MEMORANDUM. Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy & Environment Committee

Transcription

1 T&E COMMITTEE #1-5 April 27, 217 MEMORANDUM April 25, 217 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy & Environment Committee Glenn Orliroeputy Council Administrator Resolution on FY18 transportation fees, charges, and fares; FY18 Operating Budget: Mass Transit Fund, Parking Lot District Funds, and associated FY17-22 Capital Improvements Program projects; FY18 Operating Budget: Vision Zero NDA; and FY18 Operating Budget: Snow Removal and Storm Cleanup NDA Those anticipated to attend this worksession include: Al Roshdieh, Director, Department of Transportation (DOT) Emil Wolanin, Deputy Director, DOT Dan Hibbert, Chief, Division of Transit Services, DOT Jose Thommana, Chief, Division of Parking Management, DOT Alicia Thomas, Budget Analyst, DOT Phil McLaughlin, Manager of Operations Planning, Division of Transit Services, DOT Brady Goldsmith, Budget Analyst, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) I. FY18 Transportation Fees, Charges, and Fares According to Section 2-57 A of the Montgomery County Code, as of July 22, 24, all fees, charges, and fares for any transportation or transportation-related service or product provided by the Department of Transportation must be set by Council resolution adopted after a public hearing and approved by the Executive, unless any law expressly requires a different process. If the Executive disapproves a resolution within 1 days after it is adopted and the Council readopts it by a vote of six Councilmembers, or if the Executive does not act within 1 days after the Council adopts it, the resolution takes effect. The fees, charges, and fares currently in effect are those in Council Resolution adopted on June 14,216 and approved by the Executive on July 7, 216.

2 The County Executive recommends that Ride On fares be raised to be consistent with the Metrobus fare schedule recently adopted by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA). He recommends that the parking fee schedule for the Montgomery Hills Parking Lot District (PLD) be deleted, consistent with legislation he has proposed to merge it with the Silver Spring PLD. He recommends extending the charging hours in Bethesda to include Saturdays in lots and garages (on-street spaces are already charged from 9 am to 1 pm on Saturdays) and in Silver Spring to include evenings Mondays through Fridays until 1 pm for lots, garages, and on-street spaces. In addition, the Daily Maximum and Lost Ticket rates for Garage 49 in Bethesda would be raised to 15. per day, which reflects the increase in the daily hours of enforcement. The dates for the Traffic Management District charges have been updated to include the current period this resolution will be in effect. The Council's public hearing on this resolution was held on April 18. A draft adoption resolution reflecting the Executive's recommendation is on 1-8. Ride On fares. The Executive and Council have consistently set Ride On fares to match Metrobus fares, for two reasons. First, differing fares could cause confusion among transit patrons, especially those who use both services. Second, having a higher fare for Metrobus over Ride On is inequitable for those residents who regularly use Metrobus; this is especially true in the East County where most of the service is Metrobus. Council staff concurs with the Executive's recommendation. Extending charging hours in Bethesda. Extending charging hours to all day Saturday in Bethesda's lots and garages will generate an estimated 1,3,. The increased hours of enforcement in the lots and garages on Saturdays will cost an estimated 213,, so the net revenue from this initiative would be 1,87,. The Executive's fiscal plan last year showed this increase starting in FYI8. The Greater Bethesda Chamber of Commerce conveyed its concern about the effect on retail business of extending hours to Saturdays ( 9). It is developing an alternative proposal that would generate the same net revenue through a mixture of higher fees and a smaller number of charging hours on Saturdays. To give more time for the Chamber to get the information it needs from DOT to develop such an option and vet it with DOT, Council staff recommends postponing this issue to the Committee's May 3 worksession. Council staff will need to receive any new option-including the estimates of annual revenue and cost-by the close ofbusiness on Friday, April 28.. Extending the charging hours in Silver Spring. Extending charging hours to 1 pm weeknights in Silver Spring will generate an estimated 1,945,. The increased hours of enforcement will cost an estimated 599,5, so the net revenue from this initiative would be 1,345,5. As with the proposed Bethesda increase, the Executive's fiscal plan last year anticipated such an increase starting in FYI8. The fiscal plan this year also assumes extending charging hours to 1 pm on Saturdays in Silver Spring starting in FY21. Since the 199s Bethesda has charged for parking on-street and in lots and garages until 1 pm. Ten years ago, the Council adopted a fee resolution that extended the charging hours to match Bethesda's. However, soon after its adoption, the Chamber and several representatives of the Silver Spring restaurant industry objected to what the Council had approved. The Council quickly amended the resolution to retract the expansion ofcharging hours before they were to go in effect in July 27. 2

3 The Silver Spring Chamber of Commerce has testified in opposition to increasing the hours, citing the same types of concern the Bethesda Chamber raised in its testimony ( 1). Furthermore, it notes that the Executive's fiscal plan shows Silver Spring loaning the hard-pressed Wheaton PLD 1.2 million during FYs19-23, with no reimbursement until sometime after FY23. Chamber staff also notes that the Executive is showing the reimbursement ofa 3 million loan to the Bethesda PLD to be deferred from FY18 to FY2.\ The Friends ofthe Library Silver Spring also oppose the proposal. One suggestion by Chamber staff is to defer the expansion of charging hours until FY 19. Even including the Executive's assumptions of both the Wheaton loans (to which the Silver Spring Chamber objects) and the deferral of Bethesda' s payback, the effect on the available fund balance is manageable. The PLDs have a fund balance policy target equal to 25% of the following year's projected operating expenses. The percentages in the Executive's proposal, and the Executive's proposal with a one-year deferral of expanding the charging hours, is shown below: Silver Spring PLD: Year-End Fund Balance as % of Following Year's Operating Expenses FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 FY 2 FY 21 FY 22 FY 23 Executive Recommendation 125% 14% 71% 67% 52% 46% 44% Deferring expansion of charging hours until FY19 13% 92% 59% 56% 41% 35% 33% Council staff recommendation: Defer expansion of charging hours in Silver Spring by one year, to give the Silver Spring business community advance--but very explicit-notice that the hours will be extended to 1 pm weeknights as of July 218. This change is already long overdue; Silver Spring's economy is vastly improved, and it can absorb parking charges in the evening on weeknights. The rates will still be significantly lower than Bethesda's: on-street spaces are no more than 1./hour (compared to 2./hour in Bethesda), spaces in parking lots are no more than.8/hour (compared to 1.25/hour in Bethesda), and spaces in garages are.7/hour (compared to 1./hour in Bethesda). Silver Spring Library patrons would be charged the same 1./hour as those who park in the Bethesda Library'S lot. II. FY18 Operating Budget: Mass Transit Fund Overview. The Executive's recommendations for the Mass Transit Fund are attached on The Executive recommends total expenditures of 136,544,848 for the Mass Transit Fund, an 8,217,699 (6.4%) increase from the FY17 approved budget. Operating Budget workyears would increase by 22.9 FTEs, to FTEs, a 2.7% increase. Revenue. As noted above, the Executive is recommending raising Ride On fares to be consistent with the Metrobus fares set in the recently approved FY18 WMATA budget. The Executive estimates that the higher fares will generate 575, more fare revenue in FY18 for Ride On ( 22). Council staff recommends recognizing this added revenue in the Mass Transit Fund budget. Ride On extra. The recommended budget includes 2,158,457 (partially offset by 3,867 in fare revenue) for Ride On extra limited-stop peak-period bus service on MD 355 between the Lakeforest Transit Center and the Medical Center Metro Station, starting in mid-october. It will have 12 stations, on average about 1.3 miles apart. Buses will run every 1 minutes on weekdays from 5:3 1 Both these and other impacts on the Silver Spring PLD FY18 budget and PSP are discussed in Section III, below. 3

4 9:3 am and 3:3-7:3 pm. The service will use 17 new, specially branded buses with easy access boarding, WiFi and USB charging ports. Bus shelters will feature real time information displays. The new service will accept standard SmarTrip cards and passes, as well as cash. To eliminate delays that occur when passengers add cash to SmarTrip cards on board the bus, passengers will not be able to load cash onto SmarTrip cards on the bus. A Transit Signal Priority (TSP) system will expedite travel speeds, detecting Ride On extra buses as they approach a traffic signal; depending on when a bus approaches, TSP could provide a few extra seconds of green light to allow the bus to get through the intersection. New Route 73: Clarksburg-Shady Grove express. Recognizing that the northern portion of the Corridor Cities Transitway would not be built to Clarksburg for many years, in the fall of 215 Councilmembers Floreen and Rice wrote to the Executive requesting an express bus service between Clarksburg and the Shady Grove Metro Station, running every 15-2 minutes during peak periods and every 3 minutes during the off-peak on weekdays. The Executive responded by including a peakperiod-only service in his Recommended FY 17 Budget, and the Council approved it. The route is set to begin mid-may and run every 2 minutes for 3Yz hours in the morning peak and 3Yz hours in the evening peak on weekdays. It will begin at MD 121 and Gateway Center Drive, run southwest to the Clarksburg Premium Outlets and the Cabin Branch development, head east on West Old Baltimore Road to MD 355, then south on MD 355 to the Milestone mall in Germantown, all the while making local stops. From Milestone, it will continue as an express route via Father Hurley Boulevard, 1-27, and 1-37 to the Shady Grove Metro Station. The route is estimated to carry 35 passengers per day. The two-month cost in FY17 was estimated to be 117,438 (offset by fare revenue of 12,49); since the annual cost is estimated to be 75,23 annually, the Executive is requesting 587,792 more for FYI8. Fare revenue is estimated to be 72,293, or about 1% of the cost, below the system average of 18.7%. Extension ofroute 75 in Clarksburg. Currently, Route 75 runs all-day service between various points in Clarksburg and the Germantown Transit Center. The Executive proposes extending the route to serve the Clarksburg Premium Outlets, starting in mid-october. The additional cost in FY18 is estimated to be 345,733, partially offset by 49,89 in fare revenue. Ride On route eliminations. The table on displays-in descending order-the effectiveness of existing Ride On routes on weekdays, Saturdays and Sundays. Overall, the average is 2.6 riders per platform hour, down from 21.7 riders per hour last year and 22.4 riders per hour two years ago. Most routes meet Ride On's minimum performance standards: 15 riders per platform hour for peak-period-only routes and 1 riders per platform hour for all-day routes. Those routes that fall consistently or significantly below these minimum standards are annotated with a in the table. The Executive recommends eliminating the three least productive routes, annotated with an X: Route 3, between the Takoma and Silver Spring Metro Stations, via Dale Drive. It would be terminated in mid-october, and save 84,593 in expenditures (foregoing 4,3 in fare revenue). Route 93, a shuttle between the Twinbrook Metro Station and the U.S. Health & Human Services Department in the Parklawn Building, would be terminated in mid-october, and save 65,591 in expenditures (foregoing 2,437 in fare revenue). 4

5 Route 94, the "Meet the MARC" shuttle between Clarksburg and the Germantown MARC Station. It would be tenninated in mid-october, and save 26,25 in expenditures, and forgoing 175, in State aid. This has been a free service, so there would no foregone fare revenue. Metrobus service reductions. Metrobus service in Montgomery County is funded entirely by the State. Nevertheless, it is important to note that the FY18 budget recently adopted by the WMATA Board ofdirectors eliminates three routes: Route J5, a peak-period weekday service between the Twinbrook and Silver Spring Metro Stations. The route has run 6 buses northbound and 4 buses southbound in the morning peak on 3-minute headways, and the reverse in the evening peak. Route J7, a peak-period weekday service from Bethesda to Lakeforest Mall. The route has run 4 buses northbound in the morning peak at a 25-minute headway. Route J9, a peak-period weekday service from the Lakeforest Transit Center to the Bethesda Metro Station. The route has run 8 buses southbound in the morning and 7 buses northbound in the evening, at a 3-minute headway. The Ride On extra service noted above should take up much ofthe slack oflosing the J7 and J9. The WMAT A budget also reduces-but not eliminates-service on Route T2 between Friendship Heights and Rockville via River and Falls Roads. Normally the Montgomery County WMA TA Board members are invited on the day the Committee reviews transit issues, but April 27 is a Board meeting day. However, the Board members are scheduled to attend the Committee's May 3 worksession to summarize the new budget and to discuss WMATA-related issues with Committee members. Call-'n'-Ride. The Call-'n'-Ride Program provides subsidized taxi service for low-income seniors (age 65 or older) and low-income persons with disabilities (age 18 or older). The subsidy levels were adjusted three years ago. The subsidy levels for one-person households is as follows: A person earning less than 15,857 would pay 5.25 for 6 ofrides (91.3% subsidy). A person earning 15,857-21,43 would pay 1 for 6 ofrides (83.3% subsidy). A person earning 21,44-26,951 would pay 2 for 6 of rides (66.7% subsidy). A person earning 26,952-32,499 would pay 3 for 6 ofrides (5.% subsidy). A table showing both the income ranges for households up to six persons is on 26. A breakdown of participants by subsidy level is on 27. Bus cost allocation. More than a decade ago the Council hired an independent consultant to develop a means of comparing Ride On and Metrobus costs so that the Council could follow how they tracked from year to year. Ride On costs have usually been lower than those of Metrobus. Following the directives from the consultant, DOT calculated the recommended partially allocated cost of Ride On for FY18 to be 95.49lhour, compared to 91.9/hour in FYI7. This is the rate that should be used in deciding whether it would be more cost effective to add Ride On or Metrobus 5

6 service. The corresponding partially-allocated rate for Metrobus is /hour for FYI8, which is up from from FYI7. Therefore, at the margin, it is still generally more cost-effective for the County to add Ride On service rather than Metrobus service. DOT has provided a more detailed breakdown of Ride On's 95.49/hour partially allocated cost and /hour fully allocated cost ( 28). III. FY18 Operating Budget: Parking Lot District (PLD) Funds Overview. The Executive's recommendations for the PLD Funds are attached on For FYI8, the Executive recommends total expenditures of 28,59,46 for the Parking Lot District Funds, a 1,241,644 (4.5%) increase from the FY17 approved budget. Operating Budget Full-Time Equivalents (FTEs) would remain unchanged at FTEs. Security. No workyear changes are recommended for parking garage and lot security in FYI8. All the security again will be provided by contract security guards, except for 6, of 44,42 hours in the Silver Spring PLD, which will continue to be provided by the Clean & Safe Team. The cost will increase by 66,756 due to a negotiated higher cost per hour for contract security. Montgomery Hills. Periodically there have been suggestions to merge this tiny PLD with the Silver Spring PLD, for administrative simplicity as much as anything else. There were two potential problems with this: (1) the Montgomery Hills property tax rate has historically been much lower than Silver Spring's, so the taxes on Montgomery Hills businesses would had to have been increased substantially; and (2) the parking fees in Montgomery Hills have been historically lower than Silver Spring's, and so the rates for its lots would had to have been increased higher than what the market there would bear. However, neither ofproblems exist anymore. Two years ago, the Council set the property tax in all four PLDs at 11. It also allows DOT to set parking fees at rates lower than the maximum within any PLD. Therefore, the two districts can be merged without having an effect on taxes or fees in Montgomery Hills. Given that the Silver Spring CBD is in robust fiscal shape (see below), there may never be a better opportunity to merge the Montgomery Hills PLD into the Silver Spring CBD. Earlier this month the Executive transmitted a bill that would do exactly that. Its transmittal was too late for it to be acted upon until June. Therefore, if the Council concurs with the Executive, it should approve the rate resolution (Section I, above) and the Silver Spring PLD budget accordingly. After the bill's public hearing, should the Council decide not to merge the districts, it will need to amend the rate resolution and the PLD budget in June. In 24 the Council amended Chapter 6-16 of the County Code to allow an annual transfer from the Montgomery Hills PLD to the Silver Spring Regional Services Center to provide for streetscape maintenance and minor capital projects in Montgomery Hills, essentially treating it as a mini urban district (but without an urban district tax). The provision, in its entirety, is as follows: (e) Notwithstanding the limits in subsection (a) or (b) or any other provision ofthis Chapter, the County Council may transfer revenue from the Montgomery Hills Parking Lot District parking tax: (1) to fund activities ofthe Silver Spring Regional Services Center in the Montgomery Hills Parking District, an amount in Fiscal Year 25 that does not exceed 15,, and in each succeeding fiscal year does not exceed the maximum amount for the previous fiscal year increased by the annual average 6

7 increase, if any, in the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers in the Washington-Baltimore metropolitan area, or any successor index, for the previous calendar year, to: (A) provide and maintain amenities, fa~ade improvements, streetscape improvements, and property in public rights-of-way; (B) promote and implement activities that benefit residential and commercial interests in the district. These activities may incidentally benefit neighboring communities; and (C) enhance the safety and security of persons and property in public areas; and (2) to fund projects in the Capital Improvements Program that improve the street and sidewalk infrastructure serving the Montgomery Hills Parking Lot District. For the past few years the budgeted transfer has been 5,OOO/year. Since the Executive's bill would eliminate the Montgomery Hills PLD as an entity, it would have the collateral effect of discontinuing this transfer, unless a provision were inserted enabling the (newly expanded) Silver Spring PLD to transfer such funds. When the bill comes before the Council in June, Council staff will recommend precisely that. Council staff recommendation: Show in the Silver Spring PLD's FY18 budget-and in the PSP for subsequent years-a transfer of 5, annually to the Silver Spring Regional Services Center budget for streets cape maintenance in Montgomery Hills. Transfers. In 214 the Council approved a provision in Chapter 6-16 that allows the Council to transfer, by resolution, funds from one PLD to another if the resolution stipulates the reason for the transfer and the tenns ofrepayment. The provision, in its entirety, is as follows: (f) (1) Notwithstanding the limits in subsection (a) or (b) or any other provision ofthis Chapter, the County Council may authorize the transfer of revenue from parking fees collected in a parking lot district in any fiscal year to temporarily fund the operations ofanother parking lot district. In this subsection, "parking fee" means revenue from parking meters, parking permits, or any other user charge for parking. (2) The Council must approve any transfer under this subsection in the resolution approving the district's annual operating budget or in a separate resolution. Each transfer offunds must be conditioned on a reasonable repayment agreement. Each authorizing resolution must specify: (A) the purposes for which the transferred funds may be used; and (B) the terms of repayment to the originating parking lot district. To date the Council has approved two transfers. The first, approved as part of the FY15 Operating Budget resolution, transferred 1.5 million from the Silver Spring PLD to the Bethesda PLD in FY15, requiring the reimbursement in FY16 ( 43), and in FY16 the reimbursement occurred. The second, approved the following year, transferred 3 million from the Silver Spring PLD to the Bethesda PLD in FY16, with the Council stating that the Council "expects" the funds to be repaid in FY18 ( 44). However, after it was pointed out that the law requires stipulating the tenns of repayment, the Council amended the budget resolution a few weeks later stating the FY16 transfer "must" be repaid in FY18 ( 45-46), and it will be. As noted in Section I, the Executive is showing the reimbursement of the 3 million transfer to the Bethesda PLD to be deferred from FY18 to FY2. This cannot be done without the Council explicitly approving it by resolution; if the Council approves, it would be included among the miscellaneous provisions ofthe FY 18 Operating Budget resolution, just as the prior transfers were in the FY15 and FY16 resolutions. The Silver Spring PLD can absorb this deferral (see, again, Section I). Council staff recommends a 3 million transfer from the Silver Spring PLD to the Bethesda PLD, with the reimbursement in FY2. 7

8 The Executive's PSP shows a series of annual transfers from the Silver Spring PLD to the Wheaton PLD in FYs19-23: 4, in FY19, 4, in FY2, 2, in FY21, and 1, each in FY22 and FY23. No payback is shown, so they would not be reimbursed until after FY23. Council staff believes that a better approach next year would be to transfer the full 1.2 million in FY19 with payback to Silver Spring in FY24; that would improve Wheaton's balances in the intervening years while Silver Spring's balances in those years would still be very healthy. Since the Executive is not recommending a transfer in FY18, there is no action for the Council to take now, unless it wished to transfer funds in FY18 instead. Relationship to urban district funding. As noted above, the Silver Spring PLD's fiscal health is sufficient to withstand transfers and a delay in expanding charging hours by one more year. However, should the Council wish to help fund Reconciliation List items, it could do so by adjusting the funding for the Silver Spring Urban District by increasing the PLD's contribution and reducing the Silver Spring Urban District's tax rate, if only for FY18. Although Bethesda PLD's fiscal situation is not robust, the same could take place there. The Executive's proposal for the Silver Spring Urban District calls for 892,457 to come from its 2.4 /1 tax and 1,989,71 from PLD transfers; PLD transfers would constitute about 69% of the total between the two. His proposal for the Bethesda Urban District calls for 629,19 from its 1.2 /1 tax and 1,671,3 from PLD transfers; PLD transfers would constitute about 73% of the total between the two. The funding mix would be nearly 9% from PLD funds if the Silver Spring PLD contributed 594,971 more and the Silver Spring Urban District Tax were reduced to.8 /1 in FY18, and if the Bethesda PLD contributed 395,487 more and the Bethesda Urban District Tax were reduced to.44 /1. Between the two districts the property tax revenue reduced would be 99,458. This would allow the General Fund property tax to be increased by.5 /1, which would generate the ability to budget 965,28 for Reconciliation List items in the General Fund and yet remain under the Charter's property tax limitation. The effect on the end-of-year balance of increasing the PLDs contributions to their respective urban districts is shown in the tables below. They assume one time higher contributions in FY18: Silver Spring PLD: Year-End Fund Balance as % of Following Year's Operating Expenses FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 FY 2 FY 21 FY 22 FY 23 Executive Recommendation 125% 14% 71% 67% 52% 46% 44% Deferring expansion of charging hours until FY 19 13% 92% 59% 56% 41% 35% 33% Deferring expansion of charging hours until FY19 and increasing transfer to urban district by 594,971 in FY18 13% 87% 54% 51% 36% 31% 28% Even with deferring the expansion of charging hours one year, the Silver Spring PLD could contribute 594,971 to its corresponding urban district in FYl8 and remain above the 25% target through FY23. Bethesda PLD: Year-End Fund Balance as % of Followin2 Year's Operatin2 Expenses FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 FY 2 FY 21 FY 22 FY 23 Executive Recommendation 3% 22% 11% 33% 28% 28% 35% Increasing transfer to urban district by 395,487 in FY18 3% 2% 9% 31% 25% 26% 33% 8

9 The year-end fund balance in the Bethesda PLD falls below the 25% target in either scenario during FYsI8-19. Although the balance falls to 9% in FY19 under the transfer scenario, only two years ago the Executive recommended and the Council approved a Bethesda PLD budget-which included a transfer from Silver Spring-that had a balance of only 6% of the following year's operating expense. The important point to note in the table is that as Bethesda regains fiscal health starting in FY2, and the balance is above 25% in every year, even assuming the transfer. Council staff recommends the above transfers to the urban districts, generating 965,28 in resources for the General Fund Operating Budget. Both Silver Spring and Bethesda CBD taxpayers would benefit by this in FYI8; the net property tax rate would drop by 1.55 /1 in the Silver Spring CBD and by.71 /1 in the Bethesda CBD. The net rate would increase for other property taxpayers in the County by only.5 /1; this translates, for example, to about.82 more in property tax in FY18 for a home valued at the County's current median price of49,. Wheaton. This PLD is in the poorest fiscal shape, which is why the Executive is considering transfers for FYsI9-23. The year-end fund balances are shown in the table below: Wheaton PLD: Year-End Fund Balance as % of FY FY FY FY FY FY FY Followin2 Year's Operating Expenses Executive Recommendation 48% 15% 11% 25% 27% 23% 16% A further sign of Wheaton PLD's bad fiscal straits is that its transfer to support the Wheaton Urban District is only 24,358. Here we find just the opposite situation than Silver Spring and Bethesda: between PLD transfers and the urban district tax, only 1% would come from Wheaton PLD transfers. To keep the Wheaton Urban District functioning, the Executive is recommending nearly a 1.4 million non-baseline services General Fund subsidy; neither the Silver Spring nor Bethesda Urban Districts would receive a non-baseline subsidy.2 IV. FY17-22 CIP: Parking Lot District and Mass Transit Fund amendments Parking Lot Districts Service Facility ( 47-48). This is a new shop that will go under construction shortly adjacent to the north wall of Garage 2 in Silver Spring, behind M-NCPPC's headquarters. The scope of the project has not changed, but its construction has been deferred about 9 months due to a delay in obtaining necessary permits. The new building is anticipated to be completed in early FYI9. Council staff concurs with the Executive's recommendation. The shop is funded with Current Revenue from the Silver Spring PLD, but it serves all the PLDs. When the project was approved in 214, the Council determined that the Bethesda PLD should pay 45% of its cost, and the Wheaton PLD should pay 6% of its cost; given the 4,197, total cost, Bethesda's share is 1,888,65 and Wheaton's is 251,82. The payments would be made in the form of an annual "rent" of 144,9/year from Bethesda and 19,32/year from Wheaton, starting in FY18. This is precisely what the fiscal plans show. However, at these rates the paybacks to Silver Spring will not be completed until FY 23. If the project will be finished in FY19, this effectively has the Silver Spring 2 Each Urban District receives a baseline services subsidy from the General Fund. This subsidy is based on the amount of funding estimated that the General Fund would have to pay for "baseline" (normal) maintenance in these CBDs ifthere were no urban districts. A non-baseline subsidy is a General Fund transfer that is above the cost of such normal maintenance. 9

10 PLD loaning 1,598,85 to the Bethesda PLD and 213,13 to the Wheaton PLD during the FY2-3 period. Over time, as fiscal conditions in the Bethesda and Wheaton PLDs allow, their reimbursements to the Silver Spring PLD should be accelerated. Ride On Bus Fleet ( 49). For FY18 the Executive is recommending substituting the acquisition of three new hybrid buses with diesel buses, saving 66,, and deleting the acquisition of two new hybrid buses due to the planned elimination of the Route 94 "Meet the MARC" service from Clarksburg to the Germantown MARC Station, saving 1,444,. Council staff concurs. Executive's April 24 transportation CIP amendments. These will be addressed at the May 3 worksession after Council staff has had the opportunity to review them. v. FY1S Operating Budget: Vision Zero NDA Council President Berliner and Vice President Riemer recommend adding 1, to the Reconciliation List (in two 5, tranches) for initiatives to help achieve Vision Zero ( 5-51). If this proposal is to be funded, it would be best done in a non-departmental account (NDA) that could distribute funds to different departments as well as to provide grants to non-government entities. It likely would be administered by the Office of the County Executive or OMB. VI. FY1S Operating Budget: Snow Removal and Storm Cleanup NDA For the FY17 Budget the Council appropriated 5,884,99 for this NDA, which supplements the amounts budgeted for this work within the Departments of Transportation and General Services. This was the same amount for this NDA since it was inaugurated in the FY12 budget. The Executive recommends the same amount in FYl8 ( 52). The Executive's budget calls for the DOT General Fund budget for FY18 to include 3,377,1 for storm removal and storm cleanup, 34,81 (1.%) higher than for FY17. Council staff concurs with the Executive's recommendation for this NDA. f:\orlin\fyl7\t&e\fyls op budg\17427te.doc 1

11 Resolution No.: Introduced: April 4, 217 Adopted: COUNTY COUNCIL FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND Lead Sponsor: County Council SUBJECT: Setting Transportation Fees, Charges, and Fares Background 1. Under Section 2-57 A of the Montgomery County Code, as of July 22, 24, all fees, charges, and fares for any transportation or transportation-related service or product provided by the Department oftransportation must be set by Council resolution adopted after a public hearing and approved by the Executive, unless any law expressly requires a different process. If the Executive disapproves a resolution within 1 days after it is adopted and the Council readopts it by a vote of six Councilmembers, or ifthe Executive does not act within 1 days after the Council adopts it, the resolution takes effect. 2. The fees, charges, and fares currently in effect are those in Council Resolution adopted on June 28, 216 and approved by the Executive on July 7, The County Executive recommends that Ride On fares be raised to be consistent with the Metrobus fare schedule recently adopted by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. He recommends that the parking fee schedule for the Montgomery Hills Parking Lot District be deleted, consistent with legislation he is proposing to merge it with the Silver Spring Parking Lot District. He recommends extending the charging hours in the Bethesda Parking Lot District to include Saturdays in lots and garages and in the Silver Spring Parking Lot District to include Monday through Friday evenings until 1 pm. In addition, the Daily Maximum and Lost Ticket rates for Garage 49 in Bethesda would be raised to 15. per day, which reflects the increase in the daily hours of enforcement. The dates for the Traffic Management District charges have been updated to include the current period this resolution will be in effect. 4. Notice of a public hearing was given, and a public hearing was held on April 18, 217.

12 Page Two Resolution No.: Action The County Council for Montgomery County, Maryland approves the following resolution: Transportation fares, fees, and charges in Resolution are amended as described in Table 1, attached. These changes become effective July 1,217. This is a correct copy ofcouncil action. Linda M. Lauer, Clerk ofthe Council Date Isiah Leggett, County Executive Date

13 TABLE 1: TRANSPORTATION FARES, FEES, AND CHARGES I. Transit Fares Regular cash fare or token 2. Regular fare paid with SmarT rip 2. Route 7 cash fare or token 4.25 Route 7 fare paid with SmarTrip 4.25 VanGo Route 28 and Route 94 shuttle [ s] Free Designated routes in Free-Wheeling Days promotion Free Kids ride Free Program (2-8 pm weekdays) Free Give and Ride Program Free MetroAccess Certified and/or Conditional Customer with ID Free MetroAccess - Companion of Certified and/or Conditional customer with ID Free Children under age 5 Free Local bus-to-bus transfer (SmarTrip only) Free Metrorail-to-Ride On bus transfer with SmarTrip 1.5 Metrorail-to-Route 7 transfer with SmarTrip 3.75 Local bus-to-route 7 transfer with SmarTrip 2.25 Metrobus Weekly pass Free MARC weekly, monthly, TLC passes transfer to Ride On Free MTA Commuter Bus Pass transfer to Ride On Free Ride on Monthly Pass 45. Boarding Route 7 with weekly or monthly pass 2.25 Youth Cruiser Pass 11. Per Month Youth SmarTrip Card (one-time fee) 2. Summer Youth Cruiser pass (for 3-month period of June, July, and August) 18. 'C' Pass (for current County employees) Free 'U' Pass (for Montgomery College transportation fee-paying students) Free except express Route 7 bus 2.25 Senior* with identification card from 9:3 am-3 : pm weekdays and Saturdays Free Senior* with identification card except from 9:3 am-3:pm weekdays and Saturdays with case fare or token 1. with SmarTrip card 1. Metrorail-to-Ride On bus transfer (SmarTrip only).5 Local bus transfer (SmarTrip only) Free Senior* with identification card for express Route 7 except from 9:3 am-3: pm weekdays with cash fare or token 2.1 with SmarTrip card 2.1 Metrorail-to-Route 7 with SmarTrip 1.6

14 Local bus-to-route 7 with SmarTrip 1.1 Boarding with weekly or monthly pass with SmarTrip 1.1 * For the purposes of this resolution, a person with disabilities not certified for Metro Access is treated the same as a senior. II. Parking Fees (Note: No payment is required for motorcycles in spaces or areas where only motorcycle parking is pennitted. No payment is required for any vehicle at all public parking spaces on Sundays and County holidays.) A. Bethesda Parking Lot District 1. Meters on-street from 9am to 1 pm, Monday through Saturday, and in lots and garages from 7am to 1pm, Monday through Saturday. a. Parking in spaces within right of way of public streets b. Parking in spaces on a surface parking lot c. Parking in spaces in a parking garage 2. Garage 49 Daily Maximum Lost Ticket 3. A Garage Specific Monthly Access Card 4. Special Pennits a. Parking pennits Parking Convenience Sticker Daily Parking Penn it "AMlPM" Parking Pennit b. Carpool Pennits 2 Persons 3 and 4 Persons 5 or More Persons c. Townhouse Resident Pennit 5. Bethesda Library parking lot 2. orless Per Hr or Less Per Hr. 1. or Less Per Hr. 15. Per Day 15. Per Day 15. or Less Per Month 15. Per Month 12. Per Day 2. Per Month 17. Per Month 58. Per Month 15. Per Month 2. Per Month 1. Per Hour B. Silver Spring Parking Lot District 1. Meters on-street from 9 am to 1 pm, Monday through Friday, and in lots and garages from 7 am to 1 pm, 2. Parking in spaces within right of way of public streets 1. or Less Per Hr. a. Parking in spaces on a surface parking lot.8 or Less Per Hr. b. Parking in spaces in a parking garage.7 or Less Per Hr. (Except for Garage 6 and 61)

15 1. Special Permits a. Parking permits Parking Convenience Sticker Daily Parking Permit "AMlPM" Parking Permit Garage Specific Monthly Access (Except for Garage 6 and 61) 123. Per Month 7.8 Per Day 2. Per Month 123. or Less Per Month b. Carpool Permits 2 Persons 87. Per Month 3 and 4 Persons 49. Per Month 5 or More Persons 11. Per Month c. Townhouse Resident Permit 2. Per Month d. Permit in Garages 9 and 16 for residents in the area bounded by Blair Mill Road, Eastern Avenue and Georgia Avenue 95. Per Month 2. Garages 6 and Per Hour Monthly Permit 189. Per Month C. Wheaton Parking Lot District 1. Meters on-street from 9 am to 6 pm, Monday through Saturday, and in lots from 9 am to 6 pm, Monday through Saturday, and in garages from 9 am to 6 pm, Monday through Friday Short-Term (First 4 hours).75 Per Hour Long-Term (More than 4 hours).6 or Less Per Hour 2. Special Permits Parking Convenience Sticker Townhouse Resident Permit D. Areas Outside Parking Lot Districts 1. Meters on-street and in lots from 7 am to 7 pm, Monday through Friday Short-Term (First 4 hours) Long-Term (More than 4 hours) 2. Special Permits Parking Convenience Sticker 113. Per Month 2. Per Month 1. Per Hour.65 Per Hour 123. Per Month ill. Parking Fines and Other Charges (with County Code Section Citations) A. Motor vehicles, traffic control and highways, generally 31-6(b )(2) Snow emergency - Parked in Right -of-way 85.

16 31-7 Unregistered vehicle/parking prohibited Impeding traffic, threaten public safety 6. B. Parking regulations generally - on-street (b) Emergency/Temporary no parking sign Violation of official sign (except residential permit parking) Residential permit parking violation Parking of vehicle - snow accumulation Parking of heavy commercial vehicles, recreational vehicles, or buses Over 24 hours Within 35 feet of intersection Posted time limit Obstructing driveways (within 5 feet) 31-2 No person will: (a) Stop, stand or park a vehicle whether occupied or not: (1) Impeding traffic (2) On a sidewalk (3) Within an intersection (4) On a crosswalk (5) Alongside street repair (6) On bridge/ in tunnel (7) On any highway ramp (8) Official school board/montgomery College sign (9) Rush hour restriction (1) Behind Official sign in Right-of-Way (b) Stand or park a vehicle, whether occupied or not, except momentarily to pick up or discharge a passenger: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (1) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) within 15 feet of fire hydrant within 2 feet of painted crosswalk within 3 feet of traffic control signavdevice at a firehouse entrance clearance at a No Standing sign double parking at a posted/marked fire lane in front of theaters, posted more than 12 inches from curb opposite the flow of traffic blocking another vehicle not within designated parking space at a posted bus stop at a posted taxi stand in a handicapped parking space (c) Park a vehicle, whether occupied of not, except temporarily for the purpose of and while actually engaged in loading or unloading merchandise or passenger: (1) within 5 feet of a railroad crossing 6. (2) at an official No Parking sign 6.

17 c. Off-street public parking regulations (a) No person shall park a vehicle on a public parking facility: (1) in violation of an official sign 6. (2) in a No Parking zone 6. (3) not within a designated parking space 6. (4) in or on driving aisle/driveway/sidewalks 6. (5) at a bagged meter/temporary sign/barricade 6. (6) blocking another vehicle 6. (7) over 24 hours where not authorized 6. (8) vehicle unregistered/inoperative 6. (9) in violation front-in-only posted 6. (1) straddling marked parking spaces 6. (11) unattended/running 6. ( 12) impeding traffic (b) Prohibited vehicle/weightlsize/type (c) (c) Snow/ice emergency 6. D. Parking meters generally Expired parking meter Overtime parking at parking meter More than 3 feet from parking meter More than 1 vehicle in parking space except motorcycles 45. E. Administration, enforcement, penalties, and collection 31-62( c) Impoundment or immobilization fee ( e) Fee for withholding the registration of a vehicle (a) First late penalty for failure to fully pay fine or appeal citation within 15 days Second late penalty for failure to fully pay the original fine and penalties within 45 days of the original issuance ofthe citation 25. F. Residential Parking Permits 31-48(h) Annual fee 2. IV. Transportation Management District (TMD) annual fees In this section Gross Floor Area (GFA) is defined as described in Section of the County Code. A. Bethesda Transportation Management District Commercial space occupied before July 1,26 where payment oftmd fee was a condition of subdivision of optional method approval Commercial space first occupied on or after July 1, 26* (j). 1 O/square foot GF A.1 O/square foot GFA

18 B. Friendship Heights Transportation Management District Commercial space occupied before July 1,26 where payment oftmd fee was a condition of subdivision or optional method approval Commercial space first occupied on or after July 1, 26*. 1 O/square foot GFA.1/square foot GF A c. North Bethesda Transportation Management District Commercial space occupied before July 1, 26 where payment oftmd fee was a condition of subdivision or optional method approval Commercial space first occupied on or after July 1, 26*.1/square foot GFA.1/square foot GF A D. Silver Spring Transportation Management District Commercial space occupied before July 1,26 where payment oftmd fee was a condition of subdivision or optional method approval Commercial space first occupied on or after July 1,26*.1/square foot GFA.1/square foot GFA E. Greater Shady Grove Transportation Management District Commercial space occupied before July 1,211 where payment oftmd fee was a condition of subdivision or optional method approval Commercial space first occupied on or after July 1,211 *.1/square foot GFA.1 O/square foot GFA F. White Oak Transportation Management District Commercial space occupied before July 1,215 where payment oftmd fee was a condition of subdivision or optional method approval Commercial space first occupied on or after July 1,215*.1/square foot GF A.1/square foot GF A * Between July 1,217 and June 3, 218,2.5 centsisfgfa will be charged for each full quarter after a use and occupancy permit has been issued.

19 r: THE GREATER BETHESDA 791 Woodmont Avenue, Suite 124 Bethesda, MD 2814 C HAM B E R of COM MER C E :J Smart Business, Bright Future T (31) F (31) staff@bccchamber.org TESTIMONY OF ANDREW SHULMAN PAST CHAIR, THE GREATER BETHESDA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BEFORE THE 1'v1NTGOtvIERY COUNlY COUNCIL REGARDING FY18 TRANSPORTATION FEES, CHARGES, AND FARES APRIL 18, 217 Good afternoon. I am Andy Shulman, Past Chair of The Greater Bethesda Chamber of Commerce, representing over 63 member businesses and nonprofit organizations in Montgomery County. I am testifying in regard to FY18 Transportation Fees, Charges and Fares. According to the Department of Transportation, there is a need to increase FY18 income in the Bethesda PLD by 1.3 million over the current year budget. In order to do tl"iis, DOT has proposed to charge parking fees in all Bethesda garages on Saturdays from 7am until lopm. As we have testified in years past, our local retail stores and businesses have promoted "free parking on Saturdays" in nearby garages as an inducement to encourage retail patronage. We believe that Bethesda businesses are rightfully concerned that the proposed measure could have a negative impact and implementing this change to Saturday business will have a detrimental effect on Bethesda's retail economy. Bethesda already suffers from the perception that it is an unfriendly place to park. The Chamber continues to receive communications from frustrated Bethesda patrons regarding aggressive enforcement, as well. The proposed expanded hours will only strengthen the negative perception. In reviewing the options with the Department of Transportation, our alternatives are few. Either commence charging on Saturdays in all garages from 7am until lopm or increase parking rates. We anticipate we will propose a mixture of both. We have been communicating DOT representatives, even this morning, in an effort to obtain specific information that will allow us to make an informed decision. While we cannot make a proposal at this moment, we expect to reach a mutual solution with DOT before the work sessions begins. As we look to the future and, please keep in mind that we must have sufficient parking for the increased development that is coming online, including the partial loss of the Woodmont garage. We look forward to working with the County Council and the Department of Transportation to achieve a solution that will work for the Parking Lot District, employers, employees, customers, visitors and residents. Thank you for your consideration of our remarks. BETHESDA I CABIN JOHN I CHEVY CHASE I FRIENDSHIP HEIGHTS I GARRETT PARK I GLEN ECHO I POTOMAC I THE PIKE DISTRICT I ROCK SPRING I WESTBARD

20 861 Georgia A venue, Suite 23, Silver Spring, Maryland291 Phone (3IJ Fax(3IJ jredicker@asscc.ora. V1IWw.asscc.ora CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OUR MISSION: Working to enhance the economic prosperity of greater Silver Spring through robust promotion of our member businesses and unrelenting advocacy on their behalf. Public Hearing - Resolution to approve FY18 Transportation Fees, Charges and Fares Montgomery County Council- Tuesday, April 18, 217 The Greater Silver Spring Chamber of Commerce, representing more than 46 employers that provide more than 17, jobs in greater Silver Spring, appreciates the opportunity to comment on the resolution to approve FY18 Transportation Fees, Charges and Fares. Our concern with this resolution is that it assumes extending until 1 p.m. weekdays paid parking hours in Silver Spring. Currently, parking in Silver Spring lots and garages, and on the street, is free after 7 p.m. This free weekday evening parking is critical to Silver Spring's still-developing nighttime economy. It is particularly critical to the success of our many retail establishments, restaurants, theaters, and other entertainment venues that still rely on business from patrons who arrive by car. Silver Spring was envisioned as a live, work, and play community. Unfortunately, in recent years, development has skewed toward the "live" aspect. With one exception, no new commercial office properties are even in the pipeline. Restaurants and businesses that once relied on patrons from commercial offices are struggling during the daylight hours. They rely heavily on evening business during the week. Eliminating free weekday evening parking could drive patrons, movie theater patrons, for example, to nearby theaters in Wheaton and Calverton, where there is ample free parking Perhaps, some years down the road, when all ofthe apartment communities - planned or under construction - are fmished and filled with residents, our economy will thrive on those who can arrive on foot. But, for now, Silver Spring needs free parking during the evening hours. The County's Department of Transportation will tell you that extending enforcement hours is necessary to continue providing the services supported by the Parking Lot District. They argue that rejecting this proposal will deplete the fund balance of the district in short order. We're not buying that argument. Perhaps we could support increasing funding at some level ifthe revenue realized from extending enforcement hours were invested back into the district to provide, for example, increased maintenance in the garages, upgrades to the elevators and stairwells, expanded security, but not simply cover the actual cost of staffing the extended hours. A close look at the six-year fiscal plan, included in the County Executive's Proposed FY18 Budget, reveals what is really going on in this proposal. The Executive is proposing to transfer 1.2 million from the Silver Spring PLD to the Wheaton PLD over five years beginning in FY19, without any guarantee from the Wheaton PLD or the County that the money will ever be returned. In reality, the County is proposing to subsidize at least part of the Wheaton redevelopment by increasing revenues collected in the Silver Spring PLD. We strongly object to this proposal. If Montgomery County wants to invest in the redevelopment of Wheaton, something we wholeheartedly support, it should do so out ofgeneral Fund revenues, not on the backs of Silver Spring businesses and their patrons. On behalf ofthe businesses in the Silver Spring Parking Lot District, and their customers, we urge you to reject the proposal to extend paid parking hours to 1 p.m. and reject any transfer offunds from the Silver Spring PLD to the Wheaton PLD. (fj

21 Written Statement for the Record Opposing Parking Fee Increase in Silver Spring Submitted by Friends of the Library, Silver Spring April 18, 217 Friends of the Library Silver Spring opposes the proposed fee schedule for the Silver Spring Parking Lot District for FY 218. Currently, fees are assessed between 7 am and 7 pm, Monday through Friday, with gates remaining closed until 9 pm to ensure that all fees are paid. By increasing hours requiring payment to 1 pm, those who wish to use the library will pay higher rates to use county services, in stark juxtaposition to the other branches throughout the county and in contrast to the parking situation at the previous Silver Spring library, which offered free, on-site parking. Extending paid parking hours in Silver Spring means that customers who arrive by carincluding the vast majority of those who come with young children and customers with mobility issues-would be forced to pay for parking when visiting only the library, even if visiting after 7 pm. Many, if not most, of the other libraries in the county, including Rockville, offer free or reduced rate parking. Numerous people have told us that they will not return to the new library because of the parking situation, which not only increases costs for those visiting but continues to pose difficulties in terms of physical safety (as patrons have to cross a busy street to access the library from the main garage). The new Silver Spring library was a multi-million, multi-year investment by the county and is currently one of the most visited libraries in the system. The proposed fee structure will deter many library users in our community and weaken the effectiveness of this new, state-of-the-art branch, in addition to severely hurting neighborhood businesses. As such, we strongly oppose this new fee structure and would ask that, at the very least, it be amended to provide more ease in parking for those patrons wishing to use the library. Thank you for your consideration.

22 Transit Services Recommended FY18 Budget Mission Statement Full Time Equivalents 136,544, The mission ofthe Division oftransit Services is to provide an effective mix ofpublic transportation services in Montgomery County. Budget Overview The total recommended FY18 Operating Budget for the Division oftransit Services is 136,544,848, an increase of8,217,699 or 6.4 percent from the FY17 Approved Budget of128,327,149. Personnel Costs comprise percent ofthe budget for 848 full-time position(s) and no part-time position(s), and a total of FfEs. Total FfEs may include seasonal or temporary positions and may also reflect workforce charged to or from other departments or funds. Operating Expenses account for the remaining percent ofthe FYI8 budget. The budget increase is primarily due to new Ride On service in FYI8 and annualization ofnew service implemented in FY17. The general obligation bond Debt Service for the Mass Transit Fund is appropriated in the Debt Service Fund and is not displayed in this section. To pay for the Debt Service, a transfer offunds from the Mass Transit Fund to the Debt Service Fund of2,461,28 is required. Significant multi-program adjustments in Administration, Taxi Regulation, and Transit Operations Planning are due to corrections in staffing allocation across programs. In addition, this department's Capital Improvements Program (CIP) requires Current Revenue funding. Linkage to County Result Areas While this program area supports all eight ofthe County Result Areas, the following are emphasized:.:. An Effective and Efficient Transportation Network.:. Healthy and Sustainable Neighborhoods.:. Vital Living for A" of Our Residents I Department Performance Measures Performance measures for this department are included below (where applicable), with multi-program measures displayed at the front ofthis section and program-specific measures shown with the relevant program. The FY17 estimates reflect funding based on the FYI7 approved budget The FYI8 and FY19 figures are performance targets based on the FY18 recommended budget and funding for comparable service levels in FY19. /l2-)\ \ Transit Services Transportation 48-1

23 Initiatives o The expansion and enhancement of the Clarksburg Route 75 will allow for longer service hours until 11 : pm weekdays and Saturday and provide for service from early moming to late evening Sunday until 1 pm. The route will also include service to the Clarksburg outlets. o The new MD 355 Extra Service is a limited-stop service that will operate along MD 355 between the Lakeforest Transit Center and the Medical Center Metrorail Station. Hours ofoperation are Monday through Friday 5:3 am - 9:3 am and 3 :3 pm - 7:3 pm with service running evety ten minutes. This service will have 13 unique branded buses and 12 designated bus stops in each direction ofthis route. Service will begin October 2, 217. o Continue progress on Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) development on MD 355 and US 29. Facility planning is ongoing for MD 355. The capital budget includes an additional 21.5 million for US 29 that leverages 1 million offederal TIGER fimds. o The new Express Service to Clarlcsburg will operate from the Cabin Branch/Clarksburg community to the Shady Grove Metro Station. This is a limited stop service, that will begin May 217. Hours ofoperation are Monday through Friday 5:3 am 9: am and 3:3 pm - 7: pm with service running evety 2 minutes. Accomplishments III The Call-n-Ride program reduced the eligibility age for seniors from 67 to 65 years, making the program available to more residents. In FY17, it is anticipated that over 4 residents who are 65 & 66 years old will be added. III Implemented a pilot dialysis shuttle for Medicaid patients. The goal is to ensure the clients who require dialysis are consistently dropped off on time for treatments and taken home on time afterwards. III Began a new Rock Spring Express service on July 25, 216, which provides express bus service between Grosvenor Metrorail Station and five bus stops in the Rock Spring Business Parle. The route operates every ten minutes between 6: am and 9: am and between 3: pm and 7: pm. In the first 5 weeks ofservice, the route averaged 24 riders per day.!il Began new Route 3 I service on October 2, 216. This service operates from Tobytown Drive to Rockville MetrorailStation via Travilah Road. Key locations along the route include local schools, shopping, the new Nancy Dacek Recreational Center, Shady Grove Hospital, Glenstone museum and the Rockville Town Center. Innovations and Productivity Improvements.. Ride On bus service received a 91 % on the Transportation Security Administration's (ISA) review ofour bus service security, prevention, security awareness and protection capabilities, an increase of 12% over FY16 and considered excellent by TSA... Upgraded the Call-n-Ride database - the new improved database has greatly enhanced program efficiency including the application and recertification process, document and records' maintenance and also reduced paper use. " An extensive audit ofcall-n-ride service providers has been initiated, utilizing database enhancements to ensure there is no fraud, waste or abuse in the program... Incorporated new technology into the Same Day Access and Medicaid Transportation Databases to enhance overall efficiency. Program Contacts Contact Darlene Flynn ofthe Division oftransit Services at or Brady Goldsmith ofthe Office ofmanagement and 48 2 Transportation It 7, 1 FY18 Operating Budget and Public Services Program FY18-23 I -'" \ --~.

24 Budget at for more information regarding this department's operating budget. Program Descriptions ~ Passenger Facilities The Passenger Facilities program provides for the safe, comfortable, clean, and accessible entry for transit customers into the transit system. The program is responsible for supervising the construction and maintenance ofbus shelters and the collection of the County's share ofrevenues generated through advertising sales, as provided under a 15-year franchise agreement. It is also responsible for the purchase, installation, maintenance and replacement ofall equipment, including but not limited to bus benches, trash receptacles, transit information display units, and other passenger amenities. The program installs and maintains all system signage, including poles and bus stop flags. FY18 Recommended Changes Expenditures FTEs ~ ~ ~ ~..~._.~~.? ~PP!~~Cil.~.....~"..._..."_..._..._.. ~..._...~......~.~..._...~L~.~~!~!~... ~....."...,.:..: l\t1ulti~progi'amadlustmellts,.inc:i.uqii19.tiego..'tiated.cornp9 nationc:hange~. el11p.l()yeeb~nefit... '... <,.: ".:.' '.:' c:llanges.bi1anges(j\j~.to~tafftllrnover,reor9anl~tions;aridotherbud9e)tchafl9e)s ~ffecting' ,~7:3..,. mulliplepr6grams :.:-: :.:...;.. ~.".:..,.;:,:..,.~,..:;;: ::...;:.. :.: ;.:"..:..;.;',..,", 'J ". u:.l;...,:::~:; :.:::.:.,. <;::.;;, ;:: ::.<}.:;:..~,:..:.:.:...:..:. <:.<...:. :,:,;;...,.::...,...'...,.w.;.. u., " :.;..:.:: :.:,. ;...;"'.::;:~:L:.:.:.:::,.. FY18 Recommended 1,149, v" m..." ~.~.._...v..._... w v..."'..._ _... _..._._......_......_..._ _OY'.._. 4. * Medicaid and Senior Programs Medicaid and Senior Programs Special Transportation Programs provide: Medicaid transportation to and from medical appointments for eligible participants; a user-side subsidy program (Call-n-Ride) that provides travel options for low-income elderly and disabled; and information on public private transportation programs available to seniors and persons with disabilities FY18 Recommended Changes Expenditures FTEs ~~.!~pprov~d 7,922, Mlilti;prO~rarn.adjustri1~Dt~.jn9lJdi?g nego~iat~clcqi)lp~h~tlohch~ng7~.empiqyee b~~efi~' chal"lg~~, hangesdlj~tostaffjurnover,teorga;,lzati()ns;aridbther budget changes affe< ng' : iil.7~8 ~~1.P.!.~>pr9~rl3i)l~:\ FY18 Recommended...,...:::::~::::::.:... (:.:;..:.....,o Ride On Fixed-route bus service is provided by the Ride On system throughout the County. Ride On operates primarily in neighborhoods and provides a collector and distributor service to the major transfer points and transit centers in the County. Ride On supplements and coordinates the County's mass transit services with Metrobus and Metrorail service which is provided by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. The Ride On transit system operates and manages more than 78 routes; maintains a strategic plan for replacement ofthe bus fleet; trains new bus operators and provides continuing safety, remedial and refresher instruction for existing operators; and coordinates activities with a state ofthe art Central Communications Center, which also operates Ride On's computer-aided dispatch/automatic vehicle location system. Actual Actual Estimated Target Target Program Performance Measures FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 Hours of service 1,133,5481,133,64 1, ,167,4121,173,249 'N.-.~mbe;:.o..f. :~.'e..:. ;p.'8rt.)~~co.iii.sl.;~hsbetwee;,rldedhbuse ahdape~b;~:q~ Bbj~cl;....,. ' "...i.::.... :;;' :.:...';... ". 3.8< p~r199~9Q9~i.I~~9~Y.~~......,..:......~,~ Transit Services Transportation 48 3

25 Program Performance Measures On time performance for Ride On buses :~~~~~P~h.?~f~.~~~... Passengers transported (millions) Rld~Onpassenge~ transp6rt~:percapita (Ratioofth~number1 passenge~boa"dlnga Ride Or\bus wit~kia fisc<:i1 year and Montgomery.' 9?~~o/.;s.poPul~~~?~L1...' Percent of Ride On customers who report a satisfactory customer service Actual FY15 Actual FY16 Estimated FY17 Target FY18 Target FY % % 88.% 88.4% 88.9% " ':.' ' 21.6 :...::...2;6. " ".... :... :.:...::... :.. "..:...'... :...:.:...:.... 8% NlA NlA 8% NlA experience }31~ i?'6..~~ei~!h~~~@fi~;~ "~~~.?i~~?~~..~;,..>;....'." ~:.;~.:: ~~,l..,......f~~.:.~;.'.:...nw"~...~~:?,.~:... w.~~:.!:.".:...:.~3~7 1 Definition: This measure is calculated annually comparing the number ofride On passengers to the Montgomery County Population. It indicates whether the Ride On is maintaining a constant share of Montgomery County residents. FY18 Recommended Changes Expenditures FTEs..~.~.!,~~~~.<:)y!~ w w... w w.w...w.... w......;:'..:i.::..:...::.'... :Add:,"M"O 355::.E~~~:.~~:~.~~;::.::;.~:~.~.:::.:.::..,.... :;:...::... :...:...:.:::...:,... :.. :::...,:.:::.. Add: Express Service from Clarksburg to Shady Grove Metro...'::... ::':::-.:.:::..:~'~.::. :... :.. w...,,,.."...." :,,.''', Add: Enh~ht;g()utei5 ~n;~\()ci~rksb Gig.Outtets ~fldeijrtijnat~ Poorperfoi'rTIir,gRoi.ites3 i ' ,429, 'ww'~~~~H62':' " ,792..and.93.ii,.,i I;/:A;..;c i...t.. :.... : 'i i Eliminate: Route 94 "Meet the MARC" due to low ridership (26,25) (2.) Multi-program adjustments. including negotiated compensation changes, employee benefit changes, changes due to staff turnover, reorganizations. and other budget changes affecting 5,933,593 (.1) multiple programs.,,. ~,~,...,...,, ~,,...,,..."" w... w:,, ~:~y,.:... w.....,..."w,,,, w....w..,.....' r vw'w.,..., w...ww ,......~,.~~.,:.:.,..,... w....,.w.,...,.w... "...,..,. w, w.,. w v...,......w.,...,~.,~.:,.""."a":: ~,.. ~.... ww... :,...ww...,.",.,."w.,,...,"w...,,.w. 'w.:' ~~1~~~~T!:'!~~.~~~,.i,~.m'.:.~};::.~~... ~,.i;',l,..:;,,;._. ;~;.,'.. ::::.~;.':c.~~.w...,.;;,;..,.,.. ~..,,~.,..,.;.'w.j2...~......,.l...:...;li1j!!~~11~i~::::~l.t~3.:~~ ~ Commuter Services The Commuter Services Section promotes alternatives to the single occupant vehicle - including transit, car/vanpooling, biking, walking and telewolx- to reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality. Programs and services are concentrated in the County's five Transportation Management Districts: Silver Spring, Friendship Heights, Bethesda, North Bethesda and Greater Shady Grove, and in the Wheaton Transportation Planning & Policy area. Commuting information and assistance is also provided to businesses, employees, and residents throughout the County. Programs are developed to support use oftransportation options and the section coordinates with other local, state and regional agencies on efforts to improve effectiveness ofthose options. FY18 Recommended Changes Expenditures FTEs FY18 Recommended Taxi Regulation The Taxi Regulation program is responsible for issuance, enforcement, renewal, and management ofpassenger vehicle licenses and taxicab driver IDs. This program administers the taxicab regulation, licensing, and permit activities ofchapter 53 ofthe Montgomery County Code Transportation FY18 Operating Budget and Public Services Program FY18-23

26 FY18 Recommended Changes Expenditures FTEs FY17 Approved 655, Multi-program adjustments, Including negotiated compel1sation changes, employee benefit changes. changes due to staff turnover, reorganizations, and other budget changes affe~ng 19,19. multiple programs; ",... ~... ':... :~..:.;...:...,.:~.. :~~:.," FY18 Recommended 674, * Customer Service The Customer Service program is the interface between Ride On's service delivery and customer information. In addition to managing the distribution ofpaper transit timetables, web sites are maintained and updated, and real time information is provided through various media (phone, web, mobile apps and signs). System infonnation is provided by way ofelectronic system maps and informational displays inside and outside ofbuses and bus stop shelters. As needed, public forums are arranged for proposed service changes. FY18 Recommended Changes Expenditures FTEs..~~,?.~PP!~~~»~,,~.~...,...,..,"Ww.., w..... ".w...",....,......,....,.,,,..... w., w. w..w...~, ~.~.!!~~~.... I~?f~~s~ ~~~~i?rs~id~.f~~~~1:'!~ naturdays ii...). "'2A1t.. "'. Multi-program adjustments, including negotiated compensation changes, employee benefit changes, changes due to staff turnover, reorganizations, and other budget changes affecting (16,915) (.99) multiple programs. I FY1eR~6) ~th~~d~d: :...L.?!t9~!~~ ;63. ~ Transit Operations Planning The Transit Operations Planning program provides comprehensive, coordinated, and integrated services to assure the County's transit needs are met To accomplish this objective, the program plans and schedules Ride On service; evaluates and develops Ride On routes; adjusts schedules 3 times a year; and coordinates bus service with the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. FY18 Recommended Changes Expenditures FTEs Increase Cost: Annualization of Tobytown Service. Muiij~p~~si~.~:~~ju~t~~h.tS:j~cludiMg. n~~~t1~t~d b mperis~t1~n ~~n~.~;..~~pl~y~~ h~rie#l... chang&;~anglas due.to stafftllrnover,. re()iga!1i~tions; am:lgtl1er ~ijdgetcha~ges9ffe!cting mul~pl~pr6gral11~.... '.'......' :... )... :.:.::::::.::.,;:... FY18 Recommended 2,852, "''' ~.-~ ~ ~~-'''''... Transit Parking Facility Maintenance The Transit Parking Facility Maintenance program funds the operation and maintenance ofthe Park & Ride Lots as well as Transit Centers. The Division ofparking Management Operations section provides and manages the maintenance services. FY18 Recommended Changes Expenditures FTEs 393, Transit Services Transportation 48 5

27 F 18 Recommended Changes Expenditures FTEs Multi-program adjustments,.iricluc:ling negotiated compensation changes, employee benefit' changes, changes due to staff turnover, reorganizations, and either budget changes affecting 4,754. multiple programs: F 18 Recommended 397, * Fixed Costs The Fixed Costs program contains certain cost items that involve long-tenn funding commitments independent ofthe annual scope ofprogram costs. Fixed costs included in this category are utility payments and insurance. Casualty insurance for Ride On.is provided through the Division ofrisk Management. The costs are required or "fixed" based on the existence ofthe programs, but the actual amount is based on anticipated rates and the proposed size and scope ofthe related unit or program. FY18 Recommended Changes Expenditures FTEs ~~,?,~p~~~,~c:~... ",w"",. ""..ww,,""","''"...'w,.w~!?~,~!.~~~"_~:.~~ Multi~progr~tnadjustrl'1en~, including negotiatedcompensationchanges,empjpyee.bellefit " '.., > chfmg~,9tiangesduetps~ff tuino\i~r,reorganizations, and either budgetchanges~ff!;lcting<.> ':'(2,~12).«. multiple prqgr~itls.' '..... '. '>....,......,...,., : i......;i... 'J; <.'....,...', ? , '", ,..,.. o.....'w:....~w., ".w....,...,,,,. ;.... Wb.';"W.. :: ;.:...<:.:::.:...>:..::..:~:,.,... :...,..:~,~,..,~...:; ":':"v:'...,.w... ",,:,,.. :w., '."."... "~:...,,...:, w....:..:..... :...,~")~~,.,,.::.;.;.:.~ ~.~,./:..,~..;"...:.:.w.. :.\...:,...,.:'"...J./::..:: ";.:.:..~.:.:.<:.;,;.:.::...'"""L".,...~.. ::...::~,<,..,, F 18 Recommended 2,782,756. * Administration The Administration program provides general management, planning, supervision, and support for the Division. It performs financial management tasks, administers contracts, manages grants, provides personnel management functions, and provides Montgomery County's financial support to the Washington Suburban Transit Commission. FY18 Recommended Changes Expenditures FTEs F 17 Approved 3,139, :,:::.:...:.:::...::;...:...;::?::: Multi~prOgramadju~tfu~ri~:i~d~Jdingn.egOtiat~d~mpenSationChanges.employe~ben~tit.....""'" 9hangE S;.changes due to staff turnover,reorganizations,and other blidget changes~ff!;lcti(lg n'lui~?i~rr~~~<!'!!~:...,...,.,,".....]...l... m ;i~...,:l....,.... F 18 Recommended 1. BUDGET SUMMARY MASS TRANSIT EXPENDITURES Salaries and Wages 51,34,461 51,83,34 52,617,21 54,675, % Employee Benefits 16,995,414 18,611,84 18,129,958 19,4, % Mass Transit Personnel Costs 68,335,875 7,414,424 7,747,168 73,679, % Operating Expenses 51,938,835 52,847,86 52,148,216 57,799, % Capital Outlay 13,4 Mass Transit Expenditures 12,288,11 123,261,51 122,895, ,479,29 6.7%...,... d ' ,...,.,...,......, Transportation /' '; 1 FY18 Operating Budget and Public Services Program FY18-23 { I I ;',""---'... ;:!-"'

28 BUDGET SUMMARY PERSONNEL Full-Time Part-Time FTEs REVENUES Bus Advertising Insurance Recoveries Investment Income Miscellaneous Revenues Motor Pool Charges/Fees Other Charges/Fees Other Fines/Forfeitures Parking Fees Parking Fines Property Tax Ride On Fare Revenue State Aid: Call N' Ride State Aid: Damascus Fixed Route State Aid: Ride On Taxi Licensing Fees Mass Transit Revenues Actual FY ,173,17 327,541 61,11 28, ,113 1,415,637 9, , ,83 17,623,637 22,193, ,17 394,11 39,795, , ,143,61,".v _._ _ ~w.. l3udget... Estirnate< Recommended %Chg FY17 FY17 FY18.. Bud/Rec % % 935, 935, 1,35, 1.7% 12,25 12,25 982, ,194 1,162, % 661, , ,385 45, 45, 45, 97,9,83 96,567, ,964, % 22,769,658 22,769,658 2,886, % 379,11 379,11 379,11 39,95 39,95 39,95 38,264, 38,264, 38,764, 1.3 % 531, 531, 531, 162,247, ,924, ,218, % GRANT FUND - MeG EXPENDITURES Salaries and Wages Employee Benefits Grant Fund - MCG Personnel Costs Operating Expenses Gr,mtFund - M~~ Expe.nditures. PERSONNEL Full-Time Part-Time FTEs REVENUES Federal Grants State Grants Grant Fund - MeG Revenues 1,119, ,37 1,516,68 2,844,638 4,361, ~ ,6,855...,..., 2,415,498 4,16,353 v 1,462,21 1,462,21 1,471,943.7%..., , , , % 1,859,934 1,859,934 1,859,934 3,25,75 3,25,75 3,25,75 5,65,639. ~,65,639 5,65, , ,939,694 1,939,693 1,939,693.. w,,,,....w' m m '..Nw',, 3.125,945 3, , d..'... > ,65,639 5,65,639 5,65,639 DEPARTMENT TOTALS Transit Services Transportation 48-7

29 "- " 48-8 Transportation!,I.. ; ). FY18 Operating Budget and Public Services Program FY18-23 ~~/ BUDGET SUMMARY Actual.' BiJdget i.. Estimate. Recommended., %Chg.. " :",," FY16 FYt7.' FY17 FY18... BudfRec..."..m....,.. d.'.. W.....,... W.. :....."'.. ~'"'. "'M... _,'_c",..r',,...'w..."y.,..._...~ '..'~.'.. ",. :. '. :.,.., "'~""';"'.'.".:.. '._......:'.. m' '"'~. Total Expenditures 124,649, ,327, ,961,23 136,544, % Total Full-Time Positions % Total Part-Time Positions o TotalFTEs % Total Revenues 18,159, ,312, ,284, % ~~,99,~~... FY18 RECOMMENDED CHANGES MASS TRANSIT Changes (with service impacts) FY17RIGlNALAPPROPRIATlON 123,261, Add: MD 355 Extra Service [Ride On] 995, Add: Express Service from Clarksburg to Shady Grove Metro [Ride On] 587,792. Add: Enhance Route 75 Service to Clarksburg Outlets and Eliminate Poor Performing Routes 3 and 93 [Ride On] 21, Eliminate: Route 94 "Meet the MARC due to low ridership [Ride On] (26,25) (2.) Other Adiustments (with no service impacts) Increase Cost: Motor Pool Adjustment (includes 1.2M for MD 355 Extra Service) 3,469,179. Increase Cost: FY18 Compensation Adjustment 1,617,28. Increase Cost: Annualization of FY17 Compensation Increases 625,423. Increase Cost: Annualization of Rock Spring Park Express Service [Transit Operations Planning] 443,. Increase Cost: Bethesda Circulator Expansion 166,4. Increase Cost: Contract Escalations 163, Increase Cost: Annualization of Tobytown Service [Transit Operations Planning] 138,25. Increase Cost: Risk Management Adjustment 97,388. Increase Cost: Retirement Adjustment 65,2. Increase Cost: Contracts 45,. Increase Cost: Annualization of FY17 Personnel Costs 31,25. Increase Cost: Annualization of Seniors Ride Free Service on Saturdays [Customer Service] 2,417. Increase Cost: TMD Biennial reports." ,. Increase Cost: Bethesda TMD operating increase 15,65. Increase Cost: North Bethesda TMD operating increase 14,9. Decrease Cost: Printing and Mail (39,28). Decrease Cost: Personnel savings [Ride On] (253,171). FY18 RECOMMENDED 131,479, GRANT FUND MCG FY17RIGINALAPPROPRIATION 5,65,

30 FY18 RECOMMENDED CHANGES :. ".:...:...,:.~, <.'_>.-"'w~... FY18RECOMMENDED 5,65, PROGRAM SUMMARY Passenger Facilities Medicaid and Senior Programs Ride On Commuter Services Taxi Regulation Customer Service Transit Operations Planning Transit Parking Facility Maintenance Fixed Costs Administration FY1.tAPPR A'1iAPPR.... FTES> Ex;pendjtur:e~... ; : 'w :.- ",,"""'~'W" ""'W''''>'''''''' 1,94, ,922, ,429, ,39, , ,767, ,1, , ,785,368. 3,139, Eipei'itJitJre~ w w w, w...y ~.FY... S !r,. EC_ rl~ 1,149, ,947, ,688, ,97, , ,77, ,852, , ,782,756. 3,184, Total 128,327, ,544, CHARGES TO OTHER DEPARTMENTS MASS TRANSIT Health and Human Services General Fund 282, ,694. MASS TRANSIT FUTURE FISCAL IMPACTS CE RECOMMENDED (OOOS) "FY.1":S';', : ":'::: ;FY1.9 :: :, ::": ":":.. FY2cf.':::": :~":/::F.Y2.+ :.:.~..,.: :;: ~. ;::;FY22. ~.(:).~.:.;," :.F:Y23' :.:.:':..._.;:.,:..;..::..:..:..:.:~,:.:'.:.:._.;:,~,..;..,... :,;.,;.:.:..~.:.;.::<::.~.:.?..\ :;.:.;:. ~;..:;,::...:::';:.n.. :._,. :.,:,~,':~:~ ~.,;,... )..:.,...:.:.::.:.~:.w..;.::..:;: (.. :,...:.>.> :.:::.. :~.~:.L",...: :... : EXPENOOURES FY18 Recommended 131, , , , , ,479 No inflation or compensation change is included in outyear projections. Annualize Route Eliminations (117) (117) (117) (117) (117) Routes 3, 93, and 94 will be eliminated in Fall 217. MD 355 Extra Service o Provides funds for a full year of service in FY19. Service to begin in Fall 217. Route 75 Enhancement to Clarksburg Outlets o Provides funds for a full year of service in FY19. Service to begin in Fall 217. Transit Services Transportation 48-9

31 FUTURE FISCAL IMPACTS CE RECOMMENDED (OOOS) Title... FY22... F'Y23 FY18 FY19 FY2 FY21 Labor Contracts o These figures represent the estimated annualized cost of general wage adjustments, service increments, and other negotiated items. Subtotal Expenditures 131, , , , , , Transportation FY18 Operating Budget and Public Services Program FY18-23

32 Detail on Recommended FY18 CE Amendments Tax Supported EXPENDITUREAMENDMENTS Health and Human Services Add: The Senior Connection of Montgomecy County, Inc. 3, Provides one-time support for the escorted transportation program. NDA - Working Families Income Supplement Decrease Cost: Wo11tlng Families Income Supplement -1,548,936 Cost esumalas have been revised due to significantly lower number of anticipated recipients. NDA - State Property Tax Services Decrease Cost: Property Tax Services -229,364 SOAT relmbursement payments are projected to be lower than assumed In the County Executive's recommended budget. NOA - Community Grants: County executive Add: Community Grant: FamHy Services, loc. Provides for the Neighborhood Opportunity Natwoif(. Add: Community Grant: Potomac Community Resources, Inc. 75, 3, Provides for operating support. Total Tax Supported Expenditures -1,643,3 RESQURCEAMENDMENTS Transit Services Ride On Fare Revenue 575, Subsequent to the release of the County Executive's recommended budget, WMATA approved an increase to the base bus fare. This adjustment reflects changes to Ride On fares that are consistent with WMATA's adopted fares. Total Tax Supported Resources 575, :41:5PM Page 1 ot1

33 .._ _...._..._._.._-_._--.._-_...--_..._-._-_..._._..._ _...._._----_..._--_..-..._.._..--_._--_._---..: _.._._ _.._-_._.-._ ;... -._--_._._----_._ _-_.. Ridens FYi7 Ride On Service Profile Avg Annual Per DaiiY Pla1fOnn --Platform-- Route Ser Route Description Riders Annual Riders Houns Hdur 55 Wkdy GTC-Milestcne-MC.G-Lakeforest-Shsdy Grove-MC.R-Rockville ,843,95 52, Wkdy Glenmont-layhill-Rockville 2, ,845 17,6 33_2 15 Wkc1y Langley Park-Wayne Ave_-SUver Spring 3, , Sun GTC-Mllestone-L.akaforest-Shady Grove 2, ,558 4, Sat Langley Park-Wayne Ave.-SHver Spring 2,272 12,416 3, Wkdy Lak&forest-Washington Grove-Shady Grove 1, ,49 15, Sun Langley Park-Wayne Avs_-Silver Spring 1,694 96,558 3, Sat GTC-shady Grove ,838 1, Sat GTC-Mileslone-Lakeforest-Shady Grove-Rockville 4, ,41 8, Wkdy Montgomery Village-t.akeforest-Shady Grove-Rockville 3,25 828,75 29, Wkdy GTC-Lakaforest-Shady Grove 2, ,865 21, Wkdy Silver Spring-Leland St.-Friendship Heights 1, ,29 14, Wkd}' HiHBndale-Northwesl Park-SUver Spring 2,827 72,885 25, Sat GTC-Lakeforest-Shady Grove 1,922 11, Wkdy Wheaton-Bauer Dr.-Rockville 2,72 528,36 19, Wkdy GTC-Shady Grove 2, ,83 21, Sat Montgomery Village-lakeforast-Shady Grove-Rockville 2, ,745 4, Wkdy Silver Spring-EastIWest I-!wy-Friendship Heights ,82 7, Sun Hillandale-Northwesl PBrk-Silver Spring ,724 3,716 26_6 2 Wkdy lyltonsville-silver Spring ,385 7, Sun Wheaton-Bauer Dr.-Rockville 1,9 62,13 2, Sat Hlllandaie-Northwast Park-Silver Spring 1,969 14,357 3, Sat Lakeforest-Montgomery Wage-East Village-Shady Grove 1,14 53,742 2, Sat Wheaton-Bauer Dr.-Rockville 1,383 73, Sun Lyttonsville-Silver Spring Sat lakeforest-washinglonian Boulevard-Rockville 1,26 66,78 2, Wkdy Takoma-langley Park-Silver Spring 3, , Sat Silver Spring-Leland St.-Friendship Heights 1,67 56,551 2, Wkdy Shady Grove-Montgomery Co/lege-Rockville Pike-Madical Center 3,7 782, Wkdy HiHandale-Northwast Park-Takoma 314 8, Wkdy Montgomery ViIIage-QuaU Valley-Emory Grove-Shady Grove 1,26 321,3 13, Wkd}' Aspen Hill-Wheaton-Bethesda-Friendship Heights 2,512 64,56 27, Sat Glenmont-layhiU-Rockvllle 1,89 57,717 2, Sun Glenmont-Lay hill-rockville ,554 2, Sun Lakeforest-Washlngton Grove-Shady Grove 1,18 58,26 2, lakeforesl-montgomery Village-Eest ViUage-Shsdy Grove. Walkins Mill Wkd'y &M , , Sun GTC-Lakeforest-Shady Grove 1,495 85,215 3, Sun Twinbrook-Glenmom-White Oak-HiHandale 1,46 83,22 3, Sun Montgomery Village-lekeforast-Shady Grove-Rockville. 1, , Sat Lakeforesl-Washington Grove-Shady Grove 1,28 64,24 2, Wkdy Takoma-Flower Avenue-Wayne Avenue-Sllver Spring 1,451 37,5 16, Wkdy lakeforest-washingtonian Blvd-Rockville 1, , Wkdy Twinbrook-Glenmont-White Oak-HiUandale 2, ,45 24, Wkdy Twinbrook-Kensington-Silver Spring 1,99 57,45 23, Sat Glenmont-Aspan HiR-Twinbrook-Montgomery Mall 2,59 19,127 4, Wkdy Montgomery Village-Flower HIJl-Shady Grove ,425 3, Wkdy Clarksburg-Skylark-Scenery-Shady Grove ,79 5, Sat Takoma-langley Park-Silver SprIng 2,56 132,818 6, Sat Lyttonsviile-Sllver Spring ,447 1, Wkdy Shady Grove-Piccard Drive-Shady Grove Hospital-Traville Te , Wkd)' Wheatol't-Four Comars-Silver Spring 1, , Wkdy Glenmont-Aspen HID-Twinbrook-Montgomery Mall 2,668 68, Wkdy Traville TC-Shady Grove.Hospital-Shady Grove 93 23,265 11, Wkdy Aspen HiD-Weller Rd.-Glenmont ,35 9, Wkdy langley Park-Maple Ave.-SAver Spring 1,13 281,265 13, Sat Shady Grove-Montgomery Co/Iege-Rockville Pike-Madlcal Canter 1,867 98,951 4, Sun Lakeforest-Washlnglonian Bouleverd-RockvlllB 97 51,699 2, Wkdy Lakeforest-Quin<:e Orchard-Shady Grove Hospital-Rockville 1, , Sun SHver Spring - Friendship Heights 78 44,

34 _._ _.._--_.._ _ _.._ ~ _._--_._ _._----_._---_..._.._--_._-_.._ _..._.._......m..._ _ _.._-_._._._ _ _ _..._._--..._-..._-- Riders FY17 _~~de O~.S_-:~!ce Profi~.Avg. _..._...-Annual---Per _.., Dally Platform Platform Route Ser Route Description Riders Annual Riders Hours HDUr 17 Sun langley Park-Maple Ave.-SHver Spring 72 4,14 2, Sun Takoma-FIower Avenue-Wayne Avenue-Silver Spring ,621 2, LB Sat Grand Pre-BeJ Pre, Connecticut, Friendship His Station ,954 2,n Sun Wheaton-Four Comers-SHyer Spring ,921 2, Sun lakeforest-montgomery Village-East Village-Shady Grove no 43,89 2, Sat Langley Park-Maple Ave.-Silver Spring , Wkdy Montgomery VIIlage.Shady Grove ,98 2, Sun Glenmont-Aspen HiIJ.Twinbrook-Montgomery Mall 1,724 98,268 5, Sun Takoma-langley Park-SUver Spring 1,947 11,979 5, Sat Takoma"FJower Avenue-Wayne Avenue-SlJver Spring 83 43,99 2, sat Wheaton-Bethesda-Friendship Heights 1,32 69,6 3, Wkdy GTe, Germantown MARC, Waring Station, GTC ,155 7, Sat Montgomery VllJage-QuaU Valley-Emory Grove-Shady Grove ,644 2, Wkdy GTC-Great Seneca Hwy.-5hady Grove 1,51 268,5 14, Wkdy RockvilJe.Montgomery MalJ.Bethesda 1, ,335 19, Wkdy Kingsview-Dawson Farm-5hady Grove 36 78, ' _Wkdy....- TI!.~.~ J;J.f!!I!;hl39!!g..F~a!!klj!!.6ve.-SHv~!J~pring. _.._._. fifa , , J8. 1 Sat Twinbrook-G/enmont-Whlie Oak-HiJlandaJe 1,314 69,642 3, Sun Shady Grove-Montgomery Coflege-RockvilJe Pike-Medlcal Center 1,66 94,62 5, Sat Aspen HUJ.WeI1er Rd.-Glenmpnt ,79 1, Wkdy Takoma-Manchester Rd.-Three Oaks Dr.-8l1ver Spring ,675 4, Sat lakeforest-qulnce OrcharcI-Shady Grove HoSpItal-Rockville 1, T2 Sat Friendship Hts, River Rd. Falls Rd. Rockville W , Wkdy Hillandale-Whlte Oak-FDA-Sllver Spring ,94 8, Wkdy Wheaton-While Alnt ,635 13, L8 Sun Grand Pre-BeI Pre. Connecticut, Friendship HIs station Wkdy Shady Grove-Gaither Road-Plccard Dr.-Rockville ,81 1, Sun lakeforest-quince Orchard-5hady GrOlle Hospltal-Rockville 1, , Sat Twinbrook-Kanslngton-SUver Spring ,569 3, , : i. i : ;. 76 Wkdy PoolesvlJle-Kentlands-5hady Grove ,59 12, Sun \IIIheaton-BeIhesda-Friendship Heights 1,159 66,63 4, Wkdy langley Park-Washington Adventist Hosp-Maple Ave-Takoma ,34 7, Wkdy Klngsvlew-Rlcltter Farm-5hady Grove ,575 4, Sat Wheaton-Four Corners-Silver Spring ,358 2,316 15~7 39 Wkdy Btiggs Chaney-Glenmont , Sun GTC, Gunner's lake, GTC , Sun Montgomery Village-Qua~ Valley-Emory Grove-Shady Grove , Wkdy SOver Spring Downtown (VanGel) ,925. 1, '. 19 Wkdy Northwood-Four Comers-Sillier Spring 159 4,545 2, Wkdy Norbeck P&R-Hewitt Alle.-Glenmont , Wkdy Neval Ship R&D-Cabin John-8ethesda ,81 4, WkcJli Wheaton..forest Glen-Silver Spring ,11 12, Wkdy Fallsgrove-RockvIIle Senior Center-RockviUe-Twinbrook , Sat GTC, Gunner's lake, GTC , Sun GTC-Shady Grove ,91. 2, ! " 96 WkcJr Montgomery Mall-Roc;k Sprlng-Grosvenor ,26 8, Wkdy Sibley Hospltal-Brookmont-5anganiore Road-Friendship Heights , Sat Sibley Hospltal-Brookmont-5angamore Road-Friendshlp Heights , Wkdy Clarksburg-Correctlonal Facility.MUestone-GTC ,42 9, Sun Wheaton-While FUn! , Sat Takoma-Piney Branch Road-Franklin AIIS.-Silver Spring ,451 1, Wkdy Damascus-Woodfield Rd- Airpark Shady Grove ,525 14, Wkdy Bethesda-Glen Echo-Friendship Heights ,475 12, Sat Wheaton-While Aint ,267 1, Sat Wheaton-Forest GIan-5l1ver Spring , Wkdy langley Parte-Takoma-Silver Spring , Wkdy GJenmont-Kenslngton-Med"JCaf Center ,665 7, Wkdy MedIcal Center-Pooks Hill-Bathesda ,135 11, ~'.

35 _ _-.. _ FY17 Ride On Service Profile Avg --'" ' -.. DailY"'" Riders Annual Per.-,---_.--_. Pi8tform -Piatforrn' Route Ser Route Description Riders Annual Riders Hours Hour T2 Sun Friendship Hts. River Rd, FaDs Rd, Rockville W , Wkdy Poto~Bradley Blvd.-Bethesda ,59 9, Wkdy TraviHe TC-North Potomao-Shady Grove ,35 2, Sun Twinbrook-Kensington-Silver Spring , Wkdy Kensington-Silver Spring ,67 5, Sat Rockvil~ntgomery Mall-Bethesda ,47 3, Wkdy Twinbrook-Hungerford-Rockville , Wkdy Potomac-Tuckerman la.-grosvenor-wheaton ,415 5, WkcJy Mnestone-Medlcal Center-Bethesda Express ,18 14, Sun Aspen Hill-Weller Rd.-Glenmont 24 13,68 1, Sun langley Parle-Takoma ,473 1, Sun Rockville-Montgomery Mall-Bethesda ,558 3, Wkdy Germantown MARC-GTC-Waters Landlng-Milestone-Holy Cross ,2 14, Sat Traville TC-Shady Grove-Hospital-Shady Grove 38 16,324 1, Wkdy Forest Glen-Wheaton 72 18,36 1, Wkdy Briggs Chaney--Tamerack-Dumont Oaks-Silver Spring , Sat Fallsgrove-RockviUe-Twinbrook ,11 2, Wkdy Rockville-Tower oaks-while Flint , Sat Bethesda-Glen Echo-Friendship Heights Wkdy Glenmont-Kemp Mill Rd.-Wheaton , Sun Glen Echo-Friendship Heights 141 8, Wktly While Flint-Montgomery Man ,37 11, Wkdy GTC, Kingsview, Gec. Cinnamon Woods ,315 13,235 8., ~, ~ () " e " lp " ~, [ [;:!.. 52 Wkdy MGH-Olney-RockviDe ,78 5, Sat GTC-Waters landing-milestone 24 12,72 1, Wkdy Grosvenor-Parkside-MonlgOmery Mall loop 26 52,53 7, Sat Langley Park-Takoma-Silver Spring ,317 2, Sat GTC, Kingsview, Soccerplex , ~ () ~ i: ~. 53 Wkdy Shady Grove-MGH-Olney-Gienmont ,85 9, Sat White Flint-Montgomery Mall , Sat S~ver Spring Downtown (VanGo) ,932 2, Wkdy Takoma-Dale Dr.-Sllver Spring 23 5,865 1, Wkdy Twlnbrook-HHS Twinbrook 14 3,57 1, Wkdy Germantown MARC-Clarksburg Meet the MARC Janaury ,65 4, ,214,7761 1,175, " p <> 'l( X X

36 i;: Income Eligibility Categories for Call-n-Ride income Limits bv Household Size I I ~! \2)' '::.;: I I I \. ~. 1 I I -,_.. _.":" -.--.: -.. ' _..._-,! -.. ' 1.",~ -' i 1

37 [ Call-n..Ride Breakdown of Participants by Subsidy Levels Subsid~ level Cost Per S6 value Cost Per S12 value # of Partlci~ants % of total Particioants 91.3% , % 83.3% % 66.7% % 5% % Same Day Access (5%) 3. N/A % Total 5,168 1.% r"'-""", ~~"";".'\,.",I \ ",~/...;

38 ATTACHMENT FY18 CE OMB Recommended Budget 'Operating Cost of Ride On Bus Service, CostlHour, FY18 Dollars Cost Element Cost Cumulative Bus Operators Motor Pool Coordinators 'h:) Other Operating Labor 'r- \ \~ > '... Schedule/Communications Customer Service/Safety Other Non-labor OperlMgmt Svcs/ General Administration/Other Indirect' IRate for any new ~ service added WMATA Non-Regional.. Rate for FY / Fully Allocated Cost \..., xxfy18 COST PER HOUR CE OMS Ree.xls 4/6/217

39 I Parking District Services Recommended FY18 Budget Mission Statement Full Time Equivalents 28,59, The mission ofparking District Services is to: Support the role ofpublic parking in commercial areas throughout the County. Parking management is an important tool for achieving public objectives ofeconomic development and transportation management; Support the comprehensive development ofthe Silver Spring, Bethesda, and Wheaton central business districts and promote their economic growth and stability by supplying a sufficient number ofparking spaces to accommodate that segment ofthe public demand which is neither provided for by development nor served by alternative travel modes; Promote and complement a total transportation system through the careful balance ofrates and parking supply to encourage the use ofthe most efficient and economical transportation modes available; and Develop and implement parking management strategies designed to maximize the usage ofthe available parking supply in order to enhance the economic development ofspecific central business districts. L' Budget Overview The total recommended FY18 Operating Budget for the Parking Districts is 28,59,46, an increase ofi,241,644 or 4.54 percent from the FY17 Approved Budget of27,348,762. Personnel Costs comprise percent ofthe budget for 53 full-time position(s) and no part-time position(s), and a total of48.53 FIEs. Total FTEs may include seasonal or temporary positions and may also reflect workforce charged to or from other departments or funds. Operating Expenses account for the remaining percent ofthe FY18 budget. In addition, this department's Capital Improvements Program (CIP) requires Current Revenue funding. Linkage to County Result Areas While this program area supports all eight ofthe County Result Areas, the following are emphasized:.:. An Effective and Efficient Transportation Network.:. A Responsive, Accountable County Government.:. Strong and Vibrant Economy Department Performance Measures Performance measures for this department are included below (where applicable), with multi-program measures displayed at the front ofthis section and program-specific measures shown with the relevant program. The FY17 estimates reflect funding based on the FY17 approved budget The FY18 and FY19 figures are performance targets based on the FY18 recommended budget and funding for comparable service levels in FY19. Parking District Services Transportation 47 1

40 !B~ Initiatives o Consolidate the Montgomery Hills Parking Lot District (PLD) into the Silver Spring PLD o Develop and test the viability ofusing License Plate Reader (LPR) technologies for parlcing access control at the W oodmont Comer Garage in Bethesda. o Establish a parking guidance system directing visitors to the Capital Crescent and BethesdalElm Garages. New "dynamic signage" will be installed at key decision points in the Bethesda downtown area. Signage will display real-time space availability and hourly rates to assist motorists in locating a parking facility with available spaces and evaluate pricing options. o Expansion ofthe Garage Advertisement Program, which allows businesses to deliver customized messages to patrons, to additional Parking Lot District garages and surface lots. Accomplishments, ~ ~ Managed the Wheaton Redevelopment Project from the Schematic Design stage to the 5% Construction Documents design stage, including the addition oftwo floors, a geothennal system, and environmental remediation and waterproofing for the underground garage. At the same time, managed the interior design process for seven user agencies, and coordination with multiple county agencies and other government agencies such as WMATA and SHA. ~ Four additional electric vehicle (EV) charging stations were installed in garages in Bethesda, Silver Spring and Wheaton. These new stations bring the total number ofev charging stations in County-owned parking facilities to 12 stations (24 spaces). ~ Launched a new responsive design for the Division ofparking Management homepage. The website enhances the visitor's experience by enabling content to be viewed through the use ofmultiple devices such as mobile, laptop, or desktop computer. o Drafted a campaign, designed and launched the PARK(ing) Day webpage. PARK(ing) Day is an annual, global event to provide residents, businesses and organizations an opportunity to temporarily transform metered parking spaces into fun, park-like spots to stimulate conversations about the use ofthe urban landscape. Innovations and Productivity Improvements.- For the first time, a Demand Pricing approach was used to set parking rates at three (3) Bethesda garages. Parking rates were increased to 1. per hour at three (3) high demand parlcing garages in Bethesda CSt Elmo, Woodmont, and Bethesda Avenue Garages). All other garages remained at.8 per hour. The goal is to optimize the use ofexisting parking resources by redistributing parking demand The new Wheaton ReedielGrandview Ave. Garage will feature LED lighting fixtures, EV charging stations, low emission vehicles preferred parking spaces, and increased security measures through additional cameras and security call buttons. The Wheaton Office building will be the first Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Platinum certified government facility in Maryland featuring a geothermal system and solar panels in the roofareas. Program Contacts Contact Jose Thommana ofthe Parking Districts at or Corey Orlosky ofthe Office ofmanagement and Budget at for more information regarding this department's operating budget Program Descriptions 47 2 Transportation FY18 Operating Budget and Public Services Program FY18-23

41 "NN"W" * Administration This program supports the Parking Services program objectives through the management ofinfonnation Technology and customer service to optimize organizational effectiveness and the delivery ofservices to the public. Additionally, the program strategically plans for all components ofthe re-development ofparking Lot District (PLD) real property to promote the economic growth and stability ofassociated urban districts. The program's responsibilities are for drafting and releasing Requests for Development Proposals; generating property appraisals; negotiations and overseeing the execution ofgeneral Development Agreements; and Purchase Sales Agreements, including related development documents. The program also leads project management efforts including design and construction ofpld real property as part of mixed-use re-development projects. fy18 R~eommended Changes Expenditures EYEs 2,25, !,!~.?~~p~~~!~'~"""W""W"~' "W W W'W'. '.....,... w.... ".....,...w w.,...'w..._.." ,...,..... ' ~...w~ w.w,. :.:" _.,.,....~..,.:.,.' ~"::'W":.;.~,..."...".,':,...;".."".'. w~ 'Mu'ti~prq9t~rhadjustrnents. inclticfjl1~. rlegoti~ted compel1sati(:)j'du~nges.ernployee 'benefrt... i.,. '.',. ',, '., Changes,?htinges doe io staff turnover,. r~ani~tiops, and,otfler,budgetc!ianges affecting;<.:..~~!t!r':p~~~~~:~.'...".....'.' '.... FY18 Recommended * Financial Management "", ':,",w.' ": ".:. '."'~ 782, The Financial Management Program has overall responsibility for the recordation, reconciliation, and audit ofall parking district revenue. In addition, this program has primary responsibility for the development and execution ofthe Division Budget and Capital Improvements Program in coordination with other programs and the associated 6 Year Fiscal Cash Flows for the Parking Lot District Enterprise Funds. Also included are Accounts Payable activities and all procurement actions. It is also responsible for revenue bond debt, fixed assets and utilities programs. This program serves as the primary point of contact for the Department of Finance in the preparation ofthe annual financial statements ofthe three Parking Lot District enterprise funds and in responding to any inquiries from the auditors ofthose statements. Actual Actual Estimated Target Target Program Performance Measures FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 5?~~~~,~~~,~~~~!~~5l.~~!~~9!.~~.~~~~,~5l~gi~~~~{~~'??~~., "NO"" N/A 2.91 NlA 3. NlA Parking.Manage!iW11t ~.efficieric:y.{ratio qfe)'xpense to revel1ue~j~'''w.''''.. "" ~'T' 5i '~:~"~':: 6H'T7:::' ::";;7\'85... ""94"..;... "'9,...w"".. ;, ,. :...."... :... ;..:...~,,;u.wm. V: :~... ~.v.vu.;.,... "..,;.,...,;.,....w...,: :,.'.w...wm.... :..:..... ".u...;.:.w. "....:.... ':: '... ;.... :. :.."d..".. '..: ':.....:...:..;...;..:.~.. :..:.:.;;::.::...;:,..:..,:..:..::;;.;..:...,.;:;:.:: :~ : :.:.. ::..: ;.:::,...;w.:;.:;.;.:;::.::::::...:...;:. :.;...::,"::":',:',;..:.{...:.,;...::.:.;~::,..;...,.. :..;..";.;... ;.:: Parking Management revenue generated ( millions) ;~~~l~.~ry~~~t~~t9.~~fi~~,~%p~hqli~7.~~ Wfuill~hsJ.,..'...'. 1 Rating on a scale of 1 to 4 with 4=best '; 1\!'r::"~~~3::~" "w. Z~~~~. 28:6; ' 28~6 FY18 Recommended Changes Expenditures FTEs i.,......j9.881 FY17 Approved 7,928, T.ec......r.h.'.h......d....h.er..... o.,..fe.,..,'..ss ~..'.i....s....'. ce ,......,... '., '..'.'.i~.'.,.'.....~.:....u..:.;... o t p.. r..' i.o.... ~ em.'..... ~. " :;....:... ' ' , , '..,... '.....:..,..., '.. :.....' '... <Gio ' , ,.".".""...m...,..,... ""...,...,...m.' Multi-program adjustments, including negotiated compensation changes, employee benefit changes. changes due to staff turnover. reorganizations. and other budget changes affecting 1,358, multiple programs. * Engineering and Capital Management The Capital Projects Team provides engineering and project Management for the design and construction ofnew parking facilities, including mixed-use projects. The program also includes renovating and improving existing parking facilities to ensme the preservation and integrity ofthe parking system and its continued service to the public. This program also evaluates energy usage and recommends and implements improvements that reduce the amount ofenergy used by off-street facilities. The Planning Team Parking District Services Transportation 47 3

42 ... administers advertising in PLD garages, outreach to users and the Division's innovation initiatives. Additionally, the program participates in planning for all components ofthe growth and redevelopment ofpld properties to promote economic growth and stability ofassociated urban districts. This is done using short term demand studies and long term strategic plans and usage projections. The Maintenance Team provides the maintenance ofall parking lots, garages, and surrounding grounds. Facilities maintenance is programmed at a level which is designed to ensure the operational integrity ofthe facilities and the safety of parking patrons. Maintenance ofparking facilities includes: snow and ice removal; housekeeping seiv:ices; equipment maintenance for elevators, electrical systems, and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems (HVAC); facility repairs for maintenance of damaged glass, asphalt, concrete, plumbing, painting, space stripes, graffiti, doorframes, brick and block, meter posts, and woodwork due to vandalism, use and age; and grounds-keeping seiv:ices. FY18 Recommended Changes Expenditures FT'Es...~~ 7 A.ppr~.,,~~ "~!~~~!.~~~.n... ~1.4 Multi-pF'()gram~djustmentsi i"cljdin~l1e96tiat&dtompens~tion ch~ngesi employe'e benefit' change~.changesc:lll~ to staff turnover; reqrganization~; 'and()t!1~rbijdget phangeisaff~ctjng. '.. \' : 2~~ ~~:.~..... :.... (.9) ~~~~ipl~pr.?w~f!1~: :..."<ii" FY18 Recommended 2.5 ~ Parking Operations This unit has overall responsibility for the collection and processing ofall parking revenue, including revenue from individual meters, automated pay stations, cashiered facilities, parking permits, and parking fines. Additionally it provides support to the Mass Transit Fund in the processing ofbus revenue for deposit. The program is also responsible for the management ofthe parking citation database and provides management ofthe appeal process for all parking tickets written within the County. Parking Operations maintains regularly scheduled parking enforcement patrols in all Parking Lot Districts (PLDs), residential permit areas outside the Pills, and other designated County facilities. In addition, this program provides a comprehensive meter maintenance program to ensure all meter devices function properly. Augmenting the public safety mission ofthe County Police, this unit also provides contract security guard services for parking facilities to detect and report theft, vandalism, and threats to personal security. Security support is also provided by the Silver Spring Clean and Safe Team. Parking Operations also manages and executes the Parking Outside the Parking Districts Program funded by the County's General Fund FY18 Recommended Changes Expenditures FT'Es FY17 Approved 1,956, E~ha~~;Hb~~'6"Erifci~~~ri;~~tAdjJ~tM~~{..., ' ,......,....: /.:.....:.:.., , i :<~99,566<... (J.bo,~,... '"'".->.,:..::.,'''.,,.,.:,~.:...:._~~...:...:,.:.~...:: :w.:-.:...m...:.'..;..: :.. :...:.:_.::~"...,.,..,.; ;:-.._:.,.,...:,... ~...;.:..:..:..::.,:...".,... ~. < '" ~ "'......::::;:::..:: "::""'~~":':':':::~""~',:,.'...,.,;":,: ;.'.:::.....:.:.,...:...:. ":,;, ",:".w.wyo >."., Increase Cost: Security contract Technical Adj: Other Miscellaneous Operating Expenses (19,881). Mu iti~progta~adj4~trri~nt. ip~uqing.. n.eg~tlated 9TpensatiOnbl1a,i1ge;erhPloY~~.bel')~f!t..".../..: '.'/.i y... changes, cha~liliju~lost8fftur(l6vr;reorganizations, af1dotl:l(;lrpudget.changes~ffe9tij"lg<i x ~~I~pl~~~~~i~~~."Ii,.; '.' :::(;.. ";,,,.i....' '.,.'.... FY18 Recommended BUDGET SUMMARY... '......\ > i'."'.'... i. "".. ~.,f 1.a ,~~.....~....1.~ g. ;.E~.t.j~.... a:.~. -:..... ~.(R.~~e~m...e.;.g...~~.: u~./I..c...~~.i ":" "':;:::':-~:::::'-:::::." Transportation /::" '\ FY18 Operating Budget and Public Services Program FY18-23 \.::._-,,, ~

43 I. Parking District Services Transportation 47 5 ",...)..J PARKING DISTRICT - BETHESDA EXPENDITURES BUDGET SUMMARY. Budget... Estim;ate. '. liecomnu\nded. ">%Chg FY17 FYl1 FY18 BudlR~c.:...w.,,,...,..,.y...,,... "' Salaries and Wages 1,69,984 1,637,679 1,646,95 1,656, % Employee Benefits 572, , , ,65 3.2%... ~... Parking District Betl1.~daP.~~.onllE!l~ost!;... 2,182,522 2,231,546 2,219,769 2,~~8,~~!. 1.7%...,... Operating Expenses 7,4,984 7,992,313 8,9,721 8,247, % Capital Outlay 13,45 Debt Service Other 4,83,444 4,574,348 4,592,348 4,633, %. PCI~illgDlstric:t ~~E!t~e~~CI Expell~itllre~.. 14,31,355 14,798, ,821,838 15,149, % PERSONNEL Full-Time Part-Time... ~... FTEs % REVENUES Investment Income 23,239 39,99 38,69 66, % Land Sale 9, Miscellaneous Revenues 545, ,12 284,12 284,12...,... Parking Fees 13,56,869 14,15,81 14,15,81 15,45,81 9.2%...,... Parking Fines 3,32,459 3,25, 3,25, 3,25,... ~... Property Rentals 772,278 4, 4, 16, 3. %.._..., Property Tax (24,625) o Parking District Bethesda Revenues 17,963,767 17,719,191 17,717,891 2,65, % PARKING DISTRICT - SILVER SPRING EXPENDITURES Salaries and Wages 1,655,491 1,82,31 1,88,918 1,889, % Employee Benefits 583, , , , %... P..CI~~in{;l Dist~c:t. SilvE!r~pringPe~~nnel Costs. 2,2.~~, ,4~~l~~~,~8!,539...~,5~1,57 4.9% ',, ' Operating Expenses h.-.,.-.a.... 8,385,357...," u..." ", 8,637,324 8,712,629..., ,451, %... Capital Outlay 13, ParkinglJi~t':ict~~il...e.r ~P'1l1gE:xpE!l1d~lIl"8s 1,638,225 11,98, ,1,168 12,32, % PERSONNEL Full-Time % Part-Time FTEs % REVENUES Facility Rental Fees (18) Fire Code Enforcement Permits (28) Investment Income 65,121 95,84 126,48 222, %

44 ... BUDGET SUMMARY.. Actual. "Budget Estimate '. '. Recommended ;'%Chg.' FY16. FY17 FY17... ",.,. "..,...,.y.,.....~y1,8,.,,?~~re!e "" 'd...".. Miscellaneous Revenues 1,624,511 Parking Fees 1,866,47 1,661,253 1,661,253 12,66, % Parking Fines 1,819,11 1,869,689 1,869,689 1,897, % Property Rentals 7,515 Property Tax (395,535) Parking District - Silver Spring Revenues 22,986,633 12,626,782 12,657,422 14,726, % PARKING DISTRICT - MONTGOMERY HILLS EXPENDITURES Salaries and Wages 35,81 39,355 3, % Employee Benefits 11,147 11,514 17,37-1. % ~arking [)ist~,l:t- MontgrTIery. Hills. Personnel Costs,. 46,948 5,869 47, ,. " %...,. Operating Expenses 3,161 33,398 36,38-1. %... Pari<in". Dil;t~ct~Ptllntg~lTIerytiiUs Ex.pen~itlJ~~s 77,19 84,267 83,74-1. % PERSONNEL Full-Time Part-Time FTEs % REVENUES Investment Income 1,68 4,27 3,16-1. % Miscellaneous Revenues (833) Parking Fees 37,71 45, 45, -1. % Parking Fines 36,538 28, 28, -1. % Property Tax "...,,, u..,,,,.,,... ~ 135 Parking District - Montgomery Hills Revenues 75,158 77,27 76,16-1. % PARKING DISTRICT - WHEATON EXPENDITURES Salaries and Wages 272, , , , % Employee Benefits 97,755 13,519 11,892 17, %..Parkin"J)istr:ict~ 'ItfIleatol1.,ersonnel~()ts... 37, , , '"... '" 389,84 2.7% Operating Expenses 777,36 989,33 989,988 1,18,78 3.% u..... w ~~ri<ir1g[)i~tril:t- VIJ~eat()n~lCJler1~itures 1,147,775 1,368,171 1,368,511 1,47, % PERSONNEL Full-Time Part-Time FTEs REVENUES Investment Income 4,346 7,14 8,55 14, %.. 47 & Transportation FY18 Operating Budget and Public Services Program FY18-23

45 Miscellaneous Revenues Parking Fees Parking Fines... Property Tax Parking District - Wheaton Revenues DEPARTMENT TOTALS Total Expendnunes Total Full-Time Positions Total Part-Time Positions TotalFTEs Total Revenues BUDGET SUMMARY Actual.' Budget. Estimate Recommended <%Chg FY16 r:re.. FY17,_, n FY18...:..: ""..~.. Bud/Ree,.,..." 69, ,53 815, 815, 725, -11. % '" ".. 432, , 511, 476, -6.8% (57,482) 1.387,353 1,333,14 1, ,215,66-8.8% ,762 27, ,46 4.5% % ,412,911 31,756, , % PARKING DISTRICT BETHESDA FY18 RECOMMENDED CHANGES < '. " ;..: '... /~pehdit~t~sij:tci....:...::...::...:;.::.:....:.:...:.:.....:...;;;.. ;.. :.;.:::.....;... :...;;.. ;...:...:... :... :.... FY17 ORIGINALAPPROPRIAllON 14,798, Changes (with service impacts) Enhance: Hours of Enforcement Adjustment [Parking Operations] Other Adjustments (with no service impacts) Increase Cost: Janitorial Services Increase Cost: FY18 Compensation Adjustment Increase Cost: Security contract [Parking Operations] Technical Adj: Other Professional Services [Financial Management] Increase Cost: Annualization of FY17 Compensation Increases Increase Cost: Retirement Adjustment Increase Cost: Risk Management Adjustment Increase Cost: Debt Service Decrease Cost: Printing and Mail Decrease Cost: Retiree Health Insurance Pre-Funding Decrease Cost: Finance Chargeback..... _Nm.' 213,. 82,8. 46, , , ,819. 9,41. 1, (2,512). (3,85). (9,612). Technical Adj: Other Miscellaneous Operating Expenses [Parking Operations] (19,881). Decrease Cost: Annualization of FY17 Personnel Costs (23,664) (.51) FY18 RECOMMENDED 15,149, PARKING DISTRICT SILVER SPRING FY17 ORIGINAL APPROPRIATION 11,98, Parking District Services Transportation 47 7

46 Enhance: Hours of Enforcement Adjustment [Parking Operations] Other Adjustments (with no service impacts) Increase Cost: Janitorial Services Shift: From Montgomery Hills PLD FY18 RECOMMENDED CHANGES Increase Cost: Service and Maintenance Agreement for Multi Space Meters - ITS Mid Atlantic (ITS) Increase Cost: FY18 Compensation Adjustment Increase Cost: Security contract [Parking Operations] Increase Cost: Annualization of FY17 Compensation Increases Increase Cost: Retirement Adjustment Increase Cost: Annualization of FY17 Personnel Costs Increase Cost: Risk Management Adjustment Decrease Cost: Retiree Health Insurance Pre-Funding Decrease Cost: Finance Chargeback Decrease Cost: Elimination of One-Time Items Approved in FY17 N,..... FY18 RECOMMENDED FTEs,,,.w 599,5. 124,2. 84, ,. 51, , ,595. 8,349. 4, (2,64). (8,769) O.DO (36,). 12,32, PARKING DIS1RICT - MONTGOMERY HILLS FY17 ORIGINAL APPROPRIATION 84,267 OA2 '?th~r~~iustme~~s(with no service impacts) Shift: To Silver Spring PLD (84,267) (.42) FY18 RECOMMENDED o. PARKING DISlRICT -WHEATON Other Adiustments (with no service impacts) FY17 ORIGINALAPPROPRIAllON 1,368, Increase Cost: Janitorial Services 23,. Increase Cost: FY18 Compensation Adjustment 7,737. Increase Cost: Security contract [Parking Operations] 7,164. Increase Cost: Retirement Adjustment 1,922. Increase Cost: Annualization of FY17 Compensation Increases 1, ,",... '"......,~..,., v Increase Cost: Risk Management Adjustment 29. Increase Cost: Annualization of FY17 Personnel Costs 14. Decrease Cost: Retiree Health Insurance Pre-Funding (4). Decrease Cost: Finance Chargeback (1,684). FY18 RECOMMENDED 1,47,792 3A Transportation FY18 Operating Budget and Public Services Program FY18-23

47 PROGRAM SUMMARY Administration Financial Management 9,36, Engineering and Capital Management 6,67,6 2.5 Parking Operations 11, ,59, FUTURE FISCAL IMPACTS CE RECOMMENDED (OOOS) Trt:te :.' i ::... ~... ' FY1S<, FY19 FY2'..,FY2i':FY22... FY23 <~.~. ~. _ _ '. ~... "... "....." ",. _...._ ~...:.:;,:,_,:':': '..~,.<:...,...,:".:...: :,w._./.:nm... ::.:.w.-,;;,_.:'.,: '" > n:.:.:...,:.:.::..:::.:...:);. :.:~:.;:,",;;..,:.,.~,...:..w.. d,: :"v.,;.w.un... '.:~.:~. ~ <.:;;n. ;... h.'...:<... :v:.;';..:.~'m :n_". '" "..."... PARKING DIS1RICT -BETHESDA EXPENDITURES FY18 Recommended 15,15 15,15 15,15 15,15 15,15 15,15 No inflation or compensation change is included in outyear projections. Emergency Backup Batters in Garages Replacement every two years. Retiree Health Insurance Pre-Funding :...:...:..:...;.:.. Labor Contracts These figures represent the estimated annualized cost of general wage adjustments, service increments, and other negotiated items "...,...'."'... ~...,... Subtotal Expenditures 15,15 15,27 15,169 15,29 15,17 15,29 PARKING DISTRICT -SILVER SPRING EXPENDmJRES FY18 Recommended 12,33 12,33 12,33 12,33 12,33 12,33 No inflation or compensation change is included in outyear projections...., " Emergency Backup Batters in Garages 51 Replacement every two years. Labor Contracts These figures~epresent the estimated annualized cost of general wage adjustments, service increments, and other negotiated items. 51 o 51 Retiree Health Insurance Pre-Funding Subtotal Expenditures 12,33 12,18 12,52 12,11 12,53 12,11 18 PARKING DISTRICT -WHEATON EXPENDmIRES FY18 Recommended 1,48 1,48 1,48 1,48 1,48 1,48 No inflation or compensation change is included in outyear projections. Parking District Services Transportation 47-9

48 FUTURE FISCAL IMPACTS CE RECOMMENDED (OOOS) Title FY18 FY19.. FY2 FY21. FY22 FY23 Emergency Backup Batters in Garages Replacement every two years....,... Retiree Health Insurance Pre-Funding Labor Contracts These figures represent the estimated annualized cost of general wage adjustments, service increments, and other negotiated items Subtotal Expenditures 1,48 1,433 1,411 1,433 1,411 1, Transportation FY18 Operating Budget and Public Services Program FY18-23

49 Etilnated. 211 ReiowmeUiled 218 PI",j~"d lui? ProjlPl'ted projected Proj.wred Projl'<.1ed CPI (Fi~c.IYe.it) Beginning Fund Bliliinci' 16;45% L1% :1.% 14,136,()37 l7.~~!'; Z.3~1> 1;2/ 12,434;758 17,~~. 2,3% L?O% 12;35, % 1139% 17.39% 2.~," 2.5% 2.,~% :2-2% 2.7% 3.fIO~-1> S 1;389, ;887;284 12;829,878 J7.~9/. 2.5%.11..% 12,992,3D2 Fjlle~ Iii.Ftirfeits 14,15;1.3,Z5,()OO 362.Sl j~aosj 8l 3,25,. 1,41;45 2,65;531 ls.4s,81 J' J,25,OOO 538;9 S 19,193,171 l5,4os.qsi ; ),45,& ;81 3;25; ;i,;l5q,() 3,25; 8,565, S 27;2lo,sU S '19;148;451 S 1", ,81 3.2S,OQl,l l5!mi~o S 2;l65,Q31 Indirect Co.tS 1'rausC..rs to Spedai Funds: ru SlI])ported TotillR~.ourc6. S. (1,1l82,33Z) (38Q.3.3i) (12.799) (367;533 1;52. n.2,poo), 29;9'il.s?6 S,223;255) (47.325) (12.799) S i Ii 1;815,93 S (1,671 (HO (144,9 S -. 3,277,34 S (2; ) S U94S26).~' :> (394;526\ 1; S (1,71~s93) ci449) - 28;987,13.(5,2.13,282) n,187,6!). (2,1~175) S (394,52J». ( ) S {394;SZ6) S.- S '" S - S (394526) (394526) :> (394526) (18UI ,543 S 11,76Ui49 S (t;67s.~6} (i,647;64i) ~ ) S ( ) S 44,9) S (3;;. S., 32;3!)1;3Q6 S :& 29;93.%,733 S (1;137,!lSl). (394;526.{394,26'1 S t;14z.s~~. (USI1;.655'. CiM.9W) S 31,12,252 S ft'7;1.5. S ( S -.(3;155, (2.99.) (1.435, a.69&'t)oo). S. S Ii (i.69o.ooo j~pe1"atittgjludget E: 'tillg Debt Senice Retiree Eealth Insurnnce Pl'E-Fundin!l: B.ttel}' Backup: S S 1) (1O.Zl9.49 (4592,348.-', (14,1121,838) (}; ), (4,6:>3.64).S (15,149;872) (};7,U;438'.(4,6..<;M94).(51) S (38;5 S (16,533) (1~;442,23S) (1O;M'l93!1',991,1'&4) S {ll.1z6.366 <4,64,4 (4.,634,25) S (3,W:U92 s r~15(») (2.62) (3,34{)') S OS,5() - (16;533) (16533), (16,533) S (ls~2&.22). (15,683,787) 1) (14,25{1,431) ( 11,264,4g~) (3,91,11) (B.\O). (3.5) (1653-') (14.413,869). (17 ~'136,838: : (18, ) S (18,591;235) S (1851,22) (18,U8,787) (16,94(1.431 ) S (17,13,869) \'ur End FuM.B"bmcl' IA~ alf'!blel'\.ldd.balft~e "",AfeJ;'C+llt of;n~.years PSP~nses 12,434;75, (7;941,!l83) 4, % 3,787,468. S 12.3,161 S (8,578.4Q9) S 3,456,752 22% S 3,86;559 1, {8;63;23l1 1759;545 11% 3;88,6 13,887,284 12;829,87. S 'li,992,..\2 (8;6SS~469) (S;893;2Q4), (8;925;611) S 5,2.31;815 3,936;674 S '91.33% 28% 28% S 3;92;947 S 3,562,6 " 3;63;467 Assuillpliorn;, 1. Th~ caj;h balance include; fwld. ~'lilited to be held by tile Dhtrict to <oviirbtiild Covenants. Bond ~over.i2,e (ailnual net (""",,nues. over debf 5Ce1"\;ce.requireIile.llts) i. niaintmned at ahout 186 pen:eilt in FYlS. The miniruumrequiremeut.is 125 perc"ut 2. RevenilC' tor the air right. Ie.se for Garage 49 i. a"uiued in FY16 tlunugll FY23, 3. Increll~e 1 re\'enne ill'fy18 i~ based onoi.ncrea".,d hourn of eiiforcement' in lots ~nd gru-age. The proposed additioiial eniorc""""nt would be 11 Sallil'ciay.:. 4. Increase to re\,emle' In FY23 is ""sed on An ftgreem"nt to provide parlcillg: 1 M.auiott far US"" ofgarage n during bll,mess.hours '!clonday through Friday. 3. TIlese PlujectiollS are.bas~d on ill" Exemti\'e'. RecauDllendeifBudget iuld includethe revenue and resonrce a"~1illlptiolls oftbat budget. FY19-Z3 expendiruresare based Glrthe "m.1ior. knowu couunitlneil1>" ofelected official. alld indn,knesrotiated labof'8!ueemellt;;, estimaies'of compensation and inflation cost inctelr.;es: the opa:"tillg~st~of.c~piliil fucilitie.,tlr fiscal imp!ictofappro,oed jegisla~i()u o;regulatio,t,. ;d other prog1'a1ll1113tic coulllliiment5. Th<!y do,,':'t inct".k liuapp~"'d sei>i"" improvelljents. Tile projected fllllu,; expend;nll'e., I"''tiilles. and fund bai.1ljce may "''')rbo.ed on challge.;to fee.oi tl.'i: rates, usage, illflarlou. futlu''' i.,b9r Rgreeinent, mtd atbedatto[s.,1 "stolle<! here: 6. Ti,e Parking Lot Dis'irid. hal'''' fulld baiandepolicy ta."get ;,qual In 25 p=eni or the fullowingyear's pfojecied opel'atij"g budget exj:>eu.es. S 14.16,3113 S (8.969,s(3) S 5;46,879 35~o S 3,63,467 Parking District Services Transportation 47 11

50 ~ :ZJ;7J-J.~ =DH~ :>rrnce'll'rogralj,l'~~<ajr:jad Mtmtgymery l{ius Parldng Lot Distrid 'E.lilD:tt~ 217 R~ro"',,",uded 21lla.Pr!ft'cled Prnl... ted PniJer:lp" prolected 219: 2(1:2 loll 222 Pmltdoo Indirect eost Rate lnv~'iii!:oine yield FuDilBaImK"; 16.45% C7M..7% ll;ll % 2.3.% 1 7% I) % 11.39/.1139% 17.19"1 2.3% 24% 25% 25Wo 1.7% l.2o% 2.7% ElO% S S ' 17:39% 2SO% H)O% S - ~f\.enuf.s 45; 2!!;(i 3,J611 76,16'. 5 S - S s s..., ' -. S S S.. S, ' Indirect CostS (1.3;31) Cla;371l) (11,378) (5,) ~ S - -. s - S S S.. -., :. -.. S -'. S. ";:. 8; ". : ~ ; - : ' S S Total RA>soUrc.es BJ.74 (} II 1) S {) S S o OuemtiligBud~ Slihiotal pgp':oueratiilll BDde:d:A.,J>I'OJ>!'iaitOo s (83;1{)4) (83 ;(4) (83.71)4) S - S -. ' - :. - S ~. ' S.,. -.' - S S S Y~arElId AvaltabIeFtmd BalaRv, Avallilble FuudBaianc.1' AsA Pt.'te.J1l ofn~xt Yeai" l'sp~~ii~. 5 II %., (}. ()%., S (I /.' 'O~ii Mio % s - s S Assumptions: I', The.. ptojec.tloru; are based on.lhe..executin's Recommended Budget mel mclude th" revenue and res",lrc-e assumptions ofthat bud~, 'FICl9-!3 expenditures are based on the "IlII!iQr; KiIDwn conmutiji~i1" of ~Ie"f~d offiria1;;omd.mdmle negotiatedjab"t agre.mei1.fs, e.timal~. i>f compiiiisatilin arid ittf1.tioil cdstincr.as",th" operating.<ists ofcapif1l1 fati1itie~, tbe theal impart of nppio\~ed )egiswtioo or regiilation~,aildolberprograinmiltic C<llinmtuienl>o. They (\ not include \In''P1?~o''ed.'",,;ce improvements, Tile proj"o.teji future expend,,,,,,,,, revel;!ne>,!u)d fund balance DlIl}' \'lily b...,d on,ciumges 1. i~ 1)f I>Ix rnte", u<;ap.e,inflatioll;d,.jure l,almr.!'-r...m."'t:<;,. and other factors not "ssuld!!d here., 2: The Parking LotDi'tric~ liave " flloo balance ""iiey target equal io 25 pa'ceiii of1hefnuot, ingyeai-'., JlI'ojeded Dpemtillgblldgf't expei1.~e., Transportation FY18 Operating Budget and Public Services Program FY18-23

51 InIIJ.-lJ public. Ser\~tces>l'togfalll; Fj.S(;al. Plrul snver.spring Parking Lot. District Assumptloll. IMiiWCp.t Rate CPt (FisCal Year) Iil"~.It!eonie Yield BegIilniligFund.Balllu~e S EtiillAted i17 16AS% L7<l%.1%.19,25;215 RmllmneDd~ % :'.3/ 1.1/. 14,939,481. i:'rnjkted % 2,3/ l.~ 12,161' S J't~jecie<i 24)2 17:39% 2AO% 2.2% 8.61i;Sll S pn~d /.2.5,*, ,lZQ. I>fcrjl"cte lllll' 1139% 25/ 3..% 6;68,316 Projected 'Zfl1) 1739% 2.5% ~.OO% 5,993,211 Re"enues Ch~ for sen,it \; Fines & Forfeits Miscellaneous Subtotal Re'VeJlUes S S 1;661,253 U/)9,68ll 126~48 H651,422 1;4,6Q6; S S S 14,72612.l2,1iQ ' (84 S 14, S rz,!5q A4Q 14911,382 S S 14;1/);253 s UI9},6119 5,n4 S 165.3;982 S 15,114J : sshoo 11,63;16"1 : 15;76S,?22.1,897,689 S5;6qo 18;:U!~,lln TrallSfers Transfer!> tq<3eoera1 FWI~ 'reoontrntmit-ationi NDA J'ildirectCostS. {2,511,(8) (<187,452 (82,192) {'4tl5,26j (2,35M6) S ( ) (82,192) ' (44&,924) ~ 93,346). (53L116) (82;192) ( ,D11 ( (448;924} (2;'14;439) s (441l,92!O,. (+ts,li24) (2,61,32.3) (44s..924) - {44&,924} (Z,1'Mo'1) ( (44iI,924) Trafts~r.s.oSpeC&1 Funds: Tax SiIllPllne!l Transrerw ~n PU> Trimsfer tosikl'f' Spriol( PLo SilVei' Spring UtbiuiDiStricf 'fuin~ferfuilethesda PLD S 3:113,556). Cl,s2S,4?tl) s...;". (8,214) - (2,15,282) :& (l,9s9.71). S (2,54mQ) s (4.Q (1,32tlA's 414,9;}S (4) (2;289285) 3,, S (l;291,!hs.) S (2.) S (2,15,Sj35) S - (U5S,3!I!J) (iqa () (2,222,619) S ~;1l5~13 (1Il1tOOjl (1;t89.9~) Total R-Mourc('s S ;57 S.24,31,11 S 23,54',96 S j~317;663, Z:t,78,illci S 21,~3!ti15 CIP CllrtelitR~vennt Appr(jJ)rliitlcra ;mendlf,m. (3,311,flOO) (t,7oo,ooo) (3.464.) (2,?OO,noo) (2,7.) S (27;) (:Z;1()O,OOO) Opera~Btidget 'LeaseS Slibtomll'SP~el atlugb..dget ApprnprtatloD. So S (io.ooq 168) (llo()j)oo) - - 1,1 168) {14;,UZl{!3} (1~932;742) S. (Uoo,OOn).,t " ' (12,O.H 741). (14,7;}2,742) S (11.,48.:847 (L1;~ (39 (.51:2) (is..ool (il;215,1311 (15;68973) S (ij.165,jj,s) (1;1 boo) (1,41) - (18,81) (iz,18~;786) (14;935,786). s (t1;t~541j. (M.OOOOO) s (1,8) (5.7,2) S (lll,81) (12'942,348) M;Mi;34S) s X11!f93';S4!f) (1,iOO;OOO) (1,3) - (1S,81) (13,14;949) (is;7u;949)...< (12:4its7) (t1i:loooo) (1,3Q) (5],2) (18,&1) (13.:U5;18) :(15,925;lOS) Al'ililabl".Fuild Baliulct'A APi'l'.C'ent ofnm Ye~. PSPE~il5fj; s 14;939, ~" 3,Oj)8;186 12,576,315, 14/. 3;1l56,3!19. S 8612; % 3,{}1l, ~".3;2,35,587 S S 6,685,3l6 S 52% 3;253;137 S 5,!)9J,Hl 46% 3;36,277 5 S 5, /1, 3,3{}6;277..AsS)uDptiO!lS: L TheseprojecijQIIS~re b/is<!donilie Executi~eis Rec"mmende(! Bu.1!get ~p4 incltjde ~r~ue lmji ~S1lI'ce SlImptWlIS ofthai budgei. FY 1 ~-22 expenditpres are based the ffmajor, known cotmidbuents" of eiected oificialsanilinclude negpnated laborllgreemenis, elo1imi.t~ ofco.,,;tion aooinflaiion cost increases; the operatint.rosi 6f: ljpibij. fitci,1ifu!5;tmiascal itiipact of.pprg\",j:ll~gislabo'dor regutatiqus; iilido.thetpro~~i:qiritfutn..ru.ts..they not mcludeili:iapproi.'ed ~erviceinlpfo~~. TI:!e PWi~d.1'tI~exp"lldl.llm'S,. rev~e., lliid fitnd balanc,. 1nay V!uy based.,;, C""n~tO ~:ortipc rate", usag~. inflatioll, future labor agreemej).ts;aod ijlher: fiiclors not, a~\lmed here., 2. Incrpa~slO rewouem FYHilUldrn i are ba...d oninc... >ed houf'i of'>llforc.m~1if ill lots ""d garages. Tlte proposed additional enforcement wo;lid be Mo"d.,y through Friday begimiingin FYIa,Jlnd Sainrd.,), enfoltement begiimmg..in.fy2l 3, The PRrlciJig LOt Dislricts lulve a.fimdbai8l!ce policy farge! equal.lo 25 petcei:i! of,thdbllowingyear's projected opera.fing.budget eiq)~nst'5, Parking District Services Transportation 47 13

52 Ii'l[ IlhYl'UI>IkS~rnces l'r<lgram: ~l.(lill'lau WliIliitonpaCkiag Lot District E.tim~"d ~com_oo..d Pt";j"ctM Pl'olf<:tod PrOlected: Proj~cted ~roj.~tt'd ' lo2 221 lolz lou AssWJll)tiou'; ~tcqstrat" 16A5% 1739% 17.39% 1139% 1739% 17.~~ ~ 1739% Cl'I(Fiscal Year) 1.7% 2.3% 2.3% :2,4% 1.5% 2:5% 2.5% IIi~...,.tmeni Income Yield..7% l.2o% 1.7"A. 2.2% 2.7% 3~oo% 3.% BegluulngFlUld Balauce S ,683 S 2lll;l47 S :"6 :S '13 ae';"u~, Charges furser..ics t 315,. S 725 S15 :125, S 125,.: 1;2Q FitleS &Forft.its 511; S ,.,36 S (i S 11(i:Qo/J Mi~cel1aneou. 1l55o S 14,61> 2;7'i'o 26, ;66ti S 36;66(\ Silbtutnj Rerruues 1,334,551) S l,ll5.66 S 1.+li,773 1~867,88~ S 1,873,mI 1,877;66 S i,877;1!6 TultSfers (,84). (l1s,~). 2S3,826 ~87,1I9 S S7~j) (13.48) S (1,3;986) Transters 1 Genw.Fu.nd (66AS5) (7i,726l (71,726 {67;i,62 S (61,2) (61,662) {67,(62) Tel<i<o.omWWiiciitiimS'NDA S (4;64) (4,64 : (4,64) " - Indir~ Costs {61,391. (67,/ifl) {67 662} ( (67,662). (67;662). {61,66~ Tl1lnuers to.spedal FlInds :' Tn.S)!IlP6liflJ S {~:J 6211 S S 35,552 S 3SSS!' S 54;614 S 5.;i;6'J6 'Wheaton Urban Disttid.. (13;62!t). (24,35S}. {25,128}.5 {25;128 s (25;128). {2.666} S (27~4) Pad.:in~ DiStrict S~F8cility. S (J9,32). {1~,32. {i932ff. (19,32(». (19;32) (11).12 Tr>iusft'f froiil S.i:lwtSpri~PLP.,. 4,. 4, s 2,. lj)oo s l()();ooo Tota\ R~.our<es S 2;28; ,,?81;J39. 1,1148;744 '2,J4S,51.2,.15,26 Z,34S,Ol>S S 2,2:74~841 eip t:un,.nj R",,"uue Appropriation Expt'uditure S (157,) S (ls7doo) S (157, S,(iS7,OOO (157) s (l57;o s (151.) Appmpl'!atlons,'Expenditutes OpeI>\fi1\gBud~. (J, L47,7:92). (l,477,282). (1.; (1352,813). (l,173;88l). (1,796,82) Retiree Health Tn,surane"Pte--FUnd~... (6) (22). (27) S (34). {3:4) Batterv Bacl.-up S -. :I: t22,ooo). 122;1. S {2Z;OOO) Labor Aro;'t.'emmt S S S (2,671). (1;671. t2,67!). (2;67lJ S (" 671) gubl<ltal PSP Operaf4ig Budget Approprla/iou.S (l~'\6iisli) S (1.4P7,792:) s (1,52,13) (I.73~,175) (1,777;754) S (I.17(i,S!};) s (11121 Q9J) T otll) Use illresource. S (1,515,511) S (1.564;791) S (1,65!l,OlJ) S (1;892;115) S (1,9~4;7S4) S (1,933;892) S (1;\J7s;o9~) " Yflu'EDdA;.1IiiJ.M~Fnila BalaoiC~ S 682,l>8l 2iS, ,731 '.S' 453, , S 2'.67S4. A.~JOjI"l>le Fu.nd Bilbo A~ A Perceut ofken '\'.. Rr',.psp EXpenR' 48% 15% It~'to l!l% 27% 23% 16q;. TargnBalonce S 351; so3 433,194 S 444,438.4#, ;273 S 455,273 As.'lunpi)ons:. 'J. The~e projedions: are basedoii the E.~b:v~'tRec.ommffidedBudgo!1 and. include IlIereVenue and resource amlinptioo~ of'liiaibudp,e1. FYi9-13 expenditure~ are based on ille "major, krulwn comnii.b:nelibto(e~ted bfficials and melu!!e negotiated lllbor '1..-i>reem"uts, estiritales ofcijnqlmsatj~ anillol4iliqri. r.osr il:i"",ases, iiie' ope...tiu@:costs of c.pilal facilities, the fisclllimpli~tof 8P\>1'OVet! legislation orr~gul8tions, Bnd other progm=tie commitment>. Tbeydo.not indll~wltppro'-ed service mtprcivemenls. The projected.i'llinri' ewendonn-es, rm'i1,les,.nndfimd balance may vary ba...ton:clj.llg~. 1 ree or ta.'l,.!es, usage, inflirtion:, futurpiabor agreement.,.nd OaIer fuc!ors'noi assumed here. i Tile l'tirkilllilot D,.triel. haw a fuildbnlante' policy wgl't ~qiutl to 25 pereenl ofthe fouo,ving year's ~'roj""ted opf1'itiug budg~1 expenses Transportation ) FY18 Operating Budget and Public Services Program FY18-23

53 Page 2 Resolution No.: The Department of Economic Development may, after reporting to the Council, allocate to other Economic Development Fund Programs up to a total of 25, previously appropriated to the Economic Development Fund for the Green Investor Incentive Program. This resolution appropriates 54, to the Department ofeconomic Development to contract with the Montgomery Business Development Corporation (MBDC). The Department must not spend 4, of this appropriation for new or expanded marketing and attraction efforts until the Council receives a report detailing MBDC' s FY 215 third and fourth quarter action plan for marketing and attraction. TIlls report must be received no later than January 31,215. The report must include a summary ofmarketing activities and expenditures by quarter for FY 214 and for the flrst two quarters offy 215 to provide the Council with a baseline for marketing activity. This resolution appropriates 192,5 to the Department of Economic Development to support "Rx for Employability" and other career pathway program in health and wellness flelds. The Department ofeconomic Development must submit a report to the Council by July 14,214 detailing the Department's plans to coordinate efforts with its partners to implement career pathways programs in the health and wellness flelds. These funds must not be spent until 2 days after the Council receives this report. This resolution appropriates 32,7,836 to the Department ofpennitting Services. The Council's approved Fiscal Plan for the Department of Permitting Services Enterprise Fund estimates that in FY 215 the County will receive 38,46,5 in revenues from licenses and permits and total revenues of4,21,625. The Executive must designate in FY 214 excess reserves above the 2% fund balance, estimated to be 23,796,523 in cumulative year end reserves for proportional expenses for the Department's new headquarters in Wheaton that is expected to be available in FY 219. After expenses and the designated reserve for the Wheaton headquarters, the Council estimates the FY 214 year end fund balance will be 12,871,525. The Silver Spring Parking Lot District must transfer 1,5, in parking fee revenues~---f to the Bethesda Parking Lot District to cover a shortfall in operating funds. The Bethesda Parking Lot District must transfer 1,5, to the Silver Spring Parking Lot District in, FY 216 as repayment., _-'

54 Page 2 Resolution No.: r--' f 69. The Director of Finance must transfer 3,, in parking fee revenues from the I Silver Spring Parking Lot District to the Bethesda Parking Lot District to cover a f shortfall in operating funds. The Council expects these funds to be repaid in FY 218 i through a transfer from the Bethesda Parking Lot District to the Silver Spring Parking Lot District. I 7. This resolution appropriates 1,, to the Public Election Fund Non Depitrtmental Account to provide public campaign financing for a candidate for County elective office. These funds must only be used for purposes allowed in Article IV ofchapter 16 ofthe County Code. 71. This resolution appropriates 33,893,45 to the Department of Permitting Services. The Council's approved Fiscal Plan for the Department of Permitting Services Enterprise Fund estimates that in FY 216 the County will receive 36,14,374 in revenues from licenses and permits and total revenues of 38,42,586. The Executive must designate in FY 215 excess reserves above the 2% fund balance, estimated to be 22,819,245 in cumulative year end reserves for proportional expenses for the Department's new headquarters in Wheaton that is expected to be available in FY 219. After expenses 8nd the designated reserve for the Wheaton headquarters, the Council estimates the FY 215 year end fund balance will be 12,61,123. This is a correct copy ofcouncil action. ~.. 7h.~. Linda M. Lauer, Clerk ofthe Council

55 Resolution No.: :...=...=..;.;;; Introduced: June 9, 215 Adopted: June 9, 215 COUNTY COUNCIL FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND Lead Sponsor: County Council SUBJECT: Amendment to Fiscal Year 216 Ooerating Budget Resolution Provision No. 69. Parking Lot District Background 1. On May 21, 215, the Council adopted Resolution 18-15, Approv.al of and Appropriation for the FY 216 Operating Budget ofthe Montgomery County Government. 2. Budget provision No. 69 says, "The Director offinance must transfer 3,, in parking fee revenues from the Silver Spring Parking Lot District to the Bethesda Parking Lot District to cover a shortfall in operating funds. The Council expects these funds to be repaid in FY 218 through a transfer from the Bethesda Parking Lot District to the Silver Spring Parking Lot District" 3. After reviewing the applicable law authorizing the Council to approve such a transfer, it bas been determined that the provision should be amended to say "The Silver Spring Parking Lot. District must transfer 3,, in parking fee revenues to the Bethesda Parking Lot District to cover a shortfall in operating funds. The Bethesda Parking Lot District must transfer 3,, to the Silver Spring Parking Lot District in FY 218 as repayment" This does not amend any FY 216 appropriation or resource assumption approved bytbe Council in Resolution Action The County Council for Montgomery County, Maryland, approves the following action: Resolution 18-1 SO, Approval ofand Appropriation for the FY 216 Operating Budget ofthe Montgomery County Government, Budget Provision No. 69 is replaced with the following amended language:

56 ! Page 2 ReSolution No.: I,.. \ - The Silver Spring Parking Lot District must transfer 3,, in parking fee revenues'. \ to the Bethesda Parking Lot District to cover a shortfall in operating funds. The Bethesda I Parking Lot District must transfer.3,, to the Silver Spring Parking Lot District in 'jl / FY 218 as repaymem:-'.,---' ) This is a correct copy of Council action. oe~/h ~ Linda M. Lauer, Clerk ofthe Council

57 Parking Lot Districts Service Facility (P51551) Category Transportation Date Last Modified 3/9117 Sub Category Parking Required Adequate Public Facility No Administering Agency Transportation (AAGE3) Relocation Impad None Planning Area Silver Spring Status Preliminary Design Stage Total Thru FYi6 Rem Total FY16 6 Years FYi7 FY18 FY 19 FY2 FY21 FY22 EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE (OOOs) Beyond 6 YIS Plannina. Desion and Supervision Land Site Imorovements and Utilities Construction Other Total B Current Revenue: Parkin OPERATING BUDGET IMPACT /OOOs) Energy Maintenance Program-Other Net Impact Appropriation Request Esl FY18 Supplemental Appropriation ReQuest Transfer Cumulative Appropriation 4197 Ex~enditure I Encumbrances 394 Unencumbered Balance 383 APPROPRIATION AND EXPENDITURE DATA (ODDs) Date First Appropriation FY15 First Cost Estimate Current Scope FY Last FY's Cost Estimate 4197 Description The PLD Service Facility is proposed to indude offices for the meter and maintenance teams, shops for meter repair and cleaning, dry storage and staff facilities for everyday use amd emergency service callbacks. The facility will allow consolidation of the existing Parking Maintenance office directly across Spring Street (currently in leased space) and the Meter Maintenance Shop currently located on the ground floor of Garage 4 near Thayer Avenue and Fenton Street. The facility will be adjacent to the northern wall of Garage 2. Location 12 Spring Street, Silver Spring Capacity The facility will consist of 11,5 gross square feet of office, shop, and staff facilities space to support approximately 3 to 35 staff members and contractual employees. Estimated Schedule Design performed during FY15 and FY16. Construction will be performed during FY17, FY18 and the first quarter of FY19. Justification Moving the Meter Maintenance Shop will allow the future sale/redevelopment of the property. The existing lease for the Parking Maintenance Office is located in a building that has been purchased by a new owner. The County has been put on notice that the lease will not be renewed at its scheduled termination. The Meter Shop currently is located in Garage 4 in South Silver Spring. This facility will either need extensive rehabilitation for continued use or may be the subject of a future demolition and redevelopment Combining these teams in one location will allow space saving for conference rooms, kitchen and break room. Garage 2 also has space for additional employee parking and secure parking for Meter Maintenance vehicles. An analysis by the Leasing Office of the Department of General Services has determined that leasing or buying an existing building will cost significantly more than the construction of a ne!in facility on PLD owned land. Operating expenses are expected to decrease by combining the two current facilities into one. Fiscal Note There will be no land costs since the facility will be buiit on a surface lot owned by the Parking Lot District. Full appropriation was requesteq in FY15 in order to accomplish a designlbuild contract Disclosures A pedestrian impact analysis has been completed for this project. Coordination

58 Parking Lot Districts Service Facility (P51551) PEPCO, Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, Department of Technology Services, Office of Management and Budget, Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission

59 Ride On Bus Fleet (P5821) Category Transportation Date last Modified 3/9/17 Sub Category Mass Transit Required Adequate Public Facility No Administering Agency Transportation (AAGE3) Relocation Impact None Planning Area Countywide Status OngOing Total Thru FY16 Rem FY16 Total 6 Years FY 17 FY18 FY19 FY2 FY21 FY22 Beyond 6 Yrs EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE (OOOs) Planning, Design and Supervision land Site Improvements and Utilities Construction Other Total FUNDING SCHEDULE looos) Bond Premium Contributions Fed Stimulus 1State Allocation) Federal Aid Impact Tax Mass Transit Fund Short-Term Financing State Aid Total , APPROPRIAnON AND EXPENDITURE DATA (OOOs) Appropriation Request Est. FY 18 14,77 Supplemental Appropriation Request Transfer Cumulative Appropriation 142,675 Expenditure 1Encumbrances Unencumbered Balance 21,578 Date First Appropriation FY9 First Cost Estimate Current Scope FY last FY's Cost Estimate 228,826 Partial Closeout Thru New Partial Closeout Total Partial Closeout Description This project provides for the purchase of replacement and additional buses in the Ride On fleet in accordance with the Division of Transit Services' bus replacement plan and the Federal Transportation Administration's service guidelines Estimated Schedule FY17: 14 full-size CNG and 19 full-size diesel; FY18: 23 full-size CNG and 3 large diesel; FY19: 9 full-size hybrid and 31 small diesel; FY2: 31 large diesel; FY21: 22 full-size hybrid; FY22: 13 full-size hybrid Cost Change In FY18, switch three buses from hybrid to diesel and eliminate two buses due to discontinuation of Route 94. Justification The full-size transit buses have an expected useful life of twelve years. Smaller buses have an expected useful life of ten years. Disclosures Expenditures will continue indefinitely. The Executive asserts that this project conforms to the requirements of relevant local plans, as required by the Maryland Economic Growth, Resource Protection and Planning Act. Coordination Department of General Services, Maryland Transit Administration

60 MONTGOMERY COUNTY COUNCIL ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND MEMORANDUM To: Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy & Environment Committee From: Council President Roger Berliner and Council Vice President Hans Riemer Date: April 21, 217 Re: Vision Zero Grant Fund To further our efforts on Vision Zero, we respectfully request your consideration of placing 1, (in 5, tranches) on the reconciliation list to seed a Vision Zero Grant Fund. This Fund, along with the development of complete streets guidelines, would significantly advance Vision Zero in the County. The Fund would support projects by non-profit organizations and County agencies/departments that directly advance the County's Vision Zero goal. A key benefit of this approach is the ability to get innovative and impactful small projects off the ground in an expedient manner. The County Executive would administer the Fund by determining award criteria consistent with Vision Zero strategies and goals, by selecting awardees, and by reporting to Council periodically on the results of the program. The Fund should reside in a NDA or in another inter-departmental funding vehicle. This proposal is modeled on the successful grant fund created by the District of Columbia through their Vision Zero process. The D.c' fund has supported innovative and effective projects, including the installation of underride guards on District dump trucks, sidewalk and signage improvements, and bicycle safety education programs, among others. We have appended more information on the D.c' fund. Creating a Vision Zero Grant Fund would be an effective, efficient, and innovative to make greater progress on reducing fatal crashes in this budget cycle. Thank you for your consideration of our request.

61 P{ 17 GRANTS FY 16 GRANTS Each fiscal year, the Vision Zero program uses 5, from the photo enforceme.,t program to pilot innovative safety pro9rarns...vit.h 8fJencie!:'!'-;eeking t.o expand their role in transp()rtat!on safety. in FY16, five grants were awarded to DC government age.'i1::i!!}s. DDOT "'i-"""'~, \'J~\ODR 4" DPW DCCAH DMHHS Gn)l1t Amount 8, Data analysis and education campaign to increase awareness O! large commercial vehicle biind 5potS for people walking and biking 1, JI.ccessibi'ity fellow5 ded"lcated to safety education, sign inventory, "nd evaluat.ion of bus stop accessibility and :;!dewalk condit.ions 156, Installation and retrofit of side underride prevention devices on 6 -wheel and io wheel dump trucks (78 vehicles) 41, Public art inst.allation to highlight and discourage street harassment 2, ANC safety liaison tool kit and training - pedestrial1 safety, Age Friel1dly DC In Progress Complete In Progress Complete In Progress DC Villages! Capitol Hil! Village Gearin' Up Bicydes The Georg~~ W'ijshjil~lton Univer~ity Ho~pita! District of ColumbiiJ Department of For Hire Vehicles District of Columbia Office of Risk Mana~Jernent Grant Program Use Amount 16, DC Villages will reduce the number of seniors driving through an expanded volunteer ride program and incr(~ased use of ridesharing; improve senior driving education; and enhance pedestrian safety and navigation. 8, Gearin' Up Bicycles will organize teams of trained youth and adult bicycle mechanics to provide education, repairs, safety checks, and free safety equipment. in coordination with the District of Co!umbla Public Schools Biking in the Park program. 169, The George Washington University Ho~pital wili replicate a proven protocol to increase collection of blood evidence used to adjudicate impaired drivers throughout all District of Columbia trauma centers. 61, DFHV will provid(~ preventive enforcermmt for vehicles for hire, in cooruination with DDOT traffic control. DFf IV wii: prevent dangerous driving with comp!lancl~ check points and focused enforcement in areas with high concent.rations of vulnerable travelers. 13, ORM will irnplement a District-wide driver safety program including online training and behind-the-wheel training for hiuhrisk drive. rs. Status In Progress In Progress In Pr9ress In Progress In Progress TJ. 1.<\dk,f: Pia~: PfI'';(.f';':;'; :'v,i:c'~ P1.':':1 PrL"'~T'l:"~.!:: i 2.1

62 County achieved full pre-funding in FY 15, consistent with Council resolution No In FY17, these contributions were 43.5 million (County General Fund), 63.1 million (MCPS Consolidated Trust), and 1.5 million (Montgomery College Consolidated Trust). FY18 Recommertded Changes Expenditures FTEs FY17 Approved 43,513,55. w,......, :",...,:...,...,...,... Decrease Cost: Contribution Based on Actuarial Valuation (115.23) c......c ~!~w.~=~,'!'m!':'!:'~~... _~.~..."""..."...~.,.._.~... ~~..._"..._._,_,~.. ~_.._..._._._..,.~.,..,_._..~._..~~~~~~~~.... ~,:,~~. t% Risk Management (General Fund) This NDA funds the General Fund contribution to the Liability and Property Coverage Self-Insurance Fund. The Self-Insurance Fund, managed by the Division ofrisk Management in the Department offinance, provides comprehensive insurance coverage to contributing agencies. Contribution levels are based on the results ofan annual actuarial study. Special and Enterprise Funds, as well as outside agencies and otherjurisdictions, contribute to the Self-Insurance Fund directly. A listing ofthese member agencies and the amounts contributed can be found in the Department offinance, Risk Management Budget Summary. FY18 Recommended Changes Expenditures FrEs InCrease Cost: Risk Management Adjustment... : :...:...>. :..._.:::... : ,.~,~!~!~!,~~... ".. '.. m~:.~'~. >1,539, * Rockville Parking District This NDA provides funding towards the redevelopment ofthe City ofrockville Town Center and the establishment ofa parking district. The funding reflects a payment from the County ta the City ofrockville for County buildings in the Town Center development and is based on the commercial square footage ofcounty buildings. Also included are funds for the cost oflibrary employee parking and the County's capital cost contribution for the garage facility as agreed in the General Development Agreement r- FY18 Recommended Changes Expenditures F"fEs FY17 Approved b~~~~se C~st: R~~~iii~ p~;ki~g b~trid FY18 Recommended Snow Removal and Storm Cleanup This NDA funds the snow removal and stann cleanup costs for the Department of Transportation and General Services above the budgeted amounts in these departments for this purpose. This program includes the removal ofstann debris and snow from County roadways and facilities. This includes plowing, applying salt and sand, equipment preparation and cleanup from snow storms, and wind and rain storm cleanup. FY18 Recommended Changes Expenditures F"fEs L FY18Recommended, w,.. W ow N"N.w...,...,'w...,...' Other County Government Functions FY18 Operating Budget and Public Services Program FY18-23