September 26, agency overview. Marin Transit Strategic Planning Workshop

Transcription

1

2

3 September 26, 2011 agency overview Marin Transit Strategic Planning Workshop

4 Brief History of Marin Transit Marin County Transit District formed by a vote of the people Golden Gate Bridge, Highway & Transportation District (GGBHTD) begins providing intra-county transit service on behalf of Marin Transit Begin management and administration of paratransit services for both local and regional services in Marin County Implementation of West Marin Stagecoach Golden Gate Transit, in consultation with County of Marin, significantly reconfigures both regional and local transit services Passage of Measure A 2

5 Marin Transit Grows Up Adopt first Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) Re-structure Local Marin County Service Start Community Shuttles/Expand Stagecoach service Create Marin Transit brand Take responsibility for Muir Woods shuttle from the County Bring 7 alternative fuel vehicles to the County Implement ARRA Projects: Date Management System; Mobile Data Terminals; Automated Vehicle Location System Create Marin Access 3

6 Marin Transit Services Local Bus Service Operated by Golden Gate Transit Rural Stagecoach Operated by MV Transportation Muir Woods Shuttle Operated by Golden Gate Transit Demand Response Operated by Marin Senior Coordinating Council Community Shuttles Operated by Marin Airporter 4

7 Marin Transit Statistical Highlights 3.4 million Annual Passenger Trips (2011) 12,000 Average Daily Boardings (2011) 19 million Passenger Trips ( cumulative total) Ranked 8th among Bay Area Fixed Route Transit Operators in Total Ridership (2010) Ranked 5th in Fixed Route Passenger per Revenue Hour Productivity (2010) Awarded $3.7 million in Grant Funding ( ) 5

8 Marin Transit Financial Responsibilities Marin Transit effectively manages Public Funds Measure A Marin County Property Tax Federal Transit Administration National Park Service State Bonds (Proposition 1B) State Transit Assistance Transportation Development Act American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Deliver Projects on-time and on-budget/ Develop policies and procedures to ensure compliance with funding agency goals 6

9 Our Growth 7

10 September 26, 2011 service plan assessment and outlook Marin Transit Strategic Planning Workshop

11 Who Uses Our Services? Source: 2008 Marin Transit Systemwide Onboard Survey 9

12 Where Do Our Riders Go? 10 Source: 2010 Passenger Ride Check and 2011 Farebox

13 How Do Our Riders Get to Our Services? Source: 2008 Marin Transit Systemwide Onboard Survey 11

14 Marin Transit Services 12

15 Local Route Typologies 13

16 What Guides Our Service Planning? Measure A Goals Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan SRTP Service Plan 2006 and 2008 Short Range Transit Plan Stagecoach Service Expansion West Marin Needs Assessment Green Hubs Southern/Central Marin Novato Service and Shuttle Improvements Novato Transit Needs Assessment Countywide Market Assessment (upcoming 2012) Tiburon Needs (upcoming 2011) 14

17 Measure A Transit Service Goals 15/30 minute frequencies in priority corridors Local/ferry/multi-purpose shuttle programs Maintain/expand Stagecoach Restore night service Flexible service to the hills Expand school service 15

18 Local Transit Service Planning Options 16

19 Transit Service Improvements Current service improvements should focus on better serving current markets: Students, senior, low-income, etc. (transitdependent) Future improvements should focus on: Attracting discretionary riders Potential new riders in Countywide focused growth areas Potential new riders within existing downtowns and mixed-use corridors 17

20 Attracting the Discretionary Rider 18

21 Unfunded Transit Service Needs Service Frequency Enhancements Novato (peak and non-peak) 101 Corridor, SRTC-Fairfax Corridor, SRTC- College of Marin via SFD Corridor, Sausalito, Mill Valley (non-peak) Service Span Enhancements: evening service New Services: neighborhood and school shuttle programs 19

22 September 26, 2011 financial outlook Marin Transit Strategic Planning Workshop

23 Projected Five Year Financial Outlook Use of Reserves and Cumulative Deficit $10,000,000 $5,000,000 Fund Balance / Deficit Emergency Reserve $0 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 ($5,000,000) ($10,000,000) ($15,000,000) No service cuts, no fare increases ($20,000,000) 21 Fiscal Year

24 Fiscal Year Operating Revenue $22,516,873* Measure A 37% Property Taxes 14% Fee for Services 8% *unaudited actual Advertising & Other Revenue 2% Fares 16% National Park Service Grant 1% State Transit Funding (STA & TDA) 20% FTA Funds 2% 22

25 Fiscal Year Operating Expense $23,011,059* Regional Paratransit Contract 4% Local Paratransit Contract 16% Other Service Contracts 8% Other Operations 2% Administration 5% *unaudited actual Large Bus Contract 65% 23

26 Possible Revenue Opportunities Marin County voters have been supportive of public transit investment Thank you! Limited Opportunities for New Funding Regional Fuel Tax City or Business Contributions Increased Sales Tax from Improved Economy 24

27 Cost Saving Efforts Marin Transit has already: Reviewed administrative costs (<5% of operating costs) Launched Marin Access - provide lower cost Senior and Special Needs Transportation to control Paratransit demand and cost increases Cut 7% of Service March 2010 local bus service cuts Competitively (Re) Procured Contract Services Muir Woods and Stagecoach Services currently out to bid Paratransit Service was bid in 2010 Shuttle Service was bid in

28 Measure A Specifies Contracting Out Marin County Transit District will contract for local services in order to procure the highest quality and lowest cost transit system for Marin County residents. From: Marin County Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan 26

29 Difference between Contract and Intergovernmental Agreement Third Party Contract: A contract that is competitively procured with the public agency defining the terms and retaining the responsibility Intergovernmental Agreement: An agreement between two public entities to pass through funds for the purpose of providing transit service 27

30 Benefits of Contracting for Service Clearly defined specifications for delivery provide predictability Performance standards ensure accountability Contract terms that delineate process for service changes allow for flexibility Security from service operated by a variety of vendors Staff dedicated to Marin Transit service Corporate economies of scale when services procured from national/international contractors Competitive procurement assures highest quality at lowest cost 28

31 Benefits of Intergovernmental Agreement with GGBHTD Share existing taxpayer funded facilities Opportunity to interline vehicles with regional routes Share marketing (customer service center, transit guide) Share investment in technology Strong relationship with Golden Gate Transit professional staff Maintain passenger facilities 29

32 Cost per Revenue Hour by Contract Fiscal Year

33 MTC TSP Large Operator Costs 31

34 Small and Medium Operators Peer Agencies 32

35 Peer Agency Characteristics Operate a variety of vehicles and services Primarily serve a suburban population Employ union drivers Serve multiple cities or small county (most) Operate similar number of revenue hours 33

36 Developing a Benchmark Established peer agencies based on revenue hours provided and type of services supplied Used cost per revenue hour from MTC Statistical Summary Fiscal Year Averaged cost across all peer agencies Escalated by 3% to bring rate to Fiscal Year

37 Benchmark for Intergovernmental Agreement Peer Agency Average for Fiscal Year $ Projected Annual Increase 3% Peer Agency Projected Fiscal Year $ Benchmark (2011 dollars) $105 Current Marin Transit Intergovernmental Rate $131 * all rates are cost per revenue hour 35

38 September 26, 2011 service delivery options Marin Transit Strategic Planning Workshop

39 Operational Savings Local Service Contract 37

40 Option 1 - No Change Continue terms Golden Gate Contract thru 2017 Benefit: Continues strong working relationship and ensures current quality of service Outcome: Expected significant reduction of revenue hours by

41 Option 2: Shift Low Ridership Routes to Shuttles Local Connector and some Regular Local hours shift to shuttle contract Benefit: More closely match service and demand Outcome: Minor cost savings expected, postpones service cuts to Fiscal Year

42 Option 3: Renegotiate Rate Renegotiate rate to maintain balanced budget Benefit: Continues strong working relationship and ensures current quality of service Outcome: No change to revenue hours. No opportunity for growth. (Rate may not cover Golden Gate Transit cost) 40

43 Option 4: Competitively Procure Service Issue RFP for entire local bus contract Benefit: Ensures market rate and all contracts subject to competitive procurement Outcome: Allows for moderate growth 41

44 Option 5: Renegotiate Rate and Shift Hours Issue RFP for portion of local service contract, shift hours to shuttle service contract, and renegotiate rate with Golden Gate Transit Benefit: Closely match service typology with demand, and retain regional connectivity Outcome: Greatest opportunity for growth, improves service and jobs ( equivalent to 3 new community circulators) 42

45 Next Steps Update analysis based on feedback from today s workshop surveys in the back of the room Present recommendation to your Board at October meeting 43