Valley Metro RPTA. Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1 st Avenue, 10 th Floor Phoenix

Transcription

1 MEETINGS OF THE Management Committees Valley Metro RPTA METRO Light Rail MEETING DATE March 6, 2013 TIME 11:00 a.m. MEETING DATE March 6, 2013 TIME 1:30 p.m. LOCATION Valley Metro RPTA Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1 st Avenue, 10 th Floor Phoenix VALLEY METRO 101 N 1ST AVE STE 1300 PHOENIX AZ

2 February 27, 2013 TO: FROM: RE: Members of the Valley Metro RPTA and METRO Light Rail Management Committees Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer March 6, 2013 Packet Notes Attached is the March 6, 2013 agendas and supporting information for the Valley Metro RPTA and METRO Light Rail Management Committee meetings. These meetings can be attended via teleconference. Please contact the receptionist at for the call-in information. If you have any questions regarding the information in this packet, please let me know. Parking is available onsite and parking can be accessed via the entrance on Adams Street. Parking validation will be available at the meeting. Transit tickets are also available to those who attend the meeting using transit. If you need detailed directions, please contact the receptionist at VALLEY METRO 101 N 1ST AVE STE 1300 PHOENIX AZ

3 February 27, 2013 Transit Management Committee Wednesday, March 6, 2013 Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1 st Avenue, 10 th Floor 11:00 a.m. For those participating by telephone, please mute your phone when not speaking. Members please make sure your microphone is turned on when speaking and turned off when you are not speaking. Action Recommended 1. Public Comment 1. For information A 15-minute opportunity will be provided to members of the public at the beginning of the meeting to address the TMC on all agenda items. The Chair may recognize members of the public during the meeting at his/her discretion. Up to three minutes will be provided per speaker or a total of 15 minutes total for all speakers. 2. Minutes 2. For action Minutes from the February 6, 2013 TMC meeting are presented for approval. 3. Chief Executive Officer s Report 3. For information Steve Banta, Chief Executive Officer (CEO), will brief the TMC on current issues. CONSENT AGENDA 4A. Change Order with Black Box Network Services 4A. For action Staff will request authorization for the CEO to execute a contract change order with Black Box Network Services (BBNS) to upgrade the Aspect eworkfoce Management (ewfm) scheduling software and to implement a new Human Resource Information System that integrates agent work time into the SAGE Payroll system. The cost of this project is $82,725. VALLEY METRO 101 N 1ST AVE STE 1300 PHOENIX AZ

4 4B. Contract Change Order for Logic Tree Inc. 4B. For action Staff will request authorization for the CEO to execute a contract change order with Logic Tree Corporation to upgrade the Interactive Voice Response (IVR) used within the regional call center. The cost of this project is $86,990. REGULAR AGENDA 5. Contract Award for the East Valley Ride Choice Program 5. For action Steve Banta, CEO, will introduce Scott Wisner, Manager of Customer Service, who will request that the TMC forward to the Board authorization for the (CEO) to execute a contract to manage the East Valley Ride Choice Program with Creative Software Solutions, LLC for a five year base term not to exceed $6,022,145. The contract amount includes program administration fees as well as projected transportation costs. 6. Title VI Fare and Service Equity Analysis Policies 6. For action Steve Banta, CEO, will introduce Wulf Grote, Director, Planning and Development, who will request the TMC forward to the Board approval of the Title VI Fare and Service Equity Analysis policies for assessing the potential impacts of future proposed fare and service changes on minority and low-income populations. 7. FY 2012 Transit Performance Report (TPR) 7. For information Steve Banta, CEO, will introduce John McCormack, Chief Financial Officer, who will provide information to member cities concerning ridership, operating costs, fare revenue, and performance indicators contained in the FY12 Transit Performance Report. 8. Future TMC Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events 8. For information and discussion Chair Hazine will request future TMC agenda items from members and members may provide a report on current events. 2

5 9. Next Meeting 9. For information The next meeting of the TMC is scheduled for Wednesday, April 3, 2013 at 11:00 a.m. Qualified sign language interpreters are available with 72 hours notice. Materials in alternative formats (large print, audiocassette, or computer diskette) are available upon request. For further information, please call Valley Metro at or TTY at To attend this meeting via teleconference, contact the receptionist at for the dial-ininformation. The supporting information for this agenda can be found on our web site at 3

6 1

7 DATE AGENDA ITEM 1 February 27, 2013 SUBJECT Public Comment PURPOSE An opportunity for general public comment on issues related to Valley Metro RPTA. Up to three (3) minutes or a total of 15 minutes for all speakers, will be provided. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION For information only CONTACT Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer sbanta@valleymetro.org ATTACHMENTS None VALLEY METRO 101 N 1ST AVE STE 1300 PHOENIX AZ

8 2

9 February 27, 2013 AGENDA ITEM 2 Summary Minutes Valley Metro RPTA Transit Management Committee Wednesday, February 6, 2013 Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1 st Avenue, Suite 1000 Phoenix, AZ 11:00 a.m. Members Present Maher Hazine, City of Peoria, Chair Jodi Sorrell, City of Mesa, Vice Chair Sean Banda, Town of Buckeye Dan Cook for RJ Zeder, City of Chandler Cathy Colbath, City of Glendale Dawn Irvine, Town of Gilbert Mitch Wagner, Maricopa County Neal Young, City of Phoenix Dave Kohlbeck, City of Surprise (via phone) Mike Nevarez, City of Tempe Sara Allred, ADOT Sue McDermott, City of El Mirage Chris Hagen, City of Tolleson (via phone) Cato Esquivel, City of Goodyear Members Not Present Rogene Hill, City of Avondale Madeline Clemann, City of Scottsdale Chair Hazine called the meeting to order at 11:01 a.m. Chair Hazine said agenda item 5 is pulled from the agenda and will not be considered today. 1. Public Comment Mr. Blue Crowley said the map in the Transit Book shows the current service area. He said the fares are being increased and the service area keeps getting smaller. He said not all the fare media that is available is sold in stores. He said in agenda item 6 there is more money than expected. He said the transit system needs to be for the county. There shouldn t be money left over. VALLEY METRO 101 N 1ST AVE STE 1300 PHOENIX AZ

10 2. Minutes Minutes from the January 9, 2013 TMC meeting were presented for approval. IT WAS MOVED BY MIKE NEVARZE, SECONDED BY JODI SORELL AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM JANUARY 9, Chief Executive Officer s Report Ms. Jyme Sue McLaren said Michael Melaniphy, President and CEO of the American Public Transportation Association, will be the key note speaker at the annual Friends of Transit Conference scheduled for Friday, February 22. She said he would also be speaking to the RPTA Board on Thursday, February Consent Agenda The following items were presented on the consent agenda: A. FY 2013 Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) Amendment with Maricopa County Defining Conditions for the Provision of Public Transportation B. Workers Compensation and Employer s Liability Insurance Coverage Renewal C. Authorization to Issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for Vanpool Services D. Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Phoenix for Federal Transit Administration Pass-Through Grant AZ Mr. Dan Cook asked why there is a significant increase in the premium to the Worker s Compensation insurance. Ms. Carol Ketcherside said there was an increase in payroll and there is a general market increase of 40%. IT WAS MOVED BY NEAL YOUNG, SECONDED BY DAWN IRVINE AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE AND FORWARD THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. 5. Item pulled from the agenda. 6. RPTA Fiscal Year 2013 Mid-Year Budget Adjustments John McCormack, Chief Financial Officer, provided a presentation that included the changes to operating costs to fixed route and paratransit serivces, and changes to planning activities as illustrated in the following table: 2

11 He then provided a summary information related to the revenue changes associated with the changes to expenditures as follows: Sources of funds 2012/ /13 Amount (In thousands) Revised Adopted Increase/ Budget Budget (Decrease) Revenues: Public transportation funds (PTF) $ 112,399 $ 114,600 $ (2,201) Transit service agreements 15,790 16,659 (869) Federal grants 36,904 32,946 3,958 VMR staff & administration reimbursement 14,028 14,028 - Regional area road funds (RARF) 4,605 4, Interest & other revenues 2,494 1,194 1,300 Local participation State & local grants Regional services cost reimbursement Total revenues 187, ,122 2,275 Bond proceeds 70,000 70,000 - Carryforwards & reserves 18,973 21,988 (3,015) Total revenues & other sources of funds $ 276,370 $ 277,110 $ (740) Mr. Mike Nevarez asked whether the savings from the fuel tax credit are passed on to the cities. Mr. McCormack said it is part of the annual reconciliation at the end of the fiscal year. Ms. Cathy Colbath said the undesignated fund balance is $3 million less, is that because there is $3 million less that needs to be used? 3

12 Mr. McCormack said yes. IT WAS MOVED BY DAN COOK, SECONDED BY MIKE NEVERAZ AND UNANIMOULSY CARRIED TO APPROVE AND FORWARD TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FY 2013 MID YEAR BUDGET ADJUSTMENT. 7. FY 2011/12 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and Single Audit Act Reporting Package Mr. McCormack said the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and Single Audit Act Reporting Package are being presented for approval. He said there were no findings in the audit. And that this is the second year with the auditing firm of Heinfeld & Meech & Co. Mr. McCormack also noted that the CAFR was prepared in-house. In the past it was completed with consultant assistance. IT WAS MOVED BY DAWN IRVINE, SECONDED BY DAN COOK AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO ACCEPT AND FORWARD THE COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT (CAFR) AND SINGLE AUDIT ACT REPORTING PACKAGE TO THE BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION. 8. Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events None. With no further discussion the meeting adjourned at 11:26 a.m. 4

13 3

14 DATE AGENDA ITEM 3 February SUBJECT Chief Executive Officer s Report PURPOSE To provide TMC members with an informational updates on current events. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION For information only CONTACT Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer sbanta@valleymetro.org ATTACHMENTS None VALLEY METRO 101 N 1ST AVE STE 1300 PHOENIX AZ

15 4

16 DATE February 27, 2013 AGENDA ITEM 4A SUBJECT Change Order with Black Box Network Services PURPOSE To request the Board authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute a contract change order with Black Box Network Services (BBNS) to upgrade the Aspect eworkfoce Management (ewfm) scheduling software and to implement a new Human Resource Information System that integrates agent work time into the SAGE Payroll system. The cost of this project is $82,725. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION Currently, the Customer Service Department uses a call center scheduling software program (ewfm) to create Customer Service Agent schedules that meet call demands throughout the work week. This application also provides management with a budgetary forecast tool used to determine how many agents are needed to meet current and future call demands. The current application will no longer be supported and must be upgraded to the latest version in order to receive future upgrades or technical support. In addition, to streamline and automate the agent payroll process, staff recommends purchasing the Aspect Human Resource Information System (HRIS). This system integrates with the Aspect phone system, reporting system, and ewfm system, which makes it the ideal and most cost effective solution to integrate agent work time into the current SAGE payroll system. The last component of this change order covers training and consulting services. The training component will ensure current staff has a thorough understanding of how to use the new features in the upgraded ewfm product. Consulting services will be used to analyze current workflow processes related to agent scheduling, forecasting, and performance data and establish new processes and procedures to maximize efficiencies within the department. BBNS is the licensed authorized reseller of Aspect software products and services within the state of Arizona. Therefore, the project meets the criteria to amend the current maintenance agreement with BBNS based on sole source procurement guidelines. VALLEY METRO 101 N 1ST AVE STE 1300 PHOENIX AZ

17 COST AND BUDGET The current value of the annual maintenance agreement with this vendor is $73, The adjusted contract value that includes the change order will be $156, The funding source for this project is the Customer Service operating budget (Project 6035), which is funded by Public Transportation Funds. COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG February 19, 2013 for information TMC March 6, 2013 for action Board of Directors March 21, 2013 for action RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the TMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute a contract change order for the project outlined in this report with Black Box Network Services for a cost not to exceed $82,725. CONTACT Scott Wisner Customer Service Manager swisner@valleymetro.org ATTACHMENTS None A copy of this change order is available upon request. 2

18 DATE February 27, 2013 AGENDA ITEM 4B SUBJECT Contract Change Order with Logic Tree Corporation PURPOSE To request the Board authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute a contract change order with Logic Tree Corporation to upgrade the Interactive Voice Response (IVR) used within the regional call center. The cost of this project is $86,990. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION In 2005, an IVR was purchased from Logic Tree Corporation. The IVR was integrated with the Aspect Automated Call Distribution (ACD) system and provides the menu routing functions within the call center using voice recognition software. The IVR also provides customers with self serve automated applications including NextRide, Trip Planning, Lost and Found, and Detours. It also allows staff to record important messages on the main menu, which is used to notify customers of mission critical information or events. The current IVR software and hardware used within the call center is outdated and lacks sufficient data storage capacity. Logic Tree has proposed migrating Valley Metro s current IVR software to their Software as a Service (SaaS) platform that is hosted by Logic Tree. The SaaS model will significantly improve the reliability of the IVR platform and eliminate the need for Valley Metro to purchase and maintain new hardware and software for the life of the contract. In addition, Logic Tree provides 24/7 monitoring of all systems and services. The software and services offered in this change order are part of an integrated package of telephone system components that are currently in use within the Customer Service Department. Logic Tree owns the proprietary rights to the current IVR software platform used within the call center. Therefore, the project meets the criteria to amend the current contract with Logic Tree based on sole source procurement guidelines. COST AND BUDGET The total cost for this project is $86,990. This project will be paid for out of the FY 2013 and FY 2014 Customer Service operating budget (Project 6035). The adjusted contract value with this change order is $1,377, The Customer Service budget is funded by Public Transportation Funds. COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG February 19, 2013 for information TMC March 6, 2013 for action Board of Directors March 21, 2013 for action VALLEY METRO 101 N 1ST AVE STE 1300 PHOENIX AZ

19 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the TMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute a contract change order for the project outlined in this report with Logic Tree Corporation for a cost not to exceed $86,990. CONTACT Scott Wisner Customer Service Manager swisner@valleymetro.org ATTACHMENTS None A copy of the change order is available upon request. 2

20 5

21 DATE AGENDA ITEM 5 February 27, 2013 SUBJECT Contract Award for the East Valley Ride Choice Program PURPOSE To request the Board to authorize the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute a contract to manage the East Valley Ride Choice Program with Creative Software Solutions, LLC for a five year base term not to exceed $6,022,145. The contract amount includes program administration fees as well as projected transportation costs. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION In November 2012, Valley Metro staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the East Valley Ride Choice Program. The current contract with Veolia Transportation, who administers this program on behalf of Valley Metro, expires on June 30, The East Valley Ride Choice Program provides valuable transportation alternatives for seniors and persons with a disability in the cities of Chandler, Gilbert, Mesa and Tempe. Currently, Ride Choice customers purchase subsidized coupons from Veolia that can be used to take private taxis from participating providers to run errands or go to medical appointments. Coupons are mailed out on a monthly basis, and the copayment is collected with each order for the number of coupons ordered. In addition, customers that are undergoing dialysis treatments can receive free medical vouchers to use private taxis for trips to and from their medical appointments. The EFPS will replace the issuance of coupons for cabs and vouchers. On July 1, 2013, customers will begin using an electronic debit card to pay the fare for qualifying trips with participating transportation providers. Customers will be able to reload value or voucher units on their card using a Web portal, by telephone or by mail. Customers will also be able to review transaction history, check card balances, as well as print card balance statements. The EFPS will provide participating cities with benefits, such as real time reports that track program usage, user fares, and transportation costs. This valuable data helps Valley Metro and participating members manage transportation costs and improve administrative controls at a lower overall cost. Creative Software Solutions, LLC was the sole responder to this RFP. A thorough review of their proposal was conducted and the proposed solution met all the criteria outlined within the RFP. The price submitted by Creative Software Solutions for the term of the contract was $18,000 higher than the independent cost estimate that was VALLEY METRO 101 N 1ST AVE STE 1300 PHOENIX AZ

22 conducted by staff prior to the issuance of the RFP. This represents a 2 percent difference. Lastly, reference checks were performed and a cost analysis was conducted to ensure the proposed price was fair and reasonable. COST AND BUDGET The total cost of the contract is $6,022,145 over five years. This includes administration costs of $940,500 and estimated transportation costs of $5,081,645. The contractor (Creative Software Solutions) is responsible for paying the transportation expenses directly to the taxi providers and in turn, the contractor will invoice Valley Metro for actual expenses on a monthly basis. As a result, transportation expenses are included in the total contract value with Creative Software Solutions. The first year program expenses will be included in the FY 2014 Valley Metro operating budget (Project 2047 Alternative Transportation Programs) which is funded by participating cities and by New Freedom grants. No Public Transportation Funds are used for this program. Forecasted program costs and revenues are shown below: Fiscal Year FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 Mileage Reimbursement $ 308,360 $ 330,855 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Taxi Cab Reimbursement $ 423,634 $ 454,590 $ 484,982 $ 499,531 $ 514,517 $ 529,953 $ 545,852 Dialysis Voucher Program $ 377,798 $ 440,170 $ 472,169 $ 486,334 $ 500,924 $ 515,952 $ 531,430 Administration/Overhead $ 290,909 $ 355,631 $ 44,960 $ 46,309 $ 47,698 $ 49,129 $ 50,603 Electronic Fare Pmt Sys $ - $ - $ 201,000 $ 177,000 $ 182,000 $ 187,500 $ 193,000 Program Revenue $ (128,068) $ (138,370) $ (140,257) $ (142,361) $ (144,496) $ (146,664) $ (148,864) Net Cost $ 1,272,633 $ 1,442,876 $ 1,062,854 $ 1,066,813 $ 1,100,643 $ 1,135,870 $ 1,172,021 Grant Funding $ 411,266 $ 619,991 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 City Contributions $ 861,367 $ 822,885 $ 712,854 $ 716,813 $ 750,643 $ 785,870 $ 822,021 Chandler $ 55,150 $ 59,876 $ 57,624 $ 57,944 $ 60,679 $ 63,527 $ 66,449 Gilbert $ 58,765 $ 45,822 $ 40,472 $ 40,697 $ 42,618 $ 44,618 $ 46,670 Mesa $ 696,619 $ 636,297 $ 530,158 $ 533,102 $ 558,262 $ 584,461 $ 611,346 Tempe $ 50,833 $ 80,890 $ 84,600 $ 85,070 $ 89,084 $ 93,264 $ 97,556 Total City Contributions $ 861,367 $ 822,885 $ 712,854 $ 716,813 $ 750,643 $ 785,870 $ 822,021 (1) Grant funding is unknown beyond 2013, estimated at $350,000 (2) Transportation and administration costs forecasted to grow by 3% per year beyond FY 2014 (3) Program revenue projected to grow by 1% in FY2014 and by 2% beyond 2014 COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG February 19, 2013 for information TMC March 6, 2013 for action Board of Directors March 21, 2013 for action RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that TMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute a contract to manage the East Valley Ride Choice Program with Creative Software Solutions, LLC for a five year base term not to exceed $6,022,145. The contract amount includes program administration fees as well as projected transportation costs. 2

23 CONTACT Scott Wisner Manager, Customer Service ATTACHMENTS None A copy of the contract is available upon request. 3

24 6

25 DATE AGENDA ITEM 6 February 27, 2013 SUBJECT Title VI Fare and Service Equity Analysis Policies PURPOSE To request Board approval of the Title VI Fare and Service Equity Analysis policies for assessing the potential impacts of future proposed fare and service changes on minority and low-income populations. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION In October 2012, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) issued new guidelines (Circular B) to help ensure that changes in transit service and fares are implemented in compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Executive Order Title VI is intended to ensure that all persons are not discriminated against or denied the benefits of public services based on their color, race, or national origin. In 1994, Executive Order added the same protections for low-income populations. The new federal guidelines require transit providers to establish policies by April 1, 2013 to identify and evaluate potential equity issues related to changes in transit fares or services, including fixed-route bus and light rail. Valley Metro, in coordination with the City of Phoenix, developed the fare and service equity policies to fulfill this requirement, and conducted a public outreach program between January 3 rd and March 5 th, All member agencies were offered the opportunity to participate in the public outreach program that included open dialogue sessions with local public agency committees, commissions, and special interest groups. A public meeting was also held. Fare Equity Policy Per FTA, a Title VI analysis must be conducted for any fare change considered. Transit fare policies and payment structures are included in the indices of discrimination that are monitored for disparate impacts on minority populations and disproportionate treatment of low-income populations to ensure pricing structures and subsidies are commensurate with the services provided. The fare equity policy focuses on the delta (or difference) between the percent changes in fare for the type of services (e.g. express and local) provided and common socioeconomic characteristics of existing riders (also based on service type). The delta is a percentage threshold used only to determine whether a disparate or disproportionate impact may occur if a proposed fare structure is adopted.

26 Valley Metro and the City of Phoenix have developed a fare equity policy that establishes the percentage threshold used to determine disparate or disproportionate impacts of fare changes. As part of the public process, the public were provided a range of percentage values to consider (3, 4 or 5%), and asked for their comment on what the threshold should be. Valley Metro recommends a value of 5% for the delta between the proposed percent of fare changes by fare types. Service Equity Policy Changes to transit services (rerouting, reductions or expansions) are also monitored for disparate and/or disproportionate treatment with regard to populations served. The FTA requires transit providers develop policies for service equity focused on changes to transit service that are deemed to be Major Service Changes. Valley Metro recommends that any proposed change in service that reduces, expands or reroutes existing service by more than 25% be considered a major service change. The determination of a potential equity impact rests predominantly on the demographic characteristics of the route s service area, and the populations using the route. If the percentage of minority and/or low-income passengers on an affected route is greater than the average percentage of the transit system s minority and/or low-income riders by transit service classification (local, express, neighborhood circulators, and rural bus), a disparate or disproportionate impact is determined. Public Input Public outreach to date has shown a favorable response to the proposed policies. Persons contacted during the public outreach process support the development of service and fare equity analysis policies, and the proposed analysis thresholds. COST AND BUDGET The impact on cost and budget will depend on the service and/or fare changes being proposed during each adjustment cycle. COMMITTEE ACTION RTAG, January 22, 2013 for information RTAG, February 19, 2013 for information TMC, March 6, 2013 for action RPTA Board of Directors, March 21, 2013 for action RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the TMC forward to the Board of Directors approval of the Title VI Fare and Service Equity Analysis policies for assessing the potential impacts of future proposed fare and service changes on minority and low-income populations. 2

27 CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Planning and Development ATTACHMENTS Proposed Major Service Change and Service Equity Policy Proposed Fare Equity Policy 3

28 PROPOSED MAJOR SERVICE CHANGE & SERVICE EQUITY POLICY Purpose of the Policy The purpose of the Major Service Change and Service Equity Policy is to define thresholds for determining major service changes and whether potential changes to existing transit services will have a disparate impact based on race, color, or national origin, or whether potential service changes will have a disproportionately high or adverse impact on minority and/or low-income populations. Basis for Policy Standards Federal law requires the City of Phoenix and Valley Metro to evaluate changes to transit services, as outlined in FTA Circular B, effective October 1, In order to comply with 49 CFR Section 21.5(b)(a), 49 CFR Section 21.5 (b)(7) and Appendix C to 49 CFR part 21, recipients shall evaluate significant system-wide service and fare changes and proposed improvements at the planning and programming stages to determine whether those changes have a discriminatory impact. For service changes, this requirement applies to major service changes only. The recipient should have established guidelines or threshold for what it considers a major change to be. Proposed Policy A. Major Service Change The following is considered a major service change (unless otherwise noted under Exemptions), and will be evaluated in accordance with the regulatory requirements set forth in FTA Circular B: 1. Route-Level Service Reduction or Elimination Reducing an existing route by more than 25% 1 of weekday route revenue miles, or 1 A change of 25% in weekly route revenue miles and/or route directional miles is the current City of Phoenix threshold for determining whether a potential transit service change qualifies as a major service change (or substantial service change) according to the City of Phoenix resolution (1990). This percentage is generally an industry-wide percentage threshold used by peer transit systems throughout the United States. The City of Phoenix resolution also specifies that a public comment period will be initiated when a change in transit service of 25% or more is determined. Proposed Major Service Change & Page 1 January 2013 Service Equity Policy

29 Reducing an existing route by more than 25% 1 of Saturday route revenue miles, or Reducing an existing route by more than 25% 1 of Sunday route revenue miles, or Reducing the number of route directional miles more than 25% 1, or A change in a route alignment resulting in a 25% 1 or greater variance from the existing route alignment, or In situations where service would be reduced or eliminated in jurisdictions where minority and/or low-income populations exceed the transit system service area average. 2. Route-Level Expansion or Addition of a New Route Adding a new route, or Expansion of an existing route that increases weekday route revenue miles by more than 25% 1, or Expansion of an existing route that increases Saturday route revenue miles by more than 25% 1, or Expansion of an existing route that increases Sunday route revenue miles by more than 25% 1, or Expanding the number of route directional miles more than 25% 1, or A change in a route alignment resulting in a 25% 1 or greater variance from the existing route alignment. B. Minority Disparate Impact Policy (Service Equity Analysis) When conducting a service change equity analysis, the following thresholds will be used to determine when a service change would have a disparate impact on minority populations: 1. Route-Level Service Reduction or Elimination Service Level and Service Area Reduction: Proposed Major Service Change & Page 2 January 2013 Service Equity Policy

30 o If the percentage of minority passengers 2 on an affected route is greater than the transit system s minority ridership (within the appropriate dataset s margin of error) by transit classification (local, express, neighborhood circulators, and rural bus) Route-Level Expansion or Addition of a New Route Service Level Expansion or Service Area Expansion (includes addition of new routes): o If a service level expansion or service area expansion is considered that coincides with a reduction in transit service on the same route or other routes, and the route(s) considered for service expansion predominantly serve non-minority and/or non-low-income geographic areas while the route(s) considered for reduction predominantly serve minority and/or lowincome geographic areas, then a disproportionate burden may be determined. The determination of a disproportionate burden will be based on meeting both of the following criteria: If the percentage of minority passengers 2 on an affected route considered for service expansion is less than the transit system s minority ridership percentage (within the appropriate dataset s margin of error) by transit classification (local, express, neighborhood circulators, and rural bus), 3 AND If the percentage of minority passengers 2 on an affected route considered for service reduction is greater than the transit system s minority ridership percentage (within the appropriate dataset s margin of error) by transit classification (local, express, neighborhood circulators, and rural bus). 3 2 Local routes include local fixed-route bus, light rail, LINK bus, local limited stop bus. Express routes include express bus and RAPID bus. Circulator routes will be evaluated similarly to local routes for fare changes and major services changes, but will be considered separately from local and express services when considered in the context of a region- or system-wide Title VI analysis. Circulator bus services are provided by the municipalities they serve and not the regional transit agency. Proposed Major Service Change & Page 3 January 2013 Service Equity Policy

31 C. Low-Income Disproportionate Burden Policy (Service Equity Analysis) When conducting a service change equity analysis, the following thresholds will be used to determine when a service change would have a disproportionate burden on lowincome populations: 1. Route-Level Service Reduction or Elimination If the percentage of low-income passengers 2 on an affected route is greater than the transit system s low-income ridership (within the appropriate dataset s margin of error) by transit classification (local, express, neighborhood circulators, and rural bus) Route-Level Expansion or Addition of a New Route Service Level Expansion or Service Area Expansion (includes addition of new routes): o If a service level expansion or service area expansion is considered that coincides with a reduction in transit service on the same route or other routes, and the route(s) considered for service expansion predominantly serve non-minority and/or non-low-income geographic areas while the route(s) considered for reduction predominantly serve minority and/or lowincome geographic areas, then a disproportionate burden may be determined. The determination of a disproportionate burden will be based on meeting both of the following criteria: If the percentage of low-income passengers 2 on an affected route considered for service expansion is less than the transit system s low-income ridership percentage (within the appropriate dataset s margin of error) by transit classification (local, express, neighborhood circulators, and rural bus), 3 AND If the percentage of low-income passengers 2 on an affected route considered for service reduction is greater than the transit system s low-income ridership percentage (within the appropriate dataset s margin of error) by transit classification (local, express, neighborhood circulators, and rural bus). 3 Proposed Major Service Change & Page 4 January 2013 Service Equity Policy

32 Equity Analysis Data Sources Category Action Sub Action Evaluation Method Fare Adjustment N/A O/D a profile data of affected fare category and/or Census Data Service Span Reduction N/A O/D a profile data of Expansion N/A affected route Service Reduction N/A O/D a profile data of Headway Expansion N/A affected route Route Length Reduction N/A O/D a Data Expansion N/A Census Data Reduced Alignment N/A O/D a Data Expanded Alignment N/A Census Data Route Alignment Eliminated Segment(s) O/D a Data Modified Alignment Segment(s) to New Areas Census Data New Route New Route N/A Census Data a Origin/Destination Survey Data Exemptions The major service change thresholds exclude any changes to service that are caused by the following: Discontinuance of Temporary or Demonstration Services - The discontinuance of a temporary transit service or demonstration service that has been in effect for less than 180 days. Headway Adjustments Headways for transit routes may be adjusted up to 5 minutes during the peak hour periods, and 15 minutes during non-peak hour periods. New Transit Service Break-In Period An adjustment to service frequencies and/or span of service for new transit routes that have been in revenue service for less than 180 days. Proposed Major Service Change & Page 5 January 2013 Service Equity Policy

33 Other Service Providers or Agencies - Actions of other service providers or public agencies providing/administering transit services that are not the responsibility of Valley Metro. Natural or Catastrophic Disasters - Forces of nature such as earthquakes, wildfires, or other natural disasters, or human-caused catastrophic disasters that may force the suspension of scheduled transit service for public safety or technical reasons. Auxiliary Transportation Infrastructure Failures - Failures of auxiliary transportation infrastructure such as vehicular bridges, highway bridge overpasses, tunnels, or elevated highways that force the suspension transit service. Overlapping Services - A reduction in revenue miles on one line that is offset by an increase in revenue miles on the overlapping section of an alternative transit route (an overlapping section is where two or more bus routes or rail lines share the same alignment, stops, or stations for a short distance). Seasonal Service and Special Events - Changes to bus service levels on routes which occur because of seasonal ridership changes and event activities served by dedicated temporary bus routes or increased service frequencies. Temporary Route Detours - A short-term change to a route caused by road construction, routine road maintenance, road closures, emergency road conditions, fiscal crisis, civil demonstrations, or any uncontrollable circumstance. Public Participatory Procedures For all proposed major service changes, City of Phoenix and/or Valley Metro will hold at least one public hearing, with a minimum of two public notices prior to the hearing in order to receive public comments on the potential service changes. The first meeting notice will occur at least 30 days prior to the scheduled hearing date, with the second notice being made at least 10 days prior to the scheduled hearing date. Public materials will be produced in English and Spanish (the metropolitan region s two primary languages), or in other languages upon request, in order to ensure Limited English Proficient (LEP) populations within the transit service area are informed of the proposed service changes and can participate in community discussions. Valley Metro and/or the City of Phoenix will conduct a service equity analysis for the Valley Metro Board of Proposed Major Service Change & Page 6 January 2013 Service Equity Policy

34 Directors, the City of Phoenix City Council, and the public s consideration prior to any public hearings associated with the proposed service changes. Definitions Designated Recipient The City of Phoenix is the designated recipient for federal funds contributing to transit system capital programs and operations in the greater Phoenix metropolitan region. Disparate Impact - A facially neutral policy or practice that has a disproportionately excluding or adverse effect on the minority riders or population of the service area. Disparate Treatment - An action that results in a circumstance in which minority riders or populations are treated differently than others because of their race, color, national origin and/or income status. Disproportionate Impact - A facially neutral policy or practice that has a disproportionately excluding or adverse effect on the low-income riders or population of the service area. Express Transit Service - Includes Valley Metro designated express bus and RAPID bus services. High-Capacity Transit (HCT) - A transit facility or service that operates at a consistent, high frequency of service. Local Transit Service - Includes Light Rail Transit (LRT), and local fixed-route bus, local limited stop bus, LINK bus routes, and circulator/shuttle bus services. Low-income Populations & Areas - Low-income populations are those persons with an income of 80 percent or less of the national per capita income. Low-income Areas are residential land use areas within census tracts where the average per capita income is 80 percent or less of the national per capita income. Minority Populations & Areas - Minority populations include those persons who selfidentify themselves as being one or more of the following ethnic groups: American Indian and Alaska Native, Asian, Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, as defined in the FTA Title VI Circular. Minority Areas are residential land use areas within Census tracts where the percentage of minority persons is higher than the Valley Metro service area average. Route-Level - Refers to the geographic level of analysis at the route alignment level by which the performance of a transit route is measured for equity. Proposed Major Service Change & Page 7 January 2013 Service Equity Policy

35 Route-Service Area A three-quarter mile radial buffer on either side of a transit route s alignment. A three-quarter mile radial buffer is used to ensure compliance with the American s with Disabilities Act guidelines. Service Level Refers to the span of service (hours of operation), days of operation, trips, and headways (service frequencies) for a transit route or the regional transit system. Service Area - According to 49 CFR 604.3, geographic service area means the entire area in which a recipient is authorized to provide public transportation service under appropriate local, state, and Federal law. Service Span - The span of hours over which service is operated (e.g., 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.). The service span may vary by weekday, Saturday, or Sunday. Sub-recipient Valley Metro is a designated sub-recipient of federal funding for capital projects and service operations. Funding is passed onto Valley Metro from the designated recipient, the City of Phoenix. System-wide - Refers to the geographic level of analysis by which the performance of the entire transit system is measured for equity. Transit System A coordinated urban network of scheduled public passenger modes including fixed-route local and express buses, light rail transit, bus rapid transit, and circulator bus services that provide mobility for people from one place to another. Proposed Major Service Change & Page 8 January 2013 Service Equity Policy

36 PROPOSED FARE EQUITY POLICY Purpose of the Policy The purpose of the Fare Equity Policy is to define a threshold for determining whether potential changes to existing transit fares will have a discriminatory impact based on race, color, or national origin, or whether a potential fare adjustment will have a disproportionately high or adverse impact on minority and/or low-income populations. Basis for Policy Standards Periodically, the City of Phoenix and Valley Metro make adjustments to transit fares in order to generate revenues to help sustain transit service operations. Federal law requires the City of Phoenix and Valley Metro to prepare and submit fare equity analyses for all potential transit fare adjustments, as outlined in Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Circular B, effective October 1, Proposed Policy The following are proposed City of Phoenix and Valley Metro policies for determining if a fare adjustment will result in a minority disparate impact or low-income disproportionate impact. A. Minority Disparate Impact Policy (Fare Equity Analysis) If a planned transit fare adjustment results in minority populations bearing a fare rate change of greater than 3 to 5 1 percentage points as compared to nonminority populations, the resulting effect will be considered a minority disparate impact. B. Low-Income Disproportionate Burden Policy (Fare Equity Analysis) If a planned transit fare adjustment results in low-income populations bearing a fare rate change of greater than 3 to 5 1 percentage points as compared to nonlow-income populations, the resulting effect will be considered a low-income disproportionate burden. 1 The final policy will include a single value to determine if a minority disparate impact or low-income disproportionate impact is determined. The value included in the final policy will be determined in consultation with the community. Proposed Fare Equity Policy Page 1 March 2013

37 Equity Analysis Data Sources Category Action Sub Action Evaluation Method Fare Adjustment N/A Service Span O/D a profile data of affected fare category and/or Census Data Reduction N/A O/D a profile data of Expansion N/A affected route Service Reduction N/A O/D a profile data of Headway Expansion N/A affected route Route Length Reduction N/A O/D a Data Expansion N/A Census Data Reduced Alignment N/A O/D a Data Expanded Alignment N/A Census Data Route Alignment Eliminated Segment(s) O/D a Data Modified Alignment Segment(s) to New Areas Census Data New Route New Route N/A Census Data a Origin/Destination Survey Data Public Participatory Procedures For all proposed fare changes, City of Phoenix and/or Valley Metro will hold at least one public hearing, with a minimum of two public notices prior to the hearing in order to receive public comments on the proposed fare changes. The first meeting notice will occur at least 30 days prior to the scheduled hearing date, with the second notice being made at least 10 days prior to the scheduled hearing date. Public materials will be produced in English and Spanish (the metropolitan region s two primary languages), or in other languages upon request, in order to ensure Limited English Proficient (LEP) populations within the transit service area are informed of the proposed service changes and can participate in community discussions. Valley Metro and/or the City of Phoenix will conduct a fare equity analysis for the Valley Metro Board of Directors, the City of Phoenix City Council, and the public s consideration prior to any public hearings associated with the proposed fare changes. Definitions Designated Recipient The City of Phoenix is the designated recipient for federal funds contributing to transit system capital programs and operations in the greater Phoenix metropolitan region. Proposed Fare Equity Policy Page 2 March 2013

38 Disparate Impact - A facially neutral policy or practice that has a disproportionately excluding or adverse effect on the minority riders or population of the service area. Disparate Treatment - An action that results in a circumstance in which minority riders or populations are treated differently than others because of their race, color, national origin and/or income status. Disproportionate Impact - A facially neutral policy or practice that has a disproportionately excluding or adverse effect on the low-income riders or population of the service area. Express Transit Service - Includes Valley Metro designated express bus and RAPID bus services. High-Capacity Transit (HCT) - A transit facility or service that operates at a consistent, high frequency of service. Local Transit Service - Includes Light Rail Transit (LRT), and local fixed-route bus, local limited stop bus, LINK bus routes, and circulator/shuttle bus services. Low-income Populations & Areas - Low-income populations are those persons with an income of 80 percent or less of the national per capita income. Low-income Areas are residential land use areas within census tracts where the average per capita income is 80 percent or less of the national per capita income. Minority Populations & Areas - Minority populations include those persons who selfidentify themselves as being one or more of the following ethnic groups: American Indian and Alaska Native, Asian, Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, as defined in the FTA Title VI Circular. Minority Areas are residential land use areas within Census tracts where the percentage of minority persons is higher than the Valley Metro service area average. Route-Level - Refers to the geographic level of analysis at the route alignment level by which the performance of a transit route is measured for equity. Route-Service Area A three-quarter mile radial buffer on either side of a transit route s alignment. A three-quarter mile radial buffer is used to ensure compliance with the American s with Disabilities Act guidelines. Service Level Refers to the span of service (hours of operation), days of operation, trips, and headways (service frequencies) for a transit route or the regional transit system. Proposed Fare Equity Policy Page 3 March 2013

39 Service Area - According to 49 CFR 604.3, geographic service area means the entire area in which a recipient is authorized to provide public transportation service under appropriate local, state, and Federal law. Service Span - The span of hours over which service is operated (e.g., 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.). The service span may vary by weekday, Saturday, or Sunday. Sub-recipient Valley Metro is a designated sub-recipient of federal funding for capital projects and service operations. Funding is passed onto Valley Metro from the designated recipient, the City of Phoenix. System-wide - Refers to the geographic level of analysis by which the performance of the entire transit system is measured for equity. Transit System A coordinated urban network of public passenger modes including fixed-route local and express buses, light rail transit, bus rapid transit, and circulator bus services that provide mobility for people from one place to another. Proposed Fare Equity Policy Page 4 March 2013

40 7

41 DATE AGENDA ITEM 7 February 27, 2013 SUBJECT FY 2012 Transit Performance Report (TPR) PURPOSE To provide information to the Board of Directors and member cities concerning ridership, operating costs, fare revenue, and performance indicators contained in the FY12 Transit Performance Report. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION The Transit Performance Report (TPR) is updated annually using data provided by our member agencies and the Valley Metro Regional Ridership Report. Performance targets that were developed as part of the Service Effectiveness and Efficiency Study in 2010 are being updated as part of the Valley Metro Operations Standards study. Given the ongoing discussions on how to appropriately update the performance targets, the FY 2012 TPR does not include performance targets. For the FY 2012 TPR, we have changed methodology used in accounting for and reporting transit performance data. In general a greater scope of operating activities has been incorporated to conform with NTD standards. As a result, some financial measures are not directly comparable to previous years data. To deal with the accounting change and afford the reader the opportunity to compare prior year results under the same accounting standard, we have generated Report 1A which reports the annual results using the historical accounting method. Report 1A will be most useful to compare prior year results to FY12. In addition, explanatory footnotes have been included with the tables and graphs to identify the nature of the accounting changes. COST AND BUDGET Funding for staff to develop this report is in the adopted FY Operating and Capital Budget (project 3315) and is paid by Regional Area Road Funds and MAG/FTA Section 5303 funding. COMMITTEE PROCESS Financial Working Group February 19, 2013 for information RTAG February 19, 2013 for information RMC March 6, 2013 for information TMC March 6, 2013 for information Board of Directors March 21, 2013 for information VALLEY METRO 101 N 1ST AVE STE 1300 PHOENIX AZ

42 RECOMMENDATION This item is being presented for information only. CONTACT John P. McCormack Chief Financial Officer ATTACHMENTS FY 2012 TPR Reports 1A and 1 2

43 FY 2012 Transit Performance Report Report 1A: System Total July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2012 Total Total Total Total Wheelchairs Revenue Revenue System Boardings Boardings Hours Miles Fixed Route (1) 57,489, ,983 2,253,260 28,686,261 Dial-a-Ride (2) 856, , ,701 5,679,244 Vanpool (3) 1,145, ,918 5,777,291 Rail (4) 13,553, ,722 2,435,946 Total 73,045, ,715 3,038,601 42,578,741 Total Total Total Total Fare Operating Security Safety System Revenue Cost Incidents Incidents Fixed Route (1) $47,669,020 $214,387, Dial-a-Ride (2) $1,961,995 $33,006, Vanpool $3,560,477 $3,585, Rail $11,889,930 $28,909, Total $65,081,422 $279,890, Percentage Total On-Time Mechanical System Performance Failures Fixed Route (1) 94.06% 2,191 Dial-a-Ride (2) 97.16% 198 Vanpool (3) Rail 97.20% 85 Total 96.14% 2,474 (1) Fixed Route also includes circulator service. (2) Data Includes alternative ADA programs such as East Valley Ride Choice and Taxi. (3) Vanpool does not track wheelchairs or on-time performance. (4) Rail wheelchairs not tracked.

44 Report 1A: System Total Service Efficiency Farebox Recovery Ratio FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11 to FY 12 System Total Total Total % Change Fixed Route (1) 24.1% 22.0% 22.2% 0.98% Dial-a-Ride (2) 6.2% 6.8% 5.9% % Vanpool 92.9% 100.8% 99.3% -1.52% Rail 28.0% 33.0% 41.1% 24.61% Total 23.3% 22.5% 23.3% 3.40% Operating Cost per Boarding FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11 to FY 12 System Total Total Total % Change Fixed Route (1) $3.50 $3.77 $ % Dial-a-Ride (2) $36.99 $37.72 $ % Vanpool $2.34 $2.98 $ % Rail $2.72 $2.42 $ % Total $3.72 $3.90 $ % Subsidy (Net Operating Cost) per Boarding FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11 to FY 12 System Total Total Total % Change Fixed Route (1) $2.66 $2.94 $ % Dial-a-Ride (2) $34.69 $35.17 $ % Vanpool $0.17 -$0.02 $ % Rail $1.96 $1.62 $ % Total $2.85 $3.03 $ % Operating Cost per Revenue Mile FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11 to FY 12 System Total Total Total % Change Fixed Route (1) $5.90 $7.08 $ % Dial-a-Ride (2) $4.38 $4.70 $ % Vanpool $0.47 $0.60 $ % Rail $12.43 $12.90 $ % Total $5.41 $6.26 $ % (1) Fixed Route includes circulator service. (2) FY 2011 and FY 2012 DAR data includes alternative ADA programs.

45 Net Operating Cost per Revenue Mile Report 1A: System Total FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11 to FY 12 System Total Total Total % Change Fixed Route (1) $4.48 $5.52 $ % Dial-a-Ride (2) $4.10 $4.39 $ % Vanpool $0.03 $0.00 $ % Rail $8.95 $8.64 $ % Total $4.15 $4.85 $ % Operating Cost per Revenue Hour FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11 to FY 12 System Total Total Total % Change Fixed Route (1) $81.23 $ $ % Dial-a-Ride (2) $60.15 $68.26 $ % Vanpool (3) $ $ Rail $ $ $ % Total $81.15 $ $ % Net Operating Cost per Revenue Hour FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11 to FY 12 System Total Total Total % Change Fixed Route (1) $61.65 $81.07 $ % Dial-a-Ride (2) $56.41 $63.65 $ % Vanpool (3) $ $ Rail $ $ $ % Total $62.23 $78.80 $ % Average Fare FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11 to FY 12 System Total Total Total % Change Fixed Route (1) $0.84 $0.83 $ % Dial-a-Ride (2) $2.30 $2.55 $ % Vanpool $2.17 $3.00 $ % Rail $0.76 $0.80 $ % Total $0.87 $0.88 $ % (1) Fixed Route includes circulator service. (2) FY 2011 and FY 2012 DAR data includes alternative ADA programs. (3) No FY 2011 data available

46 Report 1A: System Total Service Effectiveness Total Boardings FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11 to FY 12 System Total Total Total % Change Fixed Route (1) 55,574,959 54,814,001 57,489, % Dial-a-Ride (2) 777, , , % Vanpool 1,135,783 1,054,315 1,145, % Rail 12,112,738 12,793,529 13,553, % Total 69,601,005 69,462,678 73,045, % Boardings per Revenue Mile FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11 to FY 12 System Total Total Total % Change Fixed Route (1) % Dial-a-Ride (2) % Vanpool % Rail % Total % Safety Incidents per 100,000 Boardings FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11 to FY 12 System Total Total Total % Change Fixed Route (1) Dial-a-Ride (2) Vanpool Rail Total Security Incidents per 100,000 Boardings FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11 to FY 12 System Total Total Total % Change Fixed Route (1) Dial-a-Ride (2) Vanpool Rail Total (1) Fixed Route includes circulator service. (2) FY 2011 and FY 2012 DAR data includes alternative ADA programs.

47 Report 1A: System Total Operating Cost FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11 to FY 12 System Total Total Total (1) % Change Fixed Route (1) $194,414,536 $206,820,088 $214,387, % Dial-a-Ride (2) $28,762,414 $30,205,889 $33,006, % Vanpool $2,658,382 $3,139,579 $3,585, % Rail $32,964,700 $31,020,110 $28,909, % Total $258,800,032 $271,185,667 $279,890, % Fare Revenue FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11 to FY 12 System Total Total Total % Change Fixed Route (1) $46,853,915 $45,541,541 $47,669, % Dial-a-Ride (2) $1,791,298 $2,039,203 $1,961, % Vanpool $2,469,143 $3,165,415 $3,560, % Rail $9,228,058 $10,238,281 $11,889, % Total $60,342,414 $60,984,440 $65,081, % Revenue Miles FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11 to FY 12 System Total Total Total % Change Fixed Route (1) 32,968,784 29,216,449 28,686, % Dial-a-Ride (2) 6,572,800 6,421,324 5,679, % Vanpool 5,623,377 5,264,634 5,777, % Rail 2,652,759 2,405,140 2,435, % Total 47,817,719 43,307,547 42,578, % Revenue Hours FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11 to FY 12 System Total Total Total % Change Fixed Route (1) 2,393,455 1,989,384 2,253, % Dial-a-Ride (2) 478, , , % Vanpool 134, , Rail 182, , , % Total 3,189,320 2,667,427 3,038, % (1) Fixed Route includes circulator service. (2) FY 2011 and FY 2012 DAR data includes alternative ADA programs.

48 FY 2012 Transit Performance Report Report 1: System Total July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2012 Total Total Total Total Wheelchairs Revenue Revenue System Boardings Boardings Hours Miles Fixed Route (1) 57,489, ,983 2,253,260 28,686,261 Dial-a-Ride (2) 856, , ,701 5,679,244 Vanpool (3) 1,145, ,918 5,777,291 Rail (4) 13,553, ,722 2,435,946 Total 73,045, ,715 3,038,601 42,578,741 Total Total Total Total Fare Operating Security Safety System Revenue Cost (5) Incidents Incidents Fixed Route (1) $47,669,020 $223,214, Dial-a-Ride (2) $1,961,995 $36,117, Vanpool $3,560,477 $3,585, Rail $11,889,930 $28,909, Total $65,081,422 $291,827, Percentage Total On-Time Mechanical System Performance Failures Fixed Route (1) 94.06% 2,191 Dial-a-Ride (2) 97.16% 198 Vanpool (3) Rail 97.20% 85 Total 96.14% 2,474 (1) Fixed Route includes circulator service. (2) Data Includes alternative ADA programs such as East Valley Ride Choice and Taxi. (3) Vanpool does not track wheelchairs or on-time performance. (4) Rail wheelchairs not tracked. (5) For FY 2012 data, Total Operating Costs includes regional services such as customer service, marketing, bus stop maintenance, and fare collection maintenance. Fixed Route also includes circulator service.

49 Report 1: System Total Service Efficiency Farebox Recovery Ratio (2) FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 System Total Total Total Fixed Route (1) 24.1% 22.0% 21.4% Dial-a-Ride (3) 6.2% 6.8% 5.4% Vanpool 92.9% 100.8% 99.3% Rail 28.0% 33.0% 41.1% Total 23.3% 22.5% 22.3% Operating Cost per Boarding (2) FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 System Total Total Total Fixed Route (1) $3.50 $3.77 $3.88 Dial-a-Ride (3) $36.99 $37.72 $42.18 Vanpool $2.34 $2.98 $3.13 Rail $2.72 $2.42 $2.13 Total $3.72 $3.90 $4.00 Subsidy (Net Operating Cost) per Boarding (2) FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 System Total Total Total Fixed Route (1) $2.66 $2.94 $3.05 Dial-a-Ride (3) $34.69 $35.17 $39.89 Vanpool $0.17 -$0.02 $0.02 Rail $1.96 $1.62 $1.26 Total $2.85 $3.03 $3.10 Operating Cost per Revenue Mile (2) FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 System Total Total Total Fixed Route (1) $5.90 $7.08 $7.78 Dial-a-Ride (3) $4.38 $4.70 $6.36 Vanpool $0.47 $0.60 $0.62 Rail $12.43 $12.90 $11.87 Total $5.41 $6.26 $6.85 (1) Fixed Route includes circulator service. (2) For FY 2012 data, Total Operating Costs includes regional services such as customer service, marketing, bus stop maintenance, and fare collection maintenance. (3) FY 2011 and FY 2012 DAR data includes alternative ADA programs.

50 Net Operating Cost per Revenue Mile (2) Report 1: System Total FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 System Total Total Total Fixed Route (1) $4.48 $5.52 $6.12 Dial-a-Ride (3) $4.10 $4.39 $6.01 Vanpool $0.03 $0.00 $0.00 Rail $8.95 $8.64 $6.99 Total $4.15 $4.85 $5.33 Operating Cost per Revenue Hour (2) FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 System Total Total Total Fixed Route (1) $81.23 $ $99.06 Dial-a-Ride (3) $60.15 $68.26 $74.98 Vanpool (4) $ $26.58 Rail $ $ $ Total $81.15 $ $96.04 Net Operating Cost per Revenue Hour (2) FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 System Total Total Total Fixed Route (1) $61.65 $81.07 $77.91 Dial-a-Ride (3) $56.41 $63.65 $70.91 Vanpool (4) $ $0.19 Rail $ $ $ Total $62.23 $78.80 $74.62 Average Fare FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 System Total Total Total Fixed Route (1) $0.84 $0.83 $0.83 Dial-a-Ride (3) $2.30 $2.55 $2.29 Vanpool $2.17 $3.00 $3.11 Rail $0.76 $0.80 $0.88 Total $0.87 $0.88 $0.89 (1) Fixed Route includes circulator service. (2) For FY 2012 data, Total Operating Costs includes regional services such as customer service, marketing, bus stop maintenance, and fare collection maintenance. (3) FY 2011 and FY 2012 DAR data includes alternative ADA programs. (4) No FY 2011 data available

51 Report 1: System Total Service Effectiveness Total Boardings FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 System Total Total Total Fixed Route (1) 55,574,959 54,814,001 57,489,998 Dial-a-Ride (2) 777, , ,347 Vanpool 1,135,783 1,054,315 1,145,501 Rail 12,112,738 12,793,529 13,553,490 Total 69,601,005 69,462,678 73,045,336 Boardings per Revenue Mile FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 System Total Total Total Fixed Route (1) Dial-a-Ride (2) Vanpool Rail Total Safety Incidents per 100,000 Boardings FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 System Total Total Total Fixed Route (1) Dial-a-Ride (2) Vanpool Rail Total Security Incidents per 100,000 Boardings FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 System Total Total Total Fixed Route (1) Dial-a-Ride (2) Vanpool Rail Total (1) Fixed Route includes circulator service. (2) FY 2011 and FY 2012 DAR data includes alternative ADA programs.

52 Report 1: System Total Operating Cost (2) FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 System Total Total Total (1) Fixed Route (1) $194,414,536 $206,820,088 $223,214,304 Dial-a-Ride (3) $28,762,414 $30,205,889 $36,117,742 Vanpool $2,658,382 $3,139,579 $3,585,900 Rail $32,964,700 $31,020,110 $28,909,660 Total $258,800,032 $271,185,667 $291,827,606 Fare Revenue (2) FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 System Total Total Total Fixed Route (1) $46,853,915 $45,541,541 $47,669,020 Dial-a-Ride (3) $1,791,298 $2,039,203 $1,961,995 Vanpool $2,469,143 $3,165,415 $3,560,477 Rail $9,228,058 $10,238,281 $11,889,930 Total $60,342,414 $60,984,440 $65,081,422 Revenue Miles FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 System Total Total Total Fixed Route (1) 32,968,784 29,216,449 28,686,261 Dial-a-Ride (3) 6,572,800 6,421,324 5,679,244 Vanpool 5,623,377 5,264,634 5,777,291 Rail 2,652,759 2,405,140 2,435,946 Total 47,817,719 43,307,547 42,578,741 Revenue Hours FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 System Total Total Total Fixed Route (1) 2,393,455 1,989,384 2,253,260 Dial-a-Ride (3) 478, , ,701 Vanpool 134, ,918 Rail 182, , ,722 Total 3,189,320 2,667,427 3,038,601 (1) Fixed Route includes circulator service. (2) For FY 2012 data, Total Operating Costs includes regional services such as customer service, marketing, bus stop maintenance, and fare collection maintenance. (3) FY 2011 and FY 2012 DAR data includes alternative ADA programs.

53 8

54 DATE AGENDA ITEM 8 February 27, 2013 SUBJECT Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events PURPOSE Chair Hazine will request future agenda items from members and members may provide a report on current events. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PRCESS None RECOMMENDATION For information only CONTACT Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer sbanta@valleymetro.org ATTACHMENTS None VALLEY METRO 101 N 1ST AVE STE 1300 PHOENIX AZ

55 February 27, 2013 Rail Management Committee Wednesday, March 6, 2013 Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1 st Avenue, 10 th Floor 1:30 p.m. For those participating by telephone, please mute your phone when not speaking. Members please make sure your microphone is turned on when speaking and turned off when you are not speaking. Action Recommended 1. Public Comment 1. For information A 15-minute opportunity will be provided to members of the public at the beginning of the meeting to address the RMC on all agenda items. The Chair may recognize members of the public during the meeting at his/her discretion. 2. Minutes 2. For action Minutes from the February 6, 2013 RMC meeting are presented for approval. 3. Chief Executive Officer s Report 3. For information Steve Banta, Chief Executive Officer, will brief the RMC on current issues. 4. Title VI Fare and Service Equity Analysis Policies 4. For action Steve Banta, CEO will introduce Wulf Grote, Director, Planning and Development, who will request the RMC forward to the Board approval of the Title VI Fare and Service Equity Analysis policies for assessing the potential impacts of future proposed fare and service changes on minority and low-income populations. VALLEY METRO 101 N 1ST AVE STE 1300 PHOENIX AZ

56 5. FY 2012 Transit Performance Report (TPR) 5. For information Steve Banta, CEO, will introduce John McCormack, Chief Financial Officer, who will provide information to member cities concerning ridership, operating costs, fare revenue, and performance indicators contained in the FY12 Transit Performance Report. 6. Future Board Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events 6. For information and discussion Chair Cavazos will request future RMC agenda items from members and members may provide a report on current events. 7. Next Meeting 7. For information The next meeting of the RMC is scheduled for April 3, 2013 at 1:30 p.m. Qualified sign language interpreters are available with 72 hours notice. Materials in alternative formats (large print, audiocassette, or computer diskette) are available upon request. For further information, please call Valley Metro at or TTY at To attend this meeting via teleconference, contact the receptionist at for the dial-in-information. The supporting information for this agenda can be found on our web site at 2

57 1

58 DATE AGENDA ITEM 1 February 27, 2013 SUBJECT Public Comment PURPOSE A 15-minute opportunity will be provided to members of the public at the beginning of the meeting to address the RMC on all agenda items. The Chair may recognize members of the public during the meeting at his/her discretion. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION For information only CONTACT Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer sbanta@valleymetro.org ATTACHMENTS None VALLEY METRO 101 N 1ST AVE STE 1300 PHOENIX AZ

59 2

60 DATE AGENDA ITEM 2 February 27, 2013 Minutes from the Rail Management Committee Wednesday, February 6, 2013 Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1 st Avenue, Suite 1000 Phoenix, AZ 1:30 p.m. Members Present Neal Young for David Cavazos, City of Phoenix Dan Cook, City of Chandler Mike Nevarez, City of Tempe Cathy Colbath, City of Glendale Kari Kent, City of Mesa Chair Neal Young called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. 1. Public Comment Mr. Blue Crowley said the Federal Government states that public comment must be put in the meeting proceedings. He indicated on the map from the Transit Book that transit service is not available throughout the county. He said taxes are collected throughout the county and service should be made available. He said rail is only serving a small portion of the county and there is plenty railroad tracks from Union Pacific for heavy rail. He said the according to the budget there are $61 million in bus replacements. Rail should be a part of the whole system. He said the rail stop on 12 th Street has no connecting bus service. He said the bus service on Central Avenue is parallel service no connector service. 2. Minutes Minutes from the January 9, 2013 RMC meeting were presented for approval. IT WAS MOVED DAN COOK, SECONDED BY MIKE NEVAREZ AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM JANUARY 9, 2013 VALLEY METRO 101 N 1ST AVE STE 1300 PHOENIX AZ

61 3. Chief Executive Officer s Report Ms. Jyme Sue McLaren provided the following items: Northwest Extension Ground Breaking held on January 12 th was very successful. Valley Metro hosted the Rail-Volution Planning Committee. This item is presented for information only. 4. Consent Agenda The following items were presented on the consent agenda: A. Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Phoenix for Federal Transit Administration Pass-Through Grant AZ IT WAS MOVED BY JODI SORELL, SECONDED BY CATHY COLBATH AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. 5. Valley Metro Rail FY 2012 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and Single Audit Act Report Mr. Young asked if the audit was clean with no material findings. Ms. McLaren said yes. IT WAS MOVED BY CATHY COLBATH, SECONDED BY DAN COOK AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE AND FORWARD THE FY 2012 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT AND SINGLE AUDIT ACT REPORT TO THE BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION. 6. METRO Fiscal Year 2013 Mid-Year Budget Adjustment Mr. McCormack provided a presentation which included dollar adjustments being made to future project development and to capital projects that are underway in the current fiscal year. He also summarized the revenue assumptions associated those changes. The following tables summarize the changes. 2

62 3

63 Ms. Jodi Sorell noted that the budget adjustment associated with projects in Mesa is taking place prior to action being taken by the Mesa City Council. Mr. McCormack said this approval would be contingent upon Mesa Council approval. IT WAS MOVED BY DAN COOK, SECONDED BY MIKE NEVAREZ AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE AND FORWARD THE MID-YEAR BUDGET ADJUSTMENT TO THE BOARD CONTINGENT UPON MESA COUNCIL APPROVAL. 7. Rail Transit Cost and Value This item was not presented. 8. Future RMC Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events None With no further discussion the meeting adjourned at 1:45 p.m. 4

64 3

65 DATE AGENDA ITEM 3 February 27, 2013 SUBJECT Chief Executive Officer Report PURPOSE Steve Banta, Chief Executive Officer, will brief the RMC on current issues. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION For information only CONTACT Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer sbanta@valleymetro.org ATTACHMENTS None VALLEY METRO 101 N 1ST AVE STE 1300 PHOENIX AZ

66 4

67 DATE AGENDA ITEM 4 February 27, 2013 SUBJECT Title VI Fare and Service Equity Analysis Policies PURPOSE To request Board approval of the Title VI Fare and Service Equity Analysis policies for assessing the potential impacts of future proposed fare and service changes on minority and low-income populations. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION In October 2012, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) issued new guidelines (Circular B) to help ensure that changes in transit service and fares are implemented in compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Executive Order Title VI is intended to ensure that all persons are not discriminated against or denied the benefits of public services based on their color, race, or national origin. In 1994, Executive Order added the same protections for low-income populations. The new federal guidelines require transit providers to establish policies by April 1, 2013 to identify and evaluate potential equity issues related to changes in transit fares or services, including fixed-route bus and light rail. Valley Metro, in coordination with the City of Phoenix, developed the fare and service equity policies to fulfill this requirement, and conducted a public outreach program between January 3 rd and March 5 th, All member agencies were offered the opportunity to participate in the public outreach program that included open dialogue sessions with local public agency committees, commissions, and special interest groups. A public meeting was also held. Fare Equity Policy Per FTA, a Title VI analysis must be conducted for any fare change considered. Transit fare policies and payment structures are included in the indices of discrimination that are monitored for disparate impacts on minority populations and disproportionate treatment of low-income populations to ensure pricing structures and subsidies are commensurate with the services provided. The fare equity policy focuses on the delta (or difference) between the percent changes in fare for the type of services (e.g. express and local) provided and common socioeconomic characteristics of existing riders (also based on service type). The delta is a percentage threshold used only to determine whether a disparate or disproportionate impact may occur if a proposed fare structure is adopted. Valley Metro and the City of Phoenix have developed a fare equity policy that establishes the percentage threshold used to determine disparate or disproportionate impacts of fare changes. As part of the public process, the public were provided a range of percentage values to consider (3, 4 or 5%), and asked for their comment on what the threshold should VALLEY METRO 101 N 1ST AVE STE 1300 PHOENIX AZ

68 be. Valley Metro recommends a value of 5% for the delta between the proposed percent of fare changes by fare types. Service Equity Policy Changes to transit services (rerouting, reductions or expansions) are also monitored for disparate and/or disproportionate treatment with regard to populations served. The FTA requires transit providers develop policies for service equity focused on changes to transit service that are deemed to be Major Service Changes. Valley Metro recommends that any proposed change in service that reduces, expands or reroutes existing service by more than 25% be considered a major service change. The determination of a potential equity impact rests predominantly on the demographic characteristics of the route s service area, and the populations using the route. If the percentage of minority and/or low-income passengers on an affected route is greater than the average percentage of the transit system s minority and/or low-income riders by transit service classification (local, express, neighborhood circulators, and rural bus), a disparate or disproportionate impact is determined. Public Input Public outreach to date has shown a favorable response to the proposed policies. Persons contacted during the public outreach process support the development of service and fare equity analysis policies, and the proposed analysis thresholds. COST AND BUDGET The impact on cost and budget will depend on the service and/or fare changes being proposed during each adjustment cycle. COMMITTEE ACTION RTAG, January 22, 2013 for information RTAG, February 19, 2013 for information RMC, March 6, 2013 for action METRO Board of Directors, March 21, 2013 for action RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors approval of the Title VI Fare and Service Equity Analysis policies for assessing the potential impacts of future proposed fare and service changes on minority and low-income populations. CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Planning and Development ATTACHMENTS Proposed Major Service Change and Service Equity Policy Proposed Fare Equity Policy 2

69 PROPOSED MAJOR SERVICE CHANGE & SERVICE EQUITY POLICY Purpose of the Policy The purpose of the Major Service Change and Service Equity Policy is to define thresholds for determining major service changes and whether potential changes to existing transit services will have a disparate impact based on race, color, or national origin, or whether potential service changes will have a disproportionately high or adverse impact on minority and/or low-income populations. Basis for Policy Standards Federal law requires the City of Phoenix and Valley Metro to evaluate changes to transit services, as outlined in FTA Circular B, effective October 1, In order to comply with 49 CFR Section 21.5(b)(a), 49 CFR Section 21.5 (b)(7) and Appendix C to 49 CFR part 21, recipients shall evaluate significant system-wide service and fare changes and proposed improvements at the planning and programming stages to determine whether those changes have a discriminatory impact. For service changes, this requirement applies to major service changes only. The recipient should have established guidelines or threshold for what it considers a major change to be. Proposed Policy A. Major Service Change The following is considered a major service change (unless otherwise noted under Exemptions), and will be evaluated in accordance with the regulatory requirements set forth in FTA Circular B: 1. Route-Level Service Reduction or Elimination Reducing an existing route by more than 25% 1 of weekday route revenue miles, or 1 A change of 25% in weekly route revenue miles and/or route directional miles is the current City of Phoenix threshold for determining whether a potential transit service change qualifies as a major service change (or substantial service change) according to the City of Phoenix resolution (1990). This percentage is generally an industry-wide percentage threshold used by peer transit systems throughout the United States. The City of Phoenix resolution also specifies that a public comment period will be initiated when a change in transit service of 25% or more is determined. Proposed Major Service Change & Page 1 January 2013 Service Equity Policy

70 Reducing an existing route by more than 25% 1 of Saturday route revenue miles, or Reducing an existing route by more than 25% 1 of Sunday route revenue miles, or Reducing the number of route directional miles more than 25% 1, or A change in a route alignment resulting in a 25% 1 or greater variance from the existing route alignment, or In situations where service would be reduced or eliminated in jurisdictions where minority and/or low-income populations exceed the transit system service area average. 2. Route-Level Expansion or Addition of a New Route Adding a new route, or Expansion of an existing route that increases weekday route revenue miles by more than 25% 1, or Expansion of an existing route that increases Saturday route revenue miles by more than 25% 1, or Expansion of an existing route that increases Sunday route revenue miles by more than 25% 1, or Expanding the number of route directional miles more than 25% 1, or A change in a route alignment resulting in a 25% 1 or greater variance from the existing route alignment. B. Minority Disparate Impact Policy (Service Equity Analysis) When conducting a service change equity analysis, the following thresholds will be used to determine when a service change would have a disparate impact on minority populations: 1. Route-Level Service Reduction or Elimination Service Level and Service Area Reduction: Proposed Major Service Change & Page 2 January 2013 Service Equity Policy

71 o If the percentage of minority passengers 2 on an affected route is greater than the transit system s minority ridership (within the appropriate dataset s margin of error) by transit classification (local, express, neighborhood circulators, and rural bus) Route-Level Expansion or Addition of a New Route Service Level Expansion or Service Area Expansion (includes addition of new routes): o If a service level expansion or service area expansion is considered that coincides with a reduction in transit service on the same route or other routes, and the route(s) considered for service expansion predominantly serve non-minority and/or non-low-income geographic areas while the route(s) considered for reduction predominantly serve minority and/or lowincome geographic areas, then a disproportionate burden may be determined. The determination of a disproportionate burden will be based on meeting both of the following criteria: If the percentage of minority passengers 2 on an affected route considered for service expansion is less than the transit system s minority ridership percentage (within the appropriate dataset s margin of error) by transit classification (local, express, neighborhood circulators, and rural bus), 3 AND If the percentage of minority passengers 2 on an affected route considered for service reduction is greater than the transit system s minority ridership percentage (within the appropriate dataset s margin of error) by transit classification (local, express, neighborhood circulators, and rural bus). 3 2 Local routes include local fixed-route bus, light rail, LINK bus, local limited stop bus. Express routes include express bus and RAPID bus. Circulator routes will be evaluated similarly to local routes for fare changes and major services changes, but will be considered separately from local and express services when considered in the context of a region- or system-wide Title VI analysis. Circulator bus services are provided by the municipalities they serve and not the regional transit agency. Proposed Major Service Change & Page 3 January 2013 Service Equity Policy

72 C. Low-Income Disproportionate Burden Policy (Service Equity Analysis) When conducting a service change equity analysis, the following thresholds will be used to determine when a service change would have a disproportionate burden on lowincome populations: 1. Route-Level Service Reduction or Elimination If the percentage of low-income passengers 2 on an affected route is greater than the transit system s low-income ridership (within the appropriate dataset s margin of error) by transit classification (local, express, neighborhood circulators, and rural bus) Route-Level Expansion or Addition of a New Route Service Level Expansion or Service Area Expansion (includes addition of new routes): o If a service level expansion or service area expansion is considered that coincides with a reduction in transit service on the same route or other routes, and the route(s) considered for service expansion predominantly serve non-minority and/or non-low-income geographic areas while the route(s) considered for reduction predominantly serve minority and/or lowincome geographic areas, then a disproportionate burden may be determined. The determination of a disproportionate burden will be based on meeting both of the following criteria: If the percentage of low-income passengers 2 on an affected route considered for service expansion is less than the transit system s low-income ridership percentage (within the appropriate dataset s margin of error) by transit classification (local, express, neighborhood circulators, and rural bus), 3 AND If the percentage of low-income passengers 2 on an affected route considered for service reduction is greater than the transit system s low-income ridership percentage (within the appropriate dataset s margin of error) by transit classification (local, express, neighborhood circulators, and rural bus). 3 Proposed Major Service Change & Page 4 January 2013 Service Equity Policy

73 Equity Analysis Data Sources Category Action Sub Action Evaluation Method Fare Adjustment N/A O/D a profile data of affected fare category and/or Census Data Service Span Reduction N/A O/D a profile data of Expansion N/A affected route Service Reduction N/A O/D a profile data of Headway Expansion N/A affected route Route Length Reduction N/A O/D a Data Expansion N/A Census Data Reduced Alignment N/A O/D a Data Expanded Alignment N/A Census Data Route Alignment Eliminated Segment(s) O/D a Data Modified Alignment Segment(s) to New Areas Census Data New Route New Route N/A Census Data a Origin/Destination Survey Data Exemptions The major service change thresholds exclude any changes to service that are caused by the following: Discontinuance of Temporary or Demonstration Services - The discontinuance of a temporary transit service or demonstration service that has been in effect for less than 180 days. Headway Adjustments Headways for transit routes may be adjusted up to 5 minutes during the peak hour periods, and 15 minutes during non-peak hour periods. New Transit Service Break-In Period An adjustment to service frequencies and/or span of service for new transit routes that have been in revenue service for less than 180 days. Proposed Major Service Change & Page 5 January 2013 Service Equity Policy

74 Other Service Providers or Agencies - Actions of other service providers or public agencies providing/administering transit services that are not the responsibility of Valley Metro. Natural or Catastrophic Disasters - Forces of nature such as earthquakes, wildfires, or other natural disasters, or human-caused catastrophic disasters that may force the suspension of scheduled transit service for public safety or technical reasons. Auxiliary Transportation Infrastructure Failures - Failures of auxiliary transportation infrastructure such as vehicular bridges, highway bridge overpasses, tunnels, or elevated highways that force the suspension transit service. Overlapping Services - A reduction in revenue miles on one line that is offset by an increase in revenue miles on the overlapping section of an alternative transit route (an overlapping section is where two or more bus routes or rail lines share the same alignment, stops, or stations for a short distance). Seasonal Service and Special Events - Changes to bus service levels on routes which occur because of seasonal ridership changes and event activities served by dedicated temporary bus routes or increased service frequencies. Temporary Route Detours - A short-term change to a route caused by road construction, routine road maintenance, road closures, emergency road conditions, fiscal crisis, civil demonstrations, or any uncontrollable circumstance. Public Participatory Procedures For all proposed major service changes, City of Phoenix and/or Valley Metro will hold at least one public hearing, with a minimum of two public notices prior to the hearing in order to receive public comments on the potential service changes. The first meeting notice will occur at least 30 days prior to the scheduled hearing date, with the second notice being made at least 10 days prior to the scheduled hearing date. Public materials will be produced in English and Spanish (the metropolitan region s two primary languages), or in other languages upon request, in order to ensure Limited English Proficient (LEP) populations within the transit service area are informed of the proposed service changes and can participate in community discussions. Valley Metro and/or the City of Phoenix will conduct a service equity analysis for the Valley Metro Board of Proposed Major Service Change & Page 6 January 2013 Service Equity Policy

75 Directors, the City of Phoenix City Council, and the public s consideration prior to any public hearings associated with the proposed service changes. Definitions Designated Recipient The City of Phoenix is the designated recipient for federal funds contributing to transit system capital programs and operations in the greater Phoenix metropolitan region. Disparate Impact - A facially neutral policy or practice that has a disproportionately excluding or adverse effect on the minority riders or population of the service area. Disparate Treatment - An action that results in a circumstance in which minority riders or populations are treated differently than others because of their race, color, national origin and/or income status. Disproportionate Impact - A facially neutral policy or practice that has a disproportionately excluding or adverse effect on the low-income riders or population of the service area. Express Transit Service - Includes Valley Metro designated express bus and RAPID bus services. High-Capacity Transit (HCT) - A transit facility or service that operates at a consistent, high frequency of service. Local Transit Service - Includes Light Rail Transit (LRT), and local fixed-route bus, local limited stop bus, LINK bus routes, and circulator/shuttle bus services. Low-income Populations & Areas - Low-income populations are those persons with an income of 80 percent or less of the national per capita income. Low-income Areas are residential land use areas within census tracts where the average per capita income is 80 percent or less of the national per capita income. Minority Populations & Areas - Minority populations include those persons who selfidentify themselves as being one or more of the following ethnic groups: American Indian and Alaska Native, Asian, Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, as defined in the FTA Title VI Circular. Minority Areas are residential land use areas within Census tracts where the percentage of minority persons is higher than the Valley Metro service area average. Route-Level - Refers to the geographic level of analysis at the route alignment level by which the performance of a transit route is measured for equity. Proposed Major Service Change & Page 7 January 2013 Service Equity Policy

76 Route-Service Area A three-quarter mile radial buffer on either side of a transit route s alignment. A three-quarter mile radial buffer is used to ensure compliance with the American s with Disabilities Act guidelines. Service Level Refers to the span of service (hours of operation), days of operation, trips, and headways (service frequencies) for a transit route or the regional transit system. Service Area - According to 49 CFR 604.3, geographic service area means the entire area in which a recipient is authorized to provide public transportation service under appropriate local, state, and Federal law. Service Span - The span of hours over which service is operated (e.g., 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.). The service span may vary by weekday, Saturday, or Sunday. Sub-recipient Valley Metro is a designated sub-recipient of federal funding for capital projects and service operations. Funding is passed onto Valley Metro from the designated recipient, the City of Phoenix. System-wide - Refers to the geographic level of analysis by which the performance of the entire transit system is measured for equity. Transit System A coordinated urban network of scheduled public passenger modes including fixed-route local and express buses, light rail transit, bus rapid transit, and circulator bus services that provide mobility for people from one place to another. Proposed Major Service Change & Page 8 January 2013 Service Equity Policy