HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2012 0620 CC REG ITEM 09C ITEM 9.C.
City ouncii fleeting
ACTION:
MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable City Council
FROM: Dave Klotzle, City Engineer/Public Works Director
Prepared by: Shaun Kroes, Senior Management Analys
DATE: June 8, 2012 (CC Meeting of 06/20/12)
SUBJECT: Consider Letter of Support for the Ventura County Transportation
Commission's Ventura County Regional Transit Study Final Report:
Executive Summary and Report to the Legislature
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
As previously discussed at the May 2, 2012 City Council meeting, the Ventura County
Transportation Commission (VCTC) approved its Regional Transit Study on April 13,
2012. The report was in response to SB 716 (Wolk) which requires that all
Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds be spent on transit services effective July
1, 2014. SB 716 also provided VCTC with an opportunity to provide a report to the
Legislature by December 31, 2011, analyzing options and providing a recommendation
for organizing public transit services and the future expenditure of local transportation
fund revenues in Ventura County. The full motion at VCTC, made by Councilmember
Millhouse and approved by a nine to four vote, was:
• Receive and file final VCTC Regional Transit Study.
• Authorize the Executive Director to submit the Executive Summary of the study,
as the plan called for by SB 716, to Senate Committee on Transportation and
Housing and the Assembly Transportation Committee.
• Authorize the Executive Director to pursue legislation consistent with
Commission action on March 2, 2012 and for elements of the Executive
Summary that require legislative action for implementation.
• Include language from the Santa Paula letter in the Executive Summary
(Attachment 2).
SAPublic Works\Everyone\Reports\Staff Reports\2012\June\06-20-12(Regional Transit Study).doc 78
Honorable City Council
June 20, 2012
Page 2
• Add to final report, Section 3, page 17 following the final paragraph, "The
Commission believes the proposal adopted by VCTC best addresses these
concerns at this time."
• A delegation determined by the Chair will meet with Assemblymembers Williams,
Smythe and Gorell to discuss VCTC's concerns.
• Delete recommendation #7 in the Executive Summary.
• Delete pages 30-33 Policy Considerations in Final Report .
• In the Final Report insert "The Commission will continue the discussion and
study of a consolidation of transit operations within the County".
The finalized "Ventura County Regional Transit Study Final Report: Executive Summary
and Report to the Legislature" (Attachment 1) was submitted to the California State
Senate Transportation and Housing Committee and the California State Assembly
Transportation Committee on April 20, 2012. VCTC's Executive Director, Darren Kettle,
has begun work to pursue legislation to implement elements of the Regional Transit
Study, including flexible use of Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds for streets
and roads projects. While attempting to find an author for the legislation, Mr. Kettle has
received a request from legislative staff for letters of approval of the April 13 Regional
Transit Study from Ventura County cities.
On May 2, 2012, the City Council approved continuing to oppose AB 1778 (Williams),
which requires that all TDA funds in Ventura County be spent only on transit effective
July 1, 2014 (similar to SIB 716). AB 1778 also states that if a respective jurisdiction in
Ventura County does not encumber all of its allocated TDA funds for transit by the first
year, or does not spend the funds within two years of allocation, the unspent funds
must be returned to VCTC to be redistributed to other transit operators or transit
services in proportional amounts based on population, contingent upon specified
criteria. AB 1778 passed the Assembly on May 31, 2012. At the time of preparation of
this staff report, AB 1778 is in the State Senate Transportation and Housing
Committee, which must vote on the bill before it can be presented to the State Senate.
The Transportation and Housing Committee is expected to vote on AB 1778 before July
6, 2012.
FISCAL IMPACT
AB 1778 would result in the loss of TDA funding for streets and roads.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
1. Authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of support for VCTC's Ventura County
Regional Transit Study Final Report: Executive Summary and Report to the
Legislature.
79
Honorable City Council
June 20, 2012
Page 3
Attachments:
1. Ventura County Regional Transit Study Final Report: Executive Summary
and Report to the Legislature.
2. Santa Paula Letter
80
Attachment 1
.. �, �<
April 20, 2012
The Honorable Mark DeSaulnier
Chairman, Transportation and Housing Committee
California State Senate
State Capitol, Room 5035
Sacramento, California 95814
The Honorable Bonnie Lowenthal
Chairwoman, Transportation Committee
California State Assembly
State Capitol, Room 3152
Sacramento, California 95814
Dear Chairs DeSaulnier and Lowenthal:
It is my pleasure to submit to your respective committees the Ventura County
Transportation Commission's Ventura County Regional Transit Study Executive
Summary and Report to the Legislature. Enacted in 2009, SB 716 (Wolk) generally
requires that Transportation Development Act funds be spent for public transit
purposes, but in a section specific to Ventura County SB 716 states that:
The Ventura County Transportation Commission may submit to the Senate Committee on
Transportation and Housing and the Assembly Committee on Transportation a report analyzing
options for organizing public mass transportation services in the county, for the expenditure of
revenues deposited in the local transportation fund, and a recommended legislative proposal for
implementing the plan by December 31, 2011. If the legislative proposal is not enacted by the end
of the 2011-12 Regular Session of the Legislature, revenues deposited in the local transportation
fund in that county shall be available for the fiscal year beginning on July 1, 2014, and each fiscal
year thereafter, solely for claims for Article 4(commencing with Section 99260)and Article 4.5
(commencing with Section 99275) purposes.
The Commission recognizes that the requested date for this submittal was December
31, 2011. The Commission staff advised Committee staff that the Commission was
working in due diligence but in the interest of fully addressing a very complicated issues
and gaining the greatest level of stakeholder involvement it was likely that, while the
Commission would not meet the "deadline," it fully intended to submit the report in a
timely fashion.
This report is the culmination of a nearly two-year study of options for organizing public
transportation services for Ventura County and the direction and actions adopted by the
Ventura County Transportation Commission pursuant to it. The direction for the study
81
950 County Square Dr., Suite 207 - Ventura, California 93003 - (805) 642-1591 - fax (805) 642-4860 - www.goventura.org
came from two sources: A 2009 Commission workshop on the future of VCTC's own
VISTA service and legislative provisions arising out of SB 716, which went into effect
January 1, 2010. The Commission believes the proposal adopted by VCTC and being
submitted herewith best addresses Ventura County public transportation needs at this
time.
Should you or Committee staff require any further information please do not hesitate to
contact me at (805) 642-1591 x 123.
Sincerely,
Darren M. Kettle
Executive Director
82
TRANSFORMING TRANSPORTATION IN VENTURA COUNTY
Ventura County Regional Transit Study
FINAL REPORT
Executive Summary and Report to the Legislature
Prepared for:
Ventura County Transportation Commission
Prepared by:
MIG, Inc.
Wendel
Patti Post&Associates
As adopted by the Ventura County Transportation Commission April 13, 2012
83
Ventura County Regional Transit Study
Final Report—Executive Summary
Report to the Legislature
Executive Summary
Introduction
This report presents the findings and outcomes of a nearly two-year study of options for
organizing public transportation services for Ventura County and the direction and
actions adopted by the Ventura County Transportation Commission pursuant to it. The
direction for the study came from two sources: A 2009 Commission workshop on the
future of VCTC's own VISTA service and legislative provisions arising out of SIB 716,
which went into effect January 1, 2010. SB 716 generally requires that Transportation
Development Act funds be spent for public transit purposes, but in a section specific to
Ventura County states that:
The Ventura County Transportation Commission may submit to the Senate Committee on
Transportation and Housing and the Assembly Committee on Transportation a report analyzing
options for organizing public mass transportation services in the county,for the expenditure of
revenues deposited in the local transportation fund, and a recommended legislative proposal for
implementing the plan by December 31, 2011. If the legislative proposal is not enacted by the
end of the 2011-12 Regular Session of the Legislature, revenues deposited in the local
transportation fund in that county shall be available for the fiscal year beginning on July 1, 2014,
and each fiscal year thereafter,solely for claims for Article 4(commencing with Section 99260)
and Article 4.5(commencing with Section 99275)purposes.
The study has involved data collection, analysis of options by a Steering Committee and
engagement of the community, the operators, and city and county management. The
process culminated in an unprecedented level of consensus among the operators on
the desirable path forward in creating a more coordinated, customer-focused system of
services in Ventura County. A proposal was developed by transit operators in the
County, which ultimately resulted in adoption of a recommendation by the Commission
to be forwarded to the Legislature. Details on the analysis, process and
recommendations are presented in the report.
Commission Recommendation in Report to the Legislature
As an outcome to this study, the Commission adopted a consensus position reached by
the Regional Transit Study Steering Committee, the transit managers and the city
managers. The proposal is an innovative combination of the cooperation and
consolidation approaches discussed in this report that is uniquely tailored to Ventura
County's conditions and needs, and that allows for further development and change
over time as results and conditions warrant:
1
84
Ventura County Regional Transit Study
Final Report—Executive Summary
Report to the Legislature
1. Support creation of a Gold Coast Transit District (GCTD) to assume the
responsibilities for West County public transportation services. Cities and
communities in West County (including Heritage Valley) would be provided with
the opportunity to join the District or the Heritage Valley communities could
consent to form their own JPA for the administration and delivery of transit
services. These options will be examined in this next year of transition.
2. Transition authority for VISTA services in West County to the new District, with
services in the Heritage Valley subject to negotiation and participation by those
communities and California State University Channel Islands (CSUCI) and Santa
Barbara County Association of Governments (for Coastal Express) pending
continued funding agreements with those entities.
3. Support creation of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in East County
between the cities of Camarillo, Moorpark, Simi Valley and Thousand Oaks and
the County of Ventura for unincorporated East County, to further coordination of
individual services.
4. Transition authority for VISTA East service to the East County MOU.
5. Support legislation to allow the use of TDA funds for Article 8 purposes,
including streets and roads, and continued return to source of Local Transit
Funds.
6. Use VCTC discretionary transit funds to deliver sustainable levels of transit
service. .
The Commission will continue the discussion and study of a consolidation of transit
operations within the County.
Study Background and Process
The study began in April, 2010 with appointment of a Commission Steering Committee
from the Commission membership, representing the diverse geography and interests of
Ventura County. This Steering Committee met six times over the course of the study,
providing policy guidance and a forum for deliberation on issues and alternatives. Each
of the ten agencies providing public transportation was interviewed in-depth and
operator profiles were prepared. Meetings were held with the technical committee of
the operators (TRANSCOM), the city managers and the public. The public meetings
were conducted in conjunction with VCTC's Comprehensive Transportation Plan and
involved subregional advisory groups and a regional advisory group.
2
85
Ventura County Regional Transit Study
Final Report—Executive Summary
Report to the Legislature
Guiding Principles
The Commission adopted the following Guiding Principles for the study:
Develop a network of sustainable services that meet the diverse needs of the
customers through the following actions:
1. Foster open dialogue among communities, system users, operators and
agencies
2. Transition to a user-focused system that goes beyond individual operator
boundaries
3. Gain consensus on the approach from elected officials and city management
4. Incorporate applicable Federal, State, regional and local livability,
sustainability and greenhouse gas reduction goals
Current State of Transit in Ventura County
Public transportation in Ventura County is provided by ten different agencies through a
combination of fixed route and demand-responsive services. These operations range in
size from the multi-jurisdictional Gold Coast Transit Joint Powers Authority to the Ojai
Trolley. VCTC operates VISTA, which consists of basic interjurisdictional connector
routes and a dial-a-ride serving Heritage Valley (mainly the communities of Santa Paula,
Fillmore and Piru). Based on local funding policies and perception of transit needs,
operators offer different days and hours of service. This makes connections difficult
and service confusing, especially for the infrequent or new rider. While VCTC and the
operators have attempted to improve connections through coordinated fare media and
scheduling software, progress toward truly integrated service has been minimal.
Costs also vary widely—for example according to data from the 2009 National Transit
Database (NTD), utilized for illustrative purposes early in the report process, cost per
passenger trip for the four largest operations ranges from $3.66 to $7.70 for fixed route
service and from $5.55 to $46.39 for demand-response service. There are many reasons
for this range in costs—for example type of area served, level of service provided, type
of vehicle operated and variance in labor costs, including contract or in-house service
and administrative overhead. Also, agencies can use different reporting methods and
some transit costs are not included.
3
86
Ventura County Regional Transit Study
Final Report—Executive Summary
Report to the Legislature
Views of the Current Situation
Interviews of key stakeholders (including all of the Transportation Commissioners)
revealed some common views:
• Many of the obstacles to transit service are inherent to Ventura County's
characteristics—widely spaced, diverse communities and centers where
geographic areas do not share common economic, social and transportation
service values.
• Current transportation services are good given the amount of local resources
that are available and individual cities are doing a good job of balancing
resources.
• There is no one preferred organizational structure for transit service provision —
views range from a single entity to the current system of smaller, customized
providers
• There is extensive support for quality transit services
Organizational Options Considered
The Steering Committee and the Commission considered four potential models for
structuring public transit service in Ventura County:
Collaboration — informal agreements to modify or change the status quo. For example,
agreements for an "800" or "511" information number, regionwide marketing, or
transfers. Over the years, VCTC has managed a number of these agreements, including
a coordinated farecard, paratransit scheduling software and NextBus information
program.
Coordination —formal agreements that modify ways of doing business. This could
include a countywide ADA paratransit service, agreements to share funding
responsibility (such as the current agreement between various parties and VCTC to
VISTA service on the 101 corridor), a Joint Powers Authority to govern more formal
service coordination,joint procurement or public information and marketing.
Consolidation — a formal combination or blending of services under a single or multiple
entities. There are two types of Consolidation — Full or Moderate.
Full Consolidation — a single agency provides all policy, funding, planning and
operations.
4
87
Ventura County Regional Transit Study
Final Report—Executive Summary
Report to the Legislature
Moderate Consolidation - a central entity provides policy, planning and funding
and one or two operating entities provide the service.
Policy Direction on Options
Mid-point in the study, the Steering Committee determined, with concurrence of the
Commission, that Commission staff and the consultant team should move forward with
analysis and city consultation on the Full Consolidation option (with strong continued
local influence) and a hybrid version of Moderate Consolidation with two operating
entities. Under this type of arrangement, the entities could be a combination of a
District, a Joint Powers Authority or other alternative. Key principles moving forward
were:
• Keep communities whole — having at least the level of service that communities
have now
• Increase connectivity
• Improve local service
• Maintain a level of local influence and control
Evolution of the Organizational Concept
During consultation with the operators and city management, several expressed
concern that the Coordination option had been abandoned prematurely and requested
that it be re-inserted for further consideration. In meeting with the Steering Committee,
the operators and management were offered the option of presenting their own
alternative. VCTC informed State Senate Transportation Committee staff that the
report would be submitted after December 31, 2011 so that an organizational option
could be worked out that the Commission and the communities could come to
consensus.
The operators developed an initial proposal that featured:
• Creating a Gold Coast Transit District (GCTD) to provide a framework for
consolidated service in West County. Communities, including Heritage Valley,
would be provided with the opportunity to join the District.
• Provide for member agency TDA to be subvented to GCTD as of July 1, 2014,
net of funding for transit stations, stops and facilities. TDA would be returned to
individual jurisdictions in East County and west county cities not participating in
5
88
Ventura County Regional Transit Study
Final Report—Executive Summary
Report to the Legislature
the Gold Coast Transit District and cities would be allowed to file for Article 8
purposes (for streets and roads) if there were no unmet transit needs.
• Transition responsibility for operation of VISTA (with the exception of VISTA East
and the VISTA 126) based on funding agreements established with non-Gold
Coast Transit (GC-0 partners including California State University Channel Islands
(CSUCI) and Santa Barbara Council of Governments (SBCAG), to GCTD. VISTA
East would be operated under the East County MOU. VISTA 126 would be
administered and operated in the same manner as all Heritage Valley Transit
Service. In.the event the Heritage Valley cities opt not to participate in the Gold
Coast Transit District, a new JPA may be created to operate all Heritage Valley
transit services.
• Consolidate ADA service into no more than two areas.
• Create an East County MOU to govern further coordination of service, transfers
and fares among East County operators.
They also articulated Guiding Principles that stated the right of local agencies to .
determine how to provide services, concern with equity of TDA requirements, the
importance of continued local control of state and federal funds, and the desirability of
consolidation of local ADA and dial-a-ride operations.
Steering Committee and Commission Direction
The Steering Committee considered the operators' proposal and recommended:
• Include Customer Focus as a top priority in any Guiding Principles
• Express consensus support for the operators' structural proposal
• Further consolidation would be pursued at a future undetermined date
• The operators' proposal for use of TDA for Article 8 purposes in East County
remained an open issue
March 2, 2012 Commission Action
On March 2 the Commission took action to "Support the operators'proposal in
concept with the understanding that all cities would have flexible use of TDA funds and
further discussion of Heritage Valley Service would take place before a proposal is
brought back to VCTC on April 13th with the specifics fleshed out and with the
6
89
Ventura County Regional Transit Study
Final Report—Executive Summary
Report to the Legislature
recognition that the concept of full consolidation will continue to be discussed as a long
term goal. Staff was directed to work with city managers to flesh out specifics."
April 13, 2012 Commission Action
On April 13, 2012 the Commission acted to receive and file the final VCTC Regional
Transit Study as amended by Commission action and submit the Executive Summary as
amended as the plan called for by SB 716, to the Senate Committee on Transportation
and Housing and the Assembly Transportation Commission.
Future Steps
VCTC and the operators, working with the consultant team, have identified a number of
issues to be considered in successful implementation of this new organizational model.
These include logistics for transition 'of VISTA service, including outside funding
arrangements from CSUCI and SBCAG; VCTC roles and responsibilities; framework for
further consolidation of ADA and dial-a-ride services; creation and constitution of
GCTD; terms and timing of the East County MOU and arrangements for use of VCTC
discretionary funds to meet the objective of "keeping communities whole" from a
service perspective. The intent is to submit this report to the Legislature and continue
proceeding in the preferred direction for reorganizing and improving the delivery of
public transportation in Ventura County.
7
90
Attachment 2
£,ANTq
O A
p City of Santa. Paula
r, "Citrus Capital o f the.
tj
.A
970 Ventura Street•Santa Paula,Calitorrra•Mailing Address:P.O.Box 569.93061•Phone:(805)525-4478•Fax:(805)525-6278
♦4'
April 12;-20.1.2
Supervisor John Zaragoza, Chair
Ventura County.Transportation Commission -
950 County Square Dr.#207
Ventura, CA 93003
Dear Chairman Zaragoza:
The existing VISTA Transit services, both the Dial-A-Ride and the 126 Express Bus, provides
lifeline service to many residents of Santa Paula. It is extremely important to us that we are
able to maintain or even enhance the existing level of services in the most cost effective
manner. While we understand that the Commission is expected to approve a Ventura County
Regional Transit Study at its meeting on 4113/12, issues relating to the Heritage Valley services
are n ye reso e a ecause o elr rmpo ante a ma y ca ent people in - ----
our community, should not be rushed. To avoid any misunderstanding I am asking that the
Ventura County Transportation Commission amend the Executive Summary of the Study before
it is approved to include the following specific language noted in bold Italic.
Top of Page 2
1. Support creation of a Gold Coast Transit District (GCTO) to assume the
responsibilities for West County public transportation services. Cities and
communities in West County (including Heritage Valley) would be provided with the
opportunity to join the District or the Heritage Valley communities could consent
to form their own JPA for the administration and delivery of transit
services. These options will be examined In this next year of transition.
Page 5
Provide for member agency TDA to be subvented to GCTD as of July 1, 2014, net of funding for
transit stations, stops and facilities. TDA would be returned to individual jurisdictions in East
County and west county cities not participating In the Gold Coast Transit District and cities
would be allowed to file for Article 8 purposes (for streets and roads) if there were no unmet
transit needs.
Page 6
Transition responsibility for operation of VISTA(with the exception of VISTA East and the VISTA
126) based on funding agreements established with non-Gold Coast Transit (GCT) partners
including California State University Channel Islands (CSUCI) and Santa Barbara Council of
Governments (SBCAG), to GCTO. VISTA East would be operated under the East County MOU.
VISTA 126 would be administered and operated in the same manner as all Heritage Valley
Transit Service. In the event the Heritage Valley cities opt not to participate In the Gold
Coast Transit District, a new JPA may be created to operate all Heritage Valley transit
services.
1
91
i
The City of Santa Paula appreciates your cooperation in this matter and also asks:
• That Page 34 of the Report be modified to reflect that the Heritage Valley may not opt to
become-a member of the Gold Coast Transit District; and "
• That the tables shown on pages 38-41 be modified to reflect consideration of the issues
regarding the Heritage Valley services.
Finally,with respect to the Gold Coast Transit District, it is assumed that TDA for the member
agencies would be subvened directly to the District. Clearly, only a portion of the County of
Ventura's share of those funds should be subvened, those relating to the neggraphic area
represented by the Gold Coast Transit District.so that County funds would be available to
support services in other parts of the County such as the Heritage Valley or OakPark,
Thank you very much for your consideration. Please don't hesitate to contract me d you have
any questions.
Sincerely,
Ra9J. andez
Vice Mayor
cc: Darrin kettle
VCTC Commissioners
i 2
;
1 92