Calgary Regional Partnership. Regional Transit Service Business and Funding Models

Transcription

1 Calgary Regional Partnership Regional Transit Service Business and Funding Models

2 Project Schedule January 2015 December 2015 January December 2016 Jan 2015 Phase 1A: Develop Business Model Phase 1B: Develop Funding Model APPROVAL May 2016 Workshop #1 Summary of What We Heard & Outline of Business/Funding Models & Evaluation Criteria Workshop #2 Summary of Evaluated & Shortlisted Business Models, Funding Options, Service Plan, New CPRP Partnership Model and Identified Member and Customer Benefits (More Cost - Benefit Analysis to be Done with Sep. Report) Model Foundation Report Submission of Recommended Business/Funding Model Report mid-sep. with Approval By Year End Late Nov 2015 Preliminary Implementation Strategy and Operating Bylaw Phase 2: Develop Implementation Strategy & Approval (will be shortened) Workshop #3 Consultation, Draft Implementation Report Submission Final Implementation Report Submission Oct 2016 Presentation to CRP Committees and Councils WE ARE HERE

3 Project Schedule Workshop #1 Workshop #2 Summary of Business/Funding Model Evaluation (More Details on Cost Benefit Analysis to Be Undertaken) WE ARE HERE

4 Project Schedule Workshop #2 Final Report Submission Recommended Obtain Approval WE ARE HERE Implementation Plan Strategy

5 June Workshop Objectives

6 Workshop Objectives Update from Last Workshop Summarize Evaluation of 4 Models We Examined Introduce New Model-CRP Partnership Company Model- Building on Foundation Established with South Pilot Service Work Outline Strategic 20 Year Service Plan and Costs Outline Some Funding Models Options-Decision Trees Have Breakout for Input/Discussion Discuss Benefits to Members, Existing Service Providers and Customers of New Business/Funding Model Outline Where We Are in Work Schedule and Future Directions

7 Workshop # 2 Agenda 1. April Workshop Summary Key Points 2. Four RFP Business Models and Evaluation 3. New CRP Partnership Company Model and Evaluation 4. Strategic Transit Service Plan 5. Plans s Operating and Capital Costs 6. Transit Funding Models Breakout - Discussion, Questions 7. Benefits - New CRP Business/Funding Model and Sharing Resources 8. Why Move Now? 9. Future Directions ENGAGE EVALUATE ENVISION NEW CRP BUSINESS & FUNDING MODEL IMPLEMENTATION

8 Breakout Questions 1. What key benefits and challenges do you see from the standpoint of CRP owning and operating regional transit service? 2. What important issues or questions need to be addressed to make this model work? 3. Please rank the 3 business models-commission, controlled corporation and partnering company. ENGAGE EVALUATE ENVISION NEW CRP BUSINESS & FUNDING MODEL IMPLEMENTATION

9 1. April Workshop Summary Key Points

10 Workshop Key Points Preference for Regional Transit Service Commission and Controlled Corporation. Strongest evaluation criteria: Clarity of oversight and responsibility Accountability Success obtaining funding Transit service coordination Increased efficiency and effectiveness Desired sustainable funding and fair formula for sharing: Consider: population, equalized assessment, capacity - hrs. or kms, equal municipal share and in future - ridership

11 Key Points All members need skin in the game annual contributions, and clear exit/entry rules. High quality service. Desired weighted voting. Local transit service- primary municipal responsibility. Realization that transit enhancements generate many benefits employment mobility, economic development, greenhouse gas reductions, and land use planning objectives. Cannot achieve future transit vision and success if all are working independently

12 Short-listed Evaluation Criteria Land Use and Transit Integration Responsiveness/Adaptability to Changing Conditions Regional Transit Service Coordination Accountability Recognizes Differences Among Members by Weighted Voting Enhances Efficiency and Effectiveness in Transit Services Able to Best Obtain Funding Strong Transit Advocacy to Senior Governments Regional Mobility Enhancements Clarity of Oversight and Responsibility Transparency

13 2. Four RFP Business Models and Evaluation

14 Business Model RFP Options Examined To Date Inter-Municipal Partnership Regional Transit Services Commission Controlled Corporation Cooperative Note: Models above do not work with/integrate current CRP Inc. as Part 9 Company compared to establishing internal separate regional service identify

15 Business Model - Inherent Strength and Issues Regional Transit Services Commission Widely used in North America for public transit systems, and there are implementation plans. Board members have fiduciary duty to the RTSC and not to the municipalities they come from. Board can have elected and non-elected members. Board can have weighted voting. Can borrow through the Alberta Capital Finance Authority (ACFA). Can expropriate land.

16 Business Model - Inherent Strength and Issues (cont.) Cooperative Model Generally not used as model in Canada or North America for public transit systems other than very small paratransit services (i.e. Nova Scotia, Coast Cooperative Alliance for Seacoast Transportation in NH). More used for taxis, car sharing and school transit systems. Can only have weighted voting imperfectly with more members. Harder to mandate financial responsibility and equitable rules on membership withdrawals. Cannot expropriate land or borrow from ACFA.

17 Business Model - Inherent Strength and Issues (cont.) Controlled Corporation More inclined to operate in business-like form than RTSC, therefore tends to not subsidize transit costs. Cannot expropriate land and use ACFA. Greater autonomy/separation from municipalities than the RTSC, but requires annual meetings with the municipalities in the Region. Board members have a fiduciary duty to the controlled corporation and not to the municipalities. Cannot borrow from the ACFA and expropriate land. Is not recognized as a common form of regional transit service business unit in North America but could be recognized as eligible transit for funding. Likely to require more time to get approval.

18 Detailed Business Model Evaluation Criteria Base Case Regional Transit Services Controlled Corporation Cooperative Purchase Capital Assets Weighted Votes Ability N/A Difficulty in Obtaining Provincial Approval Requires Strong Business/Funding Plan Transparency in Decision Not Suited Clarity of Oversight and Responsibility Clear Accountability to Requirements Greater Efficiency and Effectiveness Stronger & Coordinated Regional and Local Transit Services Less Suited Adequately Suited Advocate For Increased Funding/Friendly Policy Changes to Senior Governments Ability to mixed politicians and non-elected as directors Best Suited Funding Eligibility from Provincial & Federal Transit Capital Program High Clarity of Purpose Representativeness Can Obtain ACFA Funding Higher Desire to Restrain Costs Degree of Allegiance of Board Members to Regional Agency and Transfer of Power Powers of Expropriation Degree of Start-Up costs Profit Distribution Liability Transfer Responsiveness/Adaptability to Change Ability to Establish Membership Fees Ability to Integrate Transit Service and Land Use Best Meet the Criteria

19 Model Evaluation Note: Models above do not work with/integrate current CRP Inc. as Part 9 Company compared to establishing internal separate regional service identify

20 3. New CRP Partnership Company Model and Evaluation

21 Business Model Options CRP Incorporated was created in 1999 as Part 9 Company under Alberta Companies Act Can own and purchase transit capital assets It is non profit corporation (i.e. simply can t distribute any profits to members) Borrowing from AFCA and expropriating lands would have to be done through municipal members

22 Business Model Options With CRP as Part 9 Company can: Integrate regional transit agency as part of CRP Would have to adhere by land use CMP and servicing plans and policies Can have weighted voting For good business practices would want to keep financial, operational and administrative issues separate from other CRP areas Can have its new own Board and linkages to main Board Would establish via Implementation Plan and Operating Bylaw

23 Calgary Regional Partnership Future for Pilot Service and After-Transition in 3 rd Yr. Servicing (Water, etc.) Board Executive Committee Land Use Planning New CRP Staff Transit Functions - Regional Marketing /Branding, Communications/Education, Short/Strategic Planning, Financing and Capital Planning, Operations and Contracts o Potential contributed to by Membership Fees related to Population and Equalized Assessment Committees CRP Partnership Company Model Board Hybrid Members Could Be Politicians and Others Operating Bylaw & Clear Linkages to Board and Land Use and Servicing Plans Members Capital o Purchase of Vehicles & sharing on Cost of Park & Ride, Exchanges and Maintenance Facilities (Local & Regional) Funding o Cost sharing of Municipalities with formulaequal share, population, service hrs. etc. o Canada Building Infrastructure o GreenTRIP o Gas Tax o FCM Fund o Seed Funding Province Operating o Coordinate and Handle Functions for New Regional Services o Contractors - Operations Funding o Cost sharing Municipalities with formula o Fares, Advertising, Business Partnerships, others Benefits: Clear Oversight and Accountability Sharing of Vehicles & Other Capital Facilities for Regional and Local Transit Services (fewer facilities required) Assistance from Above Transit Functions New Regional Connections Negotiate with Railway Fare Integration and Consistent Standards Share Best Practices Research

24 CRP Partnership Company Model Evaluation ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS MODELS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA Regional Transit Service Entity within CRP Can Purchase Capital Assets Can purchase transit capital assets-buses, maintenance facilities etc. Ability for Weighted Votes Can have weighted votes for Board Directors to recognize population differences in municipalities Degree of Difficulty in Obtaining Provincial Approval Length of time for Provincial approval and degree of difficulty of implementation Requires Strong Business Plan and Sustainable Funding Model Transparency in Decision Making Greater transparency of making decisions Clarity of Oversight and Responsibility Clear Accountability to Requirements for a Regional Public Transit System and needs of Local Municipalities Can Achieve Greater Efficiency and Effectiveness-Transit Functions and Capital Requirements Can work towards greater efficiency and effectiveness of regional transit services delivery-in terms of delivering transit operational and administrative functions, and in terms of capital requirements Ability To More Strongly, Coordinate Regional and Local Transit Services Ability to Successfully Advocate For Increased Funding/Friendly Policy Changes to Senior Governments-Common to have relationships with senior governments to advocate for transit funding and transit friendly policy changes LEGEND: Best Suited Adequately Suited Less Suited Not Suited

25 CRP Partnership Company Model Evaluation (cont.) ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS MODELS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA Regional Transit Service Entity within CRP Ability to have mix of politicians and non-elected as directors Eligibility for Funding from Provincial and Federal Transit Capital Program such as GreenTRIP and Canada Building Infrastructure Fund High Clarity of Purpose - degree to which agency understands and acts on its direct and indirect purposes. Representativeness - extent of the ability of citizens in CRP to provide direct public input on decision-making and addressing issues needed Can Obtain ACFA Funding-Can borrow low cost capital from Alberta Capital Funding Authority Would have to go through one of the Municipal members Higher Desire to Restrain Costs due to Business Model Degree of Allegiance of Board Members to Regional Agency and Transfer of Power--Board Members Must have Firm Allegiance to Regional Transit Agency versus the Local Municipality they are from Powers of Expropriation-Can directly expropriate land Degree of Start-Up costs Would have to go through one of the Municipal Profit Distribution- Can distribute profits to members Liability Transfer -Transfers more liability to regional transit identity versus municipality LEGEND: Best Suited Adequately Suited Less Suited Not Suited

26 CRP Partnership Company Model Evaluation (cont.) ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS MODELS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA Regional Transit Service Entity within CRP Responsiveness/Adaptability to Change to Required Changes (i.e. to grow or to respond to future social, economic etc., changes and service needs) Is very adaptable and responsive to required changes and transition over time. Can Establish Membership Fees- Can set membership fees Establishing Required Transit Staff Expertise- Can establish transit staff expertise in a number of areas and will have additional resources to do so Ability To Establish Strong Exit and Entry Membership Rules-Ability to establish strong financial and time commitments for members to protect the investment interests of other members Exempt from Paying GST and Local Property Taxes Ease of Collaboration, Communication and Coordination with Local Municipalities from Previous History Ease of Changing Governing Corporate Documents Municipal Affairs approval Required to sell Assets Issuance of Shares Ability to Integrate Transit Service and Land Use -Able to best integrate transit plans and policies with regional land use and policies LEGEND: Best Suited Adequately Suited Less Suited Not Suited

27 4. Strategic Transit Service Plan

28 Input/Background for Strategic Plan (cont.) The City of Calgary s Investing in Mobility: The 10 Year Infrastructure Plan Study and RouteAhead. Estimates prepared by AECOM using industry standards and reasonable revenue cost ratios for local and regional services. Standard types of buses: regional service (coach buses and articulated buses) local service (cutaway shuttles and others) Standard costs for 50 buses or smaller bus maintenance/storage facilities, park and ride lots, and transit exchanges or cost estimates from the GreenTRIP application and other sources.

29 Input/Background for Strategic Plan CRP Pilot Feasibility Study on Nanton Black Diamond/Turner Valley-High River-Okotoks to Calgary. CRP GreenTRIP Application Previous transit feasibility studies completed for Okotoks, Cochrane, and Chestermere. Regional Transit Governance Phase 1 Report and Scenario 2. Airdrie Transit Capital Investment Plan and their recent Transportation Master Plan. Input from the City of Airdrie.

30 Proposed Regional Services in Strategic Plan (15-20yrs) A Strathmore - Chestermere service to Calgary downtown service, a Cochrane to Calgary LRT service and the Nanton - High River - Turner Valley/Black Diamond - Okotoks - Calgary LRT service. Weekend tourism train service between Calgary - Cochrane and Canmore, Banff and Lake Louise. An Iricanna to Calgary service through Airdrie. The following new regional connector services: Airdrie - Cochrane; Okotoks - Chestermere - Strathmore through Calgary; Strathmore - Chestermere to Airdrie through Calgary; Cochrane - Canmore; and Okotoks - Airdrie through Calgary.

31 New Proposed Services in Strategic Plan (15-20yrs) A new Airdrie ICE service - new routes and a future BRT ICE service. The enhancement of the existing Airdrie regional ICE service. The extension of the Canmore - Banff regional service to the Village of Lake Louise. The introduction of regional summer service in the BVRTSC to the camping areas. The provision of a new regional service in the Village of Lake Louise to Lake Louise and Lake Moraine.

32 Proposed Local Services in Strategic Plan (15-20yrs) Enhanced local service - Airdrie, Banff New Local Services in: Canmore Strathmore Chestermere Okotoks High River Cochrane

33 Regional and Local Transit Services Map Lake Louise Enhance Local Service & Extend Regional Service to Lake Louise Village Enhance Local Service & Regional ICE Service Lake Moraine Provide services to campground areas during Summer Canmore Banff Introduce Service to Lake Louise and Lake Moraine Bow Valley Initiate Local Service Cochrane Calgary Airdrie Chestermere Irricana Existing Bus Service with Planned Enhancements (service frequency increase, more buses, longer route) Initiate Local Service Turner Valley Somerset-Bridlewood Station Black Diamond Downtown Okotoks Strathmore Initiate Local Service Future Bus Service Future Rail Service Initiate Local Service High River Initiate Local Service Nanton

34 5. Plan s Capital and Operating Costs

35 Capital Cost - Regional Transit Service (15-20 Years) Regional Transit Service Elements From Number of Vehicles Direct Costs Average Annual Debt Strategic Transit Plan Facilities (Million) Cost (Compounding 2% Interest) Life Cycle of Asset VEHICLES Coaches-other Regional Connectors 45 $38 $ years Cutaways-BVRTSC Sub-total 4 49 $1.00 $39.00 $0.16 $ years PARK AND RIDE LOTS Park and Ride Facilities-Okotoks, Strathmore, Chestermere, Airdrie, Cochrane, Lake Louise/Lake Moraine 6 $6 $ years Intercept Facilities - Canmore and Banff 2 $6 $ years Sub-total 8 $12 $0.76 MAINTENANCE/STORAGE FACILITIES - 50 buses or less in case of Canmore and Banff-number may be able to be reduced ** Banff/Canmore- enlarged (Banff) or reused for buses- Canmore 2 $8 $ years Airdrie 1 $8 $ years Cochrane 1 $10 $ years Okotoks 1 $10 $ years Chestermere/Strathmore 1 $10 $ years Sub-Total 6 $46 $2.87 TRANSIT EXCHANGES Cochrane, Strathmore, Okotoks, Airdrie, Chestermere, Banff, Canmore 7 $20 $ years Sub-Total 7 $20 $1.22 OTHER Bus Zones-shelters, real time displays, shelters 13 $3.30 $ years Sub-Total 13 $3.30 $0.20 GRAND TOTAL $ $7.78

36 Capital Cost - Local Transit Service (15-20 Years) Local Transit Service Elements From Strategic Transit Plan Number of Vehicles or Facilities Direct Costs (Million) Average Annual Debt Cost (Compounding 2% Interest) Life Cycle of Asset VEHICLES Cutaways-BVRTSC 19 $10 $ years Sub-total 19 $10 $1.55 OTHER Bus Zones-shelters, real time displays, shelters $3 $ years Sub-Total $3 $0.19 GRAND TOTAL $

37 Local & Regional Transit Service (15-20 Years) Strategic Regional Transit Service Plan Summary of Local and Regional Operating and Capital Cost Costs YEARS REGIONAL TRANSIT SERVICES TOTAL (without Debt Charges) in millions TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS - 20 YEARS $ ANNUAL CAPITAL COSTS $ 6.00 TOTAL OPERATING COSTS - 20 YEARS $ ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS (ABOVE 40%-50% Cost Recovery Fares) $ 3.80 ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS (AT 75%) $ 2.80 LOCAL TRANSIT SERVICES TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS - 20 YEARS $ ANNUAL CAPITAL COSTS $ 0.70 TOTAL OPERATING COSTS - 20 YEARS $ ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS (25% Cost-Recovery Fares) $ 4.70 REGIONAL SERVICES - TOTAL $ REGIONAL SERVICES - ANNUAL $ 9.80 LOCAL SERVICES - TOTAL $ LOCAL SERVICES - ANNUAL $ 5.40

38 6. Transit Funding Models

39 CRP Transit Operating Costs Funding Funding Transit Operating Costs New Business Transit Operating Funding Model Yes (Control Now) CRP Business Funding Model Options No (Future Potential) Enable New Regional Transit to be Provided Transit Fares - Various Recovery Targets Advertising Revenues Business Partnerships Municipal Gas Tax Funds contribute to CRP-Transit Local Municipality Operating Cost Share - MSI, Property Taxes, New Parking Fees CRP Regional Members Annual Transit Fees Administrative Contribution Potential New Sources %-50% Fare plus Municipal Contributions based on A Combination of Service Hrs., Kms. & Equalized Assessment, Population and Equal Share 75% Fare Recovery until 100% is reached in 3-5 Years plus Municipal Contributions based on A Combination of Service Hrs., Kms. & Equalized Assessment, Population and Equal Share 100% Fare Recovery Post 5 years New Regional Services Commission Grants, Enhanced Fuel Taxes, Parking Fees Fuel Tax Increase Funds Provincial Sales Tax Share Provincial Education Property Tax Share Private Sector Partnership Funds Funds From New Sources Regional License Fees or Vehicle Registration Fees, Funding Sources Newly Established in Calgary and Edmonton Regions for Economic Contribution of Transit Enable New Regional Transit to be Expanded More Quickly

40 CRP Transit Capital Costs Funding Funding Transit Capital Costs New Business Transit Capital Funding Model Yes (Control Now) CRP Business Funding Model Options No (Future Potential) GreenTRIP Program Building Canada Infrastructure Fund Small Community Portion FCM Green Municipal Fund Potential Other Sources Development Charges Business Partnerships, Parking Charges Regional License Fees or Vehicle Registration Fees, Funding Sources Newly Established in Calgary and Edmonton Regions for Transit Economic Benefit Fuel Tax Increase Funds Provincial Sales Tax Share Provincial Education Property Tax Share Private Sector Partnership Funds Funds From New Sources

41 Cost Allocation Who pays what? Each municipality is responsible for the local infrastructure related costs such as shelters and bus stop facilities. Regional infrastructure capital costs such as transit interchanges and terminals, park and ride lots, and storage/maintenance facilities to be shared by the new regional transit service organization and by all member municipalities. Regional operating/administrative costs paid for by transit fares, cost sharing formula and other funding programs, including annual membership fees.

42 Annual Membership Fees Could be based upon different population levels and equalized assessment. Would be used for administration/operating fees of new regional transit service entity. Recognize that all members benefit in terms of enhanced employment mobility, economic development, reduced congestion and road use, consulting assistance from regional transit service agency, reduced regional greenhouse gas emissions etc.

43 Breakout Discussion, Questions

44 Breakout Questions 1. What key benefits and challenges do you see from the standpoint of CRP owning and operating regional transit service? 2. What important issues or questions need to be addressed to make this model work? 3. Please rank the 3 business models-commission, controlled corporation and partnering company. ENGAGE EVALUATE ENVISION NEW CRP BUSINESS & FUNDING MODEL IMPLEMENTATION

45 7. Benefits-New CRP Business/Funding Model and Sharing Functions & Resources - Members/Customers

46 Benefits to Members Experience Examples Overall staff savings in required transit functions 4 to 5 positions or $0.4 million. Lower total costs (i.e. design and maintenance) in transit infrastructure for vehicles, park and ride lots, storage/maintenance facilities, technology and transit exchanges facilities shared for local and regional transit services. Optimized service, marketing, fares, standards/performance, scheduling designed for customer convenience. Stronger force in obtaining funds and negotiating to agencies such as the province and railways. Coordination and implementation of new regional services is easier with one agency than 13 municipalities.

47 With Regional Transit Services Business Model 5 positions 7.6 positions Total positions Savings from constant model positions Full Build Out-Regional Transit Services Board / Corporation (Mix of Elected Regional Board at Large & Directors Granted by Shareholders) Committees of Regional Board (Use of Consultants) Regional Service Transit Manager (Limited Use of Consultants) 1 Staff Linkages to CRP Board and Executive Committee, Land Use, Servicing Plans and Policies Communication & Education Lead 1 Staff Regional Marketing & Branding Finance & Capital Investments with Vehicle Procurement Lead 1 Staff Service and Strategic Planning Lead (Short & Long Term) 1 Staff Operations & Contracts 1 Staff Municipality Transit Staff (Developing/Implementing Local Services with regional assistance with some functions) Airdrie Staff 1 Staff 2 Staff 3 Nanton 0.1 Staff BVRTSC Canmore Banff Staff 1 Staff 2 Calgary Existing High River 0.1 Staff Okotoks 0.5 Staff BD/TV 0.1 Staff Irricana 0.1 Staff Chestermere Strathmore Cochrane 0.25 Staff 0.2 Staff 0.25 Staff Staff 4

48 Without Regional Transit Services Business Model CRP Board & Executive Committee 2 positions 14.9 positions Total 16.9 positions Regional Transportation & Mobility Committee Transit Services Manager & Assistant 2 Staff Very Limited Use of Consultants Municipality Transit Staff (slowing developing local services and limited new regional services) Airdrie BVRTSC Calgary High River Okotoks BD/TV Irricana Chestermere Strathmore Cochrane Nanton Staff 1 Staff 1 Existing Staff 1 Staff Staff 0.2 Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff Staff 2 Staff Staff Staff 3 Staff 3 Staff 4 Staff 4 Staff 5

49 Benefits to Members Experience Examples (cont.) Sharing costs of service via formulas combination factors such population, equal partner share, equalized assessment, km or service hrs. and future ridership. Ability to provide functions to local municipalities research of best practices etc., and low cost consulting for the development of local services. Developing standardized contracts with excellent performance components. Developing new funding forms and negotiating with the province.

50 Benefits to Members Experience Examples (cont.) Procurement of vehicles. Acquiring transit technology. Establishing consistent fare integration and transfer policies. Conducting and disseminating best practices research. Generating greater leverage for funding governments, private sector partnerships. Negotiating with railways.

51 Benefits to Airdrie and BVRTSC New regional service connections to Airdrie and BVRTSC. Assistance for local transit services planning, etc. at a lower cost. Future staffing costs reduction for Airdrie Transit and BVRTSC. Total transit capital costs reduction for vehicles, Park and Ride facilities, bus maintenance/storage facilities, bus exchanges and new transit technology. Improvement of all regional and local transit services for the customers in terms of needs.

52 GreenTRIP - Airdrie & BVRTSC Transit Capital Investments TRANSIT CAPITAL INVESTMENTS TOTAL COST (MILLIONS) GREENTRIP REQUEST REMAINING AMOUNT GENERATES SAVINGS NEW REGIONAL BUSINESS MODEL ADDITIONAL CONTRIBUTION TO CAPITAL PROJECTS TO REDUCE AIRDRIE TRANSIT S AND BVRTSC S CONTRIBUTION AIRDRIE Transit Zone Improvements savings yes if some were for regional service Transit Technologies savings yes if some were for regional service Transit Facility - Maintenance Regional Fleet Expansion Transit Terminals Total BVRTSC Bus Storage/Maintenance Facility in Banff Canmore Transit Hub Banff Transit Hub Lake Louise and Lake Moraine Service - Buses Total Reduced by contributions from CRP, and other members Reduced by contributions from CRP, and other members savings yes intent is to share maintenance facilities for local and regional service, and costs could be reduced if heavy maintenance placed in another maintenance facility in the region or if can be shared with Chestermere/ Strathcona savings yes CRP would contribute and costs could be further reduced with CRP procurement savings yes as transit terminals/exchanges to be shared for local and regional service CRP new regional transit service business/funding model contributions would reduce Airdrie Transit s total of $7.69 million savings yes Intent is to share maintenance facilities for local and regional service, and cost could be reduced if heavy maintenance placed in another maintenance facility in the region savings yes as transit terminals/exchanges to be shared for local and regional service savings yes as transit terminals/exchanges to be shared for local and regional service savings yes CRP would contribute and costs could be further reduced with CRP procurement of vehicles CRP new regional transit service business/funding model contributions would reduce BVRTSC transit s total of $5.45 million

53 Car User s Perspective To Transit

54 Enhanced Customer Service Experience under New Model Clear and consistent information on complete trips. Consistent safety/security and performance standards. Integrated fare media and transfer policies so trips are seamless, affordable, accessible and coordinate before and after Calgary Connect Smart card Provide common and consistent marketing/branding information and quality service recognizable by customer. Easy and seamless connections between local and regional services. Consistent customer communications and messaging.

55 Customer s Perspective Initial Stage of New Model

56 Customer s Perspective New Model Implementation

57 8. Why MOVE NOW?

58 Benefits Why Move Now? Enhance employment mobility and regional economic competitiveness. Not as difficult as first envisioned as CRP Inc. is Part 9 Company Take advantage of ACFA, low interest environment and more positive government attitude towards transit investments with strong regional model. Take advantage now of relatively clean slate of transit systems, and achieve higher customer integration that is not in the Capital Region. Take advantage of cost reductions in terms of sharing facilities, vehicles and functions.

59 Benefits Why Move Now? (cont.) Implement new services shown in strategic plan and achieve in turn the following benefits: greenhouse gas reductions; enhanced mobility; and and increase transit ridership. Without the new business/funding model, individual municipalities will not be able to do and duplicate new pilot service.

60 9. Future Directions

61 Future Directions Address Questions, Issues and Opportunities that will arise out of the workshop including industry standard cost-benefit analysis Meet with Key MA and AT in summer on work done to date and directions Develop more details of CRP Partnership Company Model for approval and go through approval process - T and CM Committee, Executive Committee and Board-Bring Report to T@ CM Committee in September Have the Business/Funding model approved before the end of Develop Implementation Plan and Strategy, Operating Bylaw and any required other required details early in 2016

62 Questions?

63 TITLE Thank You Body Text 1 Body Text 2