HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2021 0203 CCSA REG ITEM 09CCITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
City Council Meeting
of February 3, 2021
ACTION No Comments Provided.
BY B.Garza.
C. Consider Providing Comments on Possible Unmet Transit Needs to the Ventura
County Transportation Commission and Receive Report on Unmet Transit Needs
Findings and Goals. Staff Recommendation: Provide comments and direct staff
to forward them to the Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC), prior
to the end of the public comment period. (Staff: Shaun Kroes)
Item: 9.C.
MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable City Council
FROM: Shaun Kroes, Program Manager
DATE: 02/03/2021 Regular Meeting
SUBJECT: Consider Providing Comments on Possible Unmet Transit Needs to
the Ventura County Transportation Commission and Receive Report
on Unmet Transit Needs Findings and Goals
SUMMARY
On April 18, 2002, the City Council directed staff to prepare an annual report on the
City’s transit performance regarding the findings and goals that the Ventura County
Transportation Commission (VCTC) adopts each year at the conclusion of the Unmet
Transit Needs process. Attachment 1 serves as this year’s annual report on the City’s
performance. An addition to the annual report is Attachment 2, the Transit Ridership &
Statistics Report – Fiscal Year 2019/20, which provides further details about transit use
and expenditures. The City Council is being asked to review the annual report, provide
comments, and direct staff to forward the comments to VCTC.
BACKGROUND
On December 6, 2013, VCTC approved new Unmet Transit Needs definitions and
adjusted its public participation input program. This revision was in response to VCTC’s
Regional Transit Study as well as the impacts of SB 716 and SB 203 (both of which
became effective July 1, 2014). The revised definitions and public participation input
program are detailed in Attachment 3 of this report.
California Public Utilities Code (PUC) 99401.5(c) requires that VCTC hold at least one
public hearing pursuant to PUC Section 99238.5 to solicit comments on Unmet Transit
Needs that may exist within the jurisdictions and that may be reasonable to meet by
establishing or contracting for new public transportation, or specialized transportation, or
by expanding existing services. All Unmet Transit Needs that are reasonable to meet
must be funded before any allocation is made from TDA funds to the cities/county for
streets and roads pursuant to PUC 99401.5(e). Effective July 1, 2014, the remaining
Ventura County cities that this is applicable to are Camarillo, Fillmore, Moorpark and
Santa Paula (all cities with a population under 100,000 and not a member of the Gold
Item: 9.C.
281
Honorable City Council
02/03/2021 Regular Meeting
Page 2
Coast Transit District). On June 11, 2018, legislation allowed the City of Thousand
Oaks to spend TDA money on local streets, which means City of Thousand now returns
to the Unmet Transit Needs process. Although there are now a limited number of cities
that are affected by PUC 99401.5(e), VCTC must perform a countywide Unmet Transit
Needs process. The VCTC may identify an Unmet Transit Need in a service area not
affected by PUC 99401.5(e) (such as Gold Coast Transit or the City of Simi Valley);
however, it has no ability to require that Unmet Transit Needs be implemented because
the agency is already committing 100% of its TDA funding for existing transit services.
DISCUSSION
The VCTC will hold its annual public hearing on Unmet Transit Needs on February 5,
2021. Due to COVID-19, VCTC has been holding its Commission meetings virtually
(via Zoom) for several months and the Unmet Transit Needs public hearing will be no
different. Members of the public will be able to register with VCTC to provide their
comments during the virtual meeting. The VCTC also normally holds community
meetings where the public can meet with VCTC staff to provide comments. This year,
the community meetings were performed via Zoom on January 13 (beginning at 6:00
pm) and January 21 (beginning at Noon). City staff attended both virtual meetings.
Both meetings were lightly attended by members of the public. There did not appear to
be any Moorpark residents in attendance or Moorpark-specific comments. Staff from
VCTC noted that in years past there have been requests for transit services from
Fillmore to Moorpark. City staff has noted that the comments appear to be specific to
residents in Fillmore that want to travel into Moorpark and not the other way around.
City staff has commented to VCTC staff that while there’s support to help establish
transfer points/shared bus stops in Moorpark, the request appears to be a service that
should be funded by Fillmore and not Moorpark as City residents are not requesting the
service. City staff would also be supportive of VCTC attempting a grant-funded pilot
project for transit services between Fillmore and Moorpark, similar to the current Cross
County Limited service that provides direct transit service from Simi Valley/Moorpark to
the Ventura County Government Center.
In addition to attending an Unmet Transit Needs meeting, the public also has the option
of submitting written comments through VCTC’s online Unmet Transit Needs survey,
through email, telephone, or mail. Comments are due to VCTC by February 12, 2021.
Information on how to submit comments is provided on Attachment 4. Staff advertised
the comment period in the City transit buses and on the City website. The public is
encouraged to submit their comments to VCTC.
According to the PUC, VCTC must decide, by adopting a resolution, either that:
1. There are no unmet transit needs;
2. There are no unmet transit needs that are reasonable to meet; or,
3. There are unmet transit needs, including needs that are reasonable to meet.
282
Honorable City Council
02/03/2021 Regular Meeting
Page 3
The resolution must include information that provides the basis for VCTC’s decision.
Prior to VCTC’s Fiscal Year 2016/17 Transit Needs Assessment, VCTC would include
an extensive list of transit goals that were not considered an Unmet Transit Need,
based on comments submitted by the public. Goals that were applicable to Moorpark
would be included in the City’s Report of Performance. The VCTC reports since then
no longer include a list of goals. Consequently, the City’s Report of Performance
provides a general report of transit services in Moorpark. The report also addresses
any Moorpark-specific comments made during VCTC’s Unmet Transit Needs process.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
COUNCIL GOAL COMPLIANCE
This action does not support a current strategic directive.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Provide comments and direct staff to forward them to the Ventura County
Transportation Commission (VCTC), prior to the end of the public comment period.
Attachment 1: Report of Performance
Attachment 2: Transit Ridership & Statistics Report – Fiscal Year 2019/20
Attachment 3: Unmet Needs Definition
Attachment 4: Unmet Transit Needs Flyer
283
ATTACHMENT 1
Report of Performance
2021/22 Unmet Transit Needs
Moorpark City Transit
Moorpark City Transit Fiscal Year (FY) 2019/20 Ridership Information:
In FY 2019/20, Moorpark City Transit, along with all other transit services in the United
States, were impacted severely by COVID-19. Ridership levels plummeted nationwide
and Moorpark City Transit was no different. When California began implementing stay-
at-home orders in March of 2020, Moorpark City Transit (along with other transit
agencies in Ventura County) began implementing many responses, including:
• Suspension of fares on bus and dial-a-ride services (effective March 19 and
continues today).
• Dial-a-ride services began being limited to essential trips only (such as for
medical trips or travel to grocery stores). This restriction included advising
passengers of the restrictions; however, requested trips were not specifically
denied. The number of passengers per vehicle were also reduced to one
passenger per vehicle (implemented near the end of February).
• Bus service reduced the number of passengers to no more than 10 passengers
at a time. Bus service was also reduced over the course of a few weeks, with
first and last trips suspended followed by reducing bus service to only one bus
operating both routes (switching between Route 1 and Route 2 each trip). Full
service was resumed June 1, 2020.
A silver lining in response to COVID-19, was the March 27, 2020, Coronavirus Aid,
Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which included some funding for transit
services through the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). The City’s allocation was
$1,002,706, and reimbursement could be requested for expenditures that took place
after January 20, 2020. A secondary benefit was the approval of Assembly Bill 90,
which waived penalties on transit operators that do not maintain the required farebox
ratio of fare revenues to operating costs during FY 2019/20 and FY 2020/21. This has
enabled the City to keep fares suspended.
• In FY 2019/20, bus ridership decreased 31.64%; from 49,608 trips in
FY 2018/19 to 33,913 trips in FY 2019/20.
• Senior, disabled and personal care attendant (PCA) travel on the bus
decreased 27.19% in FY 2019/20 (from 11,795 trips to 8,588).
Approximately 25.32% of all passengers on the buses are
seniors/disabled/PCAs.
284
Page 2
• In FY 2018/19, the City began participating in the Ventura County
Transportation Commission College Ride program, which provides $1.10
reimbursement to a transit agency that provides free trips for passengers
that display a valid college ID. The practice continued in FY 2019/20, but
has been on “pause” since all transit fares were suspended in March
2020. The City provided approximately 5,997 trips in FY 2019/20; a
decrease of 24.48% compared to FY 2018/19 (7,941 trips provided). The
City received $6,596.70 in FY 2019/20. Approximately 17.68% of the
City’s passengers were riders with a college ID in FY 2019/20, a slight
increase compared to 16.00% in FY 2018/19.
• In FY 2019/20 Dial-A-Ride (DAR) services (both Local and InterCity
services) provided 5,611 trips. This is a decrease of 10.88% compared to
6,296 trips in FY 2018/19. Between the two services, trips on the Local
DAR service increased 32.39% (from 1,624 trips to 1,098) and InterCity
trips decreased 3.40% (from 4,672 trips to 4,513).
• The City’s VCTC audited farebox ratio (including Moorpark City Transit,
Beach Bus, and Dial-A-Ride services) was calculated at 12.83% for
FY 2019/20. The farebox ratio includes the City’s use of locally generated
developer fees used as a “Route Guarantee” to provide transit services.
Without the contribution, the City’s farebox ratio would be 4.89%. Both
calculations are below the 20% farebox requirement; however, as
previously mentioned, penalties for not achieving a 20% farebox ratio
have been suspended for FY 2019/20 and FY 2020/21.
See Attachment 2 for a more detailed report of transit services provided in FY 2018/19.
285
Page 3
Findings adopted by VCTC June 5, 2020.
There are no Unmet Transit Needs that are reasonable to meet.
During the Unmet Transit Needs process, VCTC presented Findings; some of which
included or involved transit service in Moorpark. Those Findings are provided below,
with a brief response. In some instances, the response is directly from VCTC.
Comment/Service Request Response
Service between Fillmore and
Moorpark
VCTC Response:
This year, service between the Heritage Valley and the
East County was requested 32 times, 25 of which
were for service between Fillmore and Moorpark. This
comment has been common request over the last
couple years and now reaches the threshold for
consideration. As the service between Fillmore and
Moorpark is a regional service within Ventura County,
involving multiple jurisdictions, it will require planning
with the cities of Fillmore and Moorpark, as well as the
County of Ventura. Additional vehicles will also be
needed to implement this service (and the vehicles will
likely need to be smaller, cutaway style, transit
vehicles due to the terrain of the route). At the
conclusion of the Unmet Needs process, VCTC will
begin the planning process in coordination with local
agencies, Fillmore, Santa Paula, Moorpark and the
County, with the goal of future implementation of this
service. Areas for consideration/determination include
the designated operator for the service, route
orientation, vehicle type and identification of available
funding sources.
Moorpark Staff Comments:
The City supports the concept of transit service
between Fillmore and Moorpark and is happy to work
with VCTC and City of Fillmore on potential transfer
points and times. Based upon comments submitted
from the public; this appears to be demand from
Fillmore residents, not Moorpark residents. Funding
for the transit service should be from Fillmore/VCTC.
Out of approximately 500 comments submitted, there were no comments specific to
Moorpark City Transit. A few comments were from Moorpark residents but appeared to
be related to improvements to VCTC or Metrolink services.
286
___________________________________________________________________________
TO: Troy Brown, City Manager
FROM: Shaun Kroes, Program Manager
DATE: January 8, 2021
SUBJECT: Transit Ridership & Statistics Report – Fiscal Year 2019/20
______________________________________________________________________
The tables below present a summary view of Moorpark City Transit operations in the
City for Fiscal Year (FY) 2019/20. On August 7, 2017, the City implemented route and
schedule changes for the fixed route (bus) service. The changes were based on a year-
long transit evaluation study performed by Nelson/Nygaard. The changes were
intended to streamline the routes and schedules, in an attempt to decrease passenger
confusion and increase ridership. The bus service operates Monday through Friday,
6:15 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. All Dial-A-Ride (DAR) services operate 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.,
Monday through Friday 1. All information reported under “Historical Trends” sections of
the report exclude demonstration service costs and ridership that occurred in
FY 2013/14 through FY 2015/16, in order to ensure an appropriate comparison amongst
the years2. Also, note that the first fiscal year of 2010/11 for “Historical Trends” does
not indicate the first year any transit service began. It only functions to serve as a base
year for comparison.
As in prior fiscal years, the City continues to see increasing costs for both bus and DAR
services (combined 22.32% increase in FY 2019/20 compared to FY 2018/19);
decreasing ridership (28.65% decrease in FY 2018/19 compared to FY 2017/18); and
decreasing revenue (17.46% decrease in FY 2019/20 compared to FY 2018/19).
As with all aspects of City services, Moorpark City Transit was impacted greatly by
COVID-19; with significant decreases in ridership beginning in March 2020 that
continues today. Following the model of nearly all other transit operators in Ventura
County, the City suspended transit fares for both bus and DAR services in March in an
effort to reduce interaction between passengers and drivers. The City also limited the
number of passengers allowed per bus to 10 passengers. Since the implementation of
the passenger restrictions, there were no instances of passengers being left at a bus
stop due to capacity limitations. Additional COVID-19 impacts will be discussed
throughout this report.
1 Saturday DAR service (8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) began in FY 2018/19. 2 The demonstration service included extending the hours of bus and local DAR services from 6:00 a.m.
to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday to 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday; Saturday bus
service from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.; and weekend local DAR service was also provided 8:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. These services were ended due to low ridership.
CITY ENGINEER/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
ATTACHMENT 2
287
Page 2
Staff is currently working on a couple of transit projects that will be considered in the
near future for consideration, including:
1. Proposed adjustments to the City’s bus service (route and timetable changes).
2. Approval of a pilot, on-demand “App-based” transit service that will be put
together based off a recently approved contract with RideCo Inc.
Moorpark City Transit Fixed Route - Bus Activity and Regional Agency
Reimbursements.
Jun
RIDERSHIP:
CASH
FARES
TICKETS,
TOKENS College ID VCTC Passes
& Transfers
TOTALS
MONTH
YEAR
AGO
YTD
2019-20
Last Year
YTD
Regular Fare (Student/Adult)149 0 1 0 150 1,877 24,387 36,090
115 687 8,588 11,795
22 136 938 1,723
Total Ridership 287 2,700 33,913 49,608
Average Riders Per Day 7 0 0 13 135 132 195
REVENUE: Cash Fares Prepaid College ID
Fares $0 $0 $1 $1
Year Ago $1,665 $160 $245 $2,071
YTD Total $17,167 $1,160 $6,597
$0.00 $35.89 $86.37 $294.29
$1.10 $2,106.55 $25,010.06 $36,879.28
22 20 256 255
23.05 22.78
$73.26 $57.35
$1,688.94 $1,306.58
$5,390.89 $4,095.33 $51,912.21 $60,017.59
Operations Cost $37,156.75 $26,131.53 $400,117.49 $329,236.81
Preventive Maintenance $11,892.66 $5,074.37 $121,440.65 $122,439.67
$54,440.30 $35,301.23 $573,470.35 $511,694.07
0.00% 5.97% 4.36% 7.21%
$189.69 $13.07 $16.91 $10.31
MOORPARK CITY TRANSIT TOTALS &
COMPARISONS
Senior, Disabled & PCAs - Free
Children 5 & under - Free
Total Route Systems Revenue
Service Days
Daily Hours
Hourly Rate
Daily Rate
CNG Fuel
Reimbursements (Senior Nutrition, VCTC Fares) & Adjustments
Contract Expense
Farebox Ratio
Cost Per Passenger
The table above provides ridership and cost information for the City’s bus service
(Route 1 and Route 2) for FY 2019/20 and FY 2018/19. Total ridership decreased
31.64% in FY 2019/20 (33,913) compared to FY 2018/19 (49,608 trips).
Contract expenses increased by 12.07% in FY 2019/20 ($573,470.35) compared to
FY 2018/19 ($511,694.07). The increase in costs is attributed to an increase in service
charges by the City of Thousand Oaks (Thousand Oaks) (the City’s contracted transit
operator) after the 2019 transit services request for proposal (RFP) that Thousand Oaks
completed and the City participated. It should be noted that the increase in contract
expenses would have been greater in FY 2019/20 had the City not decreased revenue
services March through May of 2020 in response to COVID-19. Vehicle maintenance
costs remained essentially the same in FY 2019/20 ($121,440.65) compared to
FY 2018/19 ($122,439.67). Thousand Oaks continues to not increase its labor costs.
Operational and fuel costs combined increased 16.13% in FY 2019/20 ($452,029.70)
compared to FY 2018/19 ($389,254.40).
288
Page 3
The FY 2019/20 farebox ratio was 4.36% compared to 7.21% in FY 2018/19. For
purposes of this transit report, the farebox ratio factors in operational costs (bus
operations and fuel) and preventive maintenance. The farebox ratio does not factor in
overhead expenditures related to transit that are included in the City’s official TDA audit.
The farebox ratio is below the 20% farebox ratio requirement for TDA; however, this
was the result of a couple of specific reasons:
1. On June 29, 2020, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill 90 which waived
penalties on operators that do not maintain the required ratio of fare revenues to
operating costs during the FY 2019/20 and FY 2020/21 fiscal years.
2. The City was eligible for additional federal funding through the Coronavirus Aid,
Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act for transit expenses that occurred
after January 20, 2020. By using existing federal grant money and the new
CARES Act funding, the City was able to reduce demand for the City’s local TSM
fund by nearly $182,000.
Moorpark City Transit Fixed Route – Historical Trends
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
$400,000
$450,000
$500,000
Bus Trends
Operation Costs
Ridership
Fares
The chart above provides operation cost (including fuel), ridership, and fare trends from
FY 2010/11 through FY 2019/20 (maintenance costs are excluded from this chart).
FY 2012/13 is when Thousand Oaks began providing services for the City after the
City’s previous contractor (Coach America) terminated its contract due to bankruptcy.
Operational and fuel costs combined increased 16.13% in FY 2019/20 ($452,029.49)
compared to FY 2018/19 ($389,254.40).
While costs have increased over the years, ridership and revenue (fares) continue to
decrease. When comparing the highest year of collected revenue (FY 2011/12;
$61,869 collected) and the lowest year of collected revenue (FY 2019/20; $25,010),
revenue has decreased 59.58%. For FY 2019/20, COVID-19 has been the most
significant contributing factor to the reduction in collected fares. This was due to both
289
Page 4
the suspension of fares in the middle of March 2020, as well as the significant drop in
ridership after local schools (50%-60% of ridership) and Moorpark College (16%-20% of
ridership) no longer had students meet in person. Ridership decreased 79.21% for the
months of March 2020 – June 2020 (3,375 trips) compared to the same time period in
2019 (16,237 trips).
Moorpark City Transit Fixed Route Operations – Funding Sources
The above chart provides a breakdown of funding sources for the City’s bus service
based on FY 2018/19 numbers, which is a typical year compared to FY 2019/20, which
is impacted by CARES Act funding that provides a disproportionate amount of federal
funding and significant reduction of TSM funding. As can be seen in the chart, a
majority of bus service is funded with TSM funds, followed by federal funds that the City
receives through its annual FTA 5307 allocation. The remaining 14% of funding came
from fares (9%) and TDA 8c funds (5%). General Fund money is not used to fund bus
service.
290
Page 5
$0
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
$120,000
$140,000
Maintenance
Maintenance
The chart above provides preventive maintenance trends from FY 2010/11 through
FY 2019/20. Preventive maintenance costs have remained relatively consistent
throughout the years, even with two different contractors providing the services (Coach
America followed by Thousand Oaks). Preventive maintenance costs in FY 2019/20
were $121,440.65. This is a 3.66% increase compared to FY 2010/11 (when CUSA
was providing maintenance service) and a decrease of 2.52% compared to FY 2012/13
(the first year Thousand Oaks began providing maintenance services). The cost
increase between FY 2018/19 ($122,439.67) and FY 2019/20 was essentially the same
with a less than 1.00% decrease.
Moorpark City Transit Fixed Route Maintenance – Funding Sources
291
Page 6
The chart on the previous page provides a breakdown of cost distribution for bus
maintenance. The City funds bus maintenance with FTA 5307 funds, which reimburse
80% of all maintenance expenditures. The remaining 20% is funded with TDA 8c funds.
General Fund money is not used to fund bus service.
Dial-A-Ride – ADA Paratransit/Senior Dial-A-Ride Programs.
Month
June
Number
of Trips
Unduplicated
Riders
Fares Paid by
Passenger Program Cost Passengers
July 2019 100 15 $200.00 $4,831.10 102
Aug. 2019 131 13 $260.00 $5,876.72 133
Sept. 2019 146 13 $292.00 $6,467.38 150
Oct. 2019 131 12 $262.00 $5,881.10 132
Nov. 2019 111 9 $222.00 $5,277.68 115
Dec. 2019 86 7 $172.00 $4,468.86 86
Jan. 2020 109 9 $218.00 $5,144.23 109
Feb. 2020 83 7 $152.00 $4,244.41 83
Mar. 2020 67 9 $126.00 $4,319.02 67
Apr. 2020 42 3 $0.00 $3,490.26 42
May 2020 35 3 $0.00 $3,464.85 35
June 2020 57 4 $0.00 $4,331.94 57
YTD To ta l 1,098 20 $1,904.00 $57,797.55 1,111
Year Ago Month 125 13 $250.00 $5,124.66 128
Year Ago YTD 1,624 44 $3,242.00 $64,299.65 1,641
Loca l Moorpa rk ADA Pa ratra nsit/Senior Dia l-A-Ride
The table above provides ridership information for the City’s Local (travel within
Moorpark) services for Seniors (65 years and older) and ADA passengers. The
“Number of Trips” column includes paying passengers (registered passengers and their
guests). The “Passengers” column includes registered passengers, their guests, and
personal care attendants (PCA). A PCA does not pay fare when traveling on DAR.
Ridership decreased 32.39% in FY 2019/20 (1,098 trips) compared to FY 2018/19
(1,624). The number of “Unduplicated Riders” decreased 54.55% during the same time
period. Unduplicated Riders indicate individual people who have used the service at
some point during the fiscal year. In FY 2019/20, 20 individuals used DAR, compared
to 44 individuals in FY 2018/19.
Similar to the City’s bus service, the City’s local DAR service saw significant decreases
in ridership from March 2020 through June 2020. As COVID-19 stay-at-home orders
took effect towards the middle of March, the City, following the practice of Thousand
Oaks, restricted DAR trips to “essential trips”. Also, similar to bus service, fares were
suspended in March in an effort to reduce contact between passengers.
292
Page 7
ECTA Dial-A-Ride – ADA and Senior Ridership to Neighboring Cities
Month
June
Number
of Trips
Unduplic ated
Riders
Fares P aid by
P assenger P rogram Cost P assengers Seniors
July 2019 462 38 $2,178.25 $30,612.31 512 234
Aug. 2019 539 41 $2,848.75 $30,543.77 572 248
Sept. 2019 593 46 $2,871.75 $35,349.23 646 212
Oct. 2019 580 42 $2,624.00 $35,933.09 626 202
Nov. 2019 516 33 $2,956.50 $34,135.24 564 194
Dec. 2019 509 33 $3,008.90 $34,587.05 555 195
Jan. 2020 525 42 $3,065.30 $36,923.14 587 197
Feb. 2020 508 40 $2,767.80 $34,858.13 558 175
Mar. 2020 247 27 $1,377.20 $19,800.54 257 66
Apr. 2020 25 5 $0.00 $5,787.39 25 5
May 2020 7 4 $0.00 $2,113.56 9 1
June 2020 2 1 $73.20 $2,194.64 2 2
YTD Tota l 4,513 97 $23,771.65 $302,838.09 4,913 1,731
Year Ago Month 385 40 $1,631.25 $16,053.67 413 197
Year Ago YTD 4,672 74 $21,223.50 $187,672.64 4,778 1,794
ECTA Service (InterCity ADA P a r a tra nsit/Senior Di a l-A-Ride)
The table above provides information on ridership on the East County Transit Alliance
(ECTA) InterCity (travel outside of Moorpark) for Senior and ADA DAR services.
Ridership decreased 3.40% in FY 2019/20 (4,513 trips) compared to FY 2018/19
(4,672) for overall ridership (Seniors and ADA). The number of Senior trips provided in
FY 2019/20 (1,731) decreased 3.51% compared to FY 2018/19 (1,794). The number of
individual Riders using the program increased 31.08% during the same time period. As
a result of the decrease in Trips and increase in the number of individual Riders, the
number of trips taken per Rider increased from 63.14 trips/Rider to 46.53 trips/Rider in
FY 2019/20. The recorded June fares of $73.20 are from previously unaccounted
revenue from March and February 2020, reflected in the June 2020 invoice.
Program costs for the ECTA InterCity service increased 61.37% in FY 2019/20. The
increase in costs is attributed to an increase in service charges by Thousand Oaks (the
City’s contracted transit operator) after the 2019 transit services RFP that the City of
Thousand completed and the City participated. It should be noted that the increase in
contract expenses would have been greater in FY 2019/20 had the demand in service
not decreased significantly between March and June 2020 due to COVID-19.
293
Page 8
Combined Dial-A-Ride – Local ADA Paratransit/Senior Dial-A-Ride and ECTA InterCity
Services.
Month
Jun
Number
of Trips
Unduplic ated
Riders
Fares P aid by
P assenger Program Cost Passengers Seniors
City Senior/ADA 57 4 $0.00 $4,331.94 57 n/a
ECTA InterCity 2 1 $73.20 $2,194.64 2 2
Month Total 59 5 $73.20 $6,526.58 59 2
YTD Tota l 5,611 117 $25,675.65 $360,635.64 6,024 1,731
Year Ago Month 510 53 $1,881.25 $21,178.33 541 197
Year Ago YTD 6,296 118 $24,465.50 $251,972.29 6,419 1,794
Paratransit & Dial-A-Ride Services Combined
The table above combines Local and InterCity service ridership and costs for
FY 2019/20. In FY 2019/20, the number of trips provided (5,611) decreased 10.88%
compared to FY 2018/19 (6,296). Overall program costs increased 43.13% during the
same period.
Moorpark Dial-A-Ride Services – Historical Trends
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
$400,000
DAR Trends
Cost
Passengers
Fares
The chart above provides costs, passenger, and fare trends from FY 2010/11 through
FY 2019/20. FY 2012/13 is when Thousand Oaks began providing services for the City
after Coach America terminated its contract due to bankruptcy. Costs initially
decreased 15.31% in FY 2012/13 ($83,332) compared to FY 2011/12 ($98,399) but
have increased over time. Part of the increase is due in part to the increase in demand
for service. Ridership has increased 171.84% from FY 2010/11 (2,216 passengers) to
FY 2019/20 (6,024 passengers). The spike in costs in FY 2019/20 is also attributed to
an increase in service charges by Thousand Oaks after the 2019 transit services RFP
that Thousand Oaks completed and the City participated.
294
Page 9
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
Fares and Passenger Trends
Passengers
Fares
The chart above provides passenger and fare trends since 2010/11. The spike in fares
in FY 2015/16 was due to a fare increases that took effect August 1, 2015. Local fare
increased from $1.50 per trip to $2.00 per trip and InterCity fare increased from $3.00
per trip and $4.50 per trip (depending on the destination) to a flat $5.00 per trip. The
fare increase was partially related to the City joining the East County Transit Alliance
(ECTA), which added the City of Simi Valley and County of Ventura to Moorpark and
Thousand Oaks’ existing InterCity ADA DAR program and added InterCity Senior DAR
for all agencies. Fares for ECTA increased again from $5.00 per trip to $6.00 per trip at
the beginning of November 2019. While the City initially started to see a decrease in
the number of passengers traveling on DAR services after joining ECTA, ridership
rebounded in FY 2017/18, followed by a slight (0.83%) decrease in ridership during
FY 2018/19. Ridership decreased 6.94% in FY 2019/20 compared to FY 2017/18 and
the decrease is attributed to the plummet in ridership is a result of COVID-19.
$25.00
$30.00
$35.00
$40.00
$45.00
$50.00
$55.00
$60.00
$65.00
Per -Passenger Cost
Per-Passenger Cost
295
Page 10
The chart on the previous page provides a comparison of the per passenger cost on
DAR services between FY 2010/11 and FY 2019/20. Passengers include both paying
riders as well as any PCAs that do not pay a fare. Per trip costs have increased and
decreased over the years depending on the transit operator and the contracted method
of payment. In the past, the City has either paid on a per-revenue hour basis, per-
trip/per-mile basis, or per-trip only basis. Currently, all costs are calculated on a
monthly basis and then divided by the total number of passengers for the month for all
participating agencies (for example, Thousand Oaks and Moorpark residents for “local”
DAR or Thousand Oaks, Moorpark, Simi Valley, etc. for ECTA). The per-passenger
rate is then charged to each respective agency for both local and ECTA services. The
creation of an adjustable per-passenger rate helps avoid past years’ occurrences where
Thousand Oaks has had to return to participating agencies and ask for a “true-up” of
costs that have exceeded the fixed per-passenger rate established at the beginning of a
respective year.
The lowest per-passenger rate during the historical time period provided above was in
FY 2012/13, at $26.32 per passenger. This was also the fiscal year with the lowest total
cost of $83,332. The number of non-paying passengers can impact the per passenger
rate (PCAs do not pay a fare). For example, in FY 2017/18, 1.79% (or 116 passengers)
didn’t pay a fare. The number of non-paying passengers increased to 123 in
FY 2018/19, or 1.92% of passengers. In FY 2019/20, non-paying passengers
(excluding COVID-19 fare suspension) increased to 6.86% of passengers.
The City also offers an unlimited ridership pass for InterCity travel for $170 per month.
For comparison, an individual who uses DAR two times a day and travels for 20 days
would pay $240 if paying the standard fare of $6.00 per trip. That same passenger
would only pay $170 for the same number of trips if he/she uses the monthly pass (a
29.17% discount). The City started to provide this pass in FY 2015/16 (charging $140
per pass) as a compromise for passengers who were using InterCity DAR daily when
rates increased from $3.00 per trip to $5.00 per trip. Similarly, the pass was increased
from $140 to $170 after fares were increased from $5.00 per trip to $6.00 per trip. Use
of the pass is extremely limited, with only one to two people using the pass before the
City suspended all fares as a result of COVID-19.
296
Page 11
Moorpark City Transit Dial-A-Ride Services – Funding Sources
The above chart provides a breakdown of funding sources for the City’s DAR services
based on FY 2018/19 numbers, which is a typical year compared to FY 2019/20, which
is impacted by CARES Act funding that provides a disproportionate amount of federal
funding and significant reduction of TSM funding. As can be seen in the chart, a
majority of DAR services is funded with TDA 8c, followed by federal funds that the City
receives through its annual FTA 5307 allocation. The remaining 10% of funding came
from fares (9%). General Fund money is not used to fund DAR services.
Expenses for DAR service are greatly impacted by the overall demand for service.
While annual expenses have increased signficantly over the past few years, COVID-19
has significantly decreased ridership towards the end of FY 2019/20, with continued
impacts into FY 2020/21 (not covered in this year’s report). As a preview; however,
DAR costs for FY 2020/21 are 79.23% less than the same quarter in FY 2019/20 (a
decrease of over $55,000).
297
Page 12
Moorpark Fixed Route and Dial-A-Ride Services Combined
Jun
CITY
BUS
DAR
City
ECTA
InterCity
TOTAL
MONTH
YEAR
AGO YTD Last Year
YTD
Service
Ridership 287 57 2 346 3,241 39,975 56,027
Farebox
Revenue $1 $0 $73 $74 $3,988 $50,633 $61,345
Contract Expense $54,440 $4,332 $2,195 $60,967 $56,480 $934,106 $763,666
Farebox Ratios 0.00% 0.00% 3.34% 0.12% 7.06% 5.42% 8.03%
Cost Per Passenger $189.69 $76.00 $1,097.32 $176.20 $17.43 $23.37 $13.63
COMPARISONSMOORPARK CITY TRANSIT
ROUTE BUS & DIAL A RIDE COMBINED
The combined trips provided for bus, DAR City (Local), and ECTA InterCity services
totaled 39,975 in FY 2019/20. This is a decrease of 28.65% compared to FY 2018/19,
when 56,027 trips were provided. Contract expenditures for all services increased
18.25% during the same time period. Revenues decreased 17.46% in FY 2019/20
compared to FY 2018/19. All transit services were impacted by COVID-19, through
decreases in ridership and suspension of transit fares. Cost increases are attributed to
the increase in service rates that went into effect July 1, 2019 as a result of the latest
RFP for transit services, issued by Thousand Oaks and participated in by the City.
Metrolink – Ventura County Line
Based on Metrolink ridership information provided by VCTC, it appears as though the
average daily boardings (inbound and outbound) involving passengers using a station
located in Ventura County along the Ventura County Line decreased 92.69% in FY
2019/20 compared to FY 2018/19. As with Moorpark City Transit, the ridership
decrease is attributed to COVID-19.
The Moorpark Metrolink Station continues to average as second most utilized station in
Ventura County. Simi Valley is the most utilized. The remaining stations in Ventura
County are Camarillo, Oxnard and Ventura. The Moorpark Station also tends to
average more passengers than Van Nuys and Burbank Airport Stations in Los Angeles
County.
C: Karen Vaughn, Interim Deputy City Manager
298
ATTACHMENT 3
“UNMET TRANSIT NEED”
Public transportation services identified by the public with sufficient broad-based community support that
have not been funded or implemented. Unmet transit needs identified in a government-approved plan
meet the definition of an unmet transit need. Sufficient broad-based community support means that
persons who will likely use the service on a routine basis demonstrate support: at least 15 requests for
general public service and 10 requests for disabled service.
Includes:
Public transit services not currently provided to reach employment, medical assistance, shop for
food or clothing, to obtain social services such as health care, county welfare programs and
education programs. Service must be needed by and benefit the general public.
Service expansions including new routes, significant modifications to existing routes, and major
increases in service hours and frequency
Excludes:
Operational changes such as minor route changes, bus stop changes, or changes in schedule
Requests for extended hour (less than one (1) hour)
Service for groups or individuals that is not needed by or will not benefit the general public
Comments about vehicles, facilities, driver performance and transit organizational structure
Requests for better coordination
Requests for reduced fares and changes to fare restrictions
Improvements funded or scheduled for implementation in the following year
Future transportation needs
Duplication or replacement of existing service
“REASONABLE TO MEET”
Outcome Definitions Measures & Criterias
Equity
The proposed service will not cause reductions in existing
transit services that have an equal or higher priority
Measures: Vehicle revenue service hours
and revenue service miles. Criteria: Transit
vehicle service hours and miles will not be
reduced on existing routes to fund the
proposed service
Timing The proposed service is in response to an existing rather
than future transit need
Criteria: Same as definition that proposed
service is in response to an existing rather
than future transit need; based on public
input
Feasibility The proposed service can be provided with the existing
fleet or under contract to a private provider
Measure: Vehicle spare ratio: Transit
system must be able to maintain FTA’s
spare ratio requirement of 20% (buses in
peak service divided by the total bus fleet
cannot fall below 20%). If less than 20%, can
additional buses be obtained (purchased or
299
Outcome Definitions Measures & Criterias
leased) or can service be provided under
contract to a private provider?
Feasibility There are adequate roadways to safely accommodate
transit vehicles
Measure & Criteria: Route inspection to
determine adequacy of infrastructure to
accommodate transit vehicles and
passengers.
Cost Effectiveness
The proposed service will not unduly affect the operator’s
ability to maintain the required passenger fare ratio for its
system as a whole
Measure: Total estimate annual passenger
fare revenue divided by total annual
operating cost (the entire service including
the proposed service) Criteria: fare
revenue/operating cost cannot fall below the
operator’s required passenger fare ratio.
Cost Effectiveness
The proposed service will meet the scheduled passenger
fare ratio standards described in Attachment A Measures and criteria in Attachment A.
Service
Effectiveness
Estimated passengers per hour for the proposed service
will not be less than the system-wide average after three
years.
Measure: Passengers per hour. Criteria:
Projected passengers per hour for the
proposed service is not less than 70% of the
system-wide average (without the proposed
service) at the end of 12 month of service,
85% at the end of 24 months of service, and
100% at the end of 36 months of service.
PASSENGER FARE RATIOS
It is desirable for all proposed transit services in urban areas to achieve a 20% passenger fare ratio by
the end of the third year of operation. A passenger fare ratio of 10% is desired for special services (i.e.,
elderly and disabled) and rural area services*. More detailed passenger fare ration standards, which will
be used to evaluate services as they are proposed and implemented, are described below. Transit
service both urban and rural areas, per state law, may obtain an “intermediate” passenger fare ratio.
Urban Service Rural
Service
Recommended Action
New Service Performance Criteria: End of Twelve Months
Less than 6% Less than 3% Provider may discontinue service
6% or more 3% or more Provider will continue service, with modifications if needed
300
New Service Performance Criteria: End of Twenty-four Months
Less than 10% Less than 5% Provider may discontinue service
10% or more 5% or more Provider will continue service, with modifications if needed
New Service Performance Criteria: End of Thirty-Six Months **
Less than 15% Less than 7% Provider may discontinue service
15% to 19% 7% to 9% Provider may consider modifying and continue service
20% or more 10% or more Provider will continue service, with modifications if needed
*Per statute the VCTC may establish a lower fare for community transit (dial-a-ride) services.
**A review will take place after 30 months to develop a preliminary determination regarding the
discontinuation of proposed services
301
Section 99401.5 of the California
Public Utilities Code requires
that at least one public hearing
be held each year to receive
testimony on whether there are
areas in Ventura County with
unmet transit needs which can
be reasonably met through any
of the following: expansion of
existing transportation systems,
establishing new systems, or
contracting for service from
common carriers and others,
UNMET TRANSIT NEEDSPUBLIC MEETINGS SHARE
YOUR THOUGHTS
CAN’T MAKE THE MEETINGS?
You can submit written comments through our online
Unmet Transit Needs survey:
Or send comments directly to:
Jeni Eddington
751 E. Daily Dr. STE. 420
Camarillo, CA 93010
jeddington@goventura.org or at 800-438-1112
Written public comments will be collected until February 12, 2021
goventura.org/unmet-needs
as provided by the
Transportation Development Act
of 1971 (as amended).
Such a determination must
be made before the Ventura
County Transportation
Commission (VCTC) can allocate
Transportation Development Act
monies in Fiscal Year 2021/2022
for purposes other than transit.
This determination will be made
following a review of local and
regional plans and the testimony
received at the public hearing.
VOICE
YOUR OPINIONS
goventura.org/unmet-needs
VIRTUAL COMMUNITY MEETINGS
Wednesday, Jan. 13th at 6 p.m.
Thursday, Jan. 21st at 12 p.m.
VIRTUAL PUBLIC HEARING
Friday, Feb. 5th at 9 a.m.
For links to meetings visit goventura.org/unmet-needs
OUR MEETINGS ARE NOW HELD ONLINE!
ATTACHMENT 4
302
COMPARTA
SUS PENSAMIENTOS
¿NO PUEDE ASISTIR A LA AUDIENCIA?
Usted puede enviar sus comentarios por escrito a través de nuestra
encuesta de Necesidades de Transporte Insatisfechas en línea:
O mande comentarios directamente a:
Jeni Eddington
751 E. Daily Dr. STE. 420
Camarillo, CA 93010
jeddington@goventura.org o al 800-438-1112
Los comentarios por escrito del público serán recolectados hasta el
12 de febrero del 2021.
EXPRESE
SUS OPINIONES
La Sección 99401.5 del Código de
Servicios Públicos de California
requiere que se lleve a cabo por lo
menos una audiencia pública cada año
para recibir testimonio para determinar
si hay áreas en el Condado de Ventura
con necesidades insatisfechas de
transporte público que razonablemente
se puedan satisfacer a través de
cualquiera de lo siguiente: ampliación
de los sistemas de transporte
existentes, establecimiento de nuevos
sistemas, o contratación de servicios
de empresas de transporte y otros,
conforme a lo dispuesto por el Decreto
del Desarrollo de Transporte de 1971
(como fue enmendado).
Tal determinación debe hacerse antes
de que la Comisión de Transporte
del Condado de Ventura (VCTC por
sus siglas en inglés) pueda asignar
fondos del Decreto del Desarrollo de
Transporte en el Año Fiscal 2021/2022
para propósitos distintos al transporte
público. Esta determinación se llevará
a cabo después de una revisión de los
planes localesy regionales, y después
de que se reciba el testimonio en la
audiencia pública.
AUDIENCIA PÚBLICA
SOBRE LAS NECESIDADES INSATISFECHAS DE
TRANSPORTE PÚBLICO
goventura.org/unmet-needs
JUNTAS COMUNITARIAS VIRTUALES
Miércoles 13 de enero a las 6 p.m.
Jueves 21 de enero a las 12 p.m.
AUDIENCIA PÚBLICA VIRTUAL
Viernes 5 de febrero a las 9 a.m.
Para obtener enlaces a las reuniones, visite
goventura.org/unmet-needs
¡NUESTRAS JUNTAS SE LLEVARÁN A CABO
EN LÍNEA!
goventura.org/unmet-needs
303
《加利福尼亞州公用事業法》第 99401.5 節規定 Ventura County 每年必須至少舉行一次公開聽證會， 以獲關於該區是否有以下任項尚未 滿足的過境交通需求的證詞: 按照1971 年 (經修訂)《運輸發展法》 的規定， 擴大現有的交通運輸系統，建立新系統或承包普通承運 商和其他的服務。
未滿足過境交通需求 公開會 分享您的想法
無法參加會議嗎?
您可由我們網上的未滿足過境交通需求調查提出您的書面意見:
或直接向以下地址寄送意见：Jeni Eddington 751 E. Daily Dr. STE. 420 Camarillo, CA 93010 jeddington@goventura.org 或拨打 800-438-1112 反馈
书面意见提交截止日期2021年2月14日
goventura.org/unmet-needs
此類決定必須在 Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC)分配 2021/2022 財年用於非運輸目的的運輸發展法案資款之前作出。
此項決定將在審查當地和當區計劃以及公開聽證會上收到的證詞之後作出 。
表達您的意見虚拟社区会议
1月13日星期三下午6点1月21日星期四下午12点
虚拟公众听证会
2月5日星期五上午9点
访问 goventura.org/unmet-needs，获取入会链接
我们的会议将在线上举行！
goventura.org/unmet-needs
304