
(400,000)
16,293,242
H :WLD0CSjLTF9899.XLSIC1tyE8U=1e
Q1
Z
ti
'�l I
�.
RAIL FORMULA
ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 6
Alternative 7
LOCAL AGENCY
33% Per Capita /33% Time
50% Per Capita
33% Ridership
25% Time /25% Rider
Camarillo
$31,484
$35,665
Fillmore
$2,925
$3,987
Moorpark
$34,082
$26,656
Ojai
$1,776
$2,463
Oxnard
$59,902
$76,783
Port Hueneme
$8,482
$10,948
San Buenaventura
$42,814
$45,108
Santa Paula
$5,547
$7,921
Simi Valley
$113,614
$89,300
Thousand Oaks
$65,371
$60,899
County of Ventura
$34,004
$40,270
TOTAL
$400,001
$400,000
I
l
di /l ` - - -� .•C 4 >T
1 s t f` Jay. 1K � 1.�.4'y fK f ✓i
� ✓ j u " � ,.`, � ice{ r : � � i frwJ y. Jr :T
•� w r 1 �'. i .� F y � .�`ti„ l \r^.+-� � J r� i S � r �s 1 „��
,fi-: r� � Z �� 1\ �' i a r J� ,«+ *r � �,j`s- �� % a •, `�►'� ""'�~ Aat, 1 ..k �, ^k >��x
✓ yr A
.» •µAx. +..A +r� ��_� �'��
sar��rir�-u�
V7" Yd
Y.CNYS' -
0
4��
Jo
r�l
J�
V'
G�tLYO A
f
r10