12:45 p.m. Valley Metro RPTA Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1 st Avenue, 10 th Floor Phoenix. MEETING OF THE Board of Directors

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "12:45 p.m. Valley Metro RPTA Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1 st Avenue, 10 th Floor Phoenix. MEETING OF THE Board of Directors"

Transcription

1 MEETING OF THE Board of Directors MEETING DATE March 22, 2012 TIME LOCATION 12:45 p.m. Valley Metro RPTA Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1 st Avenue, 10 th Floor Phoenix

2

3 March 14, 2012 TO: FROM: RE: Members of the Valley Metro RPTA Board of Directors Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer March 22, 2012 Board Packet Notes Attached is the March 22, 2012 Board Meeting agenda and supporting information. The meeting is scheduled to begin at 12:45 p.m. and will be held in the Lake Powell Conference Room at 101 N. 1 st Avenue, Suite This meeting can be attended via teleconference. Please contact Rosalia Castro for the call-in information. If you have any questions regarding the information in this packet, please let me know. Parking is available onsite and parking can be accessed via the entrance on Adams Street. Parking validation will be available at the meeting. Transit tickets are also available to those who attend the meeting using transit. If you need detailed directions, please contact the receptionist at Thank you.

4

5 March 14, 2012 Board of Directors Valley Metro RPTA Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1 st Avenue, Suite 1000 Thursday, March 22, :45 p.m. Action Recommended 1. Public Comment 1. For information An opportunity for general public comment on issues related to Valley Metro RPTA. Up to three (3) minutes will be provided for each speaker. 2. Minutes 2. For action Minutes from the February 16, 2012 Board meeting are presented for approval. 3. Chief Executive Officer Report 3. For information Steve Banta, Chief Executive Officer will brief the Board on current issues. 4. Consent Agenda 4. For action The Board will consider items A through D on consent. A. FY 2010/2011 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and Single Audit Act Report A. For action Staff requests the Board of Directors to accept the FY 2010/2011 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and Single Audit Act Report. To attend this meeting via teleconference, contact Rosalia Lopez at for the dial-in-information. The supporting information for this agenda can now be found on our website at: 1

6 B. Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs) for Arizona Avenue and Mesa Main Street LINK Station Maintenance with the cities of Chandler and Mesa and the town of Gilbert B. For action Staff requests the Board of Directors authorize the Chief Executive Officer to execute the IGAs with the cities of Mesa and Chandler and the town of Gilbert for LINK station maintenance. C. Intergovernmental Agreements with the City of Phoenix for Federal Transit Administration Pass-Through Grant Reimbursements C. For action Staff requests the Board of Directors authorize the Chief Executive Officer to execute the Intergovernmental Agreements with the City of Phoenix for Federal Transit Administration Pass- Through Grant Reimbursements FTA Section 5307 Formula, Surface Transportation Program, New Freedoms, Jobs Access/Reverse Commute and TIGGER. D. FY 2011 Transit Performance Report (TPR) D. For acceptance Staff requests the Board of Directors approve the FY 2011 Transit Performance Report. 5. Acceptance of the Dial-a-Ride Passenger Survey and the Alternative Services for Passengers Survey Reports 5. For acceptance Steve Banta, Chief Executive Officer, will introduce Kathy DeBoer of WestGroup who will present the results for the Dial-a-Ride and Alternative Services Passenger surveys. 6. Fare Policy Recommendation 6. For information Steve Banta, Chief Executive Officer, will update the Board of Directors on the status of the Fare Policy Recommendation. 7. RPTA and METRO Board Member Subcommittee The Board of Directors may discuss the process for selecting two Board members to serve on the RPTA and METRO Board Member Subcommittee and also decide the length of each member s term. 8. Legislative Update Bryan Jungwirth, Chief of Staff, will provide an update on current legislative issues. 7. For information and possible action 8. For information and possible action To attend this meeting via teleconference, contact Rosalia Lopez at for the dial-in-information. The supporting information for this agenda can now be found on our website at: 2

7 9. Future Board Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events 9. For information Chair Aames will request future Board agenda items from the Board members and Board members may provide a report on current events. 10. Next Meeting 10. For information The next meeting of the Board is scheduled for April 19, 2012 at 12:45 p.m. Qualified sign language interpreters are available with 72 hours notice. Materials in alternative formats (large print, audiocassette, or computer diskette) are available upon request. For further information, please call Nichole Myers, Valley Metro at or TTY at To attend this meeting via teleconference, contact Rosalia Lopez at for the dial-in-information. The supporting information for this agenda can now be found on our website at: 3

8

9 1

10 Board of Directors Information Summary Agenda Item 1 Date March 14, 2012 Subject Public Comment Background An opportunity for general public comment on issues related to Valley Metro RPTA. Up to three (3) minutes will be provided for each speaker. Budget Source None Impacts None Committee Action Process None Recommendation For information only. Contact Person None Attachments None 1

11

12 2

13 Board of Directors Information Summary Agenda Item A Date March 14, 2012 Subject Minutes from the February 16, 2012 Valley Metro RPTA Board of Directors Meeting Summary The February 16, 2012 Valley Metro RPTA Board of Directors meeting minutes are presented for review and approval. Fiscal Impact None Considerations None Prior Committee Action None Recommendation It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve the February 16, 2012 Valley Metro RPTA Board of Directors meeting minutes. Contact Person Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer Attachments February 16, 2012 Minutes 1

14 Minutes of the Valley Metro RPTA Board of Directors Thursday, February 16, :45 p.m. Meeting Participants Vice Mayor Ron Aames, City of Peoria, Chair Vice Mayor Scott Somers, City of Mesa, Vice Chair Councilmember Trinity Donovan, City of Chandler, Treasurer Councilmember Shana Ellis, City of Tempe Mayor Greg Stanton, City of Phoenix Councilmember Jim McDonald, City of Avondale Councilmember Eric Orsborn, Town of Buckeye Vice Mayor Jenn Daniels, Town of Gilbert (via telephone) Councilmember Joe Pizzillo, City of Goodyear Councilmember Bob Littlefield, City of Scottsdale Councilmember Rui Pereira, Town of Wickenburg (via telephone) Mayor Lana Mook, City of El Mirage Vice Mayor Kathie Farr, City of Tolleson Not Present Mayor Elaine Scruggs, City of Glendale Supervisor Max Wilson, Maricopa County Mayor Sharon Wolcott, City of Surprise Chair Ron Aames said today is the February 16, 2012 meeting of the Valley Metro RPTA, Regional Public Transportation Authority. And I'm Ron Aames. I'm Peoria councilmember and vice mayor in my second term. And this year I will be the chair of the RPTA. And to my left is Scott Somers, vice mayor of city of Mesa, and he's going to be the vice chair. And to my right is Trinity Donovan, councilmember of city of Chandler and she's going to be the treasurer. And I welcome everyone else here on the Board who is here. We do have a quorum so I'm starting. My next item was to introduce Mayor Greg Stanton who is going to represent Phoenix on the Board, but he is not here yet. So if he comes I will do that. And also Shana Ellis, the past chair of the RPTA, is going to be a little late. And when she comes she will get some recognition for her having been the chair the previous year. And we have a little kind of a trophy for her. A lot of this was about that. 2

15 Chair Aames said we'll start with public comment. And I do have one card from Gary Gelzer. And that's an opportunity to present to the Board. And if you would give your name and I think you know, Gary, that you have three minutes to talk and you can speak on any general subject. If you want to speak about a particular item, it's preferred that you wait until then, but you may also speak about that now if you so choose. Mr. Gelzer said good afternoon. My name is Gary Gelzer. I'm a councilman from the city of Goodyear. Just to give you a little bit of background, in my previous life I was a transportation officer for the Chicago Northwestern Railroad and I helped manage the commuter service of heavy rail and commuter service throughout the Chicago area. I'm here to address you concerning the schedules of express Route 562 and the express Route 563, one of which originates in Buckeye, stops in Goodyear, and the second originates in Goodyear and heads directly downtown to Phoenix. We have since the change has been instituted, which was on January 23rd, we have received a fair amount of concern from the riders that have addressed the city concerning the schedule of the four buses. And what I would request the staff to do is survey the riders at this point in time because I understand the bus schedule really would change effective July 1. But the concern of the riders are that the last bus leaving downtown Phoenix the outbound route is standing room only and the earlier buses are running empty and we are having similar issues with the buses that are coming in. So our biggest concern is you have capital assets that are -- some are being underutilized and some are being over utilized. And we think a better allocation of the times would be more appropriate and we would like that done sooner rather than later. Thank you very much. Chair Aames said thank you. Bryan, you're going to think about that; right? Mr. Jungwirth said yes, sir, Mr. Chairman, we'll get with our staff on that immediately. 2. Consent Agenda Chair Aames said next on the agenda is the consent agenda and I'm calling on Bryan Jungwirth to provide background information on the items on the consent agenda. Mr. Jungwirth said thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. The consent agenda today is Items A through H, and Items A through G have been approved by the TMC. Item H was the one that was added for the diesel system fueling system repairs. And it was an emergency procurement that I initiated with our operations staff because we found some leaking diesel fuel out of the tanks. And according to EPA you're basically obliged to fix that immediately. So we went ahead and contracted with SJ Anderson for $87,882. So this item was not a TMC item but I am asking for your ratification on that. 3

16 I want to go back to item 2 C, which is the contract award for the closed circuit television cameras. And when we issued this procurement we omitted the Davis Bacon requirements that apply to this because we thought it was more of a plug-and-play kind of thing like -- we didn't think there was construction involved because all the closed circuit TV cameras, they were all prewired and so forth, so it was a real easy deal. We found out subsequently that it is Davis Bacon required so we have a few options. We could go back out and rebid it, but the timing of that, the federal government, the FTA wants us to try to get this project done by June 30th. So what we're proposing now is changing the funding source to Public Transportation Funding (PTF). This keeps the project on task and on track. And then also we need to get these installed before we put the fare vending machines in because the closed circuit TVs cameras monitor the fare vending machines. And what I've got here is just a couple slides I wanted to show you. So the original purchase, you know, $60,000. And you can see how ARRA was funding eighteen of those cameras. And then PTF were funding seven. And then if we move to the eighteen ARRA cameras becoming public transportation fund funded, it gives you the break outs there of what the additional is. And then if you go to the next slide, it shows you the total amount then that would be coming from those particular cities, so Chandler, Mesa, and Gilbert's jurisdictional equity. And due to the timing and so forth, I think it would be a good idea to go forward and move this with nonfederal PTF funds. And we will do whatever we can. As you probably saw in the memo, the engineer's estimate was for $167,000, and now we've got a bid price of $60,000, so we're basically a third of what we thought this was going to cost. We don't want to leave that ARRA funding on the table, so we'll do whatever we can to try to attach more ARRA to bring it back into the agency to liberate basically RARF and local funding here at Valley Metro. So with that I'll conclude my comments on the consent agenda, Mr. Chairman. Vice Mayor Donovan said I have a comment on 2C. Since the ARRA funds were originally going to those three cities and now they're going to be part of our other funding, if staff could just look at, as you look to reuse the ARRA funds if it could go to those three cities so it could still remain fair. Mr. Jungwirth said we'd be happy to do that, Mr. Chairman, and Councilwoman Donovan. Chair Aames said does anyone else wish to make a comment or discuss anything on 2C or really any of the other consent items? Does anyone want to take one of the consent items off the list for further discussion? No. Okay. Then I move for a motion and a second to approve the consent agenda. 4

17 IT WAS MOVED BY VICE MAYOR SOMERS, SECONDED BY MAYOR MOOK AND UNANIMOSULY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS A THROUGH H. Chair Aames said I'm going to go back to an earlier item on my list of things to do here and that pertains to Shana Ellis, chairwoman from the city of Tempe. And Shana was the chair of the RPTA for the previous year. And we want to recognize her. And I would like to take this opportunity personally to thank you, Shana, for your service as chair for the past year. And we're going to honor you today for your outstanding work as the chair. It would take a long time to go through all of the things that you have accomplished directly at RPTA and related things back in Tempe in terms of transportation including your good work on encouraging younger people to ride the bus in Tempe. I know you gave some presentations on that even before you were chair; right? But let me start by saying a few things. And you participated in these during your term as chair: The Arizona Avenue Link ground breaking and ribbon cutting. Do you remember that? Good. The Route 184 kickoff at Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport, the mobility center ribbon cutting, which actually I wasn't able to attend because I had another engagement. But later I got a chance to go there and get a nice look at the whole center. The unveiling of the bus wrap at the Trevor Brown High School, Clear Air Campaign awards luncheon, and countless meetings to work through things like the replacement for the RPTA executive director. And I know you spent a lot of time on that and that took a lot of work and it wasn't easy. And we want to thank you for your strong leadership and ability to find mutual ground for all of us to work from. As a way of thanking you, and I think we all know about this, this is the crystal bus. It's got a little cover on it here. And it's going to make its way from me through the city of Chandler, through the city of Mesa all the way to the city of Tempe, and that's to commemorate duties and fulfillment of your responsibility as chair over the past year. And on behalf of all Valley Metro Board members and staff, we have sixteen member agencies, I want to thank you for your leadership, guidance, and commitment to the Board. Thank you, Councilmember Ellis. And is there some others who would like to speak? Councilmember McDonald said Shana, a lot of things just said right now, and I agree with all of those, but the one point I want to make having sat with you in all the subcommittee meetings the many, many, meetings the many hours we spent in executive session and your professionalism as you led the team, I just want to thank you for that, a lot of hard work, and look forward to continue to work with you in the future. Thank you. Vice Mayor Somers said I just to extend that out, I think you probably picked the worst year you could possibly be chair and you are to be commended for that and somebody should give you like this plastic bus or something for that. I mean, seriously, this year 5

18 what you had to put up with as a course for continued decrease in revenue and funding and having to find efficiencies and then this whole challenge of a retiring CEO and you come out and go through the process that you led. And because of your leadership abilities and your sense of humor and your stern finger pointing at some of us, but you were able to get that done and that was no easy task. So thank you very much for your leadership. Councilmember Ellis said thank you all for giving me this opportunity. Never led a regional board before and it was quite an experience. I learned a lot and, you know, as we all have had different leadership experiences in our lives, this one took the cake. I've got to say -- it was -- and I think that anyone that sits in that chair role will find that over the years that, you know, when you're dealing with people that really care about their own communities and they're looking out for their own community sometimes, you know, being on a regional board is a challenge. But I really value the friendships that I have here and then all of you that really, really dug in and we got a lot done this year. And thank you for the list. I have had all these memories flashing through my head of all these ground breakings and ribbon cuttings, but I didn't do those. I just happened to be chair when all of those happened. Those things were in the works for years before I even had the opportunity to sit here, so I want to thank the staff of RPTA for always making me look great and scripting me for the meetings. And if I didn't have all the briefings every month, I would not look as good as I did while I was sitting here. But most of all, I would like to thank the Tempe staff, Greg Jordan and Chad Heinrich who were both pretty new to their positions when I took over as chair. And I tell you -- okay. Now don't hire them away from Tempe, please, but they are the best staff out there, so I would like to give them a round of applause, because we all know that we are only as good as the staff that supports us. So they were really the ones that did this. So I just wanted to make sure that I could recognize them. I will turn it back over to you. Chair Aames said thank you so much, Shana, for those comments and truly you did an outstanding job last year. And as Scott Somers said it was a kind of a trying year. Although now we see revenues increasing, we see ridership increasing across bus and light rail and we may be moving into a new era and I'll certainly take credit for Authorization to Issue a Request for Proposals for Fixed Route Bus Service Operations Let me move forward now on the first item on the regular agenda and this is the authorization to issue a request for proposals for fixed route bus service operations and Bryan Jungwirth is going to give us some background on that. Mr. Jungwirth said Mr. Chairman, members of the board. This item requests authorization for us to issue an RFP for fixed route bus service. And RPTA's contract is up a year from July, so we're asking for your permission to go out. And you'll see in the agenda item there's a memo that's attached from the city of Tempe that went to their 6

19 council because what we're trying to do is a unified procurement, so it will actually be bid in three separate ways: It will be RPTA alone, Tempe alone, and then the combination of the two. And that way we'll be able to quantify the savings for the Board which are estimated at $800,000 to a million dollars as you probably saw in the memo. I don't think you need a presentation. We have one available. And we think they'll be some real efficiencies here because if you combine the two you'll allow some creativity to happen from the contracting point of view. You'll allow them to very likely only have one general manager, one maintenance manager, they'll be able to move the routes around and so forth, to minimize deadhead and garner those efficiencies that will be a real good thing, I think, for the transit system. So we're available to do a presentation if you'd like some more information. If not, I would ask that you approve this and go right to the recommendation on page 3 of the memo. With that I'll conclude my comments unless the board members would like to hear Jim give his presentation. Chair Aames said we do have a speaker request to speak on this item. And this is from Blue Crowley. And, Blue, you have three minutes. Mr. Crowley said on your requested fixed route service operation, one of the operations you're not doing is up there in Wickenburg, but with the way that it's being done, I looked at the west side because of your cutbacks on your operations isn't up to what it should be. I would have liked to have spoke at public comment, but I used transit to get here, so your operations work how well in that the two buses I missed, because they had full bike racks, I attribute that to what Terry Goddard taught me that in politics no good deed goes unpunished. Now I did call ahead and speak to the woman upstairs and she said it was brought down to you. So when you do want to get public input and such, unfortunately if we do use the transit because you're looking at it myopically and not expanding it to the level it should be. Service and operations should be 24 hours and seven days a week and it should encompass the entire county, because that's where you're getting the tax from not just the municipalities. And when you take out my route how are you really operating your services correctly. Chair Aames said thank you, Mr. Crowley. Does anyone on the council want to comment on this item? Well, I'm going to make a comment because you told me the savings could be anywhere from $800K to a million; is that correct? Mr. Jungwirth said that s correct, Mr. Chairman, those are the preliminary estimates. Chair Aames said and this is our scout program; right? Mr. Jungwirth said yes. 7

20 IT WAS MOVED BY VICE MAYOR SOMERS, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORSBORN AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO AUTHORIZE THE ACTING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ISSUE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR FIXED ROUTE TRANSIT SERVICE OPERATIONS. 4. Regional Fare Policy Recommendation Chair Aames said the next item is a regional fare policy recommendation. And I was told there might be a motion to delay this, but that's not going to be the case? Mr. Jungwirth said if I could, I would request that this Board actually table this item until its next meeting. This will allow the staff to give time to brief the Phoenix Transportation and Infrastructure Committee as well as the Phoenix Council itself. You'll recall that Phoenix has a fare ordinance. And that both the RPTA and the Phoenix Council will need to take action in order to effect any fare increase in the future. As well what we're conducting right now, we have a draft report on the fare equity analysis that's required by the Federal Transit Administration that has to do with making sure that there's no disproportional impacts on low income or minority populations. So that's still in process as we speak right now. And I think it would be premature of this Board to make any motions or take any action at this point until that equity analysis is done. And we'd like to get that fully vetted with our committees and so forth. And we don't believe this is going to hurt the timeline as it exists right now, so we'd ask your indulgence for a month off on this item. Councilmember Donovan said I have a question about the equity analysis. Will it look at both the local routes and then the express routes and the differences in equity, the costs and the shares for each of those, or is it going to put them all together for equity and fares? Mr. Jungwirth said yes, it will look at both the affects, the proportional affects, both on the express riders and then the local fare as well, and we'll be bringing those back to you. And we want to make sure that it's not impacting one group more than the other. Councilmember Donovan said so then when this comes back will we be able to see that equity analysis will that be part of the documents in the agenda items? Mr. Jungwirth said that would be our plan is to have that as an attachment to the actual recommendation so that you'll be fully apprised to that as well before you take any action. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER LITTLEFIELD, SECONDED BY VICE MAYOR SOMERS TO TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE MARCH BOARD MEETING. Chair Aames said the Regional Fare Policy recommendation is tabled until our next meeting next month. 8

21 5. Proposed Changes to the Reduced Fare Photo ID Program Chair Aames said our fifth item, our third regular agenda item, is proposed changes to the reduced fare photo ID program. And Bryan Jungwirth is going to provide background information. Mr. Jungwirth said similar to Item 3, we also have a presentation on this as well. It's in your packet. It's a pretty involved subject, I guess you could say, but on page 5 of your board memo has Items A through I that constitute the recommendations on this item and it was approved by the TMC. Phoenix, Tempe, Mesa and Glendale did vote no on this. What their concerns were, I believe, had to do with the pricing of the cards for the reduced fare ID cards. And right now we charge $2.50 and the recommendation by TMC was to increase them to $10 for the new cards, $10 for replacement cards, and a $5 surcharge for expedited processing. I believe the cities that voted no thought it was because of the ability for that population to pay the fee an extra $5, from, say, $5, the original recommendation was to go to $5. That it would be difficult. Whereas other TMC members thought, no, you should go after your full cost recovery. So if we charge the $10 it would be a full cost recovery. So the other recommendations include a revised application on disabled applicants having to mail the applications to RPTA and Valley Metro for review and verification, expedited applications, paying the higher fee, drug and alcohol dependent would be required to attend meetings, counseling, job training, and actively seek -- or actively seeking employment and that those alcohol dependent applications must be preapproved as far as their facilities by the Valley Metro staff. And then the issue that remains still is the pricing of the cards. So we have a presentation if you'd like to hear it. My recommendation would be to approve this item. If you want to discuss the differences of a $10 card versus a $5 card that would be up to you, but it is the TMC recommendation to move it to $10 for new cards, $10 for replacement, and $5 for the expedited processing. With that I'll conclude my comments, Mr. Chairman. Chair Aames said would anyone on the Board like to discuss this? Okay. Please. Vice Mayor Cathy Farr said recently I attended a meeting at the transportation committee of the legislature. The comment was made that 65 percent of our ridership on the bus is low income. I can see where this raising these cards to $10 could be a definite issue with low income people. The majority of our low income people are handicapped in one way or the other, so I think I would question that raising for the low income. I'm not sure how you would change that replacement card, but I think maybe that should be looked into before we accept this. That's just my opinion. Vice Mayor Somers said first of all, I appreciate the work that the TMC did on this. It's some good work, but since when is anything we do in mass transit cost recovered. What we're trying to do is we're trying to get full cost recovery, which is always an 9

22 admirable goal, for the card processing fee specifically. And the people that are most impacted by this are really those with mental and cognitive disabilities. Those are the folks who have a higher tendency to misplace their card. They're not doing it because they're careless, they're not doing it unintentionally. It's just they have a challenge in making sure that they're organized, and so I think that they're challenged a little more. What I would recommend is that we would approve the recommendation with the caveat of some changes out of Item H which is that we would raise the processing fee from $2.50 to $5 for new cards for individuals with mental and cognitive disabilities, and from $2.50 to $10 for new cards for other applicants, $5 for replacement cards, and free expedited processing for most cards for individuals with mental and cognitive disabilities, and a $5 surcharge for expedited processing for all other participants. And if you're entertaining the motion, I'll make that motion. Chair Aames said would anyone else want to comment on this item? Councilmember Ellis said I'll second the motion. Chair Aames said we'll do a motion in a minute. Does anyone else want to comment on this? Councilmember Donovan said I'd like to have some clarification over what's involved with the expedited processing. That's where, I guess, I'm a little bit concerned. If it takes a lot of work and it's completely free, then I'd need to understand the quantity that is happening now and how that might increase to see if it would be good for us to offer that for free so if we could get more detail. Mr. Jungwirth said Scott Wisner, our customer service manager, will talk a little bit more because he's also got a concern about the legal parameters of what's being recommended by Vice Mayor Somers. Mr. Wisner said let me just give a little clarification on the idea to lower the cost for a specific disability category. That doesn't fall within the Americans with Disabilities Act that you can single out certain types of disabilities for a different pricing structure. You have to be very careful and have equality for all. And so if your idea or your desire is to lower the cost of the card from the proposed $10 down to $5, you'd have to make that price good for all persons with disabilities. So you can't single out just certain categories. Lowering the cost for all categories is doable. To your point about cost recovery, yeah, that's not something we usually do, but that was something that TMC or some members of TMC felt that was necessary or would be a good idea. So we can certainly move forward with a reduced price on that for that category. I think for simplicity because you have low income seniors, obviously youths don't typically make income or have very low income, and administratively I would recommend you pick one price for the card and that probably would be $5. That seems like that's kind of the comfort level for most people. 10

23 Back to the expedited process, that's a process whereby right now the proposal is to have customers mail in their applications if they're disabled, so we're going to process those in the normal processing time. We think it's going to take about five days normally to get that done. We're going to receive anywhere from seven to eight thousand applications a year. Our staff is taking on that responsibility without any additional staff. So in order not to add costs and add staff, we thought we would take that internally and do that as fast as we could and try to get that done so customers can get a card in a timely planner. The expedited process allows somebody to pay a small fee to expedite that and come in directly to our offices and get it done in the same day. If we offered that for everybody, same-day service, we'd never be able to deal with the demand. So it's a nominal fee to kind of almost like what you would pay in terms of expedited process for your passport. They charge a lot more than that obviously than we would here, but that was the idea. It would be something where we could do it the same day and measure how well we're able to do that effectively with our staff. Vice Mayor Somers said thank you, Mr. Chairman. A bus card is not a passport. When they do a passport, they have to do a background investigation and a lot of other stuff. When you're doing a bus card, you're walking in and you're getting a bus card. So what is it that you feel that there would be such great demand if we did an expedited service, the same-day service of just walking in and asking for your bus card? Mr. Wisner said Mr. Chairman, Vice Mayor Somers, we have to review that application to make sure that person qualifies for the reduced fares. So in case of a disability, somebody applying for a disability card, we have to verify that person is legitimately disabled and to what level their disability affects their ability to ride transit without special training or special accommodations. So we might not be able to just look at that on face value and make the approval. We might have to contact their doctor. We may have to wait several days for their doctor to get back with us to verify their disability and to tell us that, yes, this person does have this condition that prevents them from using the bus normally. So there's going to be a time delay typically in that. Some we may be able to approve right off the bat, others we may have that time delay. So we're just saying as a matter of process, it's going to take anywhere from five to 10 days to get those done, hopefully sooner. What we're saying is if the person can bring in their documentation from their doctor so we don't have to contact their doctor directly, we can do the expedited process right there on the spot and they can walk away with a card right then and there. Vice Mayor Somers said what was your recommendation for -- was it $10 for the expedited or $5? Mr. Wisner said it was $5. Vice Mayor Somers said $5.00. So you're telling me the difference between -- for $5 you're going to sit there and make all those phone calls and contact their physician and 11

24 contact all those folks that you were talking about. It's a $5 difference between expedited and -- that's cost recovery? Mr. Wisner said no. Basically what I'm saying is that when they come in for the expedited process, they'd have to have their documentation. We wouldn't be able to -- if they don't have their documentation and they come in without it, we would try to contact their doctor. The problem with that is we can't always rely on doctors getting back to us. I've managed the ADA certification process for many years and with our paper process that was our biggest challenge was getting a response back from the doctor. It could take anywhere from two to three weeks. Vice Mayor Somers said and you estimate that amount to be $5? The difference between if I were disabled and I were to come into your office, the difference between regular service and expedited service is $5 on this proposal, and you're telling me that if I were to come in and ask for the expedited service given all the things you have to do on this background check that the cost of that you estimate is $5 to expedite. Mr. Wisner said we never did do a cost analysis of how much we'd have to charge for that. We didn't break out how much time we would have to spend on those because the idea behind that was -- Vice Mayor Somers said so it's not a recovery fee -- it's a discouragement fee. Mr. Wisner said it's a surcharge. It's a surcharge for doing the same-day appointments. Councilmember Pizzillo said just a quick question. I see your analysis, I guess, on page 7. I guess the cost of new cards is $80,000, if -- and I assume that's the $10 -- where would that money come from if it's lowered to five or whatever number that they were talking about right here? Where would you make up the difference, because apparently you have some expenses here that you're listing that you're shifting for these cards here, so if you don't get the money to cover that cost, how are you going to cover those fees? Mr. Wisner said we're not going to be able to make up that difference. The majority of those costs are staffing times so staff time spent on the process. So we wouldn't be able to make up that difference in cost in reality. We're not making that difference up now. We're basically subsidizing that with our staffing time now and eating that cost as a cost of doing business to issue those types of cards. That was the idea behind this was the TMC felt that it was a legitimate cost for the deal that these people were getting -- that these customers are getting a discount for up to five years at a reduced rate, and so the thought was a $10 fee for that initial card that's good for up to five years was a nominal fee. But we would not be able to recover all of our costs back if we did charge less than $10. Councilmember Pizzillo said it's my understanding, and just to follow up there, Mr. Chairman, is that if you're going to pay $80,000 whether the card is $2.50, $5, or $10 because your staff is there anyway and I assume most of them are probably 12

25 salaried, so you, you know, if they don't charge this it's just an additional $80,000 that you'll have to your coffers not anything that's really costing you any more money. Mr. Wisner said yes. Councilmember Pizzillo said is that clear? Mr. Wisner said yes. Councilmember Pizzillo said thank you. Just a comment, please, Mr. Chairman, is I think that's from $2.50 to $10 that's a what? A 400 percent increase? It's just to me, you know, from a shock value to piggyback on councilmember or Vice Mayor Somers is that for those people that are using that I just think that's a huge increase. Chair Aames said how much is the cost for this -- doing the additional card? That's not the $80,000; right? No. It's just issuing cards in a year for everyone. Do you have a number about -- Mr. Wisner said yes, the cost for replacement cards was estimated around $6 dollars and change. Because we don't have to have that review of the application as part of that, it's just where they can go back to the outlet that they got it from and reapply and then all that we're paying for that is the card actual materials for the card and the commission fee for that. So it's less for a replacement card. That's why you put that in there so in case you wanted to lower that amount down for replacements. We thought, you know, it was viable. Back to the point about the increase from $2.50 to $10, when we looked at this we looked at the total cost, cost recovery-wise. We proposed $5 because we believe that was a reasonable fee to charge for a card good for five years. But we got direction from the TMC to go for full cost recovery. We felt like we'd bring it before the Board, let the Board make that decision for us and we're happy to go with either way, either -- whatever the Board's desire is and we will certainly be able to do it either way. Chair Aames said I do see an amount for $53,985. Is that the replacement card cost annually? Or you're just saying on the revenue that would come in at $6.36; right? Is that what you're estimating for -- Mr. Wisner said yes. That's the replacement cost. So it would come down to $6.36 per card if we wanted full cost recovery. Chair Aames said $8,485 is that how many replacement cards you're doing -- Mr. Wisner said no. That's just assuming that everyone had a replacement card. So that could be quite a bit more or quite a bit less depending on it. There really was no way to factor in how many replacement cards we're issuing right now. Chair Aames said you haven't tracked how many replacement cards. 13

26 Mr. Wisner said no, we have not. Chair Aames said I would think it would be less than everyone. Mr. Wisner said right. Chair Aames said but it might be more than one for a particular individual. Mr. Wisner said right. Councilmember Donovan said so just for some clarification, the expedited service happens only once when people are getting new cards and would be the difference between same-day service if they have all their paperwork together or hopefully a five- to seven-day process. But if someone has lost their card, then that information will be in a system that they can go wherever they need to and they'll be able to at that moment get a replacement card and not have to have any surcharge regardless of what category they fall into? Mr. Wisner said yes, that's a good assumption. That's very true. Councilmember Donovan said so people will go to these places, will it be in a computer or how do they -- Mr. Wisner said it's all computerized and it's all networked. So when you go there if you're in the system and you've had a card and it still has eligibility on it, you can get a replacement card right there on the spot and pay your normal fee, whatever that fee is based on what the Board decides today. Councilmember Donovan said I'm not sure if Vice Mayor Somers, when you were talking about the expedited service, if you were concerned about you mentioned people with mental and cognitive disabilities losing their cards, they could still get replacement cards right away and not need the expedited service, whether it's free or $5. Vice Mayor Somers said so it's really just the expedited fee, so we don't have to worry about -- Councilmember Donovan said well, the expedited fee is just one time in the beginning -- Vice Mayor Somers said at some point I am going to form a sentence in this conversation. Fortunately the mike was off. So my concern about the expedited fee for replacement cards is moot because they can just come right in say they're missing a card and you'll give them the card right there. Mr. Wisner said yes. Vice Mayor Somers said so the expedited fee is just for the first time. 14

27 Mr. Wisner said it is for the first time only. Vice Mayor Somers said I'm a little more comfortable. Councilmember Pereira said I would suggest that we recover just what I consider as hard costs. And what I mean by that is like the current supply which is budgeted at $7500. And the equipment maintenance which is budgeted at $4,000. And the photo ID outlet commissions at $8500. If you divide that amount the total amount by the 8,400 cards that are issued, that comes to roughly $2.36 which is just under the $2.50 that we charge now. And that's where I would leave it. I would not try to recover any of the other costs because staff is already on hand, Internet connection is already available throughout the building or throughout the office space, so there really isn't -- I mean, it's already being paid for. So I wouldn't -- I would not increase to $10. I would keep it at 2.50 and look at it again in a few years down the road if it's not through working out. Chair Aames said thank you. Anyone else would like to have a comment on this? Okay. I think Vice Mayor Somers wants to revise his statement. Vice Mayor Somers said technically I never made a motion because -- Blue Crowley said and I never got to speak because I thought that you said that was still on the equation. I did turn in a card. Chair Aames said you have a minute and a half. Mr. Crowley said I don't appreciate that at all having been taken out of a meeting illegally at an RPTA function. If you look at the document I requested a week ago that I get this and I was told it hadn't been okayed. I have requested, as the past chairman knows, how many times that I get the full packet. Being that 96 percent of those that are requesting it are covered by myself being both elderly, as Bob and I are getting closer and closer and also disabled, I have a problem with the way the gentleman referred to people saying those that have a problem getting on the bus. Well, I thought we've gotten past that. It's not a problem for that wheelchair to get on the bus, it's a part of the whole equation. I totally agree with, Rui, and what he's having to say especially with the Gold Rush Days coming on and all the work that he's having to do. When I look at the math of it, I have problems with how much of that staff is also redone and when it's the total amount of people that are there, how many of the disabled are there and as Rui did the math, I really appreciate that, because that's what I would have also been saying. Give you back your time. Chair Aames said thank you. Vice Mayor Somers has another comment or question. Vice Mayor Somers said just one more for the staff member and thank you for letting 15

28 me beat up on you the whole time, not the first time. I've enjoyed it thoroughly. Mr. Wisner said I'm glad you have. Vice Mayor Somers said now you know how my staff feels. When Councilmember Pereira adds up those other numbers in considering in looking well initially with the $10 for a new card, so I can understand a higher fee for the new card because you have some additional work to do based on what you said. You have to verify through their doctor that they're actually disabled. So then the direct cost of the card is about $2.50 if we just do the direct cost. So when you do a replacement card, you don't have to do all that background; correct? You're just replacing the actual card, which according to what my distinguished colleague from Wickenburg said, is about $2.36, $2.50. Mr. Wisner said yes. Vice Mayor Somers said so that would be about accurate? Mr. Wisner said yes. IT WAS MOVED BY VICE MAYOR SOMERS, SECONDED BY MAYOR STANTION AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THIS WITH CHANGES TO SECTION H WHICH WOULD RAISE THE CARD PROCESSING FEE FROM $2.50 TO $5 PER NEW CARD, A REPLACEMENT CARD WOULD COST $2.50, AND THERE WOULD BE A $5 SURCHARGE FOR EXPEDITED PROCESSING. Chair Aames said before we go into our next item, which may lead to our leaving the room for a while, I would like to introduce one of our new board members and I brought a picture of him here in Arizona Food Industry Journal and I know he's very busy. He's probably busier than he's ever been in his life, you might guess. And he's our mayor of Phoenix. Phoenix is our large central group in the regional council of 16 here. And their needs are very important because it's such a large number of people and our growth has come from Phoenix. Although I did read that Grand Avenue was one time called Vulture Road. And that Wickenburg and the owners of that vulture mine came down that Vulture Road and founded Phoenix. Is that a true story? Councilmember Pereira said that's a true story. That's how we tell it here in Wickenburg. Chair Aames said and that's as wide regionally as we can get from Wickenburg down to Phoenix here. So we are looking forward to working with you on regional issues. Mayor Stanton said I am honored to be here. I look forward to working with all of you. I have one question. Why did you put me next to Littlefield? Did I do something wrong? Chair Aames said we would like to welcome you, Mayor Greg Stanton, and look forward to your participation on this group. 16

29 6. RPTA Executive Director Selection Update The next item is RPTA executive director selection update. And Councilmember Ellis is going to provide us with an update. Councilmember Ellis said we've had two meetings since our last RPTA Board meeting. I think we've worked out some of the concerns that members had. And I don't believe that there is anything that we need to talk about in public. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER ELLIS, SECONDED BY VICE MAYOR SOMERS AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO ADJOURN INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO A.R.S (A) (4) FOR THE PURPOSE OF INSTRUCTING ITS ATTORNEY REGARDING THE RPTA S POSITION ON AMENDING CURRENT AGREEMENTS WITH METRO, INCLUDING AN AMENDED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT WITH MR. STEVE BANTA AND AN AMENDED IGA WITH METRO. The regular meeting adjourned at 1:36 p.m. The regular meeting reconvened at 2:18 p.m. Chair Aames said we are reconvening the regular session of our RPTA meeting for Thursday, February 16, And do we have a motion concerning the RPTA executive director selection? Scott, will you do that? Vice Mayor Somers said thank you, Mr. Chairman, I'd be honored to make a motion with a short comment in front of it. First, I would like to commend the work of the subcommittee led by our former chairwoman Shana Ellis. This was a long and arduous road. Only several people stood up at a time when we were really trying to work to something that was going. And we knew going in that this was going to be difficult to put together. And they stood up and said I will lead the way. And they have done phenomenal work putting in a lot of long hours to come up with an agreement that is both fair to this Board, to the Rail Board, to the customers at the end and also to Mr. Banta. So you are all to be commended for the work. It was really a job well done. And it's members not only of this Board, in particular but as well as Valley Metro. So congratulations on a job well done. I'm looking forward to making the motion on this, sir, because this is really a historic agreement and we have for a long time had two systems of transit: Rail and bus, that were done in many ways completely separate. And we know that doing that we did have some inefficiencies. And by having a single director we would be able to provide to our customer a far more cost effective and efficient system of transportation over time. So this is a great step in creating a really truly regional transit system for everybody here in Maricopa County. IT WAS MOVED BY VICE MAYOR SOMERS, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER 17

30 LITTLEFIELD AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO ACCEPT AS WRITTEN THREE AGREEMENTS: ONE IS THE THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REGIONAL PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY AND VALLEY METRO RAIL, INCORPORATED. SECOND IS THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE REGIONAL PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY AND VALLEY METRO RAIL FOR A SINGLE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, AND THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT FOR MR. BANTA. Chair Aames said it passes unanimously. And I also would like to say that indeed this has been a long process, but I think a very valuable process for all of the citizens in Maricopa County that we have one CEO directing a larger transit program for all of us. There will still be two boards maintaining those needed things that will need to be separate in terms of some decision making. But one united front now in terms of the chief executive officer for Maricopa County transit activities rail and bus. Does anyone else want to make a comment on this? Yes. Vice Mayor Farr said I just want to make sure that we thank Mr. Jungwirth for for stepping up and keeping us going in the right direction while we were in this process. Mr. Jungwirth said it was my great honor and privilege to serve the Board and thank you for that. Chair Aames said anyone else want to make a comment? Okay with that I'll ask if there's a motion for authorization for the acting RPTA executive director to continue service until February 29th, 2012, and that's in part because the agreement with Mr. Banta as he starts his employment as a dual CEO on March 1st. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER LITTLEFIELD, SECONDED BY VICE MAYOR SOMERS AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO AUTHORIZE THE ACTING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO CONTINUE SERVICE UNTIL FEBRUARY 29, Legislative Update Mr. Jungwirth said his report would be sent out with the meeting summary. 8. Future Board Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events Vice Mayor Somers said I have two. The first one related to the motion I just made which is within the employment agreement there is opportunity for Mr. Banta under Section 4 salary, Item C for employee performance incentive compensation. This was set up so that we could establish some goals and attach them to a bonus. There are no goals, specific goals, laid out in this particular agreement. It was understood that we would do a working group on that, so I think for our next meeting we need to immediately put together a smaller working group to put together those goals in quantifiable measures that's the best interest of this Board and Mr. Banta as well. 18

31 Chair Aames said and if I may, I think we can start looking at that immediately; right, Bryan, in selecting members? Mr. Jungwirth said yes. Chair Aames said and I had two that have volunteered already. Is there anyone else that would like to volunteer? Vice Mayor Somers said the second one we heard today the discussion of $5 expedited fee, but yet there's a disconnect with what it is exactly that $5 is for, whether there's actually a cost incurred for the $5. Now I left it in place on my motion because I thought it was only fair that we covered some costs, but I would like this Board to look at that maybe direct RPTA staff to do investigation whether there actually is a cost for an expedited fee, if we even need it at all. Mr. Jungwirth said we'll be happy to do so, Mr. Chairman. 9. Executive Director s Report Mr. Jungwirth said going back if it's okay with the Board we'll send an out to the Board to see if any members would like to participate in the working group and then we'll bring that back on to the next agenda, if that's okay as well. And then the Board can vote on that since it's not on this agenda. Chair Aames said and we'll be able to discuss that; right? Mr. Jungwirth said yes. The executive director's report, Mr. Chairman, we do have a slide show real quick. Just to give you a couple issues and an update for the strike update. Veolia Phoenix has been negotiating their collective bargaining agreement with the ATU since That contract expired in June of And ATU filed an unfair labor practice charge with the NLRB with the intent to stop the implementation of the best and final offer. The NLRB then came back and said, no, you really haven't reached impasse, so you really should not, you know, basically enact your best and final offer. So it was our understanding that Veolia was going to provide a response back to NLRB yesterday -- or two days ago. And then Veolia Tempe, they were presented a best and final offer as well to the ATU members in September of 2011 and the membership voted to reject that contract. Veolia has not imposed a best and final offer in Tempe. The union has received approval from its international leadership to conduct the strike. Both of the contracts have a contingency plan that would guarantee service at some reduced level, usually like a Sunday level of service and, sometimes it may take time to ramp up to that, but we see that as a good thing to keep service on the road in the event of a strike. Veolia's current contract with RPTA expired December 31st of 2011, and 19

32 they're continuing contracts negotiations at this time. So we don't think that would spill over to the Mesa contract with RPTA, but we don't know for sure given the sick-outs and other things that could happen. METRO light rail is not affected by the strikes at all. So one of the questions is how are we communicating to the customers. And at our call center on the messaging we have up-to-date information on what's going on with the strike. We've updated the Web site with a banner to direct people to strike information. The Route Scout which is the messaging on all the buses has information on it. Our Listserve updates and messages to employers and passengers go out regularly, and then the social media, Facebook and twitter, those have been updated and released, media releases as well. We're asking people to be prepared now in the event of a strike by looking for carpool partners, working at home, or utilizing taxis. These are some of the grants that are being released. MAG's kind of leading the charge on this for the FTA grants, the discretionary grants that are coming up this year. And my understanding is they have had some meetings on that already. Bus ridership information so you're seeing a monthly increase of January over January of nearly 13 percent. That is a big jump in the bus number. And you see the average on the average weekday going up 7.6, so Saturday and Sunday must be up quite a bit as well. Monthly rail ridership 9.1 percent increase. And then 6.2 percent on the weekday average for METRO light rail ridership. Just a few business service events. Rideshare week is coming up February 26th through March the 3rd. We're asking commuters to share the ride. We have a kickoff event on the 24th of February over lunch hour at CityScape and there will be an employer challenge again similar to last year's where we got the different employers competing for the highest percentage of the carpool or share the ride to work and we'll be giving away prizes via our Web site for people that participate. Valley bike month is in April trying to market bicycling as a safe, viable transportation mode. We had a bike to work to day on the 18th of April. The Great Bike Chase to see the Diamondbacks on April 22nd. And then the different events all month. The upcoming board agenda items for March are here in front of you and then we'll be adding that potential fare policy increase to the agenda as well. Upcoming events, Friends of Transit 10th annual conference is on February 24th from 8:00 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. We've sent s to the Board. If you'd like to attend that, just let us know. We'll be happy to host you. The Congressional staff luncheon in Washington D.C. during the National League of Cities on March 12th and then the AZTA's annual conference is out in Flagstaff April 23rd. Next meetings of the Board March 22nd and April 19th at 12:45 in this room. 20

33 Mayor Stanton said on Veolia Phoenix after the finding of the unfair labor practice they were ordered back to the bargaining tables, so there is negotiations ongoing between the union and Veolia as we speak. Chair Aames said anyone else have something they want to say as kind of an update? Councilmember Pizzillo said I appreciate the staff taking a look at some of the calls we've been getting, you know, as far as the ridership and the overloading, so I appreciate the effort. In fact, I've already gotten some numbers from you, so trying to figure out a way to resolve that. I know it's Valley-wide, so I appreciate that as well, but anything you can do to help alleviate, we would appreciate that in the city of Goodyear. Thank you. With no further discussion the meeting adjourned at 2:32 p.m. 21

34

35 3

36 Board of Directors Information Summary Agenda Item 3 Date March 14, 2012 Subject Chief Executive Officer Report Background Steve Banta, Chief Executive Officer, will provide an update on agency issues. Budget Source None Impacts None Committee Action Process None Recommendation For information only. Contact Person Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer Attachments None 1

37

38 4

39 Board of Directors Information Summary Agenda Item 4 Date March 14, 2012 Subject Consent Agenda Background The Board of Directors will consider items A through D on consent. Budget Source Please refer to individual items for this information. Impacts Please refer to individual items for this information. Committee Action Process Please refer to individual items for this information. Recommendation It is recommended that the Board approve the items listed on the consent agenda. Contact Person Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer Attachments Consent Agenda Items 1

40

41 Board of Directors Information Summary Agenda Item A Date March 14, 2012 Subject FY 2010/11 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and Single Audit Act Report Background Heinfeld, Meech & Co., P.C., Certified Public Accountants, has completed the FY 2010/11 RPTA audits. Completion of the June 30, 2011, financial statement and Single Audit Act audits indicates Valley Metro s compliance with both state and federal statutory audit requirements. Preparation of a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report demonstrates Valley Metro s commitment to the highest standard of financial reporting for a governmental entity. The accompanying report is submitted for review and acceptance. In planning and performing the audit of the financial statements, Heinfeld, Meech & Co., P.C. considered RPTA s internal controls in order to determine auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing opinions on the financial statements and not to provide an opinion on internal controls. During the course of the audit there was one finding and recommendation for internal control improvements with respect to the financial statements and federal reporting for the Schedule of Expenditures of Awards. Audit adjustments were necessary to properly state account balances, transaction classifications, and related disclosures. In addition, incorrect presentation of a program Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number resulted in an understatement of expenditures; as a result, the program cluster was not audited as a major federal program as required in the prior year. The auditor s recommendation was that the Authority must design and implement effective internal control procedures to ensure the financial statements and related notes are complete and free from material misstatements and misclassification. Specifically, the Authority should use checklists to aid in the review of the financial statements and related notes to the financial statements. The Authority s personnel should obtain additional training to increase their understanding of the GAAP basis financial statements as well as the related adjusting entries and reclassifications notated throughout the audit of the Authority s financial statements. Also, controls should include 1

42 a review of the Schedule of Expenditures and Federal Awards to include verification of CFDA numbers. The Authority concurs with this recommendation and will implement a checklist to aid in the review of the financial statements. As budget allows, personnel will obtain ongoing training to increase their understanding of the GAAP basis financial statements. In addition, we have asked the Federal grantee to include in the Intergovernmental agreements verification of CFDA numbers for all future grants. The Authority s total net assets decreased $25.8 million in FY 2011, an increase of $6.9 million in governmental activities and a decrease $32.6 million in business-type activities. Total net assets of the Authority are $90.6 million, of which $67.7 million is unrestricted. Impacts Details are included in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. Committee Action Process TMC March 7, 2012 approved Board March 22, 2012 for action Recommendation It is recommended that Board of Directors accept the FY 2010/11 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and Single Audit Act Report. Contact Person Michael Taylor Acting Director of Finance Attachments Independent Auditor s Report Master Single Audit Section FY 2010/11 Management s Discussion and Analysis 2

43 HEINFELD, MEECH & CO., P.C. CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS INDEPENDENT AUDITORS REPORT 25 th Heinfeld, Meech & Co. Anniversary Chair and Members of the Board of Directors Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, the businesstype activities, and each major fund of Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority (the Authority), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2011, which collectively comprise the Authority s basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Authority s management. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and the significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinions. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, and each major fund of the Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority, as of June 30, 2011, and the respective changes in financial position and cash flows, where applicable, thereof and the respective budgetary comparisons for the General Fund and major special revenue funds for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. As described in Note 1, the Authority implemented the provisions of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions, for the year ended June 30, 2011, which represents a change in accounting principle. In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated February 27, 2012, on our consideration of Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s internal control over financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be considered in assessing the results of our audit N. Oracle Road, Tucson, Arizona Tel: (520) Fax: (520)

44 Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the management s discussion and analysis on pages 3 through 13 be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by Governmental Accounting Standards Board, who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance. Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the Authority s financial statements as a whole. The accompanying supplementary information such as the introductory section, individual fund financial schedules, and statistical section are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the financial statements. The individual fund financial schedules are the responsibility of management and were derived from and relate directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the financial statements. The information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the information is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the financial statements as a whole. The introductory and statistical sections have not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, accordingly, we do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on them. HEINFELD, MEECH & CO., P.C. Certified Public Accountants February 27, 2012 Page 2

45 HEINFELD, MEECH & CO., P.C. CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS 25 th Heinfeld, Meech & Co. Anniversary REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING AND ON COMPLIANCE AND OTHER MATTERS BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS Board of Directors Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, and each major fund of Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority as of and for the year ended June 30, 2011, which collectively comprise Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s basic financial statements and have issued our report thereon dated February 27, 2012, which was modified as to consistency because of the implementation of Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 54. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Internal Control Over Financial Reporting Management of Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting. In planning and performing our audit, we considered Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s internal control over financial reporting. Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the preceding paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that might be significant deficiencies or material weaknesses and, therefore there can be no assurance that all deficiencies, significant deficiencies, or material weaknesses have been identified. However, as described in the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs we identified a certain deficiency in internal control over financial reporting that we consider to be a material weakness. Page N. Oracle Road, Tucson, Arizona Tel: (520) Fax: (520)

46 A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the entity s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected on a timely basis. We consider the deficiency described in the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs as item to be a material weakness. Compliance and Other Matters As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s response to the finding identified in our audit is described in the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs. We did not audit Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s response and, accordingly, we express no opinion on it. This report is intended solely for the information and use of management, the Board of Directors, others within the entity, federal awarding agencies, and pass-through entities and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. HEINFELD, MEECH & CO., P.C. Certified Public Accountants February 27, 2012 Page 93

47 HEINFELD, MEECH & CO., P.C. CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS 25 th Heinfeld, Meech & Co. Anniversary REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS THAT COULD HAVE A DIRECT AND MATERIAL EFFECT ON EACH MAJOR PROGRAM AND ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER COMPLIANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH OMB CIRCULAR A-133 Independent Auditors Report Board of Directors Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority Compliance We have audited Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s compliance with the types of compliance requirements described in the OMB Circular A-133 Compliance Supplement that could have a direct and material effect on each of Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s major federal programs for the year ended June 30, Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s major federal programs are identified in the summary of auditors results section of the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs. Compliance with the requirements of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants applicable to each of its major federal programs is the responsibility of Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s compliance based on our audit. We conducted our audit of compliance in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America; the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations. Those standards and OMB Circular A-133 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether noncompliance with the types of compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program occurred. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence about Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s compliance with those requirements and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our audit does not provide a legal determination of Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s compliance with those requirements. In our opinion, Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority complied, in all material respects, with the compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on each of its major federal programs for the year ended June 30, Page N. Oracle Road, Tucson, Arizona Tel: (520) Fax: (520)

48 Internal Control Over Compliance Management of Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance with the requirements of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants applicable to federal programs. In planning and performing our audit, we considered Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s internal control over compliance with the requirements that could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program to determine the auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on compliance and to test and report on internal control over compliance in accordance with OMB Circular A-133, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of internal control over compliance. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s internal control over compliance. A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis. A material weakness in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance, such that there is a reasonable possibility that material noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. Our consideration of internal control over compliance was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control over compliance that might be deficiencies, significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over compliance that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, and each major fund, of Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority as of and for the year ended June 30, 2011, and have issued our report thereon dated February 27, 2012, which was modified as to consistency because of the implementation of Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 54. Our audit was performed for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority s basic financial statements. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards is presented for purposes of additional analysis as required by OMB Circular A-133, and is not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information is the responsibility of management and was derived from and relates directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the financial statements. The information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the schedule of expenditures of federal awards is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole. Page 95

49 This report is intended solely for the information and use of management, the Board of Directors, others within the entity, federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. HEINFELD, MEECH & CO., P.C. Certified Public Accountants February 27, 2012 Page 96

50

51 VALLEY METRO REGIONAL PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2011 SUMMARY OF AUDITORS RESULTS Financial Statements Type of auditors report issued: Unqualified Internal control over financial reporting: Material weakness(es) identified? X yes no Significant deficiency(ies) identified? yes X none reported Noncompliance material to financial statements noted? yes X no Federal Awards Internal control over major programs: Material weakness(es) identified? yes X no Significant deficiency(ies) identified? yes X none reported Type of auditors report issued on compliance for major programs: Unqualified Any audit findings disclosed that are required to be reported in accordance with section 510(a) of OMB Circular A-133? yes X no Identification of major programs: CFDA Numbers Name of Federal Program or Cluster , Federal Transit Cluster , Transit Services Program Cluster Highway Research and Development Program Dollar threshold used to distinguish between Type A and Type B programs: $309,919 Auditee qualified as low-risk auditee? X yes no Page 97

52 VALLEY METRO REGIONAL PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2011 FINDINGS RELATED TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS REPORTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS Reference Number: Type of Finding: Material weakness Description: Insufficient internal controls over financial reporting and the schedule of expenditures of federal awards CRITERIA The Authority s management is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls that include controls for the generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) basis financial statements issued by the Authority. The Authority s system of internal controls must extend beyond the general ledger and the supporting schedules prepared by the Authority; rather it must also include controls over the GAAP basis financial statements. In addition, OMB Circular A-133 requires proper presentation of federal awards in the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards. CONDITION/CONTEXT Management requested outside consultants prepare a draft of the financial statements, including related note disclosures. The outsourcing of these services is not unusual and is a result of management's cost benefit decision to rely on the accounting expertise of the consultants. The Authority's management did not have adequate internal control procedures in place over the financial statements issued by the Authority using the basis of accounting required by GAAP. In addition, the Authority s internal controls over federal reporting for the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards did not include a review process to ensure that Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) numbers are correct. EFFECT Audit adjustments were necessary to properly state account balances, transaction classifications, and related note disclosures. In addition, incorrect presentation of a program CFDA number resulted in an understatement of expenditures; as a result, the program cluster was not audited as a major federal program as required in the prior year. CAUSE The Authority's limited resources contribute to difficulties in establishing controls over financial reporting at the financial statement level. In addition, a clerical error was made on the Schedule of Expenditures and Federal Awards. Page 98

53 VALLEY METRO REGIONAL PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2011 FINDINGS RELATED TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS REPORTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS (Concl d) Reference Number: RECOMMENDATION The Authority must design and implement effective internal control procedures to ensure the financial statements and related notes are complete and free from material misstatements and misclassification. Specifically, the Authority should use checklists to aid in the review of the financial statements and related notes to the financial statements. The Authority's personnel should obtain additional training to increase their understanding of the GAAP basis financial statements drafted by the consulting firm as well as the related adjusting entries and reclassifications notated throughout the audit of the Authority's financial statements. In addition, the Authority must design and implement effective internal control procedures to ensure the federal reporting and presentation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and related notes are free from material misstatements and misclassification. Such controls should include a review of the Schedule of Expenditures and Federal Awards to include verification of CFDA numbers. VIEWS OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS AND PLANNED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS The Authority concurs with this recommendation and will implement a checklist to aid in the review of the financial statements. As budget allows, personnel will obtain ongoing training to increase their understanding of the GAAP basis financial statements. In addition, we have asked the Federal grantee to include in the Intergovernmental agreements verification of CFDA numbers for all future grants. Page 99

54 VALLEY METRO REGIONAL PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY SUMMARY SCHEDULE OF PRIOR AUDIT FINDINGS YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2011 Status of Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs Reference Number: Program Name: Federal Transit Cluster CFDA Nos.: , Status: Corrected. Page 100

55 Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority Management s Discussion and Analysis As management of Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority (the Authority), we offer this narrative overview and analysis of the financial activities of the Authority for the fiscal year ended June 30, This discussion and analysis is designed to (1) assist the reader in focusing on significant financial issues, (2) provide an overview of the Authority s financial activity, (3) identify changes in the Authority s financial position, (4) identify any material deviations from the financial plan (adopted annual budget) and (5) identify individual fund issues or concerns. Financial Highlights The Authority s total net assets decreased $25.8 million in FY 2011, an increase of $6.9 million in governmental activities and a decrease $32.6 million in business-type activities. Total net assets of the Authority are $90.6 million, of which $67.7 million is unrestricted. The governmental activities revenues increased by approximately $3.7 million (3.5%) over the previous year. The business-type activities revenues decreased by approximately $11.5 million (25%) from the previous year. At June 30, 2011, the Authority s governmental fund balance sheet reported a combined ending fund balance of $52.4 million, an increase of $6.2 million (13.5%) compared to the previous fiscal year. OVERVIEW OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The financial statements are presented as follows: Government-wide reporting presents financial statements on a government-wide basis. Fund financial statements presents governmental, proprietary and fiduciary fund financial statements, with the focus on major funds within each fund type. Measurement focus for governmental activities in the government-wide financial statements all activities, including the governmental activities, are reported using the economic resources measurement focus and accrual basis of accounting. The current financial resources focus and modified accrual basis of accounting are followed for the governmental fund financial statements. Budgetary reporting the display of both the original adopted budget and the revised budget in the budgetary comparison schedules is required by GAAP. These schedules are only required for the general fund and major special revenue funds; these statements are presented as part of the basic financial statements, and the Authority has presented this information for the proprietary funds in the other supplementary information section as additional information. Required narrative analysis the financial statements are required to be accompanied by narrative introduction and analytical overview of the government s financial activities in the form of Management s Discussion and Analysis (MD&A). 1

56 Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority Management s Discussion and Analysis (Continued) As presented below, the financial section of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the Authority consists of this discussion and analysis, the basic financial statements and required supplementary information (other than MD&A). There are also additional non-required supplementary schedules presented after the basic financial statements. The basic financial statements include the government-wide financial statements, fund financial statements, including the budgetary statements for the general fund and major special revenue funds, and notes to the financial statements. Government-wide Financial Statements The government-wide financial statements (see pages 14 16) are designed to provide a broad overview of the Authority s finances in a manner similar to those used by private businesses. All of the activities of the Authority, except those of a fiduciary nature, are included in these statements. The activities of the Authority are broken down into two columns on these statements governmental activities and business-type activities. A total column for the Authority is also provided. The governmental activities include the basic services of the Authority including general government (administration), regional planning, transportation demand management and regional customer services. Grants and general revenues generally support these activities. The business-type activities include the private sector type activities which are transit service operations and light rail transit. These activities are partially supported by user charges and provide substantial benefits, both direct and indirect, to the public at large. The statement of net assets presents information on all of the Authority s assets and liabilities, both current and noncurrent, with the difference between the two reported as net assets. The focus on net assets is designed to be similar to the emphasis for businesses. Over time, increases or decreases in net assets may serve as a useful indicator of whether the financial position of the Authority is improving or deteriorating. To assess the overall health of the 2

57 Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority Management s Discussion and Analysis (Continued) Authority, other indicators, including non-financial indicators like the Authority s tax base and the condition of its capital assets, should also be considered. The statement of activities presents information showing how the Authority s net assets changed over the most recent fiscal year. Since full accrual accounting is used for the government-wide financial statements, all changes to net assets are reported at the time that the underlying event giving rise to the change occurs, regardless of the timing of the related cash flows. This statement also focuses on both the gross and net costs of the various functions of the Authority, based only on direct functional revenues and expenses. This is designed to show the extent to which the various functions depend on general taxes and revenues for support. Fund Financial Statements Also presented are more traditional fund financial statements for governmental funds, proprietary funds and fiduciary funds. A fund is a grouping of related accounts that is used to maintain control over resources that have been segregated for specific activities or conditions. Funds are used to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal requirements as well as for managerial control to demonstrate fiduciary responsibility over the assets of the Authority. Governmental funds Governmental funds are used to account for most of the Authority s basic services. Unlike the governmental activities column on the government-wide financial statement, these fund financial statements (pages 17-18) focus on near-term inflows and outflows of spendable resources as well as on balances of spendable resources available at the end of the fiscal year. Such information is useful in looking at the Authority s near-term financial requirements. Since the governmental activities on the statements focus on near-term spendable resources, while the governmental activities on the government-wide financial statements have a longer term focus, a reconciliation of the differences between the two statements is provided following the fund financial statements and is also provided in Note 2 (pages 38-39). Proprietary funds Proprietary funds are used to account for business-type activities of the Authority. Enterprise funds are used for activities that primarily serve customers outside the governmental unit. The proprietary fund financial statements (pages 23-25) are prepared using the same long-term focus as the government-wide financial statements. The enterprise funds generally provide information similar to the business-type activities column of the government-wide financial statements, but provide more detail and additional information (i.e., cash flows). Fiduciary funds Fiduciary funds are used to account for resources held for the benefit of others. Fiduciary funds are not included in the government-wide financial statements because the resources of those funds are not available to support programs of the Authority. The fiduciary fund statement (page 26) is prepared on the same basis as the government-wide and proprietary fund statements. Notes to the Financial Statements The notes to the financial statements (pages 28 50) provide additional information that is essential to a full understanding of the data provided in the government-wide and fund financial statements and should be read with the financial statements. 3

58 Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority Management s Discussion and Analysis (Continued) Required supplementary information other than MD&A Governments have an option of including the budgetary comparison statements of the general fund and major special revenue funds as either part of the fund financial statements within the basic financial statements, or as required supplementary information after the footnotes. The Authority has chosen to present these budgetary statements as part of the basic financial statements. GOVERNMENT-WIDE FINANCIAL ANALYSIS The following tables and analysis discuss the financial position and changes to the financial position for the Authority as a whole as of and for the year ended June 30, 2011, with comparative information for the previous year. Net Assets Net assets may serve over time as a useful indicator of a government s financial position. The following table reflects the condensed Statement of Net Assets as of June 30, 2011 compared to the prior year: Governmental Activities Condensed Statement of Net Assets As of June 30 (in thousands of dollars) Business-type Activities Total Primary Government Percent Change Current and other assets $ 53,235.3 $ 46,808.8 $ 43,424.5 $ 37,341.4 $ 96,659.8 $ 84, % Noncurrent assets Cash and cash equivalents , , , , % Deferred charges % Capital assets 1, , , , , % Total assets $ 54,581.9 $ 47,498.6 $ 170,842.9 $ 214,985.5 $ 225,424.8 $ 262, % Other liabilities $ 1,486.5 $ $ 29,948.1 $ 38,262.1 $ 31,434.6 $ 38, % Long-term liabilities , , , , % Total liabilities $ 1,733.7 $ 1,521.7 $ 133,109.8 $ 144,610.5 $ 134,843.6 $ 146, % Net assets: Invested in capital assets, net of related debt $ 1,346.6 $ $ 21,322.7 $ 106,601.8 $ 22,669.3 $ 107, % Restricted % Unrestricted 51, , ,410.2 (36,226.8) 67, , % Total net assets $ 52,848.2 $ 45,976.9 $ 37,732.9 $ 70,375.0 $ 90,581.1 $ 116, % The Authority s total net assets decreased $25.8 million in FY 2011, an increase of $6.9 million in governmental activities and a decrease of $32.6 million in business-type activities. Total net assets of the Authority are $90.6 million, of which $67.7 million is unrestricted. 4

59 Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority Management s Discussion and Analysis (Continued) A portion of net assets (25.0%) represents the Authority s investment in capital assets net of accumulated depreciation and related outstanding debt used to acquire those assets. The Authority uses these capital assets to provide services to the region s citizens; consequently, it is not the Authority s intention to sell these assets, and they are therefore not available for future spending. The capital assets are reported net of related debt; as discussed in the Capital Assets and Debt Administration section (pages 11-12), the Authority pledged future transportation excise tax revenues to repay the outstanding debt obligations. The capital assets themselves are not intended to be used to liquidate these liabilities. An additional 0.2% ($0.2 million) of the Authority s net assets reflects resources that are subject to external restrictions, of which the majority is restricted for compensated absences. The remaining 74.8% ($67.7 million) represents unrestricted resources that may be used to meet the Authority s ongoing obligations to citizens, member agencies, contractors and creditors within the respective governmental and business-type activities. The governmental activities reported an increase of $6.0 million (13.3%) of unrestricted net assets over the prior year largely attributed to an increase in the interfund balance relating to short-term loans to cover temporary cash deficits in the Transit Service Operations Fund. The significant increase of $47.0 million (129.9%) of unrestricted net assets over the prior year in business-type activities is significantly due to the change in classification of the invested in capital assets net of related debt to accurately report net assets from capital purchases net of the 2009 bond issuance. Changes in Net Assets The following table compares the revenues and expenses of the Authority for the current and previous fiscal year. The increase (decrease) in net assets for each year represents the extent to which revenues were over (under) expenses during the year. (Remainder of this page intentionally left blank) 5

60 Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority Management s Discussion and Analysis (Continued) Governmental Activities Changes in Net Assets Fiscal year ended June 30 (in thousands of dollars) Business-type Activities Total Pimary Government Percent Change REVENUES Program revenues: Charges for services $ $ $ 23,374.8 $ 27,253.1 $ 23,563.8 $ 27, % Operating grants and contributions 2, , , , , , % Capital grants and contributions - - 8, , , , % General revenues: Sales taxes 107, , , , % Interest earnings % Other % Total revenues 109, , , , , , % EXPENSES Governmental activities: Regional planning 2, , , , % Transportation demand management 1, , , , % Regional customer services 7, , , , % Administration 1, , , , % Business-type activities: Transit service operations , , ,337 93, % Light rail transit , , ,140 60, % Total expenses 13, , , , , , % Excess (deficit) before transfers 96, ,227.2 (121,892.0) (107,683.2) (25,770.5) (15,456.0) 66.7% Transfers in (out) (89,250.2) (84,745.3) 89, , N/A Increase (decrease) in net assets $ 6,871.3 $ 7,481.9 $ (32,641.8) $ (22,937.9) $ (25,770.5) $ (15,456.0) 66.7% The largest financing source for the Authority as a whole is sales taxes (74.1%). The major funding sources of governmental activities are sales taxes (97.5%) and federal and state grants (2.1%). The major funding source for business-type activities are charges for services (67.6%) and transfers from the government activities (72.1%). Business-type activities also received substantial federal grants and contribution revenue (8.4%). The Authority s overall revenues decreased by $7.8 million, or 5.1%, compared to last fiscal year. Total revenues of governmental activities increased by $3.7 million, or 3.5% over the previous year mainly due to the sales tax revenues in the Public Transportation Fund. Program revenues of business-type activities decreased by $11.5 million, or 25%, compared to last fiscal year, which is largely attributable to decreases in Federal Transit Administration (FTA) capital grants. The Authority s sales tax revenue over the prior year is limited to incorporating those elements necessary for implementing the sixth year of the Proposition 400 Transit Life Cycle Program (TLCP). The Public Transportation Fund (PTF) revenues are restricted to the implementation of the transit element of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The laws pertaining to Regional Area Road Fund (RARF) revenues have changed beginning with FY Most notably, as a result of changes in the distribution of funds made by House Bill 2292, the amount of money that the Authority received previously has been divided in two, with one half going to the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG). Additionally, the allowable use of these funds has changed as well. Previously, RARF was unrestricted as to use. However, RARF revenue is now limited to fund administration in the General Fund and planning and is no longer available to fund transit services. 6

61 Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority Management s Discussion and Analysis (Continued) The largest user of resources for the Authority as a whole is the business-type activities (91.9%). For the governmental activities, the users of resources are regional customer services (58.0%), administration (14.3%), regional planning (16.5%), and transportation demand management (11.2%). Overall expenses increased by $2.5 million, or 1.5%, compared to last fiscal year. The governmental expenses decreased by $ 0.2 million, or 1.6%, over the prior year due to conservative spending practices. The expenses of business-type activities increased by $2.7 million, or 1.8%, compared to the prior year due to increase of disbursements in the Valley Metro Rail Fund. The increases in the business-type activities expenses were adhered to plan as the Authority entered its fourth year of implementing the Proposition 400 TLCP. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THE AUTHORITY S FUNDS As previously mentioned, the Authority maintains fund accounting to demonstrate compliance with budgetary and legal requirements. The following is a brief discussion of financial highlights from the fund financial statements. Governmental Funds The focus of the governmental funds financial statements (pages 17 22) is to provide information on near-term inflows, outflows and balances of spendable resources. The fund balance of the governmental funds is $52.3 million, an increase of $6.2 million, or 13.5%, from the previous year. Of the $52.4 million total fund balance, the Authority has restricted $0.8 million for compensated absences and the remainder is in unassigned fund balance in the General Fund (see Note 5 - page 42). Unassigned fund balance may serve as a useful indicator of a government s net resources available for spending at the end of the year. Of the $52.4 million fund balance, $52.2 million is reported in the General Fund which includes $47.6 million of Public Transportation Funds. With the implementation of GASB Statement No. 54, the General Fund includes the Public Transportation Fund, the Regional Customer Service and the Capital and Other Grants Funds. Previously the Public Transportation Fund was shown separately and the Regional Customer Service Fund and the Capital and Other Grants Funds were part of the non major government funds. The Public Transportation Fund was a fund developed in FY 2006 for activities relating to the first year of Proposition 400 Public Transportation Fund (PTF) sales tax revenues. The $102.7 million PTF sales tax revenue increased by $3.3 million from the last year. The Regional Customer Services Fund accounts for activities related to marketing, customer services, Americans with Disabilities (ADA) compliance, contract maintenance and quality monitoring, and farebox data reporting for the region. It provides information and customer service for the region through its centralized transit information call center. The Capital and Other Grants Fund accounts for state and federal grant revenues and expenditures not related to planning, transportation demand management or regional customer services. 7

62 Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority Management s Discussion and Analysis (Continued) The Transit Planning Fund accounts for activities related to the development of strategies to promote social and economic well-being of the community through the provision of an efficient and effective regional transit system. Revenues increased $0.6 million (254.1%) due to the increase of $.4 million in Federal grants and $.2 million in charges for services to Valley Metro Rail to complete an Origins & Destinations study. The expenditures increased 24.8% from the prior year due to an increase in short range planning and to complete an Origins and Destinations study. Prior to 2006, sales taxes allocated to the Transit Planning Fund were shown as revenues. These monies are now shown as transfers in. Total transfers in decreased 9.5% over the prior year. The Transportation Demand Management Fund accounts for activities related to the countywide ridesharing program, trip reduction program and clean air campaign. Revenues decreased 16.0% and expenditures decreased 14.7% from the prior year due to decreases in grant funds available for regional rideshare, telework and bike education programs. Proprietary Funds The proprietary fund financial statements (pages 23 25) are prepared on the same accounting basis and measurement focus as the government-wide financial statements, but provide additional detail since each enterprise fund is a major fund and is shown discretely on the fund statements. The Transit Service Operations Fund accounts for the activities related to the operations of local and express bus, paratransit and vanpool services for the region. Net assets decreased $35.6 million (58%) over the prior year due mainly to increases in transfers out to Valley Metro Rail for bond proceeds, decreases in Federal grants, and reduction in bus service. The Valley Metro Rail Fund accounts for staffing and administrative services that are contractually provided by the Authority to Valley Metro Rail, Inc. (VMR) and the PTF sales tax revenues and expenses of such funds related to the Regional Transportation Plan approved light rail projects. Valley Metro Rail, Inc. is a nonprofit corporation organized for the purpose of planning, designing, constructing and operating the light rail transit project in metropolitan Phoenix (see Note 1(a) on page 28). The Valley Metro Rail Fund has net assets of $12.0 million as of June 30, 2011 as compared to net assets of $9.0 million at the end of the previous year. In fiscal year 2011, the Valley Metro Rail Fund received 42.4% of the total PTF sales tax revenues distributed to the Authority from the Arizona Department of Revenue, totaling $40.8 million and received 11.3% of the $4.4 million RARF sales tax revenue received by the Authority, totaling $0.5 million. Additionally, the Valley Metro Rail Fund received $19.5 million of transfers in of 2009 Bond proceeds from the Transit Service Operations Fund for VMR capital expenditure reimbursements. GENERAL FUND BUDGETARY HIGHLIGHTS During the year there was a decrease $0.2 million in appropriations between the original and final amended expenditure budget. For the year ended June 30, 2011, actual expenditures were under the adopted budget amounts by $0.5 million. The positive variance was attributable to the Marketing and Finance & Management Services activities of the General Fund being under budget because of conservative spending practices. 8

63 Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority Management s Discussion and Analysis (Continued) CAPITAL ASSETS AND DEBT ADMINISTRATION Capital Assets As of June 30, 2011, the Authority had $94.6 million invested in various capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation, for its governmental and business-type activities. The overall net decrease in the Authority s capital assets for the current fiscal year was 13.2%, an increase 95.2% for governmental activities and a decrease of 13.8% for business-type activities for the current year. Major capital asset events in the current year attributing to the decrease included the following: Depreciation expense in the current year totaled $11.7 million, $0.5 million for governmental activities capital assets and $11.2 million for business type capital assets Projects that had been recorded as work in process in the prior year were completed and subsequently conveyed to various member cities. This decreased the capital assets in total by $7.6 million. The following table provides a breakdown of capital assets of the Authority at June 30, 2011 with comparative information for the previous year. Additional information on the Authority s capital assets may be found in Note 7 on pages Capital Assets, Net of Accumulated Depreciation As of June 30 (in thousands of dollars) Governmental Activities Business-type Activities Total Primary Government Percent Change Non-depreciable assets: Land $ - $ - $ 5,292.0 $ 5,292.0 $ 5,292.0 $ 5, % Work-in-progress - - 2, , , % Depreciable assets: Transit fleet , , , % Building , , , % Site improvements , , , % Computers & softw are % Equipment , , , % Vehicles % Furniture & fixtures % Total assets $ 1,346.6 $ $ 93,285.7 $ 108,271.0 $ 94,632.3 $ 108, % Debt Administration At June 30, 2011, the Authority had total bonded debt outstanding (including unamortized premium) of $105.1 million related to business-type activities. The Authority has pledged future transportation excise tax revenues to repay this outstanding debt. 9

64 Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority Management s Discussion and Analysis (Continued) Business-type Activities Revenue bonds payable $ $ Plus unamortized premium: Bond premium payable Total $ $ The Authority s current bond ratings on transportation excise revenue tax bonds are AA+ from Standard & Poor s and AA+ from Fitch. Additional information on the Authority s bonded debt and other long-term liabilities can be found in Note 9 on pages ECONOMIC FACTORS RPTA undertook a number of key projects during FY 2011, as the agency continues the implementation of the TLCP operating and capital projects. Funding for these projects and studies comes from a combination of sales tax revenues (Public Transportation Funds [PTF] and Regional Area Road Funds [RARF]) and federal grants. The key initiatives for fiscal year 2011 included: Opening of the Valley Metro Mobility Center with a transit walk offering in-person Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) assessments for the first time in the Valley. Start-up of Route 184, offering bus service to Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport, as well as public transportation for the first time south of Superstition Springs Mall on Power Road. New LINK bus route began on Arizona Avenue and Country Club Drive allowing a direct public transit link to METRO light rail from Chandler and Gilbert. Developed a new model for providing ADA Dial-a-Ride service in the West Valley utilizing a partnership with Discount Cab. For the first time ever, provided bus service to the Gila River Indian Community. Enhanced the mobile website and began using bar codes for enhanced communication to passengers. Kicked off the NextRide program to assist passengers with getting automated next bus and train information using a cell phone or the internet. Implemented the Interactive Voice Response system for East Valley Dial-a-Ride service making it easier for passengers to check on the status of upcoming trips or cancel trips. A real time bus tracker was initiated for the LINK bus routes, which is available at the station or by using the internet or a cell phone to see the exact location of a bus in real time. 10

65 Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority Management s Discussion and Analysis (Continued) The adopted FY 2012 combined operating and capital budget is $233.1 million (up approximately 4% from fiscal year 2011). The FY 2012 budget includes the sixth full year of projects funded with Proposition 400 PTF sales tax revenues ($103.4 million). Of the $103.4 million PTF revenue budgeted, $58.7 million is for bus operating and bus capital and $44.7 million is for light rail/high capacity capital. The total operating budget of $84.7 million represents a $563,000 (1%) decrease under the fiscal year 2011 operating budget of $85.3 million. The total capital budget of $148.4 million represents an $8.7 million (6%) increase over the fiscal year 2011 capital budget of $139.7 million. The major reason for the decrease in the operating budget is directly related to the projects programmed in the Transit Life Cycle Program (TLCP) for fiscal year The budget is balanced; decreases in net assets other than capital assets are not anticipated for fiscal year FINANCIAL CONTACT The financial report is designed to provide a general overview of the Authority s finances and to demonstrate accountability for the use of public funds. Questions about any of the information provided in this report, or requests for additional financial information should be addressed to the Authority s Acting Finance Director, Valley Metro RPTA, 101 N. 1 st Avenue, Suite 1100, Phoenix, AZ

66

67 Board of Directors Information Summary Agenda Item B Date March 14, 2012 Subject Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs) for Arizona Avenue and Mesa Main Street LINK Station maintenance with the communities of Chandler, Gilbert and Mesa Background The Arizona Avenue/Country Club LINK and the Mesa Main LINK are Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) projects that were approved by voters as part of Proposition 400. The Mesa Main Street LINK Bus Rapid Transit route is approximately 13 miles long connecting Superstition Springs Transit Center to the Sycamore Light Rail Transit (LRT) Center in the City of Mesa. The Arizona Avenue/Country Club LINK Bus Rapid Transit route is approximately 12 miles long with termini at Chandler Park and Ride on Germann Road in the City of Chandler and the Sycamore Transit Station in west Mesa. The design and construction costs for the Main Street LINK were funded 100% with Public Transportation Funds (PTF) under the Regional Transportation Plan. The design costs for the Arizona Avenue/ Country Club LINK route were funded by PTF under the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) while the construction costs were funded through an American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) grant from the Federal Transit Administration. RPTA continues to serve as the lead agency in the design and construction of BRT capital improvements. The IGAs that currently exist with each of the affected municipalities regarding design and construction of the BRT will expire when the projects are complete. The LINK station maintenance IGA with each of the three municipalities will be in effect immediately following project completion and acceptance. The maintenance IGAs with each of the three member agencies delinates the responsibilities of the cities/town as well as RPTA with regard to the ongoing maintenance of the various elements of the BRT routes including but not limited to: cleaning and maintenance of the LINK stations maintenance of traffic signal proirty infrastructure maintenance and cash collection of fare vending machines 1

68 maintenance of closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras maintenance of dynamic message signs (DMS) and associated audio announcement equipment as well as power and telecommunications infrastructure associated with the LINK stations and the LINK bus fleet. Fiscal Impacts Maintenance responsibilities of RPTA and the affected municipalities will incur ongoing operating costs which will be reflected in the annual budgets of RPTA and the affected municipalities. Costs associated with RPTA maintenance responsibilities associated with the LINK service will be billed through the service rate for these two routes. Considerations If the Intergovernmental Agreements are not approved, RPTA may not be in full compliance with FTA grant requirements and could be subject to Federal Transit Administration (FTA) audit findings. Non-compliance could potentially impact current grant reimbursements. Committee Action Process RTAG February 21, 2012 for review TMC March 7, 2012 approved Board March, 2012 for action Recommendation It is recommended that the Board of Directors authorize the Chief Executive Officer to execute the IGAs. Contact Person Carol Ketcherside Director of Planning Attachments The IGAs are available upon request. 2

69 Board of Directors Information Summary Agenda Item C Date March 14, 2012 Subject Intergovernmental Agreements with the City of Phoenix for Federal Transit Administration Pass-Through Grant Reimbursements Grant AZ-90-X Formula, Grant AZ-95-X009 Surface Transportation Program, Grant AZ-57-X013 New Freedoms, Grant AZ-37-X014 Jobs Access/Reverse Commute, and Grant AZ TIGGER Summary RPTA, as the lead agency, is being provided FTA funding in the following grants: AZ-90-X109 $25,116,226 Formula funds/$5,535,905 local match for bus purchases and preventive maintenance. AZ-95-X009 - $2,133,904 Surface Transportation Program funds/$37,118 for vanpool replacements and preventive maintenance. AZ-57-X013 - $539,500 New Freedoms funding/$515,500 local match for electronic fare processing system and operating assistance for the East Valley Alternative Transportation Program. AZ-37-X014 - $120,000 Job Access/Reverse Commute funds/$120,000 local match for operating assistance on Route 184 (Power Road). AZ $1,349,715 TIGGER funds/$374,229 local match for electric fan retrofit of 70 buses. The City of Phoenix is the designated recipient for all Federal Transit Administration (FTA) grant funds for the region. Agencies region-wide undertake projects approved for FTA grant funding. Agencies then submit requests to Phoenix for reimbursement of actual expenses incurred and then Phoenix executes drawdown of funds from FTA to pass-through reimbursement to agencies for their expenses. At this time, RPTA requires authorization to enter into Intergovernmental Agreements with the City of Phoenix to allow the City to reimburse RPTA for expenditures against the approved projects. 1

70 Fiscal Impact The RPTA is reimbursed the federal share of expenses by the City of Phoenix for projects undertaken as listed in the approved grant. The reimbursements approved in this grant are funded with FTA funds. Local match is in the current approved FY2011/2012 budget for some of the New Freedoms funding and for bus purchases for the City of Tempe, and for preventive maintenance. Local match for the remaining projects will be included in the agency s FY2012/2013 budget. It is anticipated that reimbursements will not exceed the approved budgeted amounts. Considerations Without approved agreements, Phoenix cannot reimburse federal funds to RPTA for any expenses covered by the grants and RPTA would need to use other funds for the project or not undertake the services provided and will be offered in the FY 13 budget. These projects are in the RPTA Operating and Capital Budgets. Prior Committee Action TMC March 7, approved Board March 22, for action Recommendation It is recommended that the Board of Directors authorize the Chief Executive Officer to execute Intergovernmental Agreements with the City of Phoenix for Federal Transit Administration Pass-Through Grant Reimbursements. Contact Person Bob Antila Senior Management Analyst Attachments Copies of the draft IGAs with the City of Phoenix are available upon request. 2

71 Board of Directors Information Summary Agenda Item D Date March 14, 2012 Subject FY 2011 Transit Performance Report (TPR) Background The Transit Performance Report (TPR) is updated annually using data provided by our member agencies and the Valley Metro Regional Ridership Report. In previous years, performance targets that were developed as part of the Service Effectiveness and Efficiency Study were updated using inflationary factors. This resulted in a large gap between the inflated targets and actual performance. Given the ongoing discussions on how to appropriately update the performance targets, the draft FY 2011 TPR does not include performance targets. For the FY 2011 TPR, some reporting cities have changed their methodology used in accounting for and reporting transit performance data. As a result, some financial measures are not directly comparable to previous years data. Where this is the case, explanatory footnotes have been included with the tables and graphs. The report also distinguishes between all service and PTF funded service. Where PTF funded service is addressed, system level data such as fare recovery rates are only for PTF funded service and not for all service. Where all service is being reported, system level data will reflect both PTF and non-ptf funded service. Budget Source Funding for staff to develop this report is in the adopted FY Operating and Capital Budget (project 3315) and is paid by Regional Area Road Funds and MAG/FTA Section 5303 funding. Impacts This report is a tool used in the five-year State performance audit process required under Proposition 400. The report also provides member agencies with service performance by mode that can be utilized to improve operational efficiencies of the various transit modes. 1

72 Committee Action Process TMC for March 7, 2012 accepted Board of Directors March 22, 2012 for acceptance Recommendation It is recommended that the Board of Directors accept the FY 2011 TPR. Contact Person Carol Ketcherside Director of Planning Attachments FY 2011 TPR 2

73 V A L L E Y M E T R O Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (JULY 1, JUNE 30, 2011) VALLEYMETRO.ORG RPT1568

74 ISSUED: JANUARY 2012 Transit Performance Report The Transit Performance Report (TPR) is prepared and updated annually by the Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA). This report is developed using input from, and reviewed by, member agencies and the RPTA committees and governing board. The TPR serves as input to the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) updates and to RPTA s Short Range Transit Plan. This year s report reflects many changes based on recommendations from our member agencies. One such change is the methodology for updating performance targets. Because this discussion is on-going, targets have been omitted from this report. Our member agencies also suggested breaking down fixed route service by the jurisdiction operated in. For example local Route 3-Van Buren provides service in the communities of Phoenix, Avondale and Tolleson. Reports 4a through 4c found in the appendix have been reformatted to indicate not only which entity is operating the service but also where the service was operated. This year s report layout has been reformatted to provide more information. Transit service in the region is made possible and supported by multiple funding sources including local city taxes. This report reflects data as reported to RPTA by local operating agencies. HIGHLIGHTS FROM FY 2010 TO 2011: System wide ridership decreased slightly (down 0.20%) Ridership on light rail increased by approximately 5.6% or 680,000 Subsidy per boarding (operating cost minus fare revenue) system wide increased by over 5%. Boardings per revenue mile for fixed route increased by over 10%. This reflects the elimination of less productive routes and route segments. Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 2

75 System Summary FY 2011 Performance Indicator Proposition 400 Fixed Route Level Fixed- Route Paratransit Vanpool Light Rail System Total % Change from FY 2010 Farebox Recovery 21.7% 22.0% 6.8% 100.8% 33% 22.5% -3.55% Operating Cost Per Boarding $4.37 $3.77 $37.72 $2.98 $2.42 $ % Subsidy Per Boarding $3.42 $2.94 $35.17 $0.00 $1.62 $ % Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $5.51 $7.04 $4.70 $0.60 $12.90 $ % Average Fare $0.95 $0.83 $2.55 $3.00 $0.80 $ % Total Boardings 7,782,061 54,814, ,833 1,054,315 12,793,529 69,462, % Percent of Total Boardings 11.21% 78.91% 1.15% 1.51% 18.42% Boardings Per Revenue Mile % information Notes: For segments of fixed route service funded by Proposition 400 or Public Transportation Fund (PTF), net operating cost is the same as the amount of PTF used for that segment. Operating costs for fixed route service includes circulator routes. Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 3

76 2011 YEAR IN REVIEW Goodyear Park & Ride The Goodyear park-and-ride was introduced to the regional transit system in December 2010 providing a place for Express route 562 riders to catch the bus as well as serving as a meeting place for carpools and vanpools. Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 4

77 COST EFFICIENCY AND SERVICE EFFECTIVENESS PERFORMANCE RESULTS PROPOSITION 400 Bus (Fixed-Route) Several of these indicators for Proposition 400 funded service differ from what is experienced with general fixed-route service. This may be explained in part by the newness of Proposition 400 funded service which may take time to mature and build ridership and also by the fact that Proposition 400 funding is more likely to be used in areas outside of the urban core. In FY 2011, boardings for PTF segments consisted of 14.20% of all fixed route service compared to only 11.65% in FY Please see Report 3A in the Appendix for more details. Farebox Recovery Ratio 21.7% of operating costs on segments funded by Proposition 400 were covered by fare revenue. This recovery rate is slightly less when compared to 22.3 % for all fixed route service. 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 0% 17.9% 2009 Subsidy Per Boarding $8.00 $7.00 $6.00 $5.00 $4.00 $3.00 $2.00 $1.00 $0.00 $ % 2010 $ % 2011 $ Operating Cost Per Boarding $8.00 $7.00 $6.00 $5.00 $4.00 $3.00 $2.00 $1.00 $0.00 $4.49 $ Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile Proposition 400 funded service cost $1.41 less per mile when compared to all fixed route service ($5.51 per revenue mile for Proposition 400 funded service and $6.92 per revenue mile for all fixed route service.) $6.00 $5.00 $4.00 $3.00 $2.00 $1.00 $0.00 $ $ $5.51 $ information Note: City of Phoenix began a new contract for fixed route service on July 1, Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 5

78 COST EFFICIENCY AND SERVICE EFFECTIVENESS PERFORMANCE RESULTS PROPOSITION 400 Bus (Fixed-Route) Average Fare Compared to all fixed route service, the average fare was more than for Proposition 400 funded service ($0.95 for Proposition 400 funded service and $0.83 for all fixed route service). $1.25 $1.00 $0.80 $1.03 $0.95 $0.75 $0.50 $0.25 $0.00 Target $0.69 (Proposed 2010) Boardings Per Revenue Mile Boardings per revenue mile increased slightly for Proposition 400 funded service from the previous fiscal year. However, when compared to all fixed route service, Proposition 400 funded service had fewer boardings per revenue mile (1.86 boarding per revenue mile for fixed route service and 1.26 for Proposition 400 funded service) Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 6

79 2011 YEAR IN REVIEW NextRide - New Innovative Service NextRide was launched. NextRide is an innovative new service giving transit riders instant access to bus and train arrival times using cell phones and the Internet. Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 7

80 COST EFFICIENCY AND SERVICE EFFECTIVENESS PERFORMANCE RESULTS Bus (Fixed-Route, System-Wide) Includes Local, Circulator, Express, LINK, RAPID, and Rural Routes Farebox Recovery Ratio For all fixed route (all modes), farebox recovery. Operating Cost Per Boarding ALERT SERVICE REDUCTION Circulator routes - ALEX, MARY and SMART ROUTE ELIMINATIONS Express routes - 536, 570, 572, 576, 582 and 590 Circulator routes - Dash-Downtown Loop, DART, Deer Run, Flash to University TRANSIT SERVICE CHANGES Local routes - 29A and 32 NEW ROUTES Arizona LINK and 184-Power Road and Route 3A incorporated into Route 3 Please see reports 4a - 4c in the Appendix for more details. 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 22.3% 24.1% 22.0% 10% 0% Subsidy Per Boarding $3.00 $2.94 $2.66 $2.50 $2.33 $2.00 $1.50 $1.00 $0.50 $ $5.00 $4.50 $4.00 $3.50 $3.00 $2.50 $2.00 $1.50 $1.00 $0.50 $0.00 $3.00 $ Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile Fix route service reduced revenue miles by over 10% or by 3.4 million miles. $7.04 $7.00 $6.50 $6.00 $5.50 $5.00 $4.50 $4.00 $3.50 $3.00 $2.50 $2.00 $1.50 $0.50 $0.00 $6.06 $5.90 $ Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 8

81 COST EFFICIENCY AND SERVICE EFFECTIVENESS PERFORMANCE RESULTS Bus (Fixed-Route, System-Wide) Includes Local, Circulator, Express, LINK, RAPID, and Rural Routes Average Fare Fixed route average fare increased by 2.6%. $1.00 $0.90 $0.80 $0.70 $0.60 $0.50 $0.40 $0.30 $0.20 $0.10 $0.00 $0.67 $0.84 $ Annual Increase/Decrease in Total Boardings 15% 12% 9% 9% 6% 3% 0% -6% -1.37% -9% -12% -15% % -18% Annual Increase/Decrease in Weekday Total Boardings The number of holiday service days observed increased compared to FY 2010, That is, the number of weekdays operated decreased. This resulted in the weekday average ridership increasing slightly. 15% 12% Annual Increase/Decrease in Saturday Average Boardings Fixed route service operated more Saturdays in FY 2011 compared to FY This resulted in the Saturday average ridership decreasing slightly. In addition, Saturday service had a larger percentage of service cuts compared to weekday service. 15% 12% 9% 6% 7.5% 9% 6% 7.5% 3% 0% -6% 1.24% 3% 0% -6% -1.77% -9% -9% -12% -12% -15% % -15% % -18% % Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 9

82 COST EFFICIENCY AND SERVICE EFFECTIVENESS PERFORMANCE RESULTS Bus (Fixed-Route, System-Wide) Includes Local, Circulator, Express, LINK, RAPID, and Rural Routes Annual Increase/Decrease in Sunday Average Boardings 15% 12% 13.4% 9% 6% 3% 3.82% 0% -6% -9% -12% -15% -18% % Boardings Per Revenue Mile Fixed route service provided fewer revenue miles compared to FY 2010 (over a drop of 10% or 3.4 million miles) Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 10

83 2011 YEAR IN REVIEW Solar-Powered Cooling Station To help commuters during the heat of the summer, a solar-powered cooling station was installed at the 3rd Street and Washington Metro station, which was modeled after a station in Dubai. Parking and shaded parking was also increased at the light rail stations along Camelback Road. Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 11

84 COST EFFICIENCY AND SERVICE EFFECTIVENESS PERFORMANCE RESULTS Light Rail Please see Report 5 in the Appendix for more details. Farebox Recovery Ratio 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 28% 21.2% 20% 10% 0% % 2011 Operating Cost Per Boarding $5.00 $4.50 $4.00 $3.50 $3.00 $2.85 $2.72 $2.50 $2.42 $2.00 $1.50 $1.00 $0.50 $ Subsidy Per Boarding Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $3.00 $50.00 $2.50 $2.00 $1.50 $1.00 $0.50 $2.24 $1.96 $1.62 $40.00 $30.00 $20.00 $15.00 $10.00 $5.00 $11.66 $12.43 $12.90 $ $ Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 12

85 COST EFFICIENCY AND SERVICE EFFECTIVENESS PERFORMANCE RESULTS Light Rail Total Boardings Light Rail service operated only 6 months in FY 2008/09. Boardings Per Revenue Mile Millions Millions On-Time Performance 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 93.9% 95.80% 97.5% Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 13

86 2011 YE AR IN REVIEW Valley Metro Mobility Center In February 2011, we celebrated the opening of the Valley Metro Mobility Center. The Mobility Center is a stateof-the-art multi-functional facility that simulates the look and feel of the Valley s public transit system. The center provides eligibility evaluation assessments and a travel training program for people with disabilities. Customers can take a transit walk through the simulated streetscape and transit system stations in an indoor environment. The center provides several services for customers with specialized mobility needs: ADA paratransit Dial-A-Ride service eligibility ADA Platinum Pass Bus and light rail travel training Alternative transportation programs Customer service call center Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 14

87 PROPOSITION 400 Paratransit This data represents Proposition 400 funding used to fund service for ADA certified passengers only. Each operating system may include more than one jurisdiction. The values in the Proposition 400 column represents the amount reimbursed or credited to each jurisdiction in FY 2010 and may not correlate to the amount of Proposition 400 a jurisdiction spent that year. System Operating Cost is the total operating cost for each operating system. Please see Report 3 in the Appendix for further details. Paratransit Operating System Proposition 400 (1) System Operating Cost Proposition 400 as a Percentage of Total Operating Costs East Valley DAR $5,703,741 $9,096, % Glendale DAR $375,465 $2,570, % Peoria DAR $165,286 $1,006, % Phoenix DAR $7,754,948 $15,591, % Surprise DAR $6,633 $617, % Sun Cities Area Transit (SCAT) $10,540 $228, % Scottsdale Cab $195,442 $415, % TOTAL $14,212,054 $29,527, % (1) Total ADA reimbursement PTF in FY 2011 does not include a payment to Maricopa County for $64,844. information East Valley DAR includes the cities of Chandler, Gilbert, Mesa, Scottsdale and Tempe Phoenix DAR includes the cities of Phoenix, Avondale, Goodyear, Tolleson and Paradise Valley Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 15

88 COST EFFICIENCY AND SERVICE EFFECTIVENESS PERFORMANCE RESULTS Paratransit Please see Report 6 in the Appendix for more details. Farebox Recovery Ratio Many DAR systems increased their ADA DAR fares in July East Valley DAR increased fare again in July 2010 and July Operating Cost Per Boarding 10% $ % $ % $ % 6.8% $35.00 $36.44 $36.99 $ % 6.3% $ % $ % 4.1% $ % $ % $ % $5.00 0% $ Subsidy Per Boarding $40.00 $30.00 $34.95 $34.69 $35.17 $20.00 $20.00 $15.00 $10.00 $5.00 $ Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 16

89 COST EFFICIENCY AND SERVICE EFFECTIVENESS PERFORMANCE RESULTS Paratransit The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 is federal law which prohibits discrimination against persons with disabilities in public accommodations, including public transportation. On-time performance measures how many ADA boardings occurred within 30 minutes of the pick-up time given to the passenger at the time of their reservation. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $70.00 $60.00 $60.70 $60.15 $50.00 $40.00 $30.00 $20.00 $10.00 $68.26 Boardings Per Revenue Mile $ ADA On-Time Performance 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 96.08% 97.35% 97.39% Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 17

90 2011 YEAR IN REVIEW Over 335 Vanpools in Service Vanpooling is a convenient, stress-free, environmentally-friendly alternative to driving alone to work. Save money. Vanpoolers save about $800 a year or more compared to driving alone. Plus, by driving your car less, you spend less on gas, repairs and maintenance. Faster Commute. Get where you re going faster thanks to quick-moving and less congested High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes. Less stress. With someone else behind the wheel you can sleep, read, or just relax. Tax Savings. Federal tax laws allow you to pay your vanpool fares out of pre-tax dollars saving you significant money. Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 18

91 COST EFFICIENCY AND SERVICE EFFECTIVENESS PERFORMANCE RESULTS Vanpool Please see Report 1 in the Appendix for more details. Farebox Recovery Ratio 120% 110% 100% 92.9% 90% 85.06% 100.8% Operating Cost Per Boarding $5.00 $4.50 $4.00 $3.50 $3.07 $3.00 $ % 70% 60% 50% $2.50 $2.00 $1.50 $1.00 $0.50 $ % $ Subsidy Per Boarding Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $0.50 $0.46 $1.00 $0.40 $0.80 $0.71 $0.30 $0.60 $0.47 $0.60 $0.20 $0.17 $0.40 $0.10 $0.20 $0.00 $ $ Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 19

92 COST EFFICIENCY AND SERVICE EFFECTIVENESS PERFORMANCE RESULTS Vanpool Net Vanpool Starts % Total Vanpool Boardings 2.0 million 1.5 million 1.0 million 1,429,232 1,135,783 1,054, , ,000 50, Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 20

93 2011 YEAR IN REVIEW Accomplishments Arizona Avenue LINK Bus Route In January 2011, a new LINK bus route serving the East Valley was introduced. The new Arizona Avenue LINK bus route provides a direct public transit link to METRO light rail from Chandler, Gilbert, and Mesa. New Bus Route 184 Traveling along Power Road, the new Route 184 takes residents to the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport and Polytechnic Campus. Avondale ZOOM Circulator The Avondale Zoom circulator replaced the Route 131-START this summer and has become a popular service with more than 400 daily passengers traveling to local neighborhoods, businesses and schools including Estrella Mountain Community College. Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 21

94 2011 YEAR IN REVIEW Accomplishments 1.5 Million Bicycles Annually More than 1.5 million bicycles are being boarded on buses annually. ShareTheRide.com The share the ride online ride matching system has logged over 300,000 commutes, saved over 5 million pounds in greenhouse gas emissions and saved over 260,000 gallons in fuel. Transit Book and ValleyMetro.org The Transit Book, ValleyMetro.org and shelter maps have all been re-worked to make them easier to read and understand. Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 22

95 2011 YEAR IN REVIEW Valley Metro NOTES Valley Metro NOTES is an online educational campaign comprised of a series of animated videos and songs delivering how to use transit information in a clear, fun and engaging way. Over the last twelve months the Notes campaign has driven a 33% increase in new visits to additional transit information on ValleyMetro.org and has helped to reduce customer service phone calls by 3%. Transit satisfaction scores also increased during the time of the Valley Metro Notes campaign with 83% of riders reporting being likely to recommend riding the bus or train to others, versus 78% the year prior. Likewise 77% of riders stated that they would be likely to ride Valley Metro a year from now, up from 72% before the campaign s launch. The overall satisfaction with the transit service in the Valley continues its upward trend, and now stands at 78%, one of the highest ratings ever. Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 23

96 Glossary ADA On-Time Performance Measures how many ADA boardings occurred within 30 minutes of the pick-up time given to the passenger at the time of their reservation. Average Fare Average fare is the average price a person pays for a transit trip. It is equal to total fare revenue collected divided by total boardings. Boarding A boarding is known as an unlinked passenger trip. Every time a person boards a vehicle it is counted as a boarding. For example, if a person makes a trip involving one transfer, this trip is counted as two boardings. Circulators Circulator routes typically serve small specific areas with short routes that are designed to provide connections between transportation systems and other area attractions like employment centers or schools. Many circulator routes charge no fare. Express/Bus Rapid Transit (RAPID) Express/Bus Rapid Transit routes provide higher speed services by operating within a limited stop and other enhancements. Express/Bus Rapid Transit routes operate on regional freeways. Farebox Recovery Ratio This is the percentage of total operating cost that is covered by fares collected. It is equal to total fare revenue collected divided by total operating costs. Fixed-Route Fixed route bus service typically operates along a designated or fixed route with no deviations. Characteristics of this service type include controlled vehicle frequencies and scheduled passenger stops. In this report, fixed route service comprises Local, Express, Bus Rapid Transit, Circulator, and Rural Connector routes. LINK Service (Bus Rapid Transit, BRT) LINK is a new type of bus service operating on arterial streets that functions as an extension of the METRO light rail line and features limited stops, signal priority, and near level boarding. Local Route Local routes may operate on either arterial or local collector streets. These are designed to serve localized trip patterns with one or more cities. Mechanical Failure Mechanical failure is a failure of some mechanical element of the revenue vehicle that prevents the vehicle from completing a scheduled revenue trip or from starting the next scheduled revenue trip. In addition, mechanical failures include failures from mechanical element of the revenue vehicle, because of local agency policy, prevents the vehicle from completing a scheduled revenue trip or starting the next revenue trip even though the vehicle is physically able to continue in revenue service. Net Vanpool Starts Calculated by subtracting number of deleted vanpools from the number of new vanpools started. Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 24

97 Glossary Operating Cost The total cost to operate and maintain a transit system including labor, fuel, maintenance, and administration. Paratransit Service This service is a shared-ride origin to destination service where an individual can request transportation from one specific location to another specific location at a certain time. This service complements fixed route service. Some systems restrict service to those who are ADA certified while other systems offer service to the general public. Rail On-Time Performance Percentage of all trips which arrive at the opposite terminal within three minutes of scheduled arrival times. Revenue Hour A revenue hour is an hour that one vehicle in revenue service is available to pick up revenue passengers. If ten vehicles are in service for two hours each, they collectively perform twenty revenue hours of service. Revenue Mile A revenue mile is a mile traveled by one vehicle in revenue service that is available to pick up revenue passengers. If ten vehicles are in service for two miles each, they collectively perform twenty revenue miles of service. Revenue Service Revenue service occurs when a vehicle is available to the general public and there is an expectation of carrying passengers who pay the required fare. Vehicles operated in farefree service are also considered in revenue service. Revenue service includes layover/ recovery time, but does not include deadhead (i.e. travel from garage to the start point of a route), or vehicle maintenance testing. Rural Routes Rural routes typically provide connections between rural and urban communities. Subsidy per Boarding Also known as net operating cost per boarding, this is the operating cost per boarding minus the fare revenue per boarding. This number indicates the amount of public funding that is used to make up the difference between the cost of providing transportation service and the revenue generated by this service on a per boarding basis. Weekday/Saturday/Sunday Average Daily Boardings: This measures boardings on a typical weekday, Saturday, or Sunday. This is calculated by dividing total boardings on a weekday, Saturday or Sunday by the number weekday, Saturdays or Sundays in the fiscal year. Transit Performance Report FY 2011 (July 1, June 30, 2011) 25

98

99 5

100 Board of Directors Information Summary Agenda Item 5 Date March 14, 2012 Subject Acceptance of the Dial-a-Ride Passenger Survey and the Alternative Services for Passengers Survey Reports Background Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA) conducts dial-a-ride passenger surveys periodically to gather demographic, trip-making and resources, and service satisfaction information. In June 2011, RPTA began the fourth regional Dial-a- Ride (DAR) Passenger Survey. The 2011 DAR Survey was augmented to include passengers of alternative services such as taxi coupon and voucher programs. The growing need for affordable transportation and the advent of Federal Transit Administration New Freedom (Section 5317) funding have resulted in an expansion of existing and implementation of new alternative services during the past few years. In June 2011, the RPTA Board of Directors approved a competitively procured contract with WestGroup Research to conduct the surveys. Dial-a-Ride (DAR) Passenger Survey: Passengers of the East Valley, Glendale, Peoria, Phoenix, and Surprise DARs, Tolleson Transportation service, and Valley Metro Mobility Services were included in the study. Each of the DARs provided WestGroup with a list of current passengers and their telephone numbers. A total of 1,701 DAR passenger interviews were conducted by telephone. Alternatives Services for Passengers Survey: Passengers of the East Valley Coupons for Cabs, Phoenix Senior Cab, Scottsdale Cab Connection; Recurring Medical Trip Voucher Service provided by Avondale, Glendale, and East Valley RideChoice; and the Mesa Mileage Reimbursement Program were included. Providers of the alternative services sent WestGroup provided a list of their current passengers and WestGroup randomly selected the passengers to be included in the survey. Each service mailed the questionnaires along with a customized cover letter and postage paid return envelope addressed to WestGroup. In order to achieve the established response quota, a second 1

101 mailing was required for all alternative services. A total of 329 questionnaires were completed and returned to WestGroup which represents a 46% response rate. Throughout the survey process the study has been guided by a Technical Advisory Group (TAG) comprised of representatives from Chandler, Gilbert, Mesa, Peoria, Phoenix, Scottsdale, Surprise, Tempe, Maricopa Association of Governments, METRO, and Valley Metro RPTA. In addition to numerous telephone and communications with TAG members regarding the study, four TAG meetings were held between July and December. On January 26, 2012 the final draft report was made available to TAG members for review. The objectives for the DAR Passenger and Alternative Services for Passengers Surveys are as follows: Provide current passenger demographic information for the region and for each of the DARs and Alternative services Provide passenger information on trip-making, transportation knowledge, and transportation options for each of the DARs and Alternative services Monitor and track passenger perceptions on service quality for each of the services. The attached power point provides key information from the DAR and the Alternative Passenger Study Reports. Budget Source The funding source for this project is from a Federal Transit Administration (FTA) New Freedom grant awarded in the amount of $62,500. The City of Phoenix Transit Department administers this program on behalf of the Valley Metro Region. Of this budgeted amount, $50,000 is FTA money and $12,500 is the required local match. The local match is being met by in-kind staff support provided by RPTA, METRO, and the TAG members for their documented time spent on the project. The contracted amount with WestGroup is $49,854 for the study. Considerations Information learned from the DAR Passenger and Alternative Services for Passengers Surveys provides Valley Metro and its members with updated passenger information to help guide service planning and delivery. The survey data also provides Valley Metro and its members with information useful in Title VI studies, fare modification analyses, and grant applications. The inclusion of satisfaction questions in this planning study allows Valley Metro and its members to view the services from the passenger point-of-view. Passenger perception of performance can be subjective and can differ from actual service delivery which is objectively measured and monitored. Both are important for consideration in planning and decision making. 2

102 Committee Action Process TMC March 7, 2012 accepted Board March 22, 2012 for acceptance Recommendation It is recommended that the RPTA Board of Directors accept the 2011 Regional Dial-a- Ride Passenger Survey and Alternative Services for Passengers Survey Reports. Contact Person Carol Ketcherside Planning Director Attachments Powerpoint Presentation 2011 Regional Dial-a-Ride Study and Alternative Services Study Draft Reports are available upon request or can be downloaded at 3

103

104 WestGroup Research Report Valley Metro Dial-a-Ride and Alternative Services Research Results February North 44 th St., Ste. 100-A Phoenix, Arizona

105 2 DIAL-A-RIDE

106 Background 1,701 telephone interviews with current DAR passengers across the Valley Margin of error for the total sample is +2 at a 95% level of confidence Conducted between September 20 and October 29, 2011 Sample Size Margin of Error Total Sample 1701 ±2.0% East Valley DAR 566 ±3.0% Chandler 89 ±7.6% Gilbert 51 ±10.3% Mesa 231 ±4.8% Scottsdale 111 ±7.0% Tempe 84 ±8.0% Glendale 333 ±4.7% Peoria 104 ±8.3% Phoenix (including Phx SW) 548 ±3.6% Surprise 95 ±9.0% Tolleson Transportation 7 ±33.8% Valley Metro Mobility Services 48 ±12.4% 3

107 Summary of DAR Respondent Demographics Average age 65 yrs. Youngest avg. since 2000 Disability 88% % with Disability Up from 74% in % 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

108 DAR: # of Trips Taken per Week Frequency of use continues to increase 5

109 DAR: Where Riders are Going Medical Appt Shopping* Social/Recreational Errands* Work Religious service School 4% 4% 3% 3% 12% 11% 9%* 6%* 7%* 6% DAR Trip Purpose 24% 24% 24% 27% 39% 40% 42% 42% Trips to work increasing 56% 60%* 61%* 63%* % 20% 40% 60% 80% Total Sample 2000 n=1117; 2002 n=1276; 2007 n=1811; 2011 n=1701 * data: 'Shopping/errands' combined and these purposes were separated in

110 DAR: Alternatives for Riders Riders continue to be dependent on service 7

111 Experience with Transfers between DARs Responses 2011 (n=1701) (A) 2007 (n=1811) (B) 2002 (n=1276) (C) Made a transfer past 3 months 11% 9%* 9% Concerns prevented use of service with transfer (n=1446) Yes 28% 22%* NA No 63% 70%* Don t know 9% 8% Despite low experience with transfers, satisfaction with the process is increasing 8

112 Use of Transit Frequency of Using City Buses/Light Rail** Use City Bus/Light Rail** FREQUENCY Daily 2-4x/week Once a week < Once a week Never 5% 11% 5%* 28% 23%* 15%* 15% 19% 18% 16% 46% 43% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Percent using transit increases, however, frequency has decreased Total sample: 2007 n=1811, 2011 n=1701 Frequency: 2007 n=421, 2011 n=482 Sample for frequency of ridership: n=482 ** In 2007, the question asked only about use/frequency of city buses. 9

113 DAR: Experience with On-time Pick-up Always Most of the time Sometimes Rarely Never DK DAR On-Time Performance 33% 31% 36%* 16% 22%* 3% 6%* 1% 3%* 1% 2% 46% % of VM Mobility Services users report they are always picked up ontime 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Total Sample 2007 n=1811; 2011 n=

114 DAR: Experience with On-time Arrival Always Most of the time (1) Experience with DAR On-Time Arrival 43% 42% 49%* 46% 40% 31%* 62% of VM Mobility Services users report they always arrive on-time Sometimes Rarely Never 12% 17%* 3% 5%* 9%* 10%* 1% 3%* 4%* 6%* 34% 34% % 20% 40% 60% Total Sample 2000 n=1117; 2002 n=1276; 2007 n=1811; 2011 n=1701 (1) Most of the time was added as a category in In previous surveys, sometimes was the second category choice. *Significantly different from 2011 results 11

115 DAR: Satisfaction with Driver and Vehicles Satisfaction continues to be high 12

116 Overall Quality, Compared to Previous Year Overall Quality in Last Year 100% 80% 26%* 7% 12% 7% 60% 40% 20% 39%* 48% 29% 32% DK/Didn't ride last year Worse Same Better 0% Total sample:2007: n=1811, 2011: n=1701; *Significantly different from 2011 results Perception of overall quality is improving or staying the same 13

117 DAR: Conclusions Users of the various DAR systems in the Valley continue to be highly dependent on this service, with more users reporting they would not be able to make their trips without DAR service than in previous years of the study. In addition, overall frequency of use each week continues to grow. Both of these factors point to the strong need for this service in the Valley. Rider perceptions and overall satisfaction with the service continue to be strong overall. In general, riders believe that service has gotten better or stayed the same compared to previous years. The only measure showing a slight decrease in satisfaction was with the comfort of the vehicles. The use of transfers from one DAR system to another continues to be very low; however, those who do transfer between systems are reporting less dissatisfaction with the process. The percentage of riders indicating they use transit service did increase compared to 2007, and, not surprisingly, usage of public transit is higher in those areas of the valley offering more extensive service in terms of geographic coverage and span and frequency of service (e.g., Tempe). 14

118 15 ALTERNATIVE SERVICES

119 Background 2011 DAR study was expanded to include passengers of alternative services such as taxi coupon, voucher programs, and the Mesa Mileage Reimbursement program. Surveys were mailed to alternative services users by Valley Metro or the represented service the week of October 3, Findings represent surveys returned to WestGroup Research through November 11, Overall, there was a 46% response rate to the mailing, with 329 completed surveys returned. Surveys Mailed Surveys Returned Margin of Error Total ±5.2% Cab coupon/voucher ±5.6% East Valley Coupons for Cabs (Chandler, Gilbert, Mesa, Tempe) ±9.9% Phoenix Senior Cab ±8.5% Scottsdale Cab Connection ±11.5% Recurring Medical Trips (Avondale, Glendale, East Valley Taxi Voucher) ±21.5% Mesa Mileage Reimbursement ±16.7% 16

120 Alternative Services Group Descriptions East Valley Coupons for Cabs: Qualified Chandler, Gilbert, Mesa, and Tempe residents who are 65 and older or who have a disability Phoenix Senior Cab: Qualified Phoenix residents age 65 and over Recurring Medical Trip Service: Avondale, Glendale, East Valley (i.e., Chandler, Gilbert, Mesa and Tempe) provide subsidized transportation to assist qualified residents making physician-ordered repetitive medical treatments and therapies such as dialysis, cancer treatments, and therapy following a stroke. 17

121 Alternative Services: Demographics Gender 22% 78% Male Female 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Age 1% 4% 7% 88% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 25 to to to Income 23% 34% 15% 21% 5% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% < $10k $10k to $14,999 $15k to $19,999 $20K to $39,999 $40k+ 18

122 Alternative Services: Demographic Overview of Groups Cab Coupon/Voucher. The average income of these users is slightly lower than the average income reported by DAR users. These users are notably older than the users of the other alternative services (by close to 10 years, on average), as well as DAR users in general. Recurring Medical Trips. This is the youngest group of users, and closely mirrors the average age that is reported for dialysis patients. This group reports a higher average income in comparison to users of the other two alternative service. Mesa Mileage Reimbursement. Individuals who use this service are, on average, eight years younger than the cab coupon/voucher users, and their average annual household income is the lowest of the three groups surveyed. 19

123 Alternative Services Where Riders are Going Medical appointments Errands Senior Center Shopping School Social/recreational outing Social Security/VA Trip Purpose by Alternative Program 23% 22% 30% 16% 17% 13% 8% 7% 17% 8% 7% 13% 39% 38% 61% 60% 57% A 84% 82% 80% A 93% Total Cab coupon/voucher (A) Mesa Milage Reimbursement (B) 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Mesa Mileage Reimbursement users go to a wider variety of locations Where do you go when you use the service? Total n=303, Cab coupon/voucher: n=272, Mesa Mileage Reimbursement: n=30 20

124 Alternative Services: Transportation Options Transportation Method Total (n=319) Cab coupon/ voucher (n=271) (A) Recurring Medical Trips (n=18) (B) Mesa Mileage Reimbursement (n=30) (C) Users are highly dependent on these services Could not go 46% 42% 44% 77% AB With family/friends 42% 43% 39% 30% Taxi (w/o coupons) 22% 23% 17% 13% DAR 17% 17% 33% 13% VM bus/light rail 10% 12% - - Walk 7% 8% 6% 3% Drive self 5% 6% 6% - Community van 4% 5%

125 Alternative Services Satisfaction Satisfaction with Service Overall satisfaction Ease of ordering coupons Vehicle comfort Driver's safe driving Paying the fare with coupons Scheduling a trip On-time arrival at destination Driver's courtesy On-time pick up Trip cost 81% 85% 82% 81% 81% 79% 77% 77% 72% 69% 15% 12% 16% 17% 15% 16% 20% 20% 22% 22% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied 22

126 Alternative Services Fixed Route Usage 100% Use of VM Transit (Bus or Light Rail) - By Service 80% 60% 40% 84% 83% 94% A 86% 20% No 0% 16% 17% B 5% Total Cab coupon/ voucher (A) Recurring Medical Trips (B) 14% Mesa Milage Reimbursement (C) Yes Do you use the Valley Metro transit (large bus or Metro Light Rail) service? Total n=312, Cab coupon/voucher: n=265, Recurring Medical Trips: n=18, Mesa Mileage Reimbursement: n=29 23

127 Conclusions Word of mouth referrals or presentations/information distributed by service providers are the two primary ways that residents find out about the alternative services programs available to them. It is important that Valley Metro and the service providers work with the appropriate groups to make sure they are prepared to provide information when requested by their constituencies. Alternative service users appear to use these transportation options for a much wider variety of trip purposes than those who use DAR. It is likely that these services offer more flexibility to the users not only because of availability, but also because these are individual, not multi-person trips. Satisfaction with these services is extremely high, with a significant majority reporting to be very satisfied. The alternative services riders are very dependent on these services to make their desired trips. Friends or family members are the most common back-up plan. 24

128 6

129 Board of Directors Information Summary Agenda Item 6 Date March 14, 2012 Subject Regional Fare Policy Recommendation Background Over the last few years Valley Metro agencies along with the RPTA have implemented service changes to streamline transit service and cost cutting measures to significantly reduce administrative costs. This has helped to maintain fare recovery revenues near the Board adopted 25 percent target. As the cost of providing transit increases, the portion that riders pay will continue to decline. In order to help minimize service reductions and maintain an appropriate fare recovery, a fare increase has been proposed. The proposed increase is forecasted to generate approximately $6 million in revenue per year which can be applied to local and regional transit service. Valley Metro RPTA and its member agencies may be required to implement significant service reductions - without a fare increase reductions may be exacerbated. It is our understanding that the following transit program deficits exist and are not inclusive of all transit program deficits: Entity Deficit Term City of Phoenix (T-2000) $60 million 8 years City of Tempe (Local Transit Tax) $14 million 4 years RPTA (Prop. 400 Bus Transit Element) > $63 million 13 years Even with a fare increase, it is likely that additional service reductions to the regional transit system will need to be made. To help resolve the current projected deficits, it is estimated that 2.6 million revenue miles of transit service would need to be reduced from the transit system which equates to approximately 8.2 percent of the current system. This is in addition to the ten percent reduction in the regional bus system that occurred in July 2010 due to the repeal of the Local Transportation Assistance Funds. In addition to monitoring the cost paid by riders, an analysis was conducted of eight regions across the country with similar systems to better understand the pricing of transit service. 1

130 Based on the analysis, pricing of transit services in Maricopa County are some of the lowest among similar and larger regions. City 1 Ride Fare 1-Day Pass (Local) 31-Day Pass (Local) Dallas $1.75 $4.00 $65.00 Los Angeles $1.50 $5.00 $75.00 Minneapolis $2.25 $6.00 $85.00 Portland $2.40 $5.00 $92.00 Sacramento $2.25 $6.00 $ Salt Lake City $2.25 $5.50 $75.00 San Diego $2.25 $5.00 $72.00 San Jose $2.00 $6.00 $70.00 Valley Metro *** $1.75 Sources: Transit agency Web Sites (October 2011) *** Valley Metro - $5.25 is the price paid onboard fixed route buses $3.50 $5.25 $55.00 In addition, nearly 80% of transit agencies across the U.S. have been forced to cut service or raise fares in many cases both (American Public Transportation Association). To develop the recommendations, the Fare Policy Committee met over the last year (Oct. 8, Dec. 12, Feb. 15, March 22, April 19, Aug. 2, and Sept. 15) to discuss the fare policy program goals and structure. The program goals included: Recommend policies that encourage transit use while achieving the adopted 25% fare revenue target to help manage service Consider the negative and positive impacts to ridership Consider the impacts of route performance on the fare revenue target Target implementation by January 1, 2012 CH2M Hill (formerly Booz Allen Hamilton), a third party consultant, was contracted to work with the Valley Metro Fare Policy Committee to conduct the analysis and help identify and recommend fare policies that achieve the objectives. The following information includes the fare policy recommendations that were approved by the Board of Directors for public input on October 27, The Regional Fare Policy Proposal It is recommended that every fiscal year Valley Metro review the fare recovery rate to determine if a fare increase is needed. The goal is to implement periodic fare increases to minimize the impact to customers and to maintain the 25% fare recovery target. The fare goals will help evaluate the regional fare recovery and determine if a fare increase is needed based on attaining the 25 percent fare revenue target to help manage transit service. Any change must be approved by the Board of Directors prior to a fare change being implemented. The proposed revisions to the fare policy incorporate an increase to the 1-ride base fare and maintain the existing Valley Metro pricing rules which apply to all fare products and 2

131 programs. The Valley Metro fare programs include the East Valley, Phoenix and Sun City ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) Dial-a-Ride fares, ASU U-Pass, Semester Pass, and the employer based Platinum Pass. The proposal also includes the elimination of the 3-day pass and the addition of a 15-day pass and a streamlined rate structure for the rural route fare (rural route 685 provides service between Ajo/Gila Bend, Buckeye and Phoenix). Proposed fare changes presented during the Public Involvement process Fare Type Current Fare Proposed Change Percent Increase FULL LOCAL BUS/LINK/LIGHT RAIL FARES 1-RIDE $1.75 $ % ALL-DAY Off-Board $3.50 $ % ALL-DAY On-Board $5.25 $ % 3-DAY $ DAY $17.50 $ % 15-DAY $ DAY $55.00 $ % EXPRESS/RAPID BUS FARES 1-RIDE $2.75 $ % ALL-DAY Off-Board $5.50 $ % ALL-DAY On-Board $7.25 $ % 31-DAY $85.00 $ % REDUCED BUS/LINK/LIGHT RAIL FARES 1-RIDE $0.85 $ % ALL-DAY Off-Board $1.75 $ % ALL-DAY On-Board $2.60 $ % 3-DAY $ DAY $8.75 $ % 15-DAY $ DAY $27.50 $ % OTHER PASSES ADA DIAL-A-RIDE $3.50 $ % RURAL ROUTE 685 *$3.25 $ % * Average fare The Alternative 3

132 The alternative to implementing the proposed fare policy change on July 1, 2012 is to delay the change to a later date. The recommendation includes a fare increase which creates approximately $6 million in revenue per year. A delay beyond July 1, 2012 would represent approximately $500,000 per month in potential revenue. In this case, Valley Metro members would need to assess the service ramifications based on the length of the delay. Public Involvement Process and Results The Board of Directors approved the implementation of a Public Involvement process on October 27, The program to obtain public input ran from November 14, 2011 to January 3, Public messages were delivered on buses and light rail, Valleymetro.org, and in local newspaper and online advertisements. A press release and related information was provided to the local media. Much of the local media promoted the public involvement process and some carried the information on their web sites. The public outreach included: 200,000+ passengers per day over two weeks: bus and light rail announcements 2,100 customers: notices to Valley Metro customer database 1,200 Employers representing 600,000+ commuters: announcements, webinars, meetings and newsletters Customer service - On hold messages 8 public hearings in Glendale, Mesa, Phoenix and Tempe Social Media based communications using Facebook and Twitter 2 advertisements in the Arizona Republic Online advertisements on AZFamily.com over a 3 week period A survey was created to help capture and organize the public input. The survey was made available at the public hearings and on ValleyMetro.org. The results where then tabulated and summarized and presented in January to the Transit Management Committee and the Valley Metro Board of Directors. The following summarizes the participation and results using the various public input options: ValleyMetro.org online survey and comment system 1,907 visitors to Fare Change Input section on ValleyMetro.org 98 participated in the electronic survey Input via mail and 138 comments received Input via Public Hearings and printed surveys 71 participants Input via Customer Service Phone line 3 registered comments The public interest level regarding the proposed fare change is less than that of the previous fare policy change in

133 o The public outreach included a variety of methods used to help drive awareness regarding the input process for the proposed fare changes. This included local TV and printed news as well as Transit vehicle messages over a two week period. o 1,907 citizens visited the Proposed Fare Change page on ValleyMetro.org and 300+ participants provided input. Very few local organizations provided input. The cost to use transit versus the level of service available is slightly more important to those surveyed (54% vs. 46%). The difference is not statistically significant. A frequent, smaller fare increase has less of a budgetary impact to customers than less frequent, larger increases. o 64% considered an increase of $.25 every three years to be a big impact. o 72% considered an increase of $.75-$1.00 every 5 years to be a big impact. 30% of respondents are neutral or strongly support the proposed fare change. The majority of respondents (69%) indicated strong opposition to the proposed fare changes. With a fare increase, the public expects improved and expanded service. Program Schedule If Valley Metro Board action for the proposed Fare Policy recommendation is delayed, here are the next steps. August to September: Valley Metro Board approval, consideration by the City of Phoenix October to December: implement new fare tariff January 1, 2013: launch new fare policy and increase Budget Source The budget to conduct the study, fare modeling, recommendations and public involvement program is $75,000. This is programmed in the approved FY 2011/2012 RPTA administrative budget and is paid for by Public Transportation Fund (PTF) revenues. Impacts The recommended fare policy is forecasted to create an additional $6 million in revenue per year which can be applied to local and regional transit service. Committee Action Process Fare Policy Committee meetings took place on October 8, 2010, December 12, 2010, February 15, March 22, April 19, August 2 and September 15. Regional Transit Advisory Group September 20, 2011 Transit Management Committee October 5, 2011 Budget and Finance Subcommittee October 6, 2011 Valley Metro RPTA Board of Directors October 20, 2011 for action Transit Management Committee January 4, 2012 for information Rail Management Committee January 4, 2012 for information Valley Metro Rail Board of Directors January 18, 2012 for information 5

134 Valley Metro RPTA Board of Directors January 19, 2012 for information Transit Management Committee February 1, 2012 approved Valley Metro RPTA Board of Directors February 16, 2012 for action tabled Transit Management Committee March 7, 2012 moved to delay implantation until January 1, If information from the Title VI Fare Equity Analysis indicates further review this item will be brought back through the committee process. Board of Directors March 22, 2012 for information Recommendation This item is presented for information only. Delaying this item will enable staff to finalize a plan to address Title VI requirements. The current proposal includes: An increase to the 1-Ride base fare by $0.25 on January 1, 2013 Maintain the existing pricing rules including adjustments to all fare programs ADA Dial-a-Ride fare (East Valley, Sun City), ASU U-Pass, Platinum Pass, etc. Eliminate the 3-day pass on January 1, 2013 Introduce a 15-day pass on January 1, 2013 Simplify the rural route fare structure to one-flat fare of $4.00 per one-way trip ($2.00 reduced fare) Revise the fare policy to consider fare changes every three years to maintain the 25% fare recovery target (requires public involvement and Board approval) Recommended Fare Structure and Pricing Fare Type Current: $1.75 Base Fare July 1, 2012 $2.00 Base Fare Pricing Rule FULL LOCAL BUS/LINK/LIGHT RAIL FARES 1-Ride $1.75 $2.00 $0.25 increments All-Day $3.50 $4.00 2x 1-Ride All-Day On-Bus $5.25 $6.00 3x 1-Ride 3-Day $ Day $17.50 $ x All-Day Off-Board 15-Day - $ x 1-Ride 31-Day $55.00 $ x 1-Ride EXPRESS/RAPID BUS FARES 1-Ride $2.75 $3.00 ~1.5x 1-Ride All-Day $5.50 $6.00 2x Express 1-Ride All-Day On-Bus $7.25 $9.00 3x Express 1-Ride 31-Day $85.00 $ x Express 1-Ride 6

135 REDUCED BUS/LINK/LIGHT RAIL FARES 1-Ride $0.85 $ x Local Fare All-Day $1.75 $ x Local Fare All-Day On-Bus $2.60 $ x Local Fare 3-Day $ Day $8.75 $ x Local Fare 15-Day $ x Local Fare 31-Day $27.50 $ x Local Fare Contact Person Mario Diaz Chief Marketing Officer or Attachments Valley Metro Fare Policy recommendation presentation 7

136

137 Regional Fare Policy Recommendation March 2012

138 The planning process Fare Policy Committee Meetings 2010: October 8, December : February 15, April 19, August 2, September 15 CH2M Hill (formerly Booz Allen Hamilton) study and fare modelling April to September (study completed July 2011) Valley Metro working groups and committees September 20: Regional Technical Advisory Group discussion October 5: Transit Management Committee October 6: Budget and Finance Subcommittee October 27: Valley Metro RPTA Board of Directors January 4: Transit Management Committee January 4: Rail Management Committee January 18: Valley Metro Rail Board of Directors January 19: Valley Metro RPTA Board of Directors February 1: Transit Management Committee March 7: Transit Management Committee 2

139 Why the proposed fare change Streamlined transit service and significantly reduced administrative costs over the last 3 years Valley Metro RPTA and member agencies are facing large transit budget deficits requiring service reductions Without the added fare revenue Valley Metro will further reduce regional transit service 3

140 Fare recovery forecast The fare recovery target established by the Valley Metro Board is 25% Forecasted Share of Cost Paid by Riders Target Current Fare Policy 25% 25% 23.6% 23.3% 23.1% 22.9% 22.5% 22.2% Bus and light rail 4

141 Fare pricing in other cities Service Provider City 1-Ride Fare 1-Day Pass Local 31-Day Pass Local Dallas $1.75 $4.00 $65.00 Minneapolis * $2.25 $6.00 $85.00 Portland ** $2.40 $5.00 $92.00 Sacramento $2.25 $6.00 $ Salt Lake City $2.25 $5.50 $75.00 San Diego $2.25 $5.00 $72.00 San Jose $2.00 $6.00 $70.00 Valley Metro proposal $2.00 $4.00 $6.00*** $64.00 Valley Metro current $1.75 $3.50 $5.25*** $55.00 Sources: Transit agency websites (October 2011) * Minneapolis peak time, ** Portland All zones, *** Valley Metro - The price paid on fixed route buses 80% of all Transit Agencies have been forced to implement fare increases or service cuts due to flat or decreased funding. Source: American Public Transportation Association 5

142 Proposed fare changes Local bus and light rail service Express/RAPID bus service Rural route service ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) paratransit (Dial-A-Ride) City of Phoenix East Valley Sun City 6

143 Proposed Fare Changes For July 1, 2012 * Average fare Fare Type Current Fare FULL LOCAL BUS/LINK/LIGHT RAIL FARES Proposed Change Percent Increase 1-RIDE $1.75 $ % ALL-DAY $3.50 $ % ALL-DAY On-Bus $5.25 $ % 3-DAY $ DAY $17.50 $ % 15-DAY $ DAY $55.00 $ % EXPRESS/RAPID BUS FARES 1-RIDE $2.75 $ % ALL-DAY $5.50 $ % ALL-DAY On-Bus $7.25 $ % 31-DAY $85.00 $ % REDUCED BUS/LINK/LIGHT RAIL FARES 1-RIDE $0.85 $ % ALL-DAY $1.75 $ % ALL-DAY On-Bus $2.60 $ % 3-DAY $ DAY $8.75 $ % 15-DAY $ DAY $27.50 $ % OTHER PASSES ADA DIAL-A-RIDE $3.50 $ % RURAL ROUTE 685 *$3.25 $ % 7

144 Public Input Summary The interest level regarding the proposed fare change is less than that of the previous fare policy change in ,907 people visited the Proposed Fare Change page on ValleyMetro.org 300+ participants provided input. Very few local organizations provided input. The cost to use transit versus the level of service available is slightly more important (54% vs. 46%). Frequent, smaller fare increases have less of a budgetary impact than less frequent, larger increases ($.25 every three years vs. $.75-$1.00 every 5 years) 30% of respondents are neutral or strongly support the proposed fare change. With a fare increase, the public expects improved or expanded service. 8

145 Recommendation At the March 7, 2012 Transit Management Committee they voted to delay implantation until January 1, If information from the Title VI Fare Equity Analysis indicates further review this item will be brought back through the committee process. This item is presented for information only. No Board action is required. Delaying this item will enable staff to finalize a plan to address Title VI requirements. The current proposal includes: An increase to the 1-Ride base fare by $0.25 on January 1, 2013 Maintain the existing pricing rules including adjustments to all fare programs ADA Dial-a-Ride fare (East Valley, Sun City), ASU U-Pass, Platinum Pass, etc. Eliminate the 3-day pass on January 1, 2013 Introduce a 15-day pass on January 1, 2013 Simplify the rural route fare structure to one-flat fare of $4.00 per one-way trip ($2.00 reduced fare) Revise the fare policy to consider fare changes every three years to maintain the 25% fare recovery target (requires public involvement and Board approval) 9

146 Recommended fare structure and pricing rules Fare Type Current: $1.75 Base Fare FULL LOCAL BUS/LINK/LIGHT RAIL FARES July 1, 2012 $2.00 Base Fare Pricing Rule 1-Ride $1.75 $2.00 $0.25 increments All-Day $3.50 $4.00 2x 1-Ride All-Day On-Bus $5.25 $6.00 3x 1-Ride 3-Day $ Day $17.50 $ x All-Day Off-Board 15-Day - $ x 1-Ride 31-Day $55.00 $ x 1-Ride EXPRESS/RAPID BUS FARES 1-Ride $2.75 $3.00 ~1.5x 1-Ride All-Day $5.50 $6.00 2x Express 1-Ride All-Day On-Bus $7.25 $9.00 3x Express 1-Ride 31-Day $85.00 $ x Express 1-Ride REDUCED BUS/LINK/LIGHT RAIL FARES 1-Ride $0.85 $ x Local Fare All-Day $1.75 $ x Local Fare All-Day On-Bus $2.60 $ x Local Fare 3-Day $ Day $8.75 $ x Local Fare 15-Day - $ x Local Fare 31-Day $27.50 $ x Local Fare - Pricing rules includes the ADA Dial-a-Ride fare (East Valley, Sun City, Phoenix) at twice the 1-Ride fare Adjustments to the ASU U-Pass, Platinum Pass, and related fare programs 10

147 Program schedule August to September: Valley Metro Board approval, consideration by the City of Phoenix October to December: implement new fare tariff January 1, 2013: launch new fare policy and increase 11

148

149 7

150 Board of Directors Information Summary Date March 14, 2012 Agenda Item 7 Subject RPTA and METRO Board Member Subcommittee Summary At the February 16, 2012 Board meetings of Valley Metro RPTA and METRO Light Rail, the respective Boards agreed to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement regarding the Single Chief Executive Officer. Sections 4 and 5 of this agreement (set forth below) state that a subcommittee consisting of 4 total members (two from each Board) be established. SECTION 4: CONFLICT RESOLUTION The Parties to this Agreement acknowledge that a single executive may serve simultaneously as CEO for both pursuant to Section 4.1 of the Parties current HR Management intergovernmental agreement, as amended. With the CEO functions consolidated in this manner, the Parties recognize the possibility of conflict arising if the CEO is assigned a direction or demand from the RPTA Board that conflicts with, or otherwise makes it impossible to perform, a direction or demand from the METRO Board. Because of this possibility, and in order to timely and appropriately address any such conflicts if they do arise, the Parties agree to create a subcommittee of their respective Boards of Directors, as necessary and as follows, to resolve actual or prospective disputes or conflicts between the Boards, regardless of the kind or nature of such disputes or conflicts: a. The subcommittee will be composed of four members, two members from each Party to this Agreement, appointed at such time as the subcommittee is formed, and each member s service is subject to removal or replacement on the subcommittee by a majority vote of its respective Board; b. A meeting of the subcommittee shall be called at the request of either Party to this Agreement, with appropriate notice to the other Party, and the CEO may call a meeting of the subcommittee in any matter where either: 1

151 i. the Parties have provided conflicting direction to the CEO, or ii. the CEO reasonably believes that the Parties to this Agreement are in conflict. c. The subcommittee shall review disputes between the Parties and make recommendations to the Parties Boards related to potential resolution of such disputes. Nothing herein shall give the subcommittee authority to resolve disputes on behalf of the Parties, but nothing herein shall prevent the Parties Boards from providing the subcommittee this authority on a case-by-case basis, if deemed appropriate by the Parties Boards. SECTION 5: CEO EVALUATION AND GOAL SETTING 1. Evaluation RPTA and METRO agree that the subcommittee referenced in Section 4 of this IGA will, with the input of the CEO, review and evaluate the performance of the CEO annually. As part of the review and evaluation process the subcommittee will prepare a summary report of its findings to be shared with both the RPTA and METRO boards for discussion, review and approval. 2. Goal Setting Section 4C of the attached CEO Agreement requires RPTA and METRO to set Employee Performance Incentive Compensation based on the CEO s successful achievement of specific and measurable goals. RPTA and METRO direct that the subcommittee referenced in Section 4 of IGA will be responsible for timely meeting with the CEO and, in conjunction with him, establishing annual goals consistent with the Employment Agreement. Establishing annual goals can include but is not limited to establishing the number of annual goals, consistency of goals, value of each goal and budgetary considerations for each goal. Upon establishing annual goals the subcommittee will provide RPTA and METRO with the goals and other relevant information for approval. RPTA and METRO also direct that the subcommittee will also timely meet and evaluate whether and, if so, to what extent each goal has been successfully achieved. The determination of which goals has been successfully achieved including but not limited to the value of each goal will then be provided to RPTA and METRO for approval. Under these provisions of the Single CEO IGA, the subcommittee is charged with: Resolving conflicting direction that the CEO may receive from the RPTA Board and the METRO Board. Establishing recommended annual goals for the CEO that are subject the approval of the RPTA Board and the METRO Board. Providing the initial evaluation of the CEO s achievement of assigned goals with such evaluation subject to the approval of the RPTA Board and the METRO Board. 2

152 Fiscal Impact There is no fiscal impact. Considerations The Valley Metro RPTA Board of Directors is being asked to select two members to serve on the RPTA and METRO Board Member Subcommittee and to also decide the length of each member s term. Committee Action Process Valley Metro RPTA Board of Directors March 22, 2012 Recommendation It is recommended that the Board of Directors discuss the process for selecting two Board members to serve on the RPTA and METRO Board Member Subcommittee and to also decide the length of each member s term. Contact Person Chair Ron Aames 3

153

154 8

155 Board of Directors Information Summary Agenda Item 8 Date March 14, 2012 Subject Legislative Update Background Bryan Jungwirth, Chief of Staff, will provide an update on current legislative issues. Budget Source None Impacts None Committee Action Process None Recommendation No formal action is required. Contact Person Bryan Jungwirth Chief of Staff Attachments None 1

156

157 9

158 Board of Directors Information Summary Agenda Item 9 Date March 14, 2012 Subject Future Board Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events Background Chair Aames will request future Board agenda items from Board members and Board members may provide a report on current events. Budget Source None Impacts None Committee Action Process None Recommendation For information only. Contact Person Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer Attachments None 1

159

160 10

Transit Management Committee

Transit Management Committee MEETING OF THE Transit Management Committee MEETING DATE March 7, 2012 TIME LOCATION 11:00 a.m. Valley Metro RPTA Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1 st Avenue, 10 th Floor Phoenix February 29, 2012

More information

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

Valley Metro RPTA. Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1 st Avenue, 10 th Floor Phoenix MEETINGS OF THE Board of Directors Valley Metro RPTA METRO Light Rail MEETING DATE Thursday, May 22, 2014 TIME 12:15 p.m. MEETING DATE Thursday, May 22, 2014 TIME 1:30 p.m. LOCATION Valley Metro RPTA Lake

More information

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

Valley Metro RPTA. Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1 st Avenue, 10 th Floor Phoenix MEETINGS OF THE Board of Directors Valley Metro RPTA METRO Light Rail MEETING DATE February 21, 2013 TIME 12:45 p.m. MEETING DATE February 21, 2013 TIME 2:00 p.m. LOCATION Valley Metro RPTA Lake Powell

More information

Audit and Finance Subcommittee

Audit and Finance Subcommittee MEETING OF THE Audit and Finance Subcommittee MEETING DATE February 9, 2017 TIME LOCATION 11:00 a.m. Valley Metro 101 N. 1st Ave., 10th Floor Lake Mead Conference Room (10B) Phoenix, AZ 85003 VALLEY METRO

More information

Transcript - The Money Drill: Why You Should Get Covered Before You Lose Your Military Life Insurance

Transcript - The Money Drill: Why You Should Get Covered Before You Lose Your Military Life Insurance Transcript - The Money Drill: Why You Should Get Covered Before You Lose Your Military Life Insurance JJ: Hi. This is The Money Drill, and I'm JJ Montanaro. With the help of some great guests, I'll help

More information

Audit and Finance Subcommittee

Audit and Finance Subcommittee MEETING OF THE Audit and Finance Subcommittee MEETING DATE January 12, 2017 TIME LOCATION 12:00 p.m. Valley Metro 101 N. 1st Ave., 10th Floor Lake Mead Conference Room (10B) Phoenix, AZ 85003 VALLEY METRO

More information

Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2010

Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2010 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2010 Phoenix, Arizona Board of Directors Chair, Councilmember Michael Johnson, City of Phoenix Vice Chair, Councilmember Shana Ellis, City

More information

Real Estate Private Equity Case Study 3 Opportunistic Pre-Sold Apartment Development: Waterfall Returns Schedule, Part 1: Tier 1 IRRs and Cash Flows

Real Estate Private Equity Case Study 3 Opportunistic Pre-Sold Apartment Development: Waterfall Returns Schedule, Part 1: Tier 1 IRRs and Cash Flows Real Estate Private Equity Case Study 3 Opportunistic Pre-Sold Apartment Development: Waterfall Returns Schedule, Part 1: Tier 1 IRRs and Cash Flows Welcome to the next lesson in this Real Estate Private

More information

Budget and Finance Subcommittee

Budget and Finance Subcommittee MEETING OF THE Budget and Finance Subcommittee MEETING DATE May 15, 2014 TIME LOCATION 12:00 p.m. Valley Metro 101 N. 1 st Ave. 10 th Floor Board Room Phoenix, AZ 85003 VALLEY METRO 101 N 1ST AVE STE 1300

More information

Scenic Video Transcript Dividends, Closing Entries, and Record-Keeping and Reporting Map Topics. Entries: o Dividends entries- Declaring and paying

Scenic Video Transcript Dividends, Closing Entries, and Record-Keeping and Reporting Map Topics. Entries: o Dividends entries- Declaring and paying Income Statements» What s Behind?» Statements of Changes in Owners Equity» Scenic Video www.navigatingaccounting.com/video/scenic-dividends-closing-entries-and-record-keeping-and-reporting-map Scenic Video

More information

Transcript - The Money Drill: Where and How to Invest for Your Biggest Goals in Life

Transcript - The Money Drill: Where and How to Invest for Your Biggest Goals in Life Transcript - The Money Drill: Where and How to Invest for Your Biggest Goals in Life J.J.: Hi, this is "The Money Drill," and I'm J.J. Montanaro. With the help of some great guest, I'll help you find your

More information

ECO LECTURE TWENTY-FOUR 1 OKAY. WELL, WE WANT TO CONTINUE OUR DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD

ECO LECTURE TWENTY-FOUR 1 OKAY. WELL, WE WANT TO CONTINUE OUR DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD ECO 155 750 LECTURE TWENTY-FOUR 1 OKAY. WELL, WE WANT TO CONTINUE OUR DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD STARTED LAST TIME. WE SHOULD FINISH THAT UP TODAY. WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE ECONOMY'S LONG-RUN EQUILIBRIUM

More information

IB Interview Guide: Case Study Exercises Three-Statement Modeling Case (30 Minutes)

IB Interview Guide: Case Study Exercises Three-Statement Modeling Case (30 Minutes) IB Interview Guide: Case Study Exercises Three-Statement Modeling Case (30 Minutes) Hello, and welcome to our first sample case study. This is a three-statement modeling case study and we're using this

More information

01 The Actual Car Accident

01 The Actual Car Accident So how does a personal injury lawsuit work? There s a lot that goes into it. From start to finish, we will discuss how the process plays out, what this means for you if you find yourself in this situation,

More information

Date: January 11, Starting Time 12:00 p.m. Location: Valley Metro Lake Mead Conference Room (10B) 101 N. 1 st Avenue, 10 th Floor Phoenix

Date: January 11, Starting Time 12:00 p.m. Location: Valley Metro Lake Mead Conference Room (10B) 101 N. 1 st Avenue, 10 th Floor Phoenix MEETING OF THE Audit and Finance Subcommitee Date: January 11, 2018 Starting Time 12:00 p.m. Location: Valley Metro Lake Mead Conference Room (10B) 101 N. 1 st Avenue, 10 th Floor Phoenix If you require

More information

HPM Module_1_Income_Statement_Analysis

HPM Module_1_Income_Statement_Analysis HPM Module_1_Income_Statement_Analysis All right, class, we're going to do another tutorial. And this is going to be on the income statement financial analysis. And we have a problem here that we took

More information

Interview With IRA Expert Ed Slott

Interview With IRA Expert Ed Slott Interview With IRA Expert Ed Slott By Robert Brokamp September 2, 2010 Motley Fool s Rule Your Retirement Certified public accountant Ed Slott, the author of five books, is considered one of America's

More information

ALLETE, Inc. Moderator: Al Hodnik October 29, :00 a.m. CT

ALLETE, Inc. Moderator: Al Hodnik October 29, :00 a.m. CT Page 1, Inc. October 29, 2010 9:00 a.m. CT Operator: Good day, and welcome to the Third Quarter 2010 Financial Results call. Today's call is being recorded. Certain statements contained in the conference

More information

Balance Sheets» How Do I Use the Numbers?» Analyzing Financial Condition» Scenic Video

Balance Sheets» How Do I Use the Numbers?» Analyzing Financial Condition» Scenic Video Balance Sheets» How Do I Use the Numbers?» Analyzing Financial Condition» Scenic Video www.navigatingaccounting.com/video/scenic-financial-leverage Scenic Video Transcript Financial Leverage Topics Intel

More information

12:00 p.m. Valley Metro RPTA. Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1 st Avenue, 10 th Floor Phoenix

12:00 p.m. Valley Metro RPTA. Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1 st Avenue, 10 th Floor Phoenix MEETINGS OF THE Management Committees Valley Metro RPTA METRO Light Rail MEETING DATE Wednesday, November 5, 2014 TIME 11:00 a.m. MEETING DATE Wednesday, November 5, 2014 TIME 12:00 p.m. LOCATION Valley

More information

Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2012

Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2012 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2012 Phoenix, Arizona Board of Directors Chair, Vice Mayor Ron Aames, Peoria Vice Chair, Vice Mayor Scott Somers, Mesa Treasurer, Councilmember

More information

TMC/RMC Joint Meeting

TMC/RMC Joint Meeting MEETINGS OF THE Management Committees Transit Management Committee (TMC) MEETING DATE Wednesday, May 4, 2016 TMC/RMC Joint Meeting MEETING DATE Wednesday, May 4, 2016 Rail Management Committee (RMC) MEETING

More information

Budget and Finance Subcommittee

Budget and Finance Subcommittee MEETING OF THE Budget and Finance Subcommittee MEETING DATE October 15, 2015 TIME LOCATION 12:00 p.m. Valley Metro 101 N. 1st Ave., 10th Floor Lake Mead Conference Room Phoenix, AZ 85003 VALLEY METRO 101

More information

VALLEY METRO RPTA FY18 Budget EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

VALLEY METRO RPTA FY18 Budget EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VALLEY METRO RPTA FY18 Budget EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FY18 ADOPTED ANNUAL OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA) provides public transportation services for

More information

Hello I'm Professor Brian Bueche, welcome back. This is the final video in our trilogy on time value of money. Now maybe this trilogy hasn't been as

Hello I'm Professor Brian Bueche, welcome back. This is the final video in our trilogy on time value of money. Now maybe this trilogy hasn't been as Hello I'm Professor Brian Bueche, welcome back. This is the final video in our trilogy on time value of money. Now maybe this trilogy hasn't been as entertaining as the Lord of the Rings trilogy. But it

More information

Purchase Price Allocation, Goodwill and Other Intangibles Creation & Asset Write-ups

Purchase Price Allocation, Goodwill and Other Intangibles Creation & Asset Write-ups Purchase Price Allocation, Goodwill and Other Intangibles Creation & Asset Write-ups In this lesson we're going to move into the next stage of our merger model, which is looking at the purchase price allocation

More information

QUINLAN: Hughlene, let's start with a baseline question, why is accounting for income taxes so important?

QUINLAN: Hughlene, let's start with a baseline question, why is accounting for income taxes so important? September 2015 Segment 4 TRANSCRIPT 1. Challenges Related to Accounting for Income Taxes SURRAN: For many accountants, accounting for income taxes remains one of the most difficult subjects within the

More information

HPM Module_1_Balance_Sheet_Financial_Analysis

HPM Module_1_Balance_Sheet_Financial_Analysis HPM Module_1_Balance_Sheet_Financial_Analysis Welcome back, class. We're going to do the tutorial on the balance sheet for Sunnyvale. This is the second tutorial on the financial statements. And we had

More information

Video Series: How to Profit From US Real Estate for Pennies on The Dollar Without Being a Landlord or Fixing or Rehabbing Anything

Video Series: How to Profit From US Real Estate for Pennies on The Dollar Without Being a Landlord or Fixing or Rehabbing Anything Video Series: How to Profit From US Real Estate for Pennies on The Dollar Without Being a Landlord or Fixing or Rehabbing Anything Video 1 Tax Lien And Tax Deed Investment View the video 1 now: www.tedthomas.com/vid1

More information

TMC/RMC Joint Meeting

TMC/RMC Joint Meeting MEETINGS OF THE Management Committees Transit Management Committee (TMC) MEETING DATE Wednesday, June 1, 2016 TMC/RMC Joint Meeting MEETING DATE Wednesday, June 1, 2016 Rail Management Committee (RMC)

More information

Find Private Lenders Now CHAPTER 10. At Last! How To. 114 Copyright 2010 Find Private Lenders Now, LLC All Rights Reserved

Find Private Lenders Now CHAPTER 10. At Last! How To. 114 Copyright 2010 Find Private Lenders Now, LLC All Rights Reserved CHAPTER 10 At Last! How To Structure Your Deal 114 Copyright 2010 Find Private Lenders Now, LLC All Rights Reserved 1. Terms You will need to come up with a loan-to-value that will work for your business

More information

September 10, 1998 N.G.I.S.C. Biloxi Meeting. CHAIRMAN JAMES: With that, I'll open it up to. COMMISSIONER DOBSON: Mayor Short, you just mentioned

September 10, 1998 N.G.I.S.C. Biloxi Meeting. CHAIRMAN JAMES: With that, I'll open it up to. COMMISSIONER DOBSON: Mayor Short, you just mentioned September 0, N.G.I.S.C. Biloxi Meeting 0 CHAIRMAN JAMES: With that, I'll open it up to questions from commissioners. Commissioner Dobson? COMMISSIONER DOBSON: Mayor Short, you just mentioned the money

More information

CLERK OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 111 NW 1 Street, Commission Chambers Miami-Dade County, Florida Thursday, April 28, 3:30 p.m.

CLERK OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 111 NW 1 Street, Commission Chambers Miami-Dade County, Florida Thursday, April 28, 3:30 p.m. CLERK OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS NW Street, Commission Chambers Miami-Dade County, Florida Thursday, April, 0 @ :0 p.m. VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD MEETING 0 BOARD MEMBERS (Present) Commissioner Jose

More information

Chris Irvin, a 14-year trading veteran of the options, stock, futures and currency markets, is a real-world trader who s determined to help others

Chris Irvin, a 14-year trading veteran of the options, stock, futures and currency markets, is a real-world trader who s determined to help others Chris Irvin, a 14-year trading veteran of the options, stock, futures and currency markets, is a real-world trader who s determined to help others find their place in the investment world. After owning

More information

Transit Management Committee

Transit Management Committee NEXT MEETING OF THE Transit Management Committee MEETING DATE June 3, 2009 TIME LOCATION 11:00 a.m. MAG Saguaro Room 302 N. 1 st Avenue Suite 200 Phoenix May 27, 2009 TO: FROM: RE: Members of the Valley

More information

ECO155L19.doc 1 OKAY SO WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS WE WANT TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN NOMINAL AND REAL GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT. WE SORT OF

ECO155L19.doc 1 OKAY SO WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS WE WANT TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN NOMINAL AND REAL GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT. WE SORT OF ECO155L19.doc 1 OKAY SO WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS WE WANT TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN NOMINAL AND REAL GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT. WE SORT OF GOT A LITTLE BIT OF A MATHEMATICAL CALCULATION TO GO THROUGH HERE. THESE

More information

The maturity to put the needs of others first.

The maturity to put the needs of others first. . The maturity to put the needs of others first. Sophie Masloff is an unusual political leader. She's mature enough that she doesn't spend her every waking hour looking out for herself and her own political

More information

The #1 Way To Make Weekly Income With Weekly Options. Jack Carter

The #1 Way To Make Weekly Income With Weekly Options. Jack Carter The #1 Way To Make Weekly Income With Weekly Options Jack Carter 1 Disclaimer: The risk of loss in trading options can be substantial, and you should carefully consider whether this trading is suitable

More information

FY17 FY16 Valley Metro RPTA Sources of Funds FY17 vs FY16

FY17 FY16 Valley Metro RPTA Sources of Funds FY17 vs FY16 FY17 ADOPTED ANNUAL OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA) provides public transportation services for Maricopa County located in the metro Phoenix, Arizona.

More information

WIL S. WILCOX, OFFICIAL FEDERAL REPORTER

WIL S. WILCOX, OFFICIAL FEDERAL REPORTER 1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 WESTERN DIVISION 4 THE HON. GEORGE H. WU, JUDGE PRESIDING 5 6 Margaret Carswell, ) ) 7 Plaintiff, ) ) 8 vs. ) No. CV-10-05152-GW ) 9

More information

VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA MEETING OF MAY 31, 2017

VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA MEETING OF MAY 31, 2017 VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA MEETING OF MAY, 0 AGENDA 0 STEPHEN P. CLARK CENTER COMMISSION CHAMBERS CONFERENCE ROOM, ND FLOOR NW st Street Miami, Florida Wednesday May, 0 0:00 A.M.

More information

Valuation Public Comps and Precedent Transactions: Historical Metrics and Multiples for Public Comps

Valuation Public Comps and Precedent Transactions: Historical Metrics and Multiples for Public Comps Valuation Public Comps and Precedent Transactions: Historical Metrics and Multiples for Public Comps Welcome to our next lesson in this set of tutorials on comparable public companies and precedent transactions.

More information

1 NEW JERSEY STATE HEALTH PLANNING BOARD 2 PUBLIC HEARING x 5 IN RE: : 6 CERTIFICATE OF NEED

1 NEW JERSEY STATE HEALTH PLANNING BOARD 2 PUBLIC HEARING x 5 IN RE: : 6 CERTIFICATE OF NEED 1 NEW JERSEY STATE HEALTH PLANNING BOARD 2 PUBLIC HEARING 3 4 ------------------------------------------x 5 IN RE: : 6 CERTIFICATE OF NEED APPLICATION FOR : 7 PARTIAL TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP OF : 8 HOBOKEN

More information

CITY OF TREASURE ISLAND, FLORIDA BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 3, :00 PM

CITY OF TREASURE ISLAND, FLORIDA BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 3, :00 PM CITY OF TREASURE ISLAND, FLORIDA BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 3, 2014 6:00 PM The meeting was called to order at 6:00 PM by Mayor Robert Minning A. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - LED

More information

Transcript - The Money Drill: The Long and Short of Saving and Investng

Transcript - The Money Drill: The Long and Short of Saving and Investng Transcript - The Money Drill: The Long and Short of Saving and Investng J.J.: Hi. This is "The Money Drill," and I'm J.J. Montanaro. With the help of some great guest, I'll help you find your way through

More information

ECO LECTURE THIRTEEN 1 OKAY. WHAT WE WANT TO DO TODAY IS CONTINUE DISCUSSING THE

ECO LECTURE THIRTEEN 1 OKAY. WHAT WE WANT TO DO TODAY IS CONTINUE DISCUSSING THE ECO 155 750 LECTURE THIRTEEN 1 OKAY. WHAT WE WANT TO DO TODAY IS CONTINUE DISCUSSING THE THINGS THAT WE STARTED WITH LAST TIME. CONSUMER PRICE INDEX, YOU REMEMBER, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT. AND I THINK WHAT

More information

MOTIONS AND RESOLUTIONS BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING APRIL 24, 2008

MOTIONS AND RESOLUTIONS BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING APRIL 24, 2008 MOTIONS AND RESOLUTIONS BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING APRIL 24, 2008 Trustee Rumbold moved to adopt Resolution No. 19-07-08, Health Benefits. Seconded by Deputy Mayor Matise. On roll call Deputy Mayor Matise

More information

"One clause which was discussed was the 6-month notification for termination."

One clause which was discussed was the 6-month notification for termination. MINUTES OF THE FIFTH MEETING OF KISSIMMEE UTILITY AUTHORITY, HELD THURSDAY,, AT 7:02 P.M., CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, KISSIMMEE, FLORIDA. July 25, 1985 PAGE 17 Present

More information

This is the Human-Centric Investing Podcast with John Diehl, where we look at the world of investing for the eyes of our clients. Take it away, John.

This is the Human-Centric Investing Podcast with John Diehl, where we look at the world of investing for the eyes of our clients. Take it away, John. Human-Centric Investing Podcast February 2, 2019 Episode 25, Social Security: How will benefits be taxed? Host: John Diehl, John Diehl, Sr. Vice President, Strategic Markets, Hartford Funds Featured Guest:

More information

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON * * * * * * * * * Timberline Four Seasons * WS-C * * * * * * * * *

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON * * * * * * * * * Timberline Four Seasons * WS-C * * * * * * * * * PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON * * * * * * * * * Robert And Janet Deal v. * Timberline Four Seasons * -0-WS-C Utilities, Inc. * * * * * * * * * * David And Jan Rosenau v. * Timberline

More information

TRANSIT AUTHORITY OF NORTHERN KENTUCKY Board of Directors March 14, 2018

TRANSIT AUTHORITY OF NORTHERN KENTUCKY Board of Directors March 14, 2018 TRANSIT AUTHORITY OF NORTHERN KENTUCKY Board of Directors The TANK Board of Director s Meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, March 14, 2018 at the TANK Offices by Mr. Tim Donoghue, Board

More information

Scenic Video Transcript Big Picture- EasyLearn s Cash Flow Statements Topics

Scenic Video Transcript Big Picture- EasyLearn s Cash Flow Statements Topics Cash Flow Statements» What s Behind the Numbers?» Cash Flow Basics» Scenic Video http://www.navigatingaccounting.com/video/scenic-big-picture-easylearn-cash-flow-statements Scenic Video Transcript Big

More information

Transit Management Committee

Transit Management Committee MEETING OF THE Transit Management Committee MEETING DATE September 2, 2009 TIME LOCATION 11:00 a.m. MAG Saguaro Room 302 N. 1 st Avenue, Suite 200 August 24, 2009 TO: FROM: RE: Members of the Valley Metro

More information

HPM Module_2_Breakeven_Analysis

HPM Module_2_Breakeven_Analysis HPM Module_2_Breakeven_Analysis Hello, class. This is the tutorial for the breakeven analysis module. And this is module 2. And so we're going to go ahead and work this breakeven analysis. I want to give

More information

TRANSIT AUTHORITY OF NORTHERN KENTUCKY Board of Directors April 11, 2018

TRANSIT AUTHORITY OF NORTHERN KENTUCKY Board of Directors April 11, 2018 TRANSIT AUTHORITY OF NORTHERN KENTUCKY The TANK Board of Director s Meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, April 11, 2018 at the TANK Offices by Mr. Tim Donoghue, Board Chair. In attendance

More information

Valley Metro. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. Fiscal Year Ended June 30, Regional Public Transportation Authority Phoenix, Arizona

Valley Metro. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. Fiscal Year Ended June 30, Regional Public Transportation Authority Phoenix, Arizona Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2013 Phoenix, Arizona Phoenix, Arizona Board of Directors Chair, Councilmember Ron Aames, Peoria Vice Chair, Councilmember Scott Somers,

More information

HPM Module_6_Capital_Budgeting_Exercise

HPM Module_6_Capital_Budgeting_Exercise HPM Module_6_Capital_Budgeting_Exercise OK, class, welcome back. We are going to do our tutorial on the capital budgeting module. And we've got two worksheets that we're going to look at today. We have

More information

Now I m going to ask the operator to give us instructions on how to ask a question.

Now I m going to ask the operator to give us instructions on how to ask a question. Wi$e Up Teleconference Call Real Estate May 31, 2006 Questions and Answers Now I m going to ask the operator to give us instructions on how to ask a question. Angie-- Coordinator: Thank you. And at this

More information

THOMSON REUTERS STREETEVENTS PRELIMINARY TRANSCRIPT. IVZ - Invesco Ltd. to Hold Analyst Call To Discuss The Acquisition Of Atlantic Trust By CIBC

THOMSON REUTERS STREETEVENTS PRELIMINARY TRANSCRIPT. IVZ - Invesco Ltd. to Hold Analyst Call To Discuss The Acquisition Of Atlantic Trust By CIBC THOMSON REUTERS STREETEVENTS PRELIMINARY TRANSCRIPT IVZ - Invesco Ltd. to Hold Analyst Call To Discuss The Acquisition Of Atlantic Trust EVENT DATE/TIME: APRIL 11, 2013 / 8:30PM GMT TRANSCRIPT TRANSCRIPT

More information

ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE MINUTES Tuesday, February 18, 2014

ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE MINUTES Tuesday, February 18, 2014 ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE MINUTES Tuesday, February 18, 2014 The meeting of the Administration and Human Services Standing Committee was held on Tuesday, February 18, 2014, at

More information

9999 High Meadow Road Lubbock, TX Administration Office: (806) Fax:(806)

9999 High Meadow Road Lubbock, TX Administration Office: (806) Fax:(806) LUBBOCK COUNTY WATER CONTROL & IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 9999 High Meadow Road Lubbock, TX 79404 Administration Office: (806)747-3353 Fax:(806)747-3714 Minutes CALLED MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

More information

HPM Module_7_Financial_Ratio_Analysis

HPM Module_7_Financial_Ratio_Analysis HPM Module_7_Financial_Ratio_Analysis Hi, class, welcome to this tutorial. We're going to be doing income statement, conditional analysis, and ratio analysis. And the problem that we're going to be working

More information

Remarks of Chairman Bill Thomas U.S. House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee

Remarks of Chairman Bill Thomas U.S. House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee Remarks of Chairman Bill Thomas U.S. House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee Tax Foundation 67 th Annual Conference Global Tax Reform: Who's Leading, Who's Lagging, and is the U.S. in the Race?

More information

Video Series: How to Profit From US Real Estate for Pennies on The Dollar Without Being a Landlord or Fixing or Rehabbing Anything

Video Series: How to Profit From US Real Estate for Pennies on The Dollar Without Being a Landlord or Fixing or Rehabbing Anything Video Series: How to Profit From US Real Estate for Pennies on The Dollar Without Being a Landlord or Fixing or Rehabbing Anything Video 2 How To Get Paid View the video 2 now: http://www.tedthomas.com/video2

More information

Total Operating Activities for FY17 are $56.9 million, an increase of $5.1M or 9.8% from FY16.

Total Operating Activities for FY17 are $56.9 million, an increase of $5.1M or 9.8% from FY16. FY17 ADOPTED ANNUAL OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET Valley Metro Rail, Inc. (VMR) is a public non-profit corporation whose members are the cities of Chandler, Glendale, Mesa, Phoenix, and Tempe. VMR plans,

More information

May 14, Budget and Finance Committee Members Los Angeles City Council. Dear Committee Members:

May 14, Budget and Finance Committee Members Los Angeles City Council. Dear Committee Members: Budget and Finance Committee Members Los Angeles City Council Dear Committee Members: May 14, 2016 Mr. Jorge Villegas' letter of May 4, 2016 to the Budget and Finance Committee, "Budget Impact Letter No.

More information

YOUR FINANCIAL COMPARISON REPORT

YOUR FINANCIAL COMPARISON REPORT Prepared on April 12th, 2009 INGCompareMe.com ALL RESULTS OK. You've compared yourself to other people like you. What's next? First, you can use this checklist and personalized report to help you keep

More information

Economic Forums. Forecasting Revenue for CA's Tax Revenue Systems

Economic Forums. Forecasting Revenue for CA's Tax Revenue Systems Dr. Chamberlain: Well, thank you very much. One correction I actually started at the state with Franchise Tax Board, and I actually worked there for 19 20 years before I went to Department of Finance.

More information

Lesson 6: Failing to Understand What You Get. From a Workers Comp Claim

Lesson 6: Failing to Understand What You Get. From a Workers Comp Claim Lesson 6: Failing to Understand What You Get From a Workers Comp Claim Rule: Workers Comp is based on disability. Many injured workers know someone who was injured at work and got a "big" settlement. But

More information

Sent: Subject: From: Joni L. Ward Sent: Wednesday, March 20, :49 PM To: Subject: RE: EES redux

Sent: Subject: From: Joni L. Ward Sent: Wednesday, March 20, :49 PM To: Subject: RE: EES redux LEDFORDSSD321735 Sent: To: Subject: IQ>vr.idaho.gov > Wednesday, March 20, 2013 3:54 PM Joni L. RE: EES redux I'll be at in the EF meeting from 8 to 430 tomorrow.. supposed to be at a luncheon on Friday

More information

CDBG-DR Duplication of Benefits,

CDBG-DR Duplication of Benefits, Steve Higginbotham: -- "Duplication of Benefits When Dealing with the Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Program." My name is Steve Higginbotham and I'm the senior committee planning and

More information

[01:02] [02:07]

[01:02] [02:07] Real State Financial Modeling Introduction and Overview: 90-Minute Industrial Development Modeling Test, Part 3 Waterfall Returns and Case Study Answers Welcome to the final part of this 90-minute industrial

More information

DODD-FRANK: Key Implications for Corporate Treasurers

DODD-FRANK: Key Implications for Corporate Treasurers DODD-FRANK: Key Implications for Corporate Treasurers March 21, 2013 Speaker: With that, let's go ahead and begin our event. Once again, today's PNC's Advisory Series Event and it is my pleasure to turn

More information

IDA DSS CONFERENCE ROOM INDIAN LAKE, NY MARCH 9, The meeting was called to order at 1:00 P.M. with the following members present:

IDA DSS CONFERENCE ROOM INDIAN LAKE, NY MARCH 9, The meeting was called to order at 1:00 P.M. with the following members present: IDA DSS CONFERENCE ROOM INDIAN LAKE, NY MARCH 9, 2010 The meeting was called to order at 1:00 P.M. with the following members present: Brian Towers, Chairman William Farber Fred Fink William Faro Robin

More information

OAK RIDGE SCHOOLS Oak Ridge, Tennessee

OAK RIDGE SCHOOLS Oak Ridge, Tennessee OAK RIDGE SCHOOLS Oak Ridge, Tennessee OAK RIDGE BOARD OF EDUCATION SPECIAL MEETING APRIL 12, 2007 Conference/Seminar Room School Administration Building 7:00 p.m. A special meeting of the Oak Ridge Board

More information

Been There, Done That Podcast: Small Business Loans

Been There, Done That Podcast: Small Business Loans Been There, Done That Podcast: Small Business Loans The SCORE Been There, Done That Podcast features interviews with the best and brightest in the world of small business, covering topics such as business

More information

TRANSIT LIFE CYCLE POLICIES

TRANSIT LIFE CYCLE POLICIES TRANSIT LIFE CYCLE POLICIES DRAFT January 6, 2011 Table of Contents GUIDING PRINCIPLE 1: A defined and consistent process will be established for allocating funding for projects in the Regional Transportation

More information

The Dialogue Podcast Transcript Private Health Insurance

The Dialogue Podcast Transcript Private Health Insurance Date: 23 Feb 2018 Interviewer: Ignatius Li Guest: Jamie Reid, Anthony Lowe Duration: 17:40 min Ignatius: Hello and welcome to the Actuaries Dialogue podcast, I'm Ignatius Li. I'm an actuary and director

More information

Fresh Start Trust. Lesson #1 Checklist Starting at the Beginning

Fresh Start Trust. Lesson #1 Checklist Starting at the Beginning Lesson #1 Checklist Starting at the Beginning ***This condensed version of the main lesson is for review purposes only. For an in-depth explanation of each of the items listed here, please refer to the

More information

VALLEY METRO RAIL FY18 Budget EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

VALLEY METRO RAIL FY18 Budget EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VALLEY METRO RAIL FY18 Budget EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FY18 ADOPTED ANNUAL OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET Valley Metro Rail, Inc. (VMR) is a public non-profit corporation whose members are the cities of Chandler,

More information

LIVING TO 100 SYMPOSIUM*

LIVING TO 100 SYMPOSIUM* LIVING TO 100 SYMPOSIUM* Orlando, Florida January 12 14, 2005 IMPACT OF AGING POPULATIONS Presenters: J. Bruce MacDonald, Discussant Lijia Guo Douglas Andrews Krzysztof Ostaszewski MR. EDWIN HUSTEAD: I

More information

Minutes. Francis City Council Meeting Thursday, May 9, 2013 Francis City Community Center 7:00 p.m.

Minutes. Francis City Council Meeting Thursday, May 9, 2013 Francis City Community Center 7:00 p.m. Minutes Francis City Council Meeting Thursday, May 9, 2013 Francis City Community Center 7:00 p.m. Attending: Mayor R. Lee Snelgrove, Councilmember s Mike Baldwin, Matt Crittenden, Jeremie Forman, Gio

More information

MEETING OF THE Valley Metro Operations and Capital Committee. 10:00 a.m.

MEETING OF THE Valley Metro Operations and Capital Committee. 10:00 a.m. VMOCC Meeting Packet MEETING OF THE Valley Metro Operations and Capital Committee MEETING DATE August 18, 2009 TIME LOCATION 10:00 a.m. METRO Rail Office 13 th Floor Conference Room 101 N. 1 st Avenue,

More information

NEWBERRY COUNTY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 12, :00 P.M.

NEWBERRY COUNTY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 12, :00 P.M. NEWBERRY COUNTY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 12, 2018 7:00 P.M. Newberry County Council met on Monday, February 12, 2018, at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers at the Courthouse Annex, 1309 College

More information

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

Valley Metro RPTA. Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1 st Avenue, 10 th Floor Phoenix MEETINGS OF THE Management Committees Valley Metro RPTA METRO Light Rail MEETING DATE November 1, 2012 TIME 11:00 a.m. MEETING DATE November 1, 2012 TIME 1:30 p.m. LOCATION Valley Metro RPTA Lake Powell

More information

Executive Summary - Fiscal Year 2016 Valley Metro Rail Preliminary Annual Operating and Capital Budget

Executive Summary - Fiscal Year 2016 Valley Metro Rail Preliminary Annual Operating and Capital Budget Executive Summary - Fiscal Year 2016 Valley Metro Rail Preliminary Annual Operating and Capital Budget Valley Metro Rail, Inc. (VMR) is a public non-profit corporation whose members are the cities of Chandler,

More information

PRESENTATION. Mike Majors - Torchmark Corporation - VP of IR

PRESENTATION. Mike Majors - Torchmark Corporation - VP of IR 1st Quarter 2017 Conference Call April 20, 2017 CORPORATE PARTICIPANTS Mike Majors Torchmark - VP of IR Gary Coleman Torchmark - Larry Hutchison Torchmark - Frank Svoboda Torchmark - Brian Mitchell Torchmark

More information

Michael Ryske trades mostly in the futures and swing trading stocks markets. He hails from Kalamazoo, Michigan. Michael got started trading in 2002

Michael Ryske trades mostly in the futures and swing trading stocks markets. He hails from Kalamazoo, Michigan. Michael got started trading in 2002 Michael Ryske trades mostly in the futures and swing trading stocks markets. He hails from Kalamazoo, Michigan. Michael got started trading in 2002 while pursuing a business degree in college. He began

More information

INTEREST RATE DERIVATIVES IN TODAY'S VOLATILE MARKETS

INTEREST RATE DERIVATIVES IN TODAY'S VOLATILE MARKETS INTEREST RATE DERIVATIVES IN TODAY'S VOLATILE MARKETS May 2011 Operator: Alice Dwyer: And with that, let's go ahead and begin our event. Once again, sponsored by PNC Advisory Series. It is my pleasure

More information

MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING SECOND AND FINAL PUBLIC TAX HEARING BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS NORTH BROWARD HOSPITAL DISTRICT September 28, :30 p.m.

MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING SECOND AND FINAL PUBLIC TAX HEARING BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS NORTH BROWARD HOSPITAL DISTRICT September 28, :30 p.m. MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING SECOND AND FINAL PUBLIC TAX HEARING BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS NORTH BROWARD HOSPITAL DISTRICT September 28, 2016 5:30 p.m. The Special Meeting of the Board of Commissioners

More information

Manager s Conference Minutes Portsmouth City Council July 14, :20 p.m.

Manager s Conference Minutes Portsmouth City Council July 14, :20 p.m. Manager s Conference Minutes Portsmouth City Council July 14, 2014 7:20 p.m. 1. General Discussion Councilman Kalb motioned to bring back the Reduction in Income Tax Credit, paying other municipalities

More information

SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212)

SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 2 ------------------------------x 3 BEACON ASSOCIATES LLC I, et al., 4 Plaintiffs, 5 v. 14 Civ. 2294 AJP 6 BEACON ASSOCIATES MANAGEMENT CORP.,

More information

EPISODE 56: DISABILITY AND AGING: MEDICARE, MEDICAID, AND BENEFITS ENROLLMENT ASSISTANCE

EPISODE 56: DISABILITY AND AGING: MEDICARE, MEDICAID, AND BENEFITS ENROLLMENT ASSISTANCE EPISODE 56: DISABILITY AND AGING: MEDICARE, MEDICAID, AND BENEFITS ENROLLMENT ASSISTANCE Event Date: March 7, 2018 Presenter: Leslie Fried, Senior Director - Center for Benefits Access - National Council

More information

Chapter 18: The Correlational Procedures

Chapter 18: The Correlational Procedures Introduction: In this chapter we are going to tackle about two kinds of relationship, positive relationship and negative relationship. Positive Relationship Let's say we have two values, votes and campaign

More information

Budget and Finance Subcommittee

Budget and Finance Subcommittee MEETING OF THE Budget and Finance Subcommittee MEETING DATE May 14, 2015 TIME LOCATION 12:00 p.m. Valley Metro 101 N. 1st Ave., 10th Floor Lake Mead Conference Room Phoenix, AZ 85003 VALLEY METRO 101 N

More information

DESTIN FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT Budget Workshop Main Station 848 Airport Road Destin, Florida. August 12, Minutes

DESTIN FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT Budget Workshop Main Station 848 Airport Road Destin, Florida. August 12, Minutes DESTIN FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT Budget Workshop Main Station 848 Airport Road Destin, Florida August 12, 2014 Minutes Commissioners present: Staff present: Tommy Green, Hillary Anderson, Mike Buckingham,

More information

Valuation Interpretation and Uses: How to Use Valuation to Outline a Buy-Side Stock Pitch

Valuation Interpretation and Uses: How to Use Valuation to Outline a Buy-Side Stock Pitch Valuation Interpretation and Uses: How to Use Valuation to Outline a Buy-Side Stock Pitch Hello and welcome to our next lesson in this final valuation summary module. This time around, we're going to begin

More information

Now, I'd like to ask Grace Protos, a program analyst in the Women s Bureau regional office in New York City, to introduce our first speaker.

Now, I'd like to ask Grace Protos, a program analyst in the Women s Bureau regional office in New York City, to introduce our first speaker. Wi$e Up Teleconference Call March 30, 2007 Saving: Pay Yourself First Speaker 1, Michael Masiello Jane Walstedt: Now, I'd like to ask Grace Protos, a program analyst in the Women s Bureau regional office

More information