Annual Report Fiscal Year INFORMATION: Fare Simplification and Pass Program MEMO - Fare Simplification 105 INFORMATION: 2020 Service Change

Transcription

1 Table of Contents Agenda 3 Approve minutes of the VRT Board of Directors Meeting 1/7/2019 MINUTES - VRT Board of Directors Meeting 1/7/ Accept minutes of the Executive Board Meeting 1/7/2019 MINUTES - Executive Board Meeting 1/7/ Accept minutes of the Executive Board Meeting 2/4/2019 MINUTES - Executive Board Meeting 2/4/ Accept minutes of the Executive Board Meeting 3/4/2019 MINUTES - Executive Board Meeting 3/4/ Operating Cash Balance Report for First Quarter 2019 Cash Balance Report Q1 21 Cash Balance Q1 22 First Quarter Budget Variance Report FY2019 1st Quarter Budget Variance Report 23 1st Quarter Variance Comments 24 FY2018 Audit VRT FY2018 Audit Financial Statements 28 ACTION: Low/No Emissions Fuel Technology MEMO - Low No Emission 59 RESOLUTION VBD Lo No Emmission Fuel Technology 61 ACTION: Regional Performance Measures Policy MEMO - Performance Measures Policy 63 POLICY - Performance Measures 64 ACTION: Accessible Conversion Transit Vans - Authorization for Expenditure and Resolution VBD AUTHORIZATION FOR EXPENDITURE - Accessible Conversion Transit Vans 67 RESOLUTION - VBD Accessible Conversion Transit Vans 68 ACTION: Automatic Passenger Counters, Authorization for Expenditure and Resolution VBD AFE - Automatic Passenger Counters 70 RESOLUTION - Automatic Passenger Counters 71 PUBLIC HEARING - Route 44 - Highway 44 Express MEMO - Route INFORMATION: Idaho Department of Transportation's Long- Range Transportation Plan - IDAGO 2040 MEMO - ITD Long Range Plan 74 Comments on ITD Long Range Plan 76 INFORMATION: Valley Regional Transit Annual Report - Fiscal Year 2018 MEMO - Annual Report Fiscal Year

2 Annual Report Fiscal Year INFORMATION: Fare Simplification and Pass Program MEMO - Fare Simplification 105 INFORMATION: 2020 Service Change Update MEMO Service Change Update 109 Attachment - Service Change Schedule 111 INFORMATION: Apportionment Amounts MEMO - Apportionment FY INFORMATION: FY2020 Capital Budget Update MEMO - FY2020 Capital Budget 114 Table Table 2 and Table 4 - New Projects 122 Table 5 and INFORMATION: Mobile Ticketing MEMO - Mobile Ticketing 124 INFORMATION: Safety Plan MEMO - Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan 126 INFORMATION: Department/Staff Reports REPORT: Executive Director - March 130 REPORT - Developement Department 131 REPORT - Operations Department 134 REPORT - Finanace and Administration 136 REPORT - Community Relations 138 REPORT - Bike Share 139 2

3 Valley Regional Transit Board of Directors Meeting Agenda Monday, April 01, :00 PM VRT Board Room 700 NE 2 nd Street Meridian, Idaho I. CALLING OF THE ROLL II. AGENDA ADDITIONS/CHANGES III. PUBLIC COMMENT (Comments will be limited to no more than three (3) minutes.) IV. FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT V. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the Consent Agenda are Action Items will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a VRT Board Member requests the item be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed under Action Items. A. Approve minutes of the VRT Board of Directors Meeting 1/7/2019 Ө Pages 7-10 B. Accept minutes of the Executive Board Meeting 1/7/2019 Ө Pages C. Accept minutes of the Executive Board Meeting 2/4/2019 Ө Pages D. Accept minutes of the Executive Board Meeting 3/4/2019 Ө Pages E. Operating Cash Balance Report for First Quarter 2019 Ө Pages Attached is the Operating Cash Balance Report for first quarter The Finance Committee will be considering approval of this item at the April 1, 2019 meeting. The VRT Board accepts the report through the consent agenda each quarter when they meet. F. First Quarter Budget Variance Report FY2019 Ө Pages G. FY2018 Audit Ө Pages The Board of Directors will consider accepting audit findings presented by Eide Bailly to the Executive Board at the March 4, 2019 meeting. The Executive Board held off on making a decision until full documentation was included in the packet for review. VI. ACTION ITEMS A. ACTION: Low/No Emissions Fuel Technology Ө Pages Kelli Badesheim 700 NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

4 The VRT Board of directors will consider adopting Resolution VBD authorizing the staff to consider all low emission/no emission fuel technology options when procuring rollingstock to operate public transportation services in the region. The resolution also requires the Executive Board to review the staff analysis for incorporating new fuel technologies prior to determining fuel sources for rollingstock. B. ACTION: Regional Performance Measures Policy Ө Pages Brian Parker Board will consider the Regional Performance Measures Policy for approval. C. ACTION: Accessible Conversion Transit Vans - Authorization for Expenditure and Resolution VBD Ө Pages Leslie Pedrosa Board will review, for approval, Resolution VBD to procure up to twenty-five Accessible Conversion Transit Vans over the next five years. D. ACTION: Automatic Passenger Counters, Authorization for Expenditure and Resolution VBD Ө Pages Stephen Hunt Board will review, for approval, to procure Automatic Passenger Counters for the entire fixed route fleet. VII. INFORMATION ITEMS A. PUBLIC HEARING - Route 44 - Highway 44 Express Ө (3 minute time limit) Page 73 Stephen Hunt will present the Route 44 - Highway 44 Express information. (Handout) Stephen Hunt The VRT Board Chair will then conduct a second Public Hearing and take formal comments on the proposed Route 44 changes. B. INFORMATION: Idaho Department of Transportation's Long-Range Transportation Plan - IDAGO 2040 Ө Pages Rhonda Jalbert and Kelli Badesheim ITD has developed a draft statewide long-range transportation plan, IDAGO 2040, which is open for public comment from February 24 through April 10, Valley Regional Transit Staff has reviewed the plan and will be reaching out to other public transportation providers and Regional Public Transportation Authorities (RPTA) for their comments and input. Staff will review and discuss the implications and proposed comments to submit to ITD for inclusion in the IDAGO 2040 Plan. C. INFORMATION: Treasure Valley and State Community Survey Corey Cook, of Boise State University, will present information regarding the Treasure Valley and State Community surveys. D. INFORMATION: Valley Regional Transit Annual Report - Fiscal Year 2018 Ө Pages Brian Parker Members will review and will consider for approval the Valley Regional Transit Annual Report. 4

5 E. INFORMATION: Fare Simplification and Pass Program Ө Pages Stephen Hunt Staff will discuss proposed objectives of the fare simplification and increase with the Board of Directors. Staff is working with the Executive Board to determine a recommendation for a future fare increase that could go into effect in FY2020. F. INFORMATION: 2020 Service Change Update Ө Pages Stephen Hunt Staff will discuss potential 2020 service changes. G. INFORMATION: Apportionment Amounts Ө Pages Rhonda Jalbert Staff will update the VRT Board of Directors on Apportionments. H. INFORMATION: FY2020 Capital Budget Update Ө Pages Rhonda Jalbert Staff completed the Transit Asset Management (TAM) scoring process for FY2019. These scores are used to inform the regional capital budget for FY2020. Staff will present findings and recommendations from the scoring process to assist the VRT Board in making decisions on capital priorities and addressing deferred maintenance, as well as system enhancements. I. INFORMATION: Mobile Ticketing Ө Pages Leslie Pedrosa Mobile ticketing will give riders the ability to purchase fare media anywhere, anytime via a smart phone app. J. INFORMATION: Safety Plan Ө Pages Leslie Pedrosa The Federal Transit Administration has published the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan Final Rule, which requires certain operators of public transportation systems that receive federal funds under 49 U.S.C to develop a safety plan K. INFORMATION: Department/Staff Reports Ө Pages Staff The most current Department/Staff Reports are included for information. VIII. EXECUTIVE SESSION The VRT Board may convene into Executive Session at this time Pursuant to Idaho Code , identifying one or more of the specific paragraphs (a) through (j). An action by the VRT Board may follow the Executive Session. IX. ADJOURNMENT Ө = Attachment Agenda order is subject to change. 5

6 NEXT VRT BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING: Monday, August 5, :00 p.m. VRT Boardroom 700 NE 2 nd Street Meridian, ID Mission Statement: Valley Regional Transit s mission is to leverage, develop, provide, and manage transportation resources and to coordinate the effective and efficient delivery of comprehensive transportation choices to the region s citizens. (ValleyConnect 2.0 Plan approved 04/02/18) The public is invited to provide written comment on an agenda item or provide comment at the VRT Board meetings. Please refer to the VRT Board Agenda Preparation and Approval Policy (approved 07/15/09) at the following weblink: Arrangements for auxiliary aids and services necessary for effective communication for qualified persons with disabilities or language assistance requests need to be made as soon as possible, but no later than three working days before the scheduled meeting. Please contact Mark Carnopis, Community Relations Manager at if an auxiliary aid is needed. 6

7 ITEM V-A Valley Regional Transit Board of Directors Meeting Minutes Monday, January 7, :00 p.m. VRT Board Room 700 NE 2 nd Street Meridian, Idaho MEMBERS ATTENDING MEMBERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT Rob Hopper-City of Caldwell Jim Tibbs-Ada County Comm. Sam Paterson-BSU Rick Ritter-Meridian Dev. Corp. Rick Visser-Ada County Comm. Brian Parker VRT John Evans-Garden City Pam White-Canyon County Comm. Edinson Bautista ACHD Stan Ridgeway-City of Eagle John Brunelle-CCDC Rhonda Jalbert-VRT Sandi Levi-City of Nampa Garret Nancolas-City of Caldwell Jacqueline Hernandez-VRT Debbie Kling City of Nampa Joe Stear-City of Kuna Gregg Eisenberg-First Transit Dave Bieter City of Boise Hal Forsgren-City of Melba Ken Pidjeon-Citizen Jim Hansen-ACHD Luke Cavener-City of Meridian Maureen Gresham-Commuteride Tom Dale-Canyon County Nathan Leigh-City of Parma Rachel Hankkala-COMPASS Larry Maneely- Ada County Kaite Justice-VRT David Lincoln-ACCHD Obed Saenz-VRT Elaine Clegg-City of Boise Susan Powell VRT Darin Taylor-City of Middleton Jacob Hassard-VRT Corey Cook BSU Caleb Lakey-ITD D3 Jeff Flynn-CWI Kelli Badesheim-VRT Elena Villanueva-City of Wilder (by phone) Genesis Milam-City of Meridian Amy Revis-ITD (by phone) Steve Jett-City of Greenleaf (by phone) CALLING OF THE ROLL Chair, Jim Hansen called the meeting to order at 12:13pm, with a quorum present, in person and by phone. AGENDA ADDITIONS/CHANGES Item V-A FY2018, Fourth Quarter Budget Report, was moved from the consent agenda to the agenda. There were no other changes. PUBLIC COMMENT Ken Pidjeon spoke about the budget report with questions about ridership and numbers. He also spoke about the shared vehicle use and the use of public vehicles for private use. FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT CONSENT AGENDA Item V-A FY2018, Fourth Quarter Budget Report, was moved from the consent agenda to the agenda. 700 NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

8 ITEM V-A Darin Taylor made a motion to approve the consent agenda; the motion was seconded by Tom Dale. The motion was passed by unanimous decision. Items on the Consent Agenda included: FY2018 Fourth Quarter Cash Balance Report Approve Minutes of 9/24/2018 VRT Board of Directors Meeting Approve Minutes of the 10/22/18 VRT Board of Directors Meeting Accept 09/18/18 Executive Board Special Meeting Minutes Accept 09/24/18 Executive Board Special Meeting Minutes Accept 11/05/18 Joint Meeting Executive Board/RAC Minutes Accept 12/03/18 Executive Board Minutes Confirm Meeting Dates for 2019 and Proposed Meeting Dates for 2020 Approve - Transit Asset Management Plan Approve - Fare Simplification and Pass Program - Fare Tariff Update Approve - Appointment to Boise Health Care Trust Acknowledge FY2018 Public Comment Report ACTION ITEMS VRT Board/Executive Board Officer Succession Debbie Kling made a motion to accept and approve officer nominations for officer succession for 2019; the motion was seconded by John Evans. The motion passed by unanimous decision. Office succession as follows: Tom Dale (Canyon County) will move for Chair-Elect to Chair David Bieter (Ada County) will move from vice-chair to chair-elect Darin Taylor (Canyon County) will move from Secretary/Treasurer to Vice-Chair Jim Hansen (Ada County) will remain on the Executive Board as immediate Past-Chair By decision of Executive Board, the office of Secretary/Treasurer will be split between Elaine Clegg and Corey Cook. Elaine Clegg will serve from now until May 1 and Corey Cook will take over and finish the remainder of the term. Open Position Nominations and Election After discussion, Dave Bieter made a motion to accept the nominations and vote to accept as at-large members for Ada and Canyon County officers: John Evans (Ada County) Luke Cavener (Ada County) Debbie Kling (Canyon County) Garret Nancolas (Canyon County) Dave Lincoln (Canyon County) Elaine Clegg (Ada County) Luke Cavener (Ada County) 8

9 ITEM V-A The motion was seconded by Darin Taylor. The motion passed by unanimous decision. Jim Hansen turned over gavel to newly elected Chair, Tom Dale to continue the meeting. FY2018 Fourth Quarter Budget Report At the request of Jim Hansen, the FY2018 Fourth Quarter Budget Report item was moved from the Consent Agenda to the regular agenda where the Executive Director answered questions from the Board. Darin Taylor made a motion the budget be accepted as presented; the motions was seconded by Jim Hansen. Motion passed by unanimous decision. PUBLIC HEARING - FY2019 Budget Amendment Rhonda Jalbert discussed the amended FY2019 Amendment. Following discussion by the Board, Tom Dale opened the floor for a public hearing. Darin Taylor made a motion to close the public hearing as no one wanted to speak; the motion was seconded by Elaine Clegg. The motion passed by unanimous decision. After discussion, Elaine Clegg moved to adopt Budget Resolution Amendment VBD The motion was seconded by Jim Hansen. Motion carried, Debbie Kling abstained. PUBLIC HEARING - Disposal of Surplus and Obsolete Assets for 2019 Kelli Badesheim presented information regarding disposal of surplus and obsolete assets. Tom Dale opened the floor for a public hearing. Jim Hanson a motion to close the public hearing as no one wanted to speak; Elaine Clegg seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. During discussion, the Board requested a memo be sent, or an item be added to the consent agenda, before something is disposed of. Darin Taylor moved to approve resolution VBD , Elaine Clegg seconded the motion. The motion passed by unanimous decision Expansion of Shared Vehicle Program Scope of Work Kaite Justice explained the expansion of the shared vehicle program growth and the constraints the program is experiencing. The board was asked to approve resolution VBD to expand the scope of the shared vehicle program. 9

10 ITEM V-A Following discussion, John Evens moved to adopt Resolution VBD19-003; Stan Ridgeway seconded the motion, with the condition Staff bring a definition of public good to the next Executive Board meeting. The motion passed by unanimous decision. INFORMATION ITEMS Local Allocation Project Stephen Hunt updated the VRT Board on the process made on the local allocation project. FY2019 and FY2020 Capital Projects Rhonda Jalbert will present the FY2019 and FY2020 Capital Projects. Performance Measures - Annual Report Brian Parker presented the performance measures annual report. Department/Staff Reports The most current Department/Staff Reports were included in the packets for information. Kelli Badesheim updated the Board letting them know the new controller will be starting on January 22. EXECUTIVE SESSION - none ADJOURNMENT Stan Ridgeway moved the meeting be adjourned, it was seconded John Evans. By unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned. NEXT VRT BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING: Monday, April 1, :00 p.m. VRT Board Room 700 NE 2 nd Street Meridian, ID 10

11 ITEM V-B Executive Board Meeting Minutes Monday, January 07, :00 a.m. VRT Board Room 700 NE 2 nd Street Meridian, Idaho MEMBERS ATTENDING MEMBERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT Dave Bieter-City of Boise Luke Cavener-City of Meridian Kelli Badesheim-VRT Elaine Clegg-City of Boise Garret Nancolas-City of Caldwell Edinson Bautista ACHD Corey Cook-Boise State Jim Tibbs-Ada County Mark Carnopis VRT Tom Dale-Canyon County Comm. Paula Cromie VRT Jim Hansen-ACHD Gregg Eisenberg ACHD Debbie Kling- City of Nampa Maureen Gresham Commuteride David Lincoln-ACCHD Rachel Hankkala COMPASS Larry Maneely (for Tibbs)-Ada County Jacob Hassard VRT Darin Taylor-City of Middleton Stephen Hunt VRT Rhonda Jalbert VRT Kaite Justice VRT Don Kostelec Self Genesis Milam (for Cavener) by phone-city of Meridian James Mundell VRT Brian Parker VRT Rocky Perkins ATU 398 Ken Pidjeon Citizen Susan Powell VRT Obed Saenz VRT CALLING OF THE ROLL Jim Hansen called the meeting to order at 11:02, with a quorum present. AGENDA ADDITIONS/CHANGES- The agenda was accepted with no objections. PUBLIC COMMENTS Ken Pidjeon discussed his views regarding Greyhound use of Main Street Station. He would like the Board to require Valley Regional Transit staff to develop more definitive cost, revenue, and staffing estimates before the Board considers this proposal further. Don Kostelec ADA Transition Plan Comment Letter Don would like to strengthen the Transition Plan in regards to public right-of-way accessibility guidelines (PROWAG) and use these guidelines to strengthen the plan. 700 NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

12 ITEM V-B CONSENT AGENDA Darin Taylor moved to approve the minutes of the 12/16/18 Executive Board Meeting, seconded by David Lincoln. The motion was approved by unanimous decision. FINANCE COMMITTEE Stephen Hunt explained the cost allocation alternative methodology and historical contribution handout to clarify points VRT was asked to explore at the December 2018 meeting. The explanation was followed by discussion. EXECUTIVE BOARD - ACTION ITEMS Officer Succession The Executive Board reviewed and confirmed officer succession and nominations for Secretary/Treasurer and at-large positions for the 2019 calendar year. At the request of staff, the Board officially nominated, to the Executive Board, the following individuals: David Lincoln, Debbie Kling, Garret Nancolas, Elaine Clegg, John Evans, and Luke Cavener. Darin Taylor moved to accept the nominations, as stated; the motion was seconded by Tom Dale and the motion passed by unanimous decision. Tom Dale made a motion to nominate Elaine Clegg to serve as the secretary/treasurer from now until May 1, then, have Cory Cook take over and assume the position as secretary/treasurer for the duration of year. This motion was seconded by Debbie Kling and the motion passed unanimously. Set Public Hearing Date for Route 44 Service Reduction Rhonda Jalbert discussed Valley Regional Transit s recommendation to set a Public Hearing date for Route 44 service reduction. Tom Dale made a motion the Board set a public hearing date for Route 44 for April 1 at 12:00 pm at VRT administrative office in Meridian and also find and appropriate date in the first part of March to set a public hearing date in Star; the motion was seconded by Dave Lincoln and the motion passed by unanimous decision. EXECUTIVE BOARD - INFORMATION ITEMS FY2020 Service Change Due to time constraints, Kelli Badesheim suggested the Board look at this item in their packet and if there are questions to contact VRT staff for clarification. There was no opposition. Greyhound - Revenue Stream Rhonda Jalbert discussed the Greyhound stream and asked the Board to provided direction to staff on how to proceed with negotiations with Greyhound - North America. 12

13 The Board would like VRT staff to address the questions raised by Mr. Pidjeon and by the Board during the meeting and have answers to those questions at the Monday, February 4, Board meeting. Mobile Ticketing Procurement Update Chair, Jim Hansen suggested the Board wait to discuss mobile ticketing unless they had any questions and move on to the ADA Transition Plan. There was no opposition. ACHD ADA Transition Plan Comment VRT staff discussed the draft letter being sent to ACHD regarding the ADA Transition Plan and wanted more feedback from the Board in regards to ADA issues and how VRT can provide guidance. VRT staff will reach out to individual Executive Board members and form a smaller committee to vet the information and bring recommendations back to the Board. Procurement Calendar The most current Procurement Calendar was included in the packet for information. Due to time constraints Jim Hansen, suggested any questions regarding the procurement calendar be directed to Kelli Badesheim or Kelly Jakovac with any questions. There were no objections. EXECUTIVE SESSION - None ADJOURNMENT Elaine Clegg made a motion to adjourn the meeting; the motion was seconded by David Lincoln. By unanimous consent, the meeting was adjourned at 12:09 p.m. NEXT VRT EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETING Monday, February 4, :00 a.m. VRT Board Room 700 NE 2 nd Street Meridian, ID ITEM V-B 13

14 ITEM V-C Executive Board Meeting Minutes Monday, February 4, :00 a.m. VRT Board Room 700 NE 2 nd Street Meridian, Idaho MEMBERS ATTENDING MEMBERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT Luke Cavener-City of Meridian Dave Bieter City of Boise Kelli Badesheim-VRT Elaine Clegg-City of Boise Corey Cook - BSU Mark Carnopis VRT Tom Dale-Canyon County Comm. Garret Nancolas-City of Caldwell Paula Cromie VRT John Evans City of Garden City Gregg Eisenberg First Transit Kent Goldthorpe ACHD Maureen Gresham Commuteride Debbie Kling- City of Nampa (phone) Rachel Hankkala COMPASS David Lincoln-ACCHD Jim Hansen Dist. #1 ACHD Darin Taylor-City of Middleton Jacob Hassard VRT Ryan Heas ACHD Stephen Hunt VRT Rhonda Jalbert VRT Jason Jedry VRT Kelly Jokovac-VRT Kaite Justice VRT Nancy Lohr VRT Brian Parker VRT Leslie Pedrosa VRT Rocky Perkins ATU 398 Ken Pidjeon Citizen Denise Prunetti VRT Deanna Simsek-Greyhound (phone) Coreen Smith VRT Hanna Veal - VRT Vanessa Wendland VRT CALLING OF THE ROLL Chairman, Tom Dale called the meeting to order at 11:04, with a quorum present. AGENDA ADDITIONS/CHANGES- The agenda was accepted with no changes. PUBLIC COMMENTS Ken Pidjeon addressed the Board to update them on his concerns regarding Greyhound and asked the Board to defer to enter negotiations until his questions, as well as the Executive Board questions are answered and a Greyhound representative with negotiating power is available to answer questions. Ken would also like VRT to reword how actions should be taken by the Board on action items. 700 NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

15 CONSENT AGENDA Approve minutes of the 1/7/2019 Executive Board Meeting Darin Taylor made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda, which consisted of approving the minutes of the 1/7/2019 Executive Board Meeting, with an addition, under Greyhound Revenue Stream, to include the committee having asked to have a Greyhound representative present at the February 4, 2019 meeting who could speak authoritatively. The motion was seconded by Elaine Clegg. The motion was approved by majority decision. Luke Cavener and John Evans abstained. FINANCE COMMITTEE Local Allocation Update Stephen Hunt updated the Executive Board on the progress made on the local allocations project. The updated was followed by discussion. EXECUTIVE BOARD - ACTION ITEMS Greyhound Revenue Stream Rhonda Jalbert presented the business case to the Executive Board to review and recommend partnering with Greyhound at Main Street Station. Rhonda answered questions presented from the Executive Board and by Ken Pidjeon at the 1/7/2019 meeting. Following discussion, Darin Taylor moved the Executive Board authorize VRT staff to enter into negotiations with Greyhound, on the Board s behalf, and include in there, all of the items that have been brought up and be detailed. In addition, a draft agreement would be provided seven days prior to when it is presented to the Executive Board so there is time to consider it. Elaine Clegg seconded the motion; the motion passed unanimously. Mobile Ticketing Procurement Kaitlin Justice discussed Valley Regional Transit recommendation to award the mobile ticketing contract to Masabi. Following discussion, Elaine Clegg made the motion to approve Resolution VEB19-001, Mobile Ticking Procurement, with one additional whereas, requiring the vendor to conduct marketing to insure that the public is aware and can use mobile ticketing. Luke Cavener seconded the motion; the motion passed unanimously. Regional Performance Measures Policy Brian Parker discussed the Regional Performance Measures Policy and recommended approval of the policy by the VRT Executive Board. The City of Boise asked that, somewhere within the performance measure, VRT add a subcategory that measures the on-time performance during peak hours. That will put the performance measures on equal footing with road-way measurements that are based on peak hours. Following discussion, Darin Taylor made a motion the Executive Board recommend to the full Board, approving the regional performance measures policy with the addition of a measure for peak-hour performance. David Lincoln seconded the motion; the motion passed unanimously. 15 ITEM V-C

16 ITEM V-C Public Good Definition Kaitlin Justice presented the Valley Regional Transit definition of public good for consideration by the Executive Board. Elaine Clegg made a motion to approve the Resolution VEB19-002, as presented. John Evans seconded the motion; the motion passed unanimously. VRT Executive Board Letter to the ACHD Commission regarding the ADA Transition Plan Staff drafted a letter with VRT s comments for the Executive Board to consider for submission to ACHD regarding the ADA Transition plan currently in a public comment phase. Darin Taylor made a motion the Executive Board submit, to ACHD, the letter presented to the Board, with the revised first full paragraph to include revisions presented during discussion on PROWAG and ADAAG Standards. Elaine Clegg seconded the motion; the motion passed unanimously. EXECUTIVE BOARD - INFORMATION ITEMS Pierce Park and State Street Intersection Project Stephen Hunt provided information for Executive Board discussion and consideration on the Pierce Park and State Street Intersection Project. Board members discussed the issue, particularly questioning whether bus bays are the appropriate investment for the public. Public Transportation Safety Plan The packet contained information on FTA safety plan requirements and current status of the project, as well as next steps. Due to time constraints, Tom Dale referred the Executive Board to their packets and there was no discussion on this agenda item. Fare Simplification and Pass Programs The packet included information on the VRT fare revenues with updates on the status of the Fare Simplification and Pass Program projects. Due to time constraints, Tom Dale referred the Executive Board to their packets and there was no discussion on this agenda item. Idaho Transportation Department Bus Stop Permit Process Jacob Hassard described VRT staffs inability to provide public bus stops along some parts of Highway 20/26 due to ITD s infrastructure requirements. Discussion followed. FY2019 Procurement Calendar The most current Procurement Calendar was included in the packet for information. Tom Dale suggested any questions regarding the procurement calendar be directed to Kelli Badesheim or Kelly Jakovac. 16

17 Department/Staff Reports The most current department/staff reports were included in the packet for information. ITEM V-C EXECUTIVE SESSION - None ADJOURNMENT Tom Dale closed meeting at 12:58 p.m. NEXT VRT EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETING: Monday, March 4, :00 a.m. VRT Board Room 700 NE 2 nd Street Meridian, ID

18 ITEM V-D Executive Board Meeting Minutes Monday, March 04, :00 a.m. VRT Board Room 700 NE 2 nd Street Meridian, Idaho MEMBERS ATTENDING MEMBERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT Dave Bieter City of Boise Luke Cavener City of Meridian Kelli Badesheim VRT Elaine Clegg City of Boise Corey Cook BSU Mark Carnopis VRT John Evans City of Garden City Garret Nancolas City of Caldwell Paula Cromie VRT Kent Goldthorpe ACHD Darin Taylor City of Middleton Tom Dale Canyon County Commission Debbie Kling City of Nampa Jodi Daugherty Eide Bailly David Lincoln ACHD Gregg Eisenberg First Transit Maureen Gresham Commuteride Rachel Hankkala COMPASS Jim Hansen Dist. #1 ACHD Ryan Head ACHD Stephen Hunt VRT Rhonda Jalbert VRT Jason Jedry VRT Kelly Jokovac VRT Leslie Pedrosa VRT Rocky Perkins ATU 398 Ken Pidjeon Citizen Obed Saenz VRT Coreen Smith VRT CALLING OF THE ROLL Chairman, Tom Dale called the meeting to order at 11:03a.m., with a quorum present. AGENDA ADDITIONS/CHANGES The agenda was accepted with no changes. PUBLIC COMMENTS Ken Pidjeon questioned the fare-box ratio recovery and revenues/ridership information provided in the meeting packet. CONSENT AGENDA David Lincoln made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda, which consisted of approving the minutes of the 2/4/2019 Executive Board meeting. The motion was seconded and was passed unanimously. 700 NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

19 FINANCE COMMITTEE FY2018 Audit Jodi Daugherty, from Eide Bailly, presented the Fiscal Year 2018 audit and noted an updated opinion letter will be sent to replace the one in the meeting packet. Following discussion, the Executive Board decided to wait to make any decision on the audit until it is presented to the Board of Directors in April. Full backup material will be included in the April Board packet. FY2020 Capital Project Budget Rhonda Jalbert presented the Transit Asset Management (TAM) scoring process for FY2019. The scores are used to form the regional capital budget for FY2020. She presented findings and recommendations from the scoring process to assist the VRT Executive Board in making decisions on capital priorities and addressing deferred maintenance, as well as system enhancements. EXECUTIVE BOARD ACTION ITEM Proposed Agenda for the April 1, 2019 Board of Directors Meeting The Executive Board discussed the proposed agenda items included in the packet for inclusion in the April 1, 2019 Board of Directors Meeting. Debbie Kling made a motion to approve the proposed agenda; the motion was seconded and was passed unanimously. EXECUTIVE BOARD - INFORMATION ITEMS Valley Regional Transit Annual Report - Fiscal Year 2018 Stephen Hunt reviewed and provided information on the Valley Regional Transit Annual Report. Following discussion, Debbie Kling requested more detailed information be included in the packet for the April Executive Board meeting. Fare Simplification and Pass Program Update Stephen Hunt presented information fare review and the potential need for fare increase. He addressed questions and concerns raised by Ken Pidjeon during public comments. The Executive Board provided input and requested staff to look at further data and consider the possibility of being able to ride the bus at no cost. FY2019 Procurement Calendar The most current Procurement Calendar was included in the packet for information. Department/Staff Reports The most current department/staff reports were included in the packet for information. EXECUTIVE SESSION - None ITEM V-D 19

20 ITEM V-D ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 2:04pm. NEXT VRT EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETING: Monday, April 1, :00 a.m. VRT Board Room 700 NE 2 nd Street Meridian, ID

21 ITEM V-E TOPIC: Operating Cash Balance Report - FY2019 Qtr. 1 DATE: April 1, 2019 Summary: Attached to this memo is the Operating Cash Balance Report as of December 31, The following items need to be pointed out: Regional operating cash balance was $473,868 at the end of December The regional system had no funds in float at the end of December Regional s cash balance is higher than the benchmark, which has averaged $463,226 on December 31over each the past three years. The Ada County system operating cash balance was $1,282,766 at the end of December This amount was made up of a cash account balance of $1,143,292 and $139,474 of funds in float. VRT utilizes local funds to pay for expenses that are related to certain federal grant funding that was not readily available at the end of December. Once the federal grant is executed, funding becomes available for drawdown, reversing funds in float into cash. The operating cash balance is higher than the cash balance benchmark for the system. The Canyon County system operating cash balance was $444,751 at the end of December This amount was made up of a cash account balance of $339,106 and $105,645 of funds in float. The operating cash balance is higher than the cash balance benchmark for the system. Boise GreenBike operating cash balance was $92,270. This system had no funds in float at the end of December The balance at the end of December 2018 is higher than the cash balance benchmark for the system. Staff Recommendation/Request: The Executive Board will review and consider accepting the FY2019 Operating Cash Balance Report as presented. Attachments Operating Cash Balance Report FY2019 Qtr. 1 For detailed information contact: Jason Jedry, Finance Controller, , jjedry@valleyregionaltransit.org. 700 NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

22 ITEM V-E Valley Regional Transit Operating Cash Balance Analysis December 31, 2018 Regional Operations GL Cash Balance at 12/31/18 $ 473,868 Funds in Float $ - Operating Cash Balance $ 473,868 Cash Balance Benchmark (Note 1) $ 463,226 Ada County System GL Cash Balance at 12/31/18 $ 1,143,292 Funds in Float $ 139,474 Operating Cash Balance $ 1,282,766 Cash Balance Benchmark (Note 1) $ 561,302 Canyon County System GL Cash Balance at 12/31/18 $ 339,106 Funds in Float $ 105,645 Operating Cash Balance $ 444,751 Cash Balance Benchmark (Note 1) $ 360,404 Boise Greenbike GL Cash Balance at 12/31/18 $ 92,270 Funds in Float $ - Operating Cash Balance $ 92,270 Cash Balance Benchmark (Note 1) $ 51,034 Note 1: Average of 2015, 2016 and 2017 at December 31st. 22

23 ITEM V-F Valley Regional Transit FY 2019 First Quarter Budget Report October December 2018 Ada County System Canyon County System Regional Boise GreenBike Category Budget Actual % Variance Budget Actual % Variance Budget Actual % Variance Budget Actual % Variance Directly Generated Funds $ 210,921 $ 269, % $ 58,707 $ 63, % $ 6,950 $ 3,967 57% $ 13,590 Auxillary Revenue $ 22,500 $ 27, % $ 8,437 $ 8,206 97% Non-Transportation Revenue $ 686 $ 73 $ 662 Federal Assistance - Operating/Administration $ 577,587 $ 242,997 42% $ 262,304 $ 94,323 36% $ 739,358 $ 648,407 88% Federal Assistance - Capital $ 966,217 $ 220,790 23% Local Assistance - Operating/Administration $ 1,427,789 $ 1,565, % $ 189,212 $ 293, % $ 530,603 $ 586, % $ 84,339 $ 52,236 62% Local Assistance - Capital $ 102,192 $ 216, % Total Revenues $ 2,238,797 $ 2,107,045 94% $ 518,659 $ 459,829 89% $ 2,345,320 $ 1,677,012 72% $ 84,339 $ 65,826 78% Wages and Salaries $ 903,846 $ 878,888 97% $ 236,738 $ 189,312 80% $ 354,558 $ 305,061 86% $ 31,991 $ 27,185 85% Capital $ 955,409 $ 411,588 43% Fringe Benefits $ 801,934 $ 736,326 92% $ 116,891 $ 75,428 65% $ 223,553 $ 208,867 93% $ 16,444 $ 17, % Professional Services $ 138,291 $ 132,894 96% $ 44,637 $ 78, % $ 200,786 $ 283, % $ 18,390 $ 6,660 36% Materials and Supplies $ 229,050 $ 206,903 90% $ 71,400 $ 99, % $ 28,797 $ 13,896 48% $ 3,700 $ 2,874 78% Utilities $ 34,713 $ 34, % $ 15,977 $ 12,355 77% $ 21,293 $ 21, % $ 750 $ 1, % Casualty and Liability $ 76,418 $ 75,330 99% $ 26,691 $ 2,656 10% $ 22,215 $ 25, % $ 1,313 $ 1, % Purchased Transportation $ 324,242 $ 310,732 96% Miscellaneous $ 23,450 $ 19,022 81% $ 5,063 $ 2,679 53% $ 208,877 $ 91,438 44% $ 3,000 $ 1,743 58% Interest $ 275 $ 100 Leases and Rentals $ 31,096 $ 17,030 55% $ 987 $ - $ 5,489 $ 5,325 97% $ 8,750 $ 6,900 79% Total Expenses $ 2,238,797 $ 2,101,218 94% $ 518,659 $ 459,829 89% $ 2,345,320 $ 1,677,012 72% $ 84,339 $ 65,826 78% Valley Regional Transit Capital Spending October December 2018 Capital Budget Budget Qtr-1 Budget - Annual Actuals - Qtr-1 Bike/Pedestrian Improvements $115,750 $463,000 $6,890 Capital - Facilities - Multi-Modal Center $0 $0 $6,229 Capital - Facility - Facilities/Bldgs/Grounds $62,500 $250,000 $55,816 Capital - Non-Revenue Vehicles $16,250 $65,000 $66,390 Capital - Other $12,500 $50,000 $31,049 Capital - Revenue Vehicles $517,500 $2,070,000 $23 Capital - Revenue Vehicles - Sub-Recipient $175,197 $700,788 $0 Capital Equipment - Communications $0 $0 $560 Capital Equipment - Farebox $0 $0 $37,788 Capital Information Technology - Hardware $10,962 $43,848 $163,000 Capital Projects - Sub-Recipient $0 $0 $413 Capital -Shop Equipment $44,750 $179,000 $43,429 Total Capital Expenses $ 955,409 $ 3,821,636 $ 411,588 23

24 VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT FY 2019 BUDGET REPORT COMMENTS October December 2018 ITEM V-F At the end of December, Fiscal Year 2019 was twenty-five percent (25%) complete. The following is a review of the budgetary status of the Ada, Canyon, Regional, and Boise GreenBike Systems as of December 31, A ten percent (+/- 10%) tolerance threshold is utilized for analysis purposes in this report. Ada County System Revenues Directly Generated Funds (128% of Budget) - This line item is favorably outside of budget parameters. Staff will be reviewing the directly generated revenues and breaking them out by the individual categories. One factor driving this increase has been training of operators collecting revenues and higher ridership. Auxiliary Revenues (124% of budget) - This line item favorably exceeds budget estimates due to greater amounts of advertising being purchased for fixed line operations. Federal Operating Assistance (42% of Budget) - This line item is unfavorably outside of budget parameters due to FY2019 Federal Funds not being available. This is typical for the first quarter of the fiscal year and will carry forward into the second quarter due to a slowing of grant processing from the governmental shutdown early this year. VRT will be utilizing more Local Operating Revenues to cover the Federal Operating amounts not available. Local Operating Assistance (110% of Budget) - This line item is outside of budget parameters. Lower amounts available in Federal Operating Revenues required more Local Operating Assistance to be recognized as revenue in order to balance total expenses that were incurred within the System through December. This condition is defined as Overmatch and will reverse as the 2019 Grants are executed at the end of QR-3. Expenses Total Ada County System operating expenses were 94% of budget through QR-1 Materials and Supplies (90% of Budget) - This line item is favorably lower than budget parameters primarily due to reductions in CNG fuel expenses. In addition some printing expenses were charged to the regional budget in Division 10. Miscellaneous (81% of Budget) - This line item is favorably lower than budget parameters due to expenses being lower than anticipated. Leases and Rentals (55% of Budget) - This line item is favorably lower than budget parameters. Staff is researching the lease payments for the Orchard facility that appears to not have been invoiced in November. 24

25 ITEM V-F Canyon County System Revenues Federal Operating Assistance (36% of Budget) - This line item is unfavorably lower than budget parameters due to FY2019 Federal Funds not being available. This is typical for the first quarter of the fiscal year and will carry forward into the second quarter due to a slowing of grant processing from the governmental shutdown early this year. VRT will be utilizing more Local Operating Revenues to cover the Federal Operating amounts not available. Local Operating Assistance (155% of Budget) - This line item is outside of budget parameters. Lower amounts available in Federal Operating Revenues required more Local Operating Assistance to be recognized as revenue in order to balance total expenses that were incurred within the System through December. This condition is defined as Overmatch and will reverse as the 2019 Grants are executed at the end of QR-3. Expenses Total Canyon County System operating expenses were 89% of budget through QR-1 Wages and Salaries (80% of Budget) - This line item is favorably below budget parameters. There were less expenses than budgeted for wages due to positions being open during the first quarter. Professional Services (175% of Budget) - This line item is unfavorably above budget parameters VRT staff are working with contractors to determine expenses in the budget hat are misclassified and will be doing journal entries to correct for this in the next quarter. Materials and Supplies (139% of Budget) - This line item is unfavorably above budget parameters due to higher CNG costs and preventative maintenance for this quarter. Utilities (77% of Budget) - This line item is favorably below budget parameters. Casualty and Liability (10% of Budget) - This line item is favorably below budget parameters due to misclassification of general liability expenses in professional services. This will be addressed in the Q2 budget report. Miscellaneous (53% of Budget) This line item is favorably below budget parameters due to lower expenses in the first quarter. Regional Operations Revenues Directly Generated Revenues (57% of Budget) - This line item is unfavorably below budget parameters due to lower Farebox revenues than anticipated within Division 20. Staff 25

26 will be reviewing the directly generated revenues and breaking them out by the individual categories. Federal Operating Assistance (88% of Budget) This line item is unfavorably below budget parameters due to FY2019 Federal Funds not being available (see above comments). Federal Capital Assistance (23% of budget) - This line item reflects lower levels of capital spending or sub-recipient capital pass-through transactions when compared to the budget through December. VRT typically has less capital spending in the first quarter. This will increase as the fiscal year progresses. Local Operating Assistance (110% of budget) - This line item is favorably outside of budget parameters. Due to funding limitations available in Federal Operating Assistance in the small urban area, more local funds are presently being utilized to cover operating (Overmatch) expenses. VRT Finance believes this overmatch situation will reverse near the end of QR-3 or in QR-4. Local Capital Assistance (212% of budget) - This line item is above budget parameters. Staff will monitor this as the fiscal year continues. Expenses Regional operating expenses are 72% of budget through the first quarter of the fiscal year. Wages and Salaries (86% of Budget) - This line item is favorably below budget parameters. This is primarily due to some positions being open. Capital (43% of budget) - This expense category is favorably below budget parameters. It should be noted that the timing of capital projects throughout the year do not always align with how the Capital Budget is spread equally (monthly/quarterly) throughout the year. Fringe Benefits (93% of budget) - This expense category is favorably below budget parameters due to expenses being lower than budgeted. Professional Services (141% of Budget) This expense category is unfavorably above budget parameters due to Professional Services that were included in the FY18 budget and are being charged in FY19. These carryforward expenses were part of the budget amendment approved on January 7, Material and Supplies (48% of Budget) This expense category is favorably below budget parameters. ITEM V-F Casualty and Liability (113% of Budget) - This line item is unfavorably above budget parameters. This is typical for the first quarter since we pay the regional liability for the year in the first quarter. 26

27 Miscellaneous (44% of Budget) - This expense category is favorably below budget parameters due to lower expenses than budgeted. Boise GreenBike Revenues Directly Generated Revenues Directly generated funds were $13,590 at the end of December. Staff is looking at the reporting system to determine why the budgeted expenses are not showing in this quarters report. This is the time of year when the utilization of the bike share system is the lowest. Local Operating Assistance (62% of Budget) - This line item is below budget parameters, due to more of the costs being covered by directly generated funds and lower than anticipated expenses. This trend will shift as the busy season for bike share kicks off in the third quarter. Expenses Total Boise GreenBike System operating expenses are at 78% of budget through QR-1. Wages and Salaries (85% of Budget) - This line item favorably below budget parameters. Professional Services (36% of Budget) This line item is favorably below budget parameters. This trend will change during the third quarter when the temporary seasonal labor is procured to support the busy season. Material and Supplies (78% of Budget) - This line item favorably below budget parameters. Utilities (193% of Budget) This line item is unfavorably above budget parameters. This will be monitored through the year. This is the first year the system is operating out of the Garden City location. Adjustments to actual expenses will be addressed in the FY2020 budget. Miscellaneous (58% of Budget) This line item is favorably below budget parameters. Staff will be looking at this budget area to balance the unfavorable utilities expenses. Leases and Rentals (79% of Budget) - This line item was favorably below budget parameters. ITEM V-F Capital: (43% of Budget) - It should be noted that the timing of capital projects throughout the year do not always align with how the Capital Budget is spread equally (monthly/quarterly) throughout the year. 27

28 ITEM V-G Financial Statements September 30, 2018 Valley Regional Transit eidebailly.com 28

29 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Table of Contents September 30, 2018 Independent Auditor s Report... 1 Financial Statements Statement of Net Position... 4 Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Change in Net Position... 5 Statement of Cash Flows... 6 Notes to Financial Statements... 7 Required Supplementary Information Schedule of Employer s Share of Net Pension Liability and Employer Contributions Federal Awards Reports in Accordance with the Uniform Guidance Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Notes to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Independent Auditor s 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 Independent Auditor s Report on Compliance for Each Major Program and Report on Internal Control over Compliance Required by the Uniform Guidance Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs

30 ITEM V-G Independent Auditor s Report To The Board of Directors Valley Regional Transit Meridian, Idaho Report on the Financial Statements We have audited the accompanying financial statements of Valley Regional Transit (VRT) as of and for the year ended September 30, 2018, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise VRT s basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents. Management s Responsibility for the Financial Statements Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America; this includes the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. Auditor s Responsibility Our responsibility is to express an opinion 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 Audit 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 from material misstatement. An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor s judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the entity s preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity s internal control. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion. Opinion In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of VRT as of September 30, 2018, the change in its financial position, and its cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. What inspires you, inspires us. eidebailly.com W. Main St., Ste. 800 Boise, ID T F EOE 1

31 ITEM V-G Other Matters Required Supplementary Information Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the schedules of employer s share of net pension liability and employer contributions as listed in the table of contents, be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the 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 or 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. Management has omitted the management s discussion and analysis that the accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires to be presented to supplement the basis financial statements. Such missing information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basis financial statements in an appropriate operation, economic, or historical context. Our opinion on the basis financial statements is not affected by the missing information. Other Information Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the financial statements that collectively comprise VRT s financial statements. The schedule of expenditures of federal awards is presented for purposes of additional analysis as required by Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, and is not a required part of the financial statements. The schedule of expenditures of federal awards is the responsibility of management and was derived from and relates directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements or to the basic 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 basic financial statements as a whole. 31 2

32 ITEM V-G Other Reporting Required by Government Auditing Standards In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated January 25, 2019 on our consideration of VRT s internal control over financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, grant agreements, and other matters. The purpose of that report is solely 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 effectiveness of VRT s internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering VRT s internal control over financial reporting and compliance. Boise, Idaho January 25,

33 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Statement of Net Position September 30, 2018 Assets Cash and cash equivalents $ 830,490 Accounts receivable Federal receivable 694,932 Dues and capital commitments receivable 171,618 Other receivable 48,558 Prepaid expenses 79,735 Inventories 440,044 Capital assets Construction in process 202,278 Land 1,210,000 Office equipment 731,147 Software 1,961,251 Machinery and equipment 770,773 Vehicles 21,196,814 Buildings and improvements 26,802,123 Accumulated depreciation (21,030,728) Total assets 34,109,035 Deferred Outflows of Resources Deferred net pension 181,177 Liabilities Accounts payable and other accrued expenses 921,026 Accrued payroll and benefits 646,271 Unearned revenue 384,581 Net pension liability 646,919 Total liabilities 2,598,797 Deferred Inflows of Resources Deferred net pension 128,934 Net Position Investment in capital assets 31,843,658 Unrestricted (281,177) Total net position $ 31,562,481 See Notes to Financial Statements 4 33

34 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Change in Net Position Year Ended September 30, 2018 Operating Revenues Directly generated funds $ 1,004,820 Auxiliary transportation funds 127,716 Federal funds 5,618,435 Local funds 8,209,506 Total operating revenues 14,960,477 Operating Expenses Salaries and fringe benefits 9,510,007 Professional services 1,863,984 Materials and supplies 1,397,595 Utilities 254,862 Casualty and liability insurance 518,121 Miscellaneous 593,621 Lease and rental 148,954 Non-capital expenditures 2,950,642 Purchased transportation 1,072,048 Depreciation 2,949,329 Total operating expenses 21,259,163 Operating Loss (6,298,686) Nonoperating Revenue and Expense Federal capital grants 3,578,160 Local capital grants 339,134 Other income 221,660 Interest expense (306) Total nonoperating revenue, net 4,138,648 Change in Net Position (2,160,038) Net Position, Beginning of Year 33,722,519 Net Position, End of Year $ 31,562,481 See Notes to Financial Statements 5 34

35 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Statement of Cash Flows Year Ended September 30, 2018 Operating Activities Receipts from customers and users $ 1,352,590 Receipts from federal government 5,827,900 Receipts from local government 8,249,115 Payments to suppliers (8,807,566) Payments to employees (9,475,203) Net Cash used for Operating Activities (2,853,164) Investing Activities Net interest received on cash and cash equivalents 221,354 Net Cash from Investing Activities 221,354 Capital and Related Financing Activities Receipts of capital grants 3,917,294 Purchase of capital assets (477,925) Proceeds from sale of capital assets 200 Net Cash from Capital and Related Financing Activities 3,439,569 Net Change in Cash and Cash Equivalents 807,759 Cash and Cash Equivalents, Beginning of Year 22,731 Cash and Cash Equivalents, End of Year $ 830,490 Reconciliation of Operating Loss to Net Cash used for Operating Activities Operating loss $ (6,298,686) Adjustment to reconcile operating loss to net cash used for operating activities Depreciation 2,949,329 GASB 68 actuarial pension expense (16,083) Changes in assets and liabilities Accounts receivable 276,772 Inventories 5,950 Prepaid expenses 39,745 Accounts payable (53,434) Accrued expenses 50,887 Unearned revenue 192,356 Net Cash used for Operating Activities $ (2,853,164) See Notes to Financial Statements 6 35

36 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Notes to Financial Statements September 30, 2018 Note 1 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies The financial statements of Valley Regional Transit (VRT) have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) applicable to state and local governments. Generally accepted accounting principles for local governments include those principles prescribed by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants in the publication entitled Audits of State and Local Governmental Units. GASB is the accepted standard-setting body for establishing governmental accounting and financial reporting principles. The significant accounting and reporting policies and practices used by VRT are described below. Reporting Entity VRT is an enterprise fund created by a vote of Ada and Canyon County voters. VRT is the regional public transportation authority responsible for the short and long-term planning and operations of the regional transit system. The VRT Board of Directors consists of 24 appointed representatives from incorporated cities, counties and highway districts in Ada and Canyon Counties, plus one representative from Capital City Development Corporation, one representative from Meridian Development Corporation, one representative from Idaho Department of Transportation and one representative from Boise State University. VRT entered into a contract with Transit Management of Ada County (TMAC) and Transit Management of Canyon County (TMCC), wholly-owned subsidiaries of First Transit Corporation, for operation of the Ada County transit system and the Canyon County transit system, respectively. Under this model, TMAC and TMCC are responsible for all operational and personnel decisions for operations. TMAC and TMCC perform all payroll and human resource functions, issue standard purchase orders, approve accounts payable, manage inventory and maintain separate bank accounts for the operations. TMAC and TMCC enter all approved purchase orders and accounts payable into the Fleetnet system, which is the overall financial information system for VRT. VRT generates all accounts payable payments which are approved by the Board of Directors and signed by authorized signatories within VRT. VRT transfers funds to the TMAC and TMCC payroll accounts on a bi-weekly basis to cover incurred personnel expenses. The results of all financial and personnel transactions are reflected in VRT s financial statements. TMAC and TMCC are responsible for remittance and reporting of all employer related payroll expenses. The financial statements for VRT include all organizations for which VRT is financially accountable, and other organizations for which the nature and significance of their relationships with VRT are such that exclusion would cause the reporting entity s financial statements to be misleading or incomplete. There were no such organizations included in the current year. Measurement Focus, Basis of Accounting and Financial Statement Presentation VRT is accounted for and reported as a proprietary-type enterprise fund, using the economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. Under this method, revenues are recognized when they are earned, and expenses are recognized when they are incurred, regardless of the timing of cash flows. The statement of net position and the statement of revenues, expenses, and change in net position display information about VRT. These statements include the financial activity of the overall reporting entity. These statements report all activities of VRT as a business type activity. Operations are financed from Federal grant monies, local contributions, advertising and fares. 36 7

37 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Notes to Financial Statements September 30, 2018 When both restricted and unrestricted resources are available for use, it is VRT s policy to use restricted resources first, then unrestricted resources as they are needed. Proprietary funds distinguish operating revenues and expenses from nonoperating items. Operating revenues and expenses generally result from providing services and producing and delivering goods in connection with a proprietary fund s principal ongoing operations. The principal operating revenues of VRT are user charges to customers, local contributions, dues, and operating grants. Operating expenses for VRT include the costs of services, administrative expenses, and depreciation on capital assets. All revenues and expenses not meeting this definition are reported as nonoperating revenues and expenses. Cash and Cash Equivalents For purposes of the statement of cash flows, VRT considers all highly liquid short-term investments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents. Accounts Receivable Receivables are due from city and federal governments for capital commitment contributions, fuel rebates, and federal grants. Based on experience, no allowance for uncollectible accounts has been established as of September 30, It is reasonably possible that this estimate will change in the near future of the date of the financial statements. Prepaids Certain payments to vendors reflect costs applicable to future accounting periods and are recorded as prepaid in the financial statements. Inventories Inventories are stated at average cost (first-in, first-out). Inventories consist of spare parts and equipment held for consumption. The cost is recorded as an expense at the time individual inventory items are used. Capital Assets The policy of VRT is to capitalize all property, such as land, buildings, and equipment with a cost equal to or greater than $5,000, and a useful life of one or more years. All capital assets are valued at historical cost or estimated historical cost if purchased or constructed. Donated capital assets are recorded at acquisition value at the date of donation. The cost of normal maintenance and repairs that does not add to the value of the asset or materially extend an asset s life is not capitalized. Depreciation of all exhaustible capital assets is charged as an expense against operations. Depreciation has been provided over the estimated useful lives using the straight-line method. When assets are retired or otherwise disposed of, the cost and related accumulated depreciation are removed from the accounts and any resulting gain or loss is reflected in the results of operations in the period of disposal. 37 8

38 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Notes to Financial Statements September 30, 2018 The estimated useful lives of fixed assets are as follows: Office equipment Software Machinery and equipment Vehicles Buildings and improvements 3-15 years 3 years 5-15 years 3-15 years years Deferred Outflows/Inflows of Resources The statement of net position includes a separate section for deferred outflows of resources. This separate financial statement element represents a consumption of net position that applies to a future period(s) and will not be recognized as an outflow of resources (expense) until then. VRT has one item that qualifies for reporting in this category: the deferred outflows related to the net pension liability reported on the statement of net position. The deferred net pension results from changes in assumptions or other inputs, changes in VRT s proportion and VRT s contributions and proportionate share of contributions, and the net difference between projected and actual earnings on pension plan investments in the actuarial calculation of VRT s net pension liability. The statement of net position includes a separate section for deferred inflows of resources. This separate financial statement element represents an acquisition of net position that applies to a future period(s) and will not be recognized as an inflow of resources (revenue) until that time. VRT has one item that qualifies for reporting in this category: the deferred inflows related to the net pension liability. The deferred net pension results from the differences between the expected and actual experience and the net difference between projected and actual earnings on pension plan investments derived from the actuarial calculation of VRT s net pension liability. Accrued Compensated Absences Accumulated unpaid vacation and compensatory time amounts are accrued and charged to expenses when earned. Terminated employees are paid out their unused vacation without stipulation except for TMCC terminated employees who are not paid for unused vacation unless they have 10 years of service or are over 62 years of age at the date of termination. Sick pay amounts are charged to expenses when used. Terminated employees are not paid for unused sick time unless they are over 60 years of age at the date of termination (VRT employee) or unless they have 15 years of service or are over 60 years of age at the date of termination (TMAC employee), in which case they are eligible to receive 50% of their sick pay balance. Terminated TMCC employees are not paid for unused sick time. Net Position VRT classifies net position, revenues and other support based on the existence or absence of grantor-imposed restrictions. Accordingly, net position of VRT and changes therein are classified and reported as follows: Investment in Capital Assets This represents VRT s total investment in capital assets. To the extent debt has been incurred but not yet expended for capital assets, such amounts are not included in this section. Unrestricted Net Position Net position not subject to grantor-imposed stipulations or received with restrictions that were satisfied in the same period. 38 9

39 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Notes to Financial Statements September 30, 2018 Risk Management VRT is exposed to various risks of loss related to theft of, damage to, or destruction of assets. VRT participates in a public entity risk pool, Idaho Counties Risk Management Pool (ICRMP), for liability insurance. VRT s exposure to loss from its participation in ICRMP is limited only to the extent of their deductible. Use of Estimates The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, net position and disclosures regarding contingent assets and liabilities. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Pensions For purposes of measuring the net pension liability and pension expense, information about the fiduciary net position of the Public Employee Retirement System of Idaho Base Plan (Base Plan) and additions to/deductions from Base Plan s fiduciary net position have been determined on the same basis as they are reported by the Base Plan. For this purpose, benefit payments (including refunds of employee contributions) are recognized when due and payable in accordance with the benefit terms. Investments are reported at fair value. Note 2 - Cash and Cash Equivalents Financial instruments which potentially subject VRT to concentration of credit risk consist principally of cash and sweep accounts. VRT maintains its cash and sweep accounts in one commercial bank. Custodial credit risk is the risk that, in the event of the failure of the counterparty, VRT will not be able to recover the value of its investments or collateral securities that are in the possession of an outside party. All deposits greater than the FDIC insurance coverage were subject to custodial credit risk. VRT has a written policy limiting custodial credit risk through preauthorization of financial institutions. Accounts at the commercial bank are guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) up to $250,000 per bank. A summary of the total insured and uninsured bank balances follows: Total cash in bank $ 886,006 Portion insured by FDIC (250,000) Collateralized held by Wells Fargo, pledged to VRT (241,565) Uninsured and uncollateralized cash $ 394,

40 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Notes to Financial Statements September 30, 2018 Note 3 - Capital Assets The following presents capital asset activity for the year ended September 30, Balance Balance October 1, September 30, 2017 Additions Deletions Transfers 2018 Non-depreciable Construction in process $ 56,657 $ 145,621 $ - $ - $ 202,278 Land 1,210, ,210,000 Depreciable Office equipment 722,856 8, ,147 Software 1,961, ,961,251 Machinery and equipment 724,423 84,216 (37,866) - 770,773 Vehicles 21,082, ,493 (78,882) - 21,196,814 Building and improvements 26,755,819 46, ,802,123 Total capital assets 52,513, ,925 (116,748) - 52,874,386 Accumulated depreciation (18,197,947) (2,949,329) 116,548 - (21,030,728) Net capital assets $ 34,315,262 $ (2,471,404) $ (200) $ - $ 31,843,658 Note 4 - Defined Contribution Plan TMAC provides for a non-discretionary 401(k) contribution of 7.5% of eligible compensation to TMAC eligible employees. To participate, the TMAC employee must have completed three months of continuous service. The 401(k) plan allows employee deferred pre-tax and Roth contributions. The maximum contribution amount to the plan is 100% of compensation less any mandatory income and payroll tax withholding or the IRS prescribed amount, whichever is less. TMCC provides for a 401(k) plan that all ATU Bargaining Unit employees who have completed three months of service can contribute to a pre-tax and a Roth contribution up to 100% of compensation less any mandatory income and payroll tax withholding or the IRS prescribed amount, whichever is less. TMCC will offer matching contributions of $0.50 for each $1.00 an employee contributes, up to a maximum of 50% of the first 6% of the employee s pay. During the year ended September 30, 2018, VRT reimbursed TMAC and TMCC for contributions of $300,771 to the plans that are managed by Empower Retirement and Quorum Financial

41 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Notes to Financial Statements September 30, 2018 Note 5 - Defined Benefit Pension Plan Plan Description Valley Regional Transit contributes to the Base Plan which is a cost-sharing multiple-employer defined benefit pension plan administered by Public Employee Retirement System of Idaho (PERSI or System) that covers substantially all employees of the State of Idaho, its agencies and various participating political subdivisions. The cost to administer the plan is financed through the contributions and investment earnings of the plan. PERSI issues a publicly available financial report that includes financial statements and the required supplementary information for PERSI. That report may be obtained on the PERSI website at Responsibility for administration of the Base Plan is assigned to the Board comprised of five members appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Idaho Senate. State law requires that two members of the Board be active Base Plan members with at least ten years of service and three members who are Idaho citizens not members of the Base Plan except by reason of having served on the Board. Pension Benefits The Base Plan provides retirement, disability, death and survivor benefits of eligible members or beneficiaries. Benefits are based on members years of service, age, and highest average salary. Members become fully vested in their retirement benefits with five years of credited service (5 months for elected or appointed officials). Members are eligible for retirement benefits upon attainment of the ages specified for their employment classification. The annual service retirement allowance for each month of credited service is 2.0% (2.3% for police/firefighters) of the average monthly salary for the highest consecutive 42 months. The benefit payments for the Base Plan are calculated using a benefit formula adopted by the Idaho Legislature. The Base Plan is required to provide a 1% minimum cost of living increase per year provided the Consumer Price Index increases 1% or more. The PERSI Board has the authority to provide higher cost of living increases to a maximum of the Consumer Price Index movement or 6%, whichever is less; however, any amount above the 1% minimum is subject to review by the Idaho Legislature. Member and Employer Contributions Member and employer contributions paid to the Base Plan are set by statute and are established as a percent of covered compensation. Contribution rates are determined by the PERSI Board within limitations, as defined by state law. The Board may make periodic changes to employer and employee contribution rates (expressed as percentages of annual covered payroll) that are adequate to accumulate sufficient assets to pay benefits when due. The contribution rates for employees are set by statute at 60% of the employer rate for general employees and 72% for police and firefighters. As of June 30, 2018, it was 6.79% for general employees and 8.36% for police and firefighters. The employer contribution rate as a percent of covered payroll is set by the Retirement Board and was 11.32% for general employees and 11.66% for police and firefighters. VRT s contributions were $162,701 for the year ended September 30,

42 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Notes to Financial Statements September 30, 2018 Pension Liabilities, Pension Expense (Revenue), and Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions At September 30, 2018, VRT reported a liability for its proportionate share of the net pension liability. The net pension liability was measured as of June 30, 2018, and the total pension liability used to calculate the net pension liability was determined by an actuarial valuation as of that date. VRT s proportion of the net pension liability was based on VRT s share of contributions in the Base Plan pension plan relative to the total contributions of all participating PERSI Base Plan employers. At June 30, 2018, VRT s proportion was percent. For the year ended September 30, 2018, VRT recognized pension expense of $146,618. At September 30, 2018, VRT reported deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pensions from the following sources: Differences between expected and actual experience Changes in assumptions or other inputs Deferred Outflows of Resources 71,013 Deferred Inflows of Resources $ $ 48,858 42,095 - Net difference between projected and actual earnings on pension plan investments - 71,876 Changes in the employer's proportion and differences between the employer's contributions and the employer's proportionate contributions 29,931 8,200 VRT's contributions subsequent to the measurement date 38,138 - Total $ 181,177 $ 128,934 The $38,138 reported as deferred outflows of resources related to pensions resulting from employer contributions subsequent to the measurement date will be recognized as a reduction of the net pension liability in the year ending September 30, The average of the expected remaining service lives of all employees that are provided with pensions through the System (active and inactive employees) determined at July 1, 2017, the beginning of the measurement period ended June 30, 2018, is 4.8 for the measurement period June 30, Other amounts reported as deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pensions will be recognized in pension expense (revenue) as follows: Year ended September 30: 2019 $ 69, , (54,590) 2022 (15,124) $ 14,

43 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Notes to Financial Statements September 30, 2018 Actuarial Assumptions Valuations are based on actuarial assumptions, the benefit formulas, and employee groups. Level percentages of payroll normal costs are determined using the Entry Age Normal Cost Method. Under the Entry Age Normal Cost Method, the actuarial present value of the projected benefits of each individual included in the actuarial valuation is allocated as a level percentage of each year s earnings of the individual between entry age and assumed exit age. The Base Plan amortizes any unfunded actuarial accrued liability based on a level percentage of payroll. The maximum amortization period for the Base Plan permitted under Section , Idaho Code, is 25 years. The total pension liability in the June 30, 2018 actuarial valuation was determined using the following actuarial assumptions, applied to all periods included in the measurement: Actuarial Assumptions Inflation 3.00% Salary increases including inflation 3.75% Investment rate of return 7.05%, net of pension plan investment expenses Cost-of-living adjustments 1.00% Mortality rates were based on the RP 2000 combined table for healthy males or females as appropriate with the following offsets: Set back three years for teachers No offset for male fire and police Forward one year for female fire and police Set back one year for all general employees and all beneficiaries An experience study was performed for the period 2013 through 2017 for the PERSI Base Plan, which reviewed all economic and demographic assumptions. The Total Pension Liability as of June 30, 2018 is based on the results of an actuarial valuation date July 1, The long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments was determined using the building block approach and a forward-looking model in which best estimate ranges of expected future real rates of return (expected returns, net of pension plan investment expense and inflation) are developed for each major asset class. These ranges are combined to produce the long-term expected rate of return by weighing the expected future real rates of return by the target asset allocation percentage and by adding expected inflation. Even though history provides a valuable perspective for setting the investment return assumption, the System relies primarily on an approach which builds upon the latest capital market assumptions. The assumptions and the System s formal policy for asset allocation are shown below. The formal asset allocation policy is somewhat more conservative than the current allocation of the System s assets. The best-estimate range for the long-term expected rate of return is determined by adding expected inflation to expected long-term real returns and reflecting expected volatility and correlation

44 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Notes to Financial Statements September 30, 2018 The capital market assumptions are: Long-Term Long-Term Expected Expected Nominal Rate Real Rate Target of Return of Return Asset Class Allocation (Arithmetic) (Arithmetic) Core Fixed Income 30.00% 3.05% 0.80% Broad US Equities 55.00% 8.30% 6.05% Developed Foreign Equities 15.00% 8.45% 6.20% Assumed Inflation - Mean 2.25% 2.25% Assumed Inflation - Stardard Deviation 1.50% 1.50% Portfolio Arithmetic Mean Return 6.75% 4.50% Portfolio Standard Deviation 12.54% 12.54% Portfolio Long-Term (Geometric) Expected Rate of Return 6.13% 3.77% Assumed Investment Expenses 0.40% 0.40% Portfolio Long-Term (Geometric) Expected Rate of Return, Net of Investments Expenses 5.73% 3.37% Portfolio Long-Term Expected Real Rate of Return, Net of Investment Expenses 4.19% Portfolio Standard Deviation 14.16% Valuation Assumptions Chosen by PERSI Board Long-Term Expected Real Rate of Return, Net of Investment Expenses 4.05% Assumed Inflation 3.00% Long-Term Expected Geometric Rate of Return, Net of Investment Expenses 7.05% Discount Rate The discount rate used to measure the total pension liability was 7.05%. The projection of cash flows used to determine the discount rate assumed that contributions from plan members will be made at the current contribution rate. Based on these assumptions, the pension plans net position was projected to be available to make all projected future benefit payments of current plan members. Therefore, the long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments was applied to all periods of projected benefit payments to determine the total pension liability. The long-term expected rate of return was determined net of pension plan investment expense but without reduction for administrative expense

45 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Notes to Financial Statements September 30, 2018 Sensitivity of the Employer's Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability to Changes in the Discount Rate The following presents the net pension liability of the Employer's proportionate share calculated using the discount rate of 7.05%, as well as what the Employer's proportionate share of the liability would be if it were calculated using a discount rate that is 1-percentage-point lower or 1-percentage-point higher than the current rate: 1% Decrease (6.05%) Current Discount Rate (7.05%) 1% Increase (8.05%) Employer's proportionate share of the net pension liability (asset) $ 1,619,385 $ 646,919 $ (158,322) Pension Plan Fiduciary Net Position Detailed information about the pension plan's fiduciary net position is available in the separately issued PERSI financial report. PERSI issues a publicly available financial report that includes financial statements and the required supplementary information for PERSI. That report may be obtained on the PERSI website at Payables to the Pension Plan At September 30, 2018, VRT had reported payables to the defined benefit pension plan of $6,371 for legally required employer contributions, $3,821 for legally required employee contributions, and $1,736 for the PERSI Choice 401(k) of which had been withheld from employee wages but not yet remitted to PERSI. Defined Contribution PERSI Choice 401(k) Employees of VRT participating in the PERSI Base Plan may enroll in the PERSI Choice 401(k) defined contribution retirement savings plan available to active members. Participation is voluntary. The PERSI Choice 401(k) is intended to be a government plan within the meaning of Code Section 414 (d) and within the meaning of section 3(32) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) and as such, is exempt from provisions of Title I ERISA. VRT does not match participants contributions in the PERSI Choice 401(k). A participant shall be 100% vested in their individual account at all times. The authority of the benefit and contribution terms are established and amended by the PERSI Board. VRT recognized $44,105 contributions to the PERSI Choice 401(k) as benefits expense during the year ended September 30, Note 6 - Lease Commitments Under the transfer agreement with the City of Boise, VRT assumed lease payments for the vehicle maintenance facility renewed effective October 1, 2015 and expires September 30, Monthly lease payments are $11,805 beginning October 1, Subsequent to October 1, 2017, base rent payments increase annually based on the Consumer Price Index

46 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Notes to Financial Statements September 30, 2018 VRT entered a lease agreement effective September 1, 2018, for the use of a facility in the operations of the Boise Bike Share Program. The lease is a three-year lease, with monthly payments of $2,300. VRT is also in a lease agreement for copiers for 39 months starting in September of The monthly payments are $1,917. Minimum lease payments are as follows: 2019 $ 152, , , , ,179 Thereafter 3,327,866 $ 4,017,095 Total rent expense was $140,769 for the year ended September 30, Note 7 - Concentrations Concentration by revenue source. Approximately 48% of VRT s total revenue for the year ended September 30, 2018, was derived from contracts with the Federal government, and 81% of the local revenue came from the City of Boise. Note 8 - Self-Insurance TMAC established a partially self-funded health plan for its employees. The employees are responsible for the first $250 of their deductible. TMAC is responsible for the remainder of the deductible up to the $2,000 out-ofpocket limit. The employee is responsible for all further claims not covered by the insurance. The health care plan is administered by Blue Cross of Idaho and they are responsible for the approval, processing and payment of claims. At September 30, 2018, VRT has reported a liability of $69,364, which represents amounts payable by VRT towards the employee s deductible for claims incurred as of the end of the year but not paid by VRT as of that date. Note 9 - Related Party The Board of VRT is made up of representatives from member organizations that pay dues to VRT as a part of the local match requirement on federal grants

47 ITEM V-G Required Supplementary Information September 30, 2018 Valley Regional Transit eidebailly.com 47

48 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Schedule of Employer s Share of Net Pension Liability and Employer Contributions Year Ended September 30, 2018 Schedule of Employer's Share of Net Pension Liability PERSI - Base Plan Last 10 - Fiscal Years* Employer s portion of the net pension liability Employer s proportionate share of the net pension liability $ 579,066 $ 699,808 $ 699,808 $ 646,919 Covered payroll $ 1,231,700 $ 1,296,576 $ 1,425,209 $ 1,411,082 Employer s proportional share of the net pension liability as a percentage of its covered payroll 47.01% 53.97% 49.10% 45.85% Plan fiduciary net position as a percentage of the total pension liability 91.38% 87.26% 90.68% 91.69% Data reported is measured at the measurement date which is as of June 30 of each year. Schedule of Employer Contributions PERSI - Base Plan Last 10 - Fiscal Years* Statutorily required contribution $ 138,531 $ 152,675 $ 150,283 $ 162,701 Contributions in relation to the statutorily required contribution $ (140,279) $ (150,744) $ (145,075) $ (170,757) Contribution (deficiency) excess $ 1,748 $ (1,931) $ (5,208) $ 8,056 Covered payroll $ 1,223,775 $ 1,348,714 $ 1,350,824 $ 1,437,288 Contributions as a percentage of covered payroll 11.46% 11.18% 10.74% 11.88% Data reported is measured as of September 30 of each year. *GASB Statement No. 68 requires ten years of information to be presented in this table. However, until a full 10- year trend is compiled, Valley Regional Transit will present information for those years for which information is available

49 ITEM V-G Federal Awards Reports in Accordance with the Uniform Guidance September 30, 2018 Valley Regional Transit eidebailly.com 49

50 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Year Ended September 30, 2018 Amounts Federal Pass Passed Federal/Grantor/Pass-Through CFDA Through Through to Grantor/Program or Cluster Title Number Number Expenditures Subrecipients Direct from U.S. Department of Transportation Formula Grants N/A $ 8,102,058 $ 2,882,475 Bus and Bus Facilities Formula Program N/A 73,508 - Capital Improvement Grants N/A 173, ,166 Total Federal Transit Cluster 8,348,732 3,055,641 Direct from U.S. Department of Transportation New Freedom Program N/A 136,169 - Pass through from Idaho Department of Transportation Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities N/A 631,630 - Total Transit Services Cluster 767,799 - Pass through from Idaho Department of Transportation Formula Grants for Rural Areas ID , ,887 Total U.S. Department of Transportation $ 9,287,418 $ 3,226,528 See Notes to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards 19 50

51 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Notes to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards September 30, 2018 Note 1 - Basis of Presentation The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards (the Schedule) includes the federal grant activity of Valley Regional Transit (VRT) under programs of the federal government for the year ended September 30, The information is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Because the Schedule presents only a selected portion of the operations of VRT, it is not intended to and does not present the financial position, changes in net position, or cash flows of VRT. Note 2 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies Expenditures reported in the Schedule are reported on the cash basis of accounting. When applicable, such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. Note 3 - Indirect Cost Rate VRT has not elected to use the 10% de minimis cost rate

52 ITEM V-G Independent Auditor s 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 The Board of Directors Valley Regional Transit Meridian, Idaho We have audited, 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, the financial statements of Valley Regional Transit (VRT) as of and for the year ended September 30, 2018, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise VRT s basic financial statements, and have issued our report thereon dated January 25, Internal Control over Financial Reporting In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements, we considered VRT's internal control over financial reporting (internal control) to determine the audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of VRT s internal control. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of VRT s internal control. 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 a combination of deficiencies, in internal control, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of VRT s financial statements will not be prevented or detected and corrected on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance. Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting 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 financial reporting that might be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies. Given these limitations, during our audit we did not identify any deficiencies in internal control that we consider to be material weaknesses. However, material weaknesses may exist that have not yet been identified. We did identify a certain deficiency in internal control, described in the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs, that we consider to be a significant deficiency. See finding What inspires you, inspires us. eidebailly.com W. Main St., Ste. 800 Boise, ID T F EOE 21

53 ITEM V-G Compliance and Other Matters As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether VRT s financial statements are free from 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. VRT s Response to Findings VRT s response to the findings identified in our audit are described in the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs. VRT s response was not subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the financial statements and, accordingly, we express no opinion on it. Purpose of this Report The purpose of this report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of VRT s internal control or on compliance. This report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering VRT s internal control and compliance. Accordingly, this communication is not suitable for any other purpose. Boise, Idaho January 25,

54 ITEM V-G Independent Auditor s Report on Compliance for Each Major Program and Report on Internal Control over Compliance Required by the Uniform Guidance The Board of Directors Valley Regional Transit Meridian, Idaho Report on Compliance for Each Major Federal Programs We have audited Valley Regional Transit s (VRT) compliance with the types of compliance requirements described in the OMB Compliance Supplement that could have a direct and material effect on each of VRT s major federal programs for the year ended September 30, VRT s major federal programs are identified in the summary of auditor s results section of the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs. Management s Responsibility Management is responsible for compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of its federal awards applicable to its federal programs. Auditor s Responsibility Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the compliance for each of VRT s major federal programs based on our audit of the types of compliance requirements referred to above. 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 the audit requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Those standards and the Uniform Guidance require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether noncompliance with the compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on the major federal program occurred. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence about VRT 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 on compliance for each major federal program. However, our audit does not provide a legal determination of VRT s compliance. Opinion on the Major Federal Program In our opinion, VRT complied, in all material respects, with the types of compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on each of its major Federal programs for the year ended September 30, What inspires you, inspires us. eidebailly.com W. Main St., Ste. 800 Boise, ID T F EOE 23

55 ITEM V-G Report on Internal Control over Compliance Management of VRT is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance with the compliance requirements referred to above. In planning and performing our audit of compliance, we considered VRT s internal control over compliance with the types of requirements that could have a direct and material effect on each major federal program to determine the auditing procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing an opinion on compliance for each major federal program and to test and report on internal control over compliance in accordance with the Uniform Guidance, 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 VRT 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 compliance requirement will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. A significant deficiency in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program that is less severe than a material weakness in internal control over compliance, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance. 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 that might be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over compliance that we consider to be material weaknesses. However, we identified a certain deficiency in internal control over compliance, as described in the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs that we consider to be a significant deficiency. See finding VRT s response to the internal control over compliance findings identified in our audit are described in the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs. VRT management s response was not subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of compliance and, accordingly, we express no opinion on the response. The purpose of this report on internal control over compliance is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over compliance and the results of that testing based on the requirements of the Uniform Guidance. Accordingly, this report is not suitable for any other purpose. Boise, Idaho January 25,

56 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended September 30, 2018 Section I - Summary of Auditor s Results Financial Statements Type of auditor s report issued: Internal control over financial reporting: Material weaknesses identified? Significant deficiencies identified not considered to be material weaknesses? Noncompliance material to financial statements noted? Unmodified No Yes No Federal Awards Internal control over major program: Material weaknesses identified? Significant deficiencies identified not considered to be material weaknesses? Type of auditor s report issued on compliance for major programs: Any audit findings disclosed that are required to be reported in accordance with Uniform Guidance 2 CFR ? No Yes Unmodified Yes Identification of major programs: Name of Federal Program CFDA Number Federal Transit Cluster Dept. of Transportation Capital Improvement Grants Dept. of Transportation Formula Grants Dept. of Transportation Bus and Bus Facilities Formula Program Transit Services Cluster Dept. of Transportation Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities Dept. of Transportation New Freedom Program Dollar threshold used to distinguish between Type A and Type B programs: $ 750,000 Auditee qualified as low-risk auditee? Yes 56 25

57 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended September 30, 2018 Section II Financial Statement Findings Financial Statement Preparation Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Criteria: Management should have an internal control system in place designed to provide for the preparation of the financial statements being audited. Condition: Eide Bailly, LLP prepared the financial statements using the trial balance accounts and figures obtained during our audit procedures. This preparation included the statement of net position; statement of revenues, expenses, and change in net position; cash flow statements; and other supplementary information. Cause: VRT did not have the time and resources to prepare the financial statements. Effect: Management must rely on the auditing firm to report financial data reliably in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Although the circumstance is not unusual for an organization of your size, the absence of controls over the preparation of financial statements increase the possibility that a misstatement of the financial statements could occur and not be prevented or detected and corrected by VRT s internal control. Recommendation: Management should consider filling the vacant Finance Director position with a person with the qualifications and education necessary to prepare GAAP compliant financial statements, disclosures and required supplementary information. Views of Responsible Officials: Valley Regional Transit experienced an unplanned staffing change when our finance director left the organization in mid-november. In addition, our long-term accounting manager retired just prior to the end of the audit period. This left VRT temporarily without the technical expertise to complete the financial statements. VRT has hired a controller to replace the finance director. The controller will begin January 22, This person will have the technical expertise to meet the internal control requirements in this area

58 ITEM V-G Valley Regional Transit Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended September 30, 2018 Section III - Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs Direct Programs Department of Transportation CFDA #20.500, , Federal Transit Cluster Special Tests and Provisions: Wage Rate Requirements Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria: For each construction contract and subcontract greater than $2,000 covered by the Wage Rate Requirements, the contractors or subcontractors are required to submit the required certified payroll reports for each week in which work was performed. Condition: During our testing of the Wage Rate Requirement, one contractor out of three did not submit all weekly certified payroll reports to Valley Regional Transit. Cause: Valley Regional Transit did not have a control in place to ensure that all required weekly certified payroll reports were received. Effect: Valley Regional Transit is out of compliance with the Wage Rate Requirement. Questioned Costs: None Reported Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of projects from 3 vendors out of 15 vendors were selected for special tests and provisions testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Year: Yes, prior year finding Recommendation: Management should implement a control process to ensure that all weekly wage reports are submitted for each contractor or subcontractor. Views of Responsible Officials: Valley Regional Transit developed and submitted an internal control process to the Federal Transit Administration in September The issues found in the audit were from projects that occurred prior to the process being developed. The operations director, the staff responsible for overseeing contractors, is reviewing invoices for all contractors to determine they are following the procedures

59 ITEM VI-A TOPIC: Low Emission No Emission Fuel Technology DATE: March 23, 2019 Summary: Valley Regional Transit has been operating with Compressed Natural Gas as the primary fuel source for fixed-route vehicles since acquiring the City of Boise system in The City of Boise adopted, by resolution, a policy of CNG as the preferred fuel choice in VRT continues to procure CNG fueled vehicles for both the Ada and Canyon counties systems. VRT and our funding partner, the City of Boise, have invested significant funding in the building and maintaining infrastructure to support CNG fueled vehicles. The capital budget shows a significant amount of future investment required to maintain and enhance the capacity of VRT to use CNG fueled vehicles. For the past two decades, CNG has been one of the most common and reliable low-no emission fuel sources. In the last decade, the industry experienced significant advances in other low-no emission fuel technologies for transit. There are also new funding sources available to assist transit systems to shift to these new low-no emission technologies. The Federal Transit Administration has appropriated $85 million in funding, specifically for funding vehicles and facilities using these technologies. VRT staff is analyzing the costs and benefits of changing fuel technology from CNG to all-electric. We are considering differences in acquisition, operating, life cycle, and infrastructure costs in making a determination if there should be a change. We have been in discussions with local partners who would provide the match to any federal funding we might receive for this change. The potential local partners have been very receptive to the concept of electric vehicles operating in their communities. Staff is preparing an application to submit in May for the current round of Low No Emission grant funds. Notice of Funding Opportunity was released on March 18. This is the last year to work directly with a partner on the grant application. These funds are only appropriated through Fiscal Year If this is determined to be the best fuel alternative for the region, VRT can take advantage of this additional funding opportunity. VRT completed an evaluation and identified Proterra as a private partner to work with on the FY2019 grant application. Proterra has the most experience building buses. Partners who have worked with Proterra have also had a high rate of success in securing the federal funding. Staff Recommendation/Request: Staff is requesting the VRT Board of Directors approve Resolution VBD authorizing staff to consider all low emission and no emission fuel technologies when 700 NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

60 ITEM VI-A evaluating vehicle procurements, and to authorize the Executive Board to review the analysis currently evaluating the federal grant funding request that can be submitted in May for electric vehicles. Implication (policy and/or financial): Changing fuel sources has both policy and fiscal implications that need to be considered in the changing and evolving landscape of fuel technology advancements. VRT staff requires the flexibility to consider a variety of fuel technologies that may evolve to determine what choices are best for the region from a cost and environmental perspective. Considering this change now is critical in that additional federal funding is available, and the organization is looking at significant costs to enhancing the CNG infrastructure that may be able to be avoided by making this switch. Highlights: (use bullet points) City of Boise City Council adopts a resolution requiring CNG to be the preferred fuel technology for fixed-route in 1993 VRT continues this practice with the majority of fixed-route and demand responsive vehicles using CNG fuel technology Deferred maintenance and capital enhancement projects are being developed for FY2020 and beyond in first and second Quarter 2019 Federal Transit Administration (FTA) released Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) for Low-no Emission Fuel Vehicle and Infrastructure grants on March 18 VRT completed a due diligence review and determined Proterra would be the most advantageous private partner for the grant application Grants are due on May 14, 2019 More Information: 1) Resolution VBD Low Emission No Emission Fuel Technology 2) For detailed information contact: Kelli Badesheim, executive director, kbadesheim@valleyregionaltransit.org or

61 ITEM VI-A VBDxx-xxx VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT BOARD RESOLUTION Low/No Emission Fuel Technology RESOLUTION VBD BY THE BOARD OF VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORIZING STAFF TO EVALUATE AND CONSIDER ALL LOW EMISSION AND NO EMISSION FUEL TECHNOLOGY IN THE PROCUREMENT OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION VEHICLES AND INFRASTRUCTURE; REQUIRING STAFF TO COMPLETE AN ANALYSIS OF FUEL TYPES TO DETERMINE THE BEST ALTERNATIVE FOR THE AUTHORITY, AND REQUIRING THE EXECUTIVE BOARD TO REVIEW AND ACCEPT STAFF S ANALYSIS PRIOR TO APPLYING FOR FEDERAL FUNDING. WHEREAS, pursuant to Idaho Code, Chapter 21, Title 40, and as a result of the approval of the voters of Ada and Canyon Counties on November 3, 1998, a regional public transportation authority (now known as Valley Regional Transit ) was created to serve Ada and Canyon counties; and WHEREAS, Idaho Code (1) confers to Valley Regional Transit, as a regional public transportation entity, exclusive jurisdiction over all publicly funded or publicly subsidized transportation services and programs except those transportation services and programs under the jurisdiction of public school districts and law enforcement agencies within Ada and Canyon Counties; and WHEREAS, The City of Boise Council adopted a resolution to procure CNG fueled vehicles for the Boise fixed-route services; and WHEREAS, VRT carried on the policy and practice upon acquiring the City of Boise system, now operated as ValleyRide in 2002; and WHEREAS, VRT and City of Boise have made a significant amount of investments in CNG fuel facilities since 1993; and WHEREAS, VRT recently completed a preliminary capital plan that shows significant deficit in funding needed to meet deferred maintenance and capital enhancements to support the services; and WHEREAS, a significant number of these projects are rollingstock replacements and CNG facilities enhancements; and WHEREAS, funding partners have expressed an interest in VRT considering electric vehicle technology for future vehicle procurements; and WHEREAS, the Federal Transit Administration has been investing additional funding in their Low No Emission grant program; and 61

62 ITEM VI-A WHEREAS, the Valley Regional Transit staff is requesting the ability to evaluate fuel technology more proactively as the technology evolves and changes; and WHEREAS, Idaho Code (2) and (5) provide that Valley Regional Transit, as a regional public transportation entity has power to raise and expend funds as provided in Idaho Code Chapter 21, Title 40 and to make contracts as may be necessary or convenient for the purposes of the Regional Public Transportation Authority Act; and WHEREAS, Idaho Code (5) provides that the Board of Valley Regional Transit may adopt resolutions consistent with law, as necessary, for carrying out the purposes of Chapter 21, Title 40, Idaho Code and discharging all powers and duties conferred to Valley Regional Transit pursuant to Chapter 21, Title 40. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT: Section 1. That the Board of Valley Regional Transit authorize staff to consider all low no emission fuel technology options when procuring rollingstock. Section 2. That the Board of Valley Regional Transit require staff to complete an analysis comparing different fuel technologies prior to determining the fuel type. Section 3. That the Board of Valley Regional Transit authorize the Executive Board to review staff analysis and approve fuel sources related to rollingstock procurements. Section 4. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effective immediately upon its adoption by the Board of Valley Regional Transit and its approval by the Board Chair. ADOPTED by the Board of Valley Regional Transit, this day of, 20. APPROVED by the Board Chair this day of, 20. ATTEST: APPROVED: EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT CHAIR VBDxx-xxx 62

63 ITEM VI-B TOPIC: Regional Performance Measurement Policy DATE: April 1, 2019 Summary: ValleyConnect 2.0 defines the performance metrics that will be used to measure the progress of public transportation services in the region. The measures are organized by the three (3) following goals and are intended to provide broad, high-level feedback about transit performance. The goals are: 1. Provide safe and reliable multi-modal transportation choices considering the entire trip from origination to destination. 2. Prioritize investments in efficient fixed-route service that expands public mobility while leveraging, maximizing, and enhancing the utilization of the existing transportation assets and resources. 3. Ensure comprehensive transportation choices and access that support economic growth and enhance quality of life for the region. Based upon these goals, VRT is establishing a regional policy to keep and track of data on the metrics shown in ValleyConnect 2.0. As data is collected and validated, information will be given on a quarterly basis to the VRT Board of Directors for their information and use in making public transportation decisions. Staff Recommendation/Request: The VRT Board of Directors are asked to review and approve the Regional Performance Measurement Policy. Implication (policy and/or financial): Improved reporting could lead to additional federal funding resources for the region. 700 NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

64 ITEM VI-B This policy supersedes all prior policy statements written, verbal, or otherwise Section Policy No. (TBD) Policy Title: Performance Measurement DRAFT Page 1 of 3 Policy Date: Policy Adopted: Approved By: Policy/Page Replaced: Policy Amended: VRT Chairman Executive Director Regional Performance Measurement Policy Statement of Policy Valley Regional Transit (VRT) adheres to planning principles and practices that enhance the long-term health of the Authority and region and its continued delivery of services by ensuring that key performance measurements are reviewed and understood. The purpose of this policy is to ensure transparency and quality decision-making capabilities by establishing a reporting system to be utilized by the Board of Directors, partner governments, and the public. The Authority shall annually adopt performance targets. Definitions A. Boardings: Unlinked passenger trips B. Complaints: Comments from the public that have been classified by customer service or other staff to be valid and generally negative in nature. C. Hours: Vehicle revenue hours D. On-time performance Demand Response: The number of departures from pickup locations and arrivals, at drop off locations completed no more than ten minutes before, or ten minutes after the scheduled time, divided by the total number of pickups and drop-offs completed. E. On-time performance Fixed Route: The number of departures from timepoints completed no more than one minute before, or five minutes after, the scheduled departure time, divided by the total number of departures from timepoints completed. F. On-time performance Fixed Route Peak: The On-time performance, as defined in (E) above, for fixed route service between the hours of 6:00-9:00 AM and 4:00-7:00 PM. G. Safety Event: A collision, derailment, fire, hazardous material spill, act of nature (Act of God), evacuation, or OSONOC occurring on transit right-of-way, in a transit revenue facility, in a transit maintenance facility, or involving a transit revenue vehicle and meeting established NTD thresholds. 64

65 Policy The Regional Performance Measurement Policy applies to providers of public transportation services in Ada and Canyon Counties, and to all of the types of public transportation services operated by those agencies, including fixed-line bus, ADA complementary paratransit, general public demand response, specialized transportation, and rideshare services. The reported information and statistical data is designed to support local, state and regional planning efforts and help governments and decision makers make multi-year comparisons and perform trend analyses. I. REPORTING II. Any public transportation entity receiving funding from the Urbanized Area Formula Program (5307) or Rural Formula Program (5311) is required to submit data to the NTD in uniform categories. A. The information that needs to be reported includes, but is not limited to: 1. All data being provided per the NTD Policy 2. Valid complaints 3. On time performance data 4. Service areas VRT will work with each agency and the services that are provided to ensure that all public transportation information and statistical data is being reported to the Federal Transportation Administration. B. Schedule Public Transportation Providers will report information, or what is indicated in their sub-recipient agreement with VRT, to VRT on a monthly basis. Service areas will be reported no less frequently than once/year. Reporting will be required for the life of the asset and/or the duration of the public transportation service being provided. The information will be formatted pursuant to the NTD/Performance Measurement Plan. C. Coordination of Reporting VRT will coordinate all public transportation reporting with the Idaho Department of Transportation Public Transportation (ITD-PT) group to ensure that all public transportation services are being reported, and no service reporting is being duplicated. VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT BOARD REPORTING A. On a quarterly basis, Valley Regional Transit shall provide the Board of Directors with the following statistics: 1. Boardings 2. Hours 3. Safety 4. On-time performance* 5. Complaints *If applicable to service type 65 ITEM VI-B

66 B. On an annual basis, Valley Regional Transit shall provide the Board of Directors a detailed report of progress toward achieving the goals set in the active short range plan. VI. RESPONSIBILITIES AND ACCOUNTABILITIES A. VRT Board of Directors Approves all related reporting information. B. Accountable Executive for Public Transportation Providers a single identifiable person who has the ultimate responsibility for carrying out the information and statistical data reporting practices; and control or direction over the human and capital resources needed to develop and maintain both the agency s public transportation agency reporting. C. Performance Measurement Lead a single identifiable person for the reporting agency that manages the overall performance reporting including the following key tasks: 1. Receive the information and statistical data from the Public Transportation Providers. 2. Compiles all necessary information. ITEM VI-B 3. Presents necessary public transportation agency funding sources, inventories of vehicles and maintenance facilities, safety event reports, measures of transit service provided and consumed data on transit employees, and narrative reports for the annual submission to the VRT Board of Directors for approval. 66

67 ITEM VI-B PROCUREMENT DESCRIPTION: Accessible Conversion Transit Vans AUTHORIZATION FOR EXPENDITURE BOARD APPROVAL TOTAL COST: Not to exceed $1,656,600 over the next five years, PURPOSE/ACTION: Valley Regional Transit is in need of rolling stock to support Specialized Transportation services. SCOPE OF WORK: Procure up to twenty-five (25) accessible conversion vans over the next five years. The vans will accommodate two (2) oversized wheel chairs with ambulatory passenger accessibility and/or up to ten (10) ambulatory passengers when wheelchairs are not being used. These vans will also be equipped with electric transit doors. DISCUSSION: Valley Regional Transit currently struggles to meet the demands for accessible transportation services, and recently added services have added to that demand. ALTERNATIVES: The alternate would be to not procure accessible vehicles; therefore, impacting Valley Regional Transit s efforts to meet the demands of the customers we provide service for. FISCAL IMPACT: The funding available for this Project will be included in the proper fiscal year capital budget. The total amount of funding available per project will be stipulated in the corresponding fiscal year. The replacement vehicles will only be purchased based off of the Transit Asset Management score and if there is local match available. The costs for the conversion vans five (5) years shall be a fixed price for each year. Additional equipment is budgeted at $3,000 per vehicle which will total $75,000. The costs per vehicle are: Year 1 $61,999 per van; Year 2 $62,310 per van; Year 3 $62,625 per van; Year 4 $62,943 per van; and Year 5 $63,264 per van RECOMMENDATION/JUSTIFICATION: Valley Regional Transit staff has followed federal procurement guidelines and VRT s policy for procuring rolling stock assets. Valley Regional Transit received bids on December 21, 2018 and determined that the most responsive and responsible vendor is Creative Bus Sales. POST RFP/FINAL SELECTION OF PROJECT: Recommend: VRT staff recommends the VRT Board of Directors approve Resolution VBD and award to Creative Bus Sales, Cyrus Way #101, Mukilteo, Washington 98275, who is the successful Respondent based on the RFB Evaluation Criteria and pricing whose total proposed price for the overall project is $1,656,600 which includes $75,000 for equipment. ROUTING ORDER OF REVIEW DATE APPROVED RESOLUTION # # 1 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 2 EXECUTIVE BOARD Approves procurements over $50,000 but under $75, VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT BOARD Approves all procurements over $75,000. On agenda 4/4/ N. E. 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

68 ITEM VI-B VBD VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT BOARD RESOLUTION ACCESSIBLE CONVERSION TRANSIT VANS RESOLUTION VBD BY THE BOARD OF VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT WITH CREATIVE BUS SALES FOR ACCESSIBLE CONVERSION TRANSIT VANS WHEREAS, pursuant to Idaho Code, Chapter 21, Title 40, and as a result of the approval of the voters of Ada and Canyon Counties on November 3, 1998, a regional public transportation authority (now known as Valley Regional Transit ) was created to serve Ada and Canyon counties; and WHEREAS, Idaho Code (1) confers to Valley Regional Transit, as a regional public transportation entity, exclusive jurisdiction over all publicly funded or publicly subsidized transportation services and programs except those transportation services and programs under the jurisdiction of public school districts and law enforcement agencies within Ada and Canyon Counties; and WHEREAS, Valley Regional Transit is in need of rolling stock to support Specialized Transportation services; and WHEREAS, Valley Regional Transit currently struggles to meet the demands for accessible transportation services, and recently added services have added to that demand; and WHEREAS, by not replacing accessible vehicles would impact Valley Regional Transit s efforts to meet the demands of the customers we provide service for; and WHEREAS, Valley Regional Transit will purchase vehicles based upon each year s current fiscal year capital budget for these expenditures; and WHEREAS, the Valley Regional Transit staff conducted a competitive procurement process as required in the VRT Procurement Policies adopted by the Valley Regional Transit Board of Directors by Resolution VBD on 01/09/17 and updated by Resolution VBD on 09/25/17, and in compliance with all local and FTA requirements; and WHEREAS, Idaho Code (2) and (5) provide that Valley Regional Transit, as a regional public transportation entity has power to raise and expend funds as provided in Idaho Code Chapter 21, Title 40 and to make contracts as may be necessary or convenient for the purposes of the Regional Public Transportation Authority Act; and WHEREAS, Idaho Code (5) provides that the Board of Valley Regional 68

69 ITEM VI-B Transit may adopt resolutions consistent with law, as necessary, for carrying out the purposes of Chapter 21, Title 40, Idaho Code and discharging all powers and duties conferred to Valley Regional Transit pursuant to Chapter 21, Title 40. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT: Section 1. That the Board of Valley Regional Transit approve the contract with Creative Bus Sales for accessible conversion transit vans Section 2. That the Board of Valley Regional Transit delegates authority to the Executive Director to finalize and execute the contract. Section 3. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effective immediately upon its adoption by the Board of Valley Regional Transit and its approval by the Board Chair. ADOPTED by the Board of Valley Regional Transit, this 4 th day of April, APPROVED by the Board Chair this day of April, ATTEST: APPROVED: EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT CHAIR VBD

70 ITEM VI-D AUTHORIZATION FOR EXPENDITURE VRT BOARD APPROVAL PROCUREMENT DESCRIPTION: TOTAL COST: Not to Exceed $331,000 Automated Passenger Counters (APC) PURPOSE/ACTION: To provide Automated Passenger Counters (APC) for systems fixed route vehicles. SCOPE OF WORK: The scope of this effort is to procure equipment, software, training and professional services for furnishing and installing APCs in fixed route vehicles. DISCUSSION: The Federal Transit Administration requires that transit agencies report on transit usage and passenger miles travelled. Funding and planning partners are also dependent on VRT to provide performance data on the services VRT provides. Efficient transit planning is also dependent on reliable, readily available performance data. Currently VRT uses GFI fare boxes and manual driver surveys for federal reporting. This method is known to be less accurate, time consuming and does not provide adequate level of detail for reliable, stop level analysis. This procurement will provide an automated means for collecting reliable data at the route and bus stop level. This data can also be leveraged for improved on time performance reporting and analysis. VRT staff conducted a competitive procurement process and selected the proposer who would provide the best value to VRT. ALTERNATIVES: The alternative to not provide an automated passenger counters would be to continually rely on fare box and manual driver counts. These processes are known to be error prone and do not provide the level of detail necessary for stakeholder requests and/or advanced planning. FISCAL IMPACT: The funding available for this Project is found in the FY19 budget, Resolution VBD approved January 7, The total amount of funding available is $306,000. RECOMMENDATION/JUSTIFICATION: The availability of reliable data about where people are using VRT transit services is important to our federal funding and stakeholder and public support. Investing in an APC system will ensure we receive the appropriate federal funds, enhance stakeholder and public support and improve our reporting and planning capabilities. POST RFP/FINAL SELECTION OF PROJECT: Recommend: VRT staff recommends the Board of Directors approve Resolution VBD for the contract with Urban Transportation Associates (UTA), Inc Airport Road, suite 212, Cincinnati, Ohio not to exceed $331,000. Base contract will be $306,000 with a contingency of $25,000 (8%) for the Automatic Passenger Counter Hardware/Software System. ROUTING # ORDER OF REVIEW DATE APPROVED RESOLUTION # 1 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 2 EXECUTIVE BOARD Approves procurements over $50,000 but under $75, VRT BOARD Approves all procurements over $75,000. On agenda 04/01/19 VBD NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

71 ITEM VI-D VBD VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT BOARD RESOLUTION AUTOMATED PASSENGER COUNTERS RESOLUTION VBD BY THE BOARD OF VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT WITH Urban Transportation Associates, Inc. FOR AUTOMATED PASSENGER COUNTERS WHEREAS, pursuant to Idaho Code, Chapter 21, Title 40, and as a result of the approval of the voters of Ada and Canyon Counties on November 3, 1998, a regional public transportation authority (now known as Valley Regional Transit ) was created to serve Ada and Canyon counties; and WHEREAS, Idaho Code (1) confers to Valley Regional Transit, as a regional public transportation entity, exclusive jurisdiction over all publicly funded or publicly subsidized transportation services and programs except those transportation services and programs under the jurisdiction of public school districts and law enforcement agencies within Ada and Canyon Counties; and WHEREAS, VRT must report on the use of its transit services, including passenger boardings and passenger miles traveled to the Federal Transit Administration; and WHEREAS, VRT funding partners have requested more data about where people in their community use transit; and WHEREAS, VRT could plan better services for the residents of the Treasure Valley if it had more reliable data; and WHEREAS, Valley Regional Transit included the budget for this expenditure in the fiscal year FY19 Budget Resolution approved January 7, 2019; and WHEREAS, the Valley Regional Transit staff conducted a competitive procurement process as required in the VRT Procurement Policies, and in compliance with all local and FTA requirements; and WHEREAS, Idaho Code (2) and (5) provide that Valley Regional Transit, as a regional public transportation entity has power to raise and expend funds as provided in Idaho Code Chapter 21, Title 40 and to make contracts as may be necessary or convenient for the purposes of the Regional Public Transportation Authority Act; and WHEREAS, Idaho Code (5) provides that the Board of Valley Regional Transit may adopt resolutions consistent with law, as necessary, for carrying out the purposes of Chapter 21, Title 40, Idaho Code and discharging all powers and duties 71

72 ITEM VI-D conferred to Valley Regional Transit pursuant to Chapter 21, Title 40. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT: Section 1. That the Board of Valley Regional Transit approves the procurement of the Automated Passenger Counters project contract with Urban Transportation Associates, Inc.. Section 2. That Board of Directors of Valley Regional Transit delegates authority to the Executive Director to finalize and execute the contract. Section 3. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effective immediately upon its adoption by the Board of Valley Regional Transit and its approval by the VRT Board Chair. ADOPTED by the Board of Valley Regional Transit, this 1st day of April, APPROVED by the Board Chair this 1st day of April, ATTEST: APPROVED: EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT CHAIR VBD

73 ITEM VII-A TOPIC: Inter County Service Changes Route 44 Highway 44 Express DATE: March 20, 2019 Summary: Valley Regional Transit (VRT) has been working with corresponding jurisdictions and the public on the viability of Route 44 Highway 44 Express. At this time, not all members have provided the funding for Route 44 for fiscal year 2019 (FY19), therefore the elimination of this route is being requested by staff. At the January 7, 2019 VRT Board of Directors meeting, the members approved a public hearing for Route 44 be scheduled for April 1, 2019, at the VRT Board of Directors Meeting. A public hearing was also held at Star City Hall on March 26, Staff Recommendation/Request: Staff requests the VRT Board of Directors to grant authority to the Executive Director to approve the reduction of Route 44 based on funding and public comment. Implication (policy and/or financial): If the Route 44 reduction is not approved, operations could be adversely affected. Highlights: September 24, 2018 Board of Directors Information Item Service Changes for FY18 Completed January 7, 2019 Board of Directors Action Item Route 44 Public Hearing Set Date Completed April 1, 2019 Board of Directors Public Hearing Route 44 May 6, 2019 Executive Board Action Determination of Status of Route 44 More information contact: Stephen Hunt, Principal Planner, , shunt@valleyregionaltransit.org 700 NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

74 ITEM VII-B TOPIC: Idaho Transportation Department s (ITD) Statewide Long Range Transportation Plan IDAGO 2040 DATE: March 21, 2019 Summary: ITD developed a draft statewide long-range transportation plan, IDAGO 2040, which is open for public comment from February 24 through April 10, The draft plan is available at: The Fixing America s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act requires states to develop longrange, statewide transportation plans in cooperation with the affected metropolitan planning organizations and other governmental entities. Valley Regional Transit staff reviewed the plan and met with the ITD planning staff. VRT staff discussed how public transportation is represented and requested that ITD provide information in IDAGO 2040 based on ValleyConnect 2.0 and Communities in Motion Public Transportation. ITD requested VRT coordinate with other public transportation providers and Regional Public Transportation Authorities (RPTA) within Idaho to present combined comments on the IDAGO 2040 for public transportation. Staff Recommendation/Request: This is an information only item. Staff will be reaching out to other public transportation providers and Regional Public Transportation Authorities (RPTA) within Idaho to present combined comments to ITD on IDAGO Implication (policy and/or financial): Public Transportation needs to be reflected properly in statewide long-range plans. Highlights: February 27, 2019 ITD presented to Regional Technical Advisory Committee (RTAC) on IDAGO 2040 April 1, 2019 Board of Directors information item IDAGO 2040 Plan and VRT comments Reach out to other public transportation providers and RPTA s within Idaho May, NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

75 ITEM VII-B Executive Board information item present findings and comments to submit to ITD on IDAGO 2040 June, 2019 Executive Board action item present comments to be submitted to ITD More Information: Rhonda Jalbert, Development Director, , 75

76 ITEM VII-B April XX, 2019 Ken Kanownik, AICP Planning Services Manager Idaho Transportation Department 3311 West State Street, Boise, Idaho Dear Mr. Kanownik: Thank you for the presentation on the ITD Long-Range Transportation Plan at the COMPASS Regional Technical Advisory Committee Meeting on February 27, 2019, as well as the presentation to VRT staff on March 14, We appreciate the opportunity to provide comment on the draft of the IDAGO, the Idaho Transportation Department s statewide 2040 long-range plan. Recognizing that the draft IDAGO is intended to be an aspirational plan, VRT s comments focus mainly on the public transportation information presented in the draft plan. VRT has recently completed its short-range public transportation plan for our region, Ada and Canyon counties, ValleyConnect 2.0. ValleyConnect 2.0 addresses the freedom to move and providing transportation options to all. As ITD moves forward with the adoption of the IDAGO plan, VRT requests ITD consider the following comments and the information provided in ValleyConnect 2.0. Chapter I Page 2: The safety target of 1.1 fatalities per 100,000,000 vehicle miles traveled is directly contradictory to the statement Even one death on Idaho s highways is one death too many. Page 4: There is no mention of the lack of dedicated public transportation funding. As public transportation was a frequent topic in the public comments, as well as an important tool in improving mobility, ITD needs to acknowledge the issue and propose steps to address it. Also, the reduction in federal funding, especially for rural areas, and the State of Good Repair backlog/deferred maintenance should also be noted. Page 9: While it is correct Idaho is rapidly growing, this plan treats that growth as homogenously distributed throughout the state. The majority of growth, both in terms of percent and volume, is occurring in urban areas within the state. (United States Census Bureau, 2017). These places require significantly different transportation systems than traditional, automobile-based, highway networks. ITD needs to recognize this and provide analysis of their role in urban transportation networks. Page 10: VRT appreciates the opportunity to provide ridership reports and the inclusion of that information in ITD s decision-making models. ITD should also consider including bike and pedestrian counts and latent demand models in growth analysis. 700 NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

77 ITEM VII-B Page 10: HUD s State of the Cities Data Systems Building Permits database indicates 3,983, 12,711, and 14,856 residential building permits were issued in Idaho for 2010, 2017, and 2018, respectively. ITD should provide clarification. Page 12: ITD needs to clarify the definition of local highways. Page 14: Is ITD striving to enhance economic growth, rather than merely accommodating it? Page 17: VRT looks forward to being a partner in the effort to increase mobility on constrained corridors in the Treasure Valley. ITD needs to provide a definition of capacity efficiency, as discussed in paragraph 1. Pages 18-19: Many of these metrics focus on measuring congestion. As previously stated, Idaho s population is rapidly shifting towards urban areas, meaning that people are competing for space, and congestion is bound to happen. While vehicular congestion is obviously going to have a negative impact on vehicular mobility, research has shown mixed relationships between congestion and safety (Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration, 2003), and a positive correlation relating to economic activity (Sweet, Does Traffic Congestion Slow the Economy, 2011), (Sweet, Traffic Congestion's Economic Impacts: Evidence from US Metropolitian Regions, 2014), (Marshall & Dumbaugh, 2018). VRT endorses the use of personthroughput as a congestion metric, and suggests ITD consider including congestion metrics more closely tied to safety and economic mobility, such as GDP per VMT. Page 20: Recommendation I.5 implies population and economic growth are impediments to a functional State Highway System, which would seem to contradict the ITD mission. Page 20: We suggest ITD include a recommendation to continue working with state and congressional leaders to provide adequate funding for public and active transportation. Page 20: VRT endorses recommendation I.10 and looks forward to collaboration with ITD to provide a robust and resilient transportation network. Chapter II Page 21: Paragraph 1 is implying ITD s planning process is solely focused on state (intercity) travel. As the State Highway System travels through cities and towns and is mixed into local travel, the paragraph should be revised to reflect ITD s role in local transportation systems. Page 22: The Bicycle Route Analysis Tool appears to be based on 2010 data and appears not to consider factors such as vehicle speeds and volumes. The colorations on the map suggest the preferred travel locations for bicycles on the State Highway System are primarily on the interstate highways. The interstate highway location method is unlikely to result in safer travel for cyclists, rather than utilizing surface highways. ITD may want to revisit their role in recommending and providing safe and comfortable intercity bicycle routes. It appears this document is implying ITD only has a supporting role in providing local active transportation, which is not completely true, due to the location of the State Highway System within cities and towns. ITD may want to revisit this position. 77

78 ITEM VII-B Page 27: The purpose and meaning of Figure II.5 is unclear. It appears to be a list of drivers of transit demand, rather than what is lacking in public transportation in Idaho. This figure needs more clarification. Page 28: Pursuing Innovative funding solutions to help meet public transportation gaps and needs statewide should be a recommendation of this chapter. Page 28: Placing the content regarding the Toward Zero Deaths initiative within the Privately Owned Vehicle Planning section of the document implies that Toward Zero Deaths only relates to the occupants of privately-owned vehicles. Obviously, this is not true. ITD should move this paragraph to encompass all modes of transportation. Page 29: Rather than using Level of Service or delay-based metrics, ITD may want to consider utilizing person-based metrics such as person-throughout, which the industry is moving towards. Chapter III Page 36: VRT looks forward to data-sharing and collaboration to increase the clarity of information provided by transportation data. VRT is currently working on a Regional Performance Measure Policy and Plan, which will help facilitate Chapter III recommendations. Chapter V Page 46: Asset Management also needs to include public transportation equipment, rolling-stock and facilities, not just the State Highway System. Technical Report 3 Statewide Transportation Planning Page 66 Enhancing Mobility ITD may want to consider Enhancing all forms of mobility and refer to complete streets, e.g. bike lanes, sidewalks, rolling-stock, etc. and not just transportation infrastructure. Page 71 Stakeholders and Partners VRT feels Regional Public Transportation Authorities (RPTA) and public transportation providers should be listed as a Stakeholder and partner, as well as local jurisdictions. Technical Report 5 Page 87 Figure/Matrix VRT suggests changing Transit to Public Transportation. Page 87 Section 5 underneath COMPASS for Transit needs to include: Treasure Valley Transit, Boise State Public Safety - Transportation, and ACHD Commuteride, at a minimum. Technical Report 7 Page 104 Criteria for the project and funding allocations may also want to include the Region s priorities, as approved by local MPO Board of Directors. Technical Report 8 ITD may want to refer to Sweep Dollars and how those are allocated in this report. 78

79 ITEM VII-B Technical Report 14 Since it is an FTA requirement, the Public Transportation Asset Management Plan needs to be mentioned and discussed in this report. Appendix 3: Page 169: Pursue funding for all modes and ITD needs to take a leadership role to get that funding is identified as a highly affirmed statement, but does not appear to be implemented well throughout the plan. Page 171: The consensus of the scenario planning shows a belief that the mode-share of single-occupancy vehicles has either peaked or plateaued. This does not resonate throughout the plan. Page Unspecified, Online Summary Survey, Figure 3: For reference, ITD should provide a pie chart of the current operating budget, broken down by similar categories, for comparison and recommendations on how to meet the future goals. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please let us know if you have any questions. We look forward to working with you to provide the best possible transportation network. Sincerely, Kelli Badesheim Executive Director CC: Stephen Hunt VRT Principal Planner Liisa Itkonen COMPASS Principal Planner Rhonda Jalbert VRT Development Director Brian Parker VRT Planner 79

80 ITEM VII-D TOPIC: VRT Annual Report DATE: April 1, 2019 Summary: In April, the Valley Regional Transit Board (VRT) approved ValleyConnect 2.0, a new plan to move transit forward in the near future. Highlights of the policies include the following: Moving forward, VRT will be operating on a fixed-route-first philosophy. This means that the primary form of public transit in the Treasure Valley should be fixed-route service. Other services, such as bike sharing and demand response style services should be coordinated in conjunction with the fixed-route system to ensure that both enhance the usefulness of each other. The fixed-route network should be primarily designed to maximize ridership. All else being equal, routes should be designed to serve more people more efficiently, rather than maximizing the service area. VRT s decisions should be grounded in data. Where the data is available, staff should be utilizing and documenting it to understand and make good decisions. When useful data is unavailable, staff should work to find short-term remedies and acquire the necessary tools to ensure data is available in the long term. This document serves as an analysis of the past year s progress toward the goals outlined in ValleyConnect 2.0 Based upon these policies, VRT has produced an annual report showing progress toward the goals in ValleyConnect 2.0 by the public transportation providers in the region in FY18. Staff Recommendation/Request: This is for information only. Implication (policy and/or financial): Improved reporting could lead to additional federal funding resources for the region. Attachments Annual Report More Information: For detailed information contact: Brian Parker, Associate Planner, , bparker@valleyregionaltransit.org 700 NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

81 ITEM VII-D ANNUAL REPORT FISCAL YEAR

82 Annual Report ITEM VII-D Contents Director s Letter At a Glance... 3 Rides... 4 Hours... 5 Safety... 6 On Time Performance... 7 Complaints... 8 A Year of Change... 9 ValleyConnect Service Changes... 9 Ada County Fixed Route Performance Comparison Fixed Route On-Time Performance Review Population with Access to Transit Transit Travel Times Compared to the Automobile Transit Accessibility Growing Demand Specialized Transportation Boise State Shuttle Serves areas of high ridership High Frequency and On-Time Later Service Appendix

83 Annual Report ITEM VII-D Director s Letter The past year was one of the most exciting times in my 18 years as Executive Director of Valley Regional Transit. We took big steps toward becoming the transit system that the Treasure Valley needs. The process of developing ValleyConnect 2.0 illustrated the desire from our citizens to have a variety of ways to get around. We are still a long way from achieving the goals set out in the plan, but we are aligning ourselves with the target and establishing methods of tracking progress. The plan can be found at This annual report represents the baseline of progress toward the Growth Scenario shown in ValleyConnect 2.0, as well as a way of highlighting some of the successes enjoyed by VRT and our public transportation providers. We are excited to see the progress in the years and months to come. Kelli Badesheim Executive Director Valley Regional Transit 2 83

84 Annual Report 2018 At a Glance The tables below present VRT s performance by service type. The outer rings of the graphs match the tabular data, while the inner rings break up the performance by subgroups. More detailed information on the subgroups is provided on the following five pages. The graphs and legend items are color-coded. RIDES (THOUSANDS) SAFETY Total FISCAL YEAR FISCAL YEAR Δ% Δ% FR 1,463 1, FR DR DR ST ST VP VP BS BS ,805 1, Total FR FR 57.2% 54.2% 2.9 DR DR 63.2% 65.5% -2.3 ST No Data ST 63.6% 58.6% 4.9 VP BS Total LEGEND FR - FIXED ROUTE No Data No Data DR - DEMAND RESPONSE ST - SPECIALIZED TRANSPORTATION VP - VANPOOL BS - BIKESHARE HOURS (THOUSANDS) ON-TIME PERFORMANCE % 55.2% 2.6 FR COMPLAINTS Early Late VP BS Total Total N/A N/A ITEM VII-D DR ST VP BS No Data No Data No Data

85 Annual Report ITEM VII-D Rides FR - FIXED ROUTE DR - DEMAND RESPONSE ST - SPECIALIZED TRANSPORTATION FY18 FY17 Δ% Ada County 1,146,000 1,191, % Boise State 173,000 42, % Canyon County 57,000 Intercounty 88, , % Ada County 38,000 52, % Canyon County 2,900 3, % Metro 20,200 16, % Shared Vehicle 12,900 8, % SHIP 9,100 6, % Kuna Senior Center 3,300 3, % Village Van 9, % Volunteer Driver 3,200 4, % Meridian Senior Center 4,200 3, % Eagle Senior Center 7,900 5, % Star Senior Center 2,900 2, % Harvest 8,700 3, % Parma Senior Center 4,500 1, % Rides 2 Wellness 9,300 4, % VP - VANPOOL ACHD CommuteRide 170, , % BS - BIKESHARE Boise GreenBike 36,000 23, % 4 85

86 Annual Report ITEM VII-D Hours FR - FIXED ROUTE DR - DEMAND RESPONSE ST - SPECIALIZED TRANSPORTATION FY18 FY17 Δ% Ada County 79,000 81, % Boise State 12,000 6, % Canyon County 12,000 11, % Intercounty 14,000 13, % Ada County 21,000 21, % Canyon County 1,300 3, % Metro 8,500 11, % Shared Vehicle 3,700 3, % SHIP 4,900 5, % Kuna Senior Center 1,600 1, % Village Van 1,700 3, % Volunteer Driver 2,800 3, % Meridian Senior Center 1, % Eagle Senior Center 3,300 2, % Star Senior Center 800 1, % Harvest 3,200 2, % Parma Senior Center 2,500 2, % Rides 2 Wellness VP - VANPOOL ACHD CommuteRide 36,000 36, % BS - BIKESHARE Boise GreenBike 20,000 65, % 5 86

87 Annual Report ITEM VII-D Safety FR - FIXED ROUTE DR - DEMAND RESPONSE FY18 FY17 Δ% Ada County % Boise State Canyon County Intercounty Ada County Canyon County Metro Shared Vehicle SHIP Kuna Senior Center ST - SPECIALIZED TRANSPORTATION Village Van Volunteer Driver Meridian Senior Center No Data VP - VANPOOL BS - BIKESHARE Eagle Senior Center Star Senior Center Harvest Parma Senior Center Rides 2 Wellness ACHD CommuteRide Boise GreenBike No Data No Data 6 87

88 Annual Report ITEM VII-D On Time Performance 100% Early Late 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% FY18 FY17 Overall Peak Hour Peak Hour On Time Early On Time Late On Time Early On Time Late On Time Δ% Ada County 6.1% 59.2% 34.7% 59.7% 7.7% 55.4% 36.9% 55.6% 3.8% FR - FIXED ROUTE Boise State No Data Canyon County 11.8% 44.8% 43.4% 50.2% 14.5% 50.5% 35.1% 53.5% -5.7% Intercounty 10.5% 44.4% 45.0% 24.0% 10.0% 42.7% 47.2% 36.9% 1.7% DR - DEMAND Ada County 23.0% 63.2% 13.9% N/A 25.7% 65.2% 9.1% N/A -2.1% RESPONSE Canyon County 10.7% 64.1% 25.2% N/A 17.1% 69.4% 13.4% N/A -5.3% Metro 22.7% 54.3% 23.0% N/A No Data Shared Vehicle SHIP 15.3% 69.1% 15.6% N/A No Data 26.1% 60.5% 13.4% N/A 8.6% Kuna Senior Center Village Van 29.2% 62.6% 8.2% N/A No Data No Data ST - SPECIALIZED Volunteer Driver No Data TRANSPORTATION Meridian Senior Center No Data Eagle Senior Center 16.6% 59.9% 23.5% N/A No Data Star Senior Center Harvest 18.8% 74.3% 6.9% N/A No Data 20.2% 68.4% 11.4% N/A 5.9% Parma Senior Center Rides 2 Wellness No Data No Data VP - VANPOOL ACHD CommuteRide Not Applicable BS - BIKESHARE Boise GreenBike Not Applicable 7 88

89 Annual Report ITEM VII-D Complaints FR - FIXED ROUTE DR - DEMAND RESPONSE ST - SPECIALIZED TRANSPORTATION VP - VANPOOL BS - BIKESHARE FY18 FY17 Δ% Ada County % Boise State Canyon County No Data % Intercounty % Ada County % Canyon County Metro Shared Vehicle SHIP Kuna Senior Center Village Van Volunteer Driver Meridian Senior Center Eagle Senior Center Star Senior Center Harvest Parma Senior Center Rides 2 Wellness ACHD CommuteRide Boise GreenBike No Data No Data No Data 8 89

90 A Year of Change Annual Report ValleyConnect 2.0 In April, the Valley Regional Transit Board approved ValleyConnect 2.0, a new plan to move transit forward in the near future. Highlights of the policies include the following: ITEM VII-D Moving forward, Valley Regional Transit will be operating on a fixed-route-first philosophy. This means that the primary form of public transit in the Treasure Valley should be fixed route service. Other services, such as bike sharing and demand response style-services should be coordinated in conjunction with the fixed route system to ensure that both enhance the usefulness of each other. The fixed route network should be primarily designed to maximize ridership. All else being equal, routes should be designed to serve more people more efficiently, rather than maximizing the service area. VRT s decisions should be grounded in data. Where the data is available, staff should be utilizing and documenting it to understand and make good decisions. When useful data is unavailable, staff should work to find short-term remedies and acquire the necessary tools to ensure data is available in the long term. This document serves as an analysis of the past year s progress toward the goals outlined in ValleyConnect 2.0 Service Changes ValleyConnect 2.0 not only establishes policies regarding what data we will be reporting, but also how VRT responds to this information. The routes included in the 2019 service changes are a response to the data in this report and the policies established in ValleyConnect 2.0. While we are excited about the growth in some aspects, we are aware of challenges in others. 9 90

91 Annual Report ITEM VII-D Ada County Fixed Route Performance Comparison Fixed route ridership ended FY 2018 mixed. Overall ridership in Ada County saw a small decline, while Canyon County ridership grew slightly and Boise State Shuttle ridership grew substantially. Figure 1 shows the total annual boardings and hours from 2018 and the resulting service productivity (annual boardings divided by hours). Also shown is the absolute and percent change from 2017*. The direction of the arrows represents the relative percent change of a route while the size indicates the volume of the change. Staff reviewed this data and sought to consolidate or revise routes that had been stagnating to improve performance. *Canyon County services are not shown in this format because we did not have reliable route level performance data in Figure 1 Fixed Route Ridership & Productivity Comparison 10 91

92 Figure 1 Fixed Route Ridership & Productivity Comparison Annual Report ITEM VII-D 11 92

93 Annual Report ITEM VII-D Figure 1 Fixed Route Ridership & Productivity Comparison 12 93

94 Annual Report ITEM VII-D Fixed Route On-Time Performance Review On-time performance has been an area of concern for the last several years. While our systemwide on-time performance has improved compared to previous years, complaints to VRT s customer service desk regarding on-time performance increased by 23 percent in FY18. This is likely because buses tended to run latest on routes and times where ridership is highest. Additionally, a bus that arrives six minutes late feels very different to a customer than one that arrives 20 minutes late, but both are counted the same in terms of on-time performance. Figures 2-4 below and on the following page illustrate these phenomena. The thickness of each line represents the frequency that a bus departs a timepoint at the variance from the schedule, as shown in the y-axis (vertical). The green area is what is classified as on time (between one minute early and five minutes late). The area inside the green divided by the total area gets to the on time performance of the route. Routes with long tails indicate that the route can frequently be severely late. Staff is continually working to improve the scheduled times for the fixed route system, as well as identifying opportunities to make capital investments to improve the reliability of high-ridership routes. Figure 2 Ada County On-Time Performance by Route 13 94

95 Annual Report ITEM VII-D Figure 3 Canyon County On-Time Performance by Route Figure 4 Intercounty On Time Performance by Route 14 95

96 Annual Report Population with Access to Transit One of the major limiting factors of public transportation s performance is the number of people that have access to transit. Figure 5 below shows the estimated population of Ada and Canyon counties that live within a five-minute (quarter-mile) walk to a bus stop. If we expand the walk shed to a half-mile, the percent of population with access to transit grows from roughly 8 percent to 17 percent. For comparison sake, an initial estimate of the regional population within a five-minute walk of the peer cities identified in ValleyConnect 2.0 is between is percent. Figure 5 Population with Access to Transit ITEM VII-D 15 96

97 Annual Report We also reviewed how accessible transit is to the higher density, transit supportive developments in Ada County and Canyon County. This analysis found that the vast majority (92 percent) of those developments had access to transit. However, because the only service that had 15-minute frequencies in 2018 was the BSU shuttle, only those developments around Boise State and downtown Boise (56 percent) had access to frequent service. Figure 6 Transit Access to Developments of Higher Density ITEM VII-D VRT will continue to work with our funding partners and local governments to add more routes, increase service frequencies and improve pedestrian connections to transit. These actions will help the traveling public access their destinations and minimize the negative impacts of higher intensity development

98 Annual Report Transit Travel Times Compared to the Automobile The reach and frequency of transit services largely determines the transit travel time between any given origin and destination. The relatively low frequencies and limited reach of the existing transit network makes taking transit less attractive. Figure 7 below shows the percent increase in travel time for an individual taking transit instead of an automobile between the origins and destinations shown, if the individual left their origin at 5PM. The black cells indicate the trip combinations that are either not feasible by transit at this time of day and direction or not applicable. This is another visualization of the limits on the current transit network. The vast majority of the delay reported here is the initial wait time or transfer time a person spends waiting for a bus to pick them up. Additionally, if there isn t a bus stop nearby, a prospective rider would need to walk to a stop, in many instances several miles. VRT is working to improve the transit travel times between destinations by adding frequency, span of service and working with cities and ACHD to improve the speed of transit. ITEM VII-D Figure 7 Transit Travel Time Comparison Boise Boise State Hyde Park Harris Ranch Micron Boise Airport Boise 280% 442% 95% N/A 16% 271% 255% N/A 71% 182% 53% 141% 121% 166% Boise State 234% 324% 402% N/A 250% 203% 255% N/A 189% 277% 53% 119% 106% 136% Hyde Park 339% 429% 258% N/A 279% 280% 255% N/A 215% 307% 53% 133% 128% 182% Harris Ranch 286% 497% 430% N/A 450% 420% 452% N/A 441% N/A N/A N/A N/A 477% Micron N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Boise Airport 121% 311% 257% 576% N/A 459% 763% N/A 255% 354% N/A N/A N/A 474% Towne Square Mall 202% 166% 299% 316% N/A 349% 500% N/A 270% 371% N/A N/A N/A 686% Meridian 665% 594% 626% N/A N/A N/A 684% N/A 700% 804% N/A N/A N/A N/A Kuna N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A College of Western Idaho 119% 88% 255% 177% N/A 234% 353% 472% N/A 271% 179% 907% N/A 567% Nampa 407% 365% 441% N/A N/A 552% 335% 408% N/A 251% 272% 1124% N/A N/A Caldwell 340% 333% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 453% 244% 693% N/A N/A Middleton N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 873% 522% 643% N/A Star N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 592% 489% 312% N/A Eagle N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 549% 333% 220% 157% 361% 17 Towne Square Mall Meridian Travel time penalty for transit compared to driving, departing at 5:00 on a Weekday 0% 50% 100% 200% 300% 400% 500% 600% 700% 800% 900% 1000% 1100% 1200% Kuna College of Western Idaho Nampa Caldwell Middleton Star Eagle Not Feasible 98

99 Annual Report ITEM VII-D Transit Accessibility As described in ValleyConnect 2.0, Valley Regional Transit s vision for the future of transit in the Treasure Valley is to connect more people to more places more often. The best way to measure this is through a measure called Transit Accessibility. This measure calculates the total number of opportunities that are accessible by transit within a given time frame. Figure 8 shows the current transit accessibility for jobs in the Treasure Valley. This map highlights the areas where transit is most useful in connecting people to jobs. It clearly shows that where transit is provided, particularly at higher levels of service e.g. State Street, Fairview, Vista - it becomes a useful travel mode. Figure 8 Current Transit Accessibility in Ada and Canyon County 18 99

100 Annual Report Figure 9 below illustrates how ValleyConnect 2.0 will expand the total number of jobs accessible to the residents of Ada County and Canyon County. Not only do areas around Boise get more connected, but new job centers such as Meridian become accessible along with areas in Caldwell, Eagle and Nampa. VRT is continuing to work with its funding partners to connect as many different people to nearby opportunities as quickly as possible. ITEM VII-D Figure 9 Growth Scenario Transit Accessibility in Ada and Canyon County

101 Growing Demand Annual Report Specialized Transportation In addition to the transit ridership growth in Canyon County and on the Boise State Shuttle, VRT saw tremendous growth with their Specialized Transportation partners. Many of these programs serve areas in West Ada County and outlying parts of Canyon County not served by fixed route service. Part of this ridership growth is due to the collaboration between VRT and partner agencies to make services more convenient and reliable through shared scheduling software and customer service capabilities. Figure 10 Specialized Service Area Map ITEM VII-D

102 Annual Report ITEM VII-D Boise State Shuttle The most significant growth in fixed route services was on the Boise State shuttle service. The service added nearly 50,000 trips to their system in FY18. Figure 11 below shows the change in ridership for each of the BSU Shuttle services. The Blue Line, Orange Line and Elder Street Shuttle all saw ridership growth that matched or Figure 11 Boise State Ridership & Productivity Comparison outpaced the increase in service hours. Some of the factors that made the service, particularly the Orange Line, successful were as follows: Serves areas of high ridership The Orange and Gray Lines connect Boise State s main campus, student housing near Ann Morrison Park, St. Luke s, Boise State s computer science facilities, and downtown Boise. The service is open to the public and is very useful for people needing to get around downtown. High Frequency and On-Time The Blue, Gray, and Orange lines run at minute frequencies. As long as the service is running, riders feel confident that a bus is coming soon. At these frequencies, it becomes less important to measure on-time performance based on a schedule, and more important to measure headway adherence. Headway adherence measures how often buses are bunching where there will be a very short time between buses followed by a longer one. Based on this measure, the Orange Line had an average headway adherence of 68 percent in FY

103 Annual Report ITEM VII-D The Orange Line would be the sixth best route in the VRT system in terms of on time performance but the second most productive. Later Service The Blue, Orange, and Gray lines all run until 10:00 PM. Because riders have a trip back to their origin if they want to stay downtown past normal working hours, they are less inclined to drive

104 Annual Report ITEM VII-D Appendix For additional information, data, and methodologies, please visit valleyregionaltransit.org/performance

105 ITEM VII-E TOPIC: Fare Simplification and Pass Programs DATE: April 1, 2019 Summary: VRT is working on a Fare Simplification and Pass Program Project which will include an updated Fare Tariff. The Fare Simplification Project will achieve the following four (4) objectives: 1. To the extent possible, riders should pay for the cost of providing the portion of the service they use. 2. Fare structures should be as simple as possible. 3. Fare structures should be based on the expected average fare rather than the single adult fare. 4. Future fare increases should be tied to changes in operating costs. Additionally, ValleyConnect 2.0 assumes that 25% of VRT s revenues will be directly generated, primarily through fares and advertising. In order to achieve this, the farebox recovery ratio needs to improve significantly. Staff is seeking input from the Board of Directors on the proposed objectives to fare simplification and fare increase. 1. To the extent possible, riders should pay for the cost of providing the portion of the service they use. This objective means that riders pay for their seat on the bus. For example, if it cost $100 per hour to operate a bus, and if an hour-long trip were filled to capacity at 50 riders, then the transit agency would be fully recovering its operating cost if the average fare were $2.00. For shorter trips, with more boardings and alightings per hour, the capacity per hour would increase, bringing down the average fare needed to recover the operating cost. This calculation is currently being researched and reviewed. Our current average fare is between $.55 and $.65. We estimate that the average fare we would need to recover operating costs would be between $1.50 and $3.00. In addition to establishing a target for our average fare, we will be reviewing the opportunities to phase in a fare increase, over time, and setting fare revenue targets. Increases in fare rates have a negative impact on demand. This relationship is known as elasticity of demand. National studies on transit elasticity suggest that every 1% increase in fare rates would result in a.66% increase in fare revenues. Applying this elasticity we would expect roughly a 17% increase in total fare revenues if we increased our fares by 25%. 700 NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

106 ITEM VII-E 2. Fare structures should be as simple as possible. VRT currently has a significant number of discounted and bulk pass products. Many of these discounts are duplicative and overly targeted. Additionally, VRT has some fare media that are swiped at the farebox, dunked, tapped, and shown to the driver. There are also barriers for many passengers to purchase a bus pass, e.g. buses only take cash, Main Street Station only takes credit or debit cards at a $10 minimum, etc. The fare system clearly needs to be simplified. Many fare products and media can, and should be, consolidated to make riding the bus easier, faster, and more understandable. 3. Fare structures should be based of the expected average fare, rather than the single adult fare. Transit fare structures typically include different rates for different kinds of users, such as adults, seniors, students, and people with disability. The average fare is calculated by summing all fare revenue and dividing that by the total number of boardings. In other words, the fare structure and mix of users determine average fare. Because the average fare considers all elements of a transit agencies fare structure, VRT would like to have a fare structure that is built around an average fare target, rather than any single component of the fare structure, i.e. the adult single use fare. By improving the Fare Tariff and encouraging different fare products, transit agencies are able to alter the average fare, while limiting negative impacts to vulnerable populations. 4. Future fare increases should be tied to changes in operating costs. As we are seeking to structure fares around the cost of providing service (see objective 1, above), it makes sense that shifts in operating cost would create shifts in the fare. This also makes changing fares less arbitrary. Innovative technologies, such as autonomous buses, electric buses, and high-capacity vehicles present opportunities to significantly lower the per-trip operating cost, thus lowering the fare needed to cover the operating cost. Alternatively, labor shortages and rising fuel costs are examples of factors that could lead to fare increases. VRT is seeking input from the Regional Advisory Council on how to most equitably transition from our current Fare Tariff structure to one that achieves the four objectives stated above. 5. Farebox recovery is based on multiple factors. One important metric related to the financial sustainability of transit service is the ratio of fare revenue compared to the total operating costs. This ratio is called farebox recovery and it is influenced by the three factors shown in Figure 1: Farebox recovery factors. 106

107 ITEM VII-E Figure 1: Farebox recovery factors National research shows that transit fares tend to be inelastic, meaning fare revenues typically go up as fares go up, even as some users choose to take transit less often. As stated, one of the purposes of this Fare Simplification Project is to increase VRT s fare revenue, but VRT is also taking steps to improve service productivity and control costs to maximize our efforts to improve our farebox recovery. VRT s network design principals adopted with ValleyConnect 2.0 and recent service changes have all been designed to maximize the hourly by focusing our resources to provide the most useful service to the highest ridership areas in the region. Similarly, VRT is consistently making efforts to reduce operating costs. Current Conditions Local fares: VRT s average fare is $0.62. o Discounted fare products, such as student/senior/disabled passes, contribute to 79.9% of the foregone revenue. Universal fares: VRT s average fare is $0.90. o Contract programs make up 93.4% of the foregone revenue. VRT s farebox recovery ratio is 7.3%. o Analysis by Four Nines Technologies (2016) and First Transit (2018) have shown that VRT fares are lower than peer agencies. Discounted Fares - There is no verification requirement to obtain a discounted fare product. Potential Changes to Fare Tariff All fare types (after consolidation) could be increased, in equal proportions, once an amount is determined. This could also happen over several years, depending upon the increase. Base fare products could be increased, while leaving discount products at the same rate. o As this would increase the discount provided, fare evasion by riders not eligible for discounted fares would likely increase. 107

108 ITEM VII-E o To counteract this, VRT would likely need to implement a verification system. Staff Recommendation/Request: Information item: Staff is seeking input from the Board of Directors on the approach to this fare simplification and review. Implication (Policy and/or Financial): The policy and strategies for fare simplification and pass programs will be used to inform the annual public transportation budgets. More Information: Rhonda Jalbert, Development Director, , rjalbert@valleyregionaltransit.org Stephen Hunt, Principal Planner, , shunt@valleyregionaltransit.org Brian Parker, Associate Planner, , bparker@valleyregionaltransit.org 108

109 ITEM VII-F TOPIC: FY 2020 Service Change Objectives DATE: April 1, 2019 Summary: Since the adoption of ValleyConnect 2.0, VRT staff has been working towards the attached Service Change Implementation Schedule. In accordance with that schedule, and based on financial forecasts and discussions with local jurisdiction staff, VRT staff presented the following objectives for the FY 2020 service change. Continued improvement of on-time performance. Staff will review on-time performance and make recommendations to schedules to improve on-time performance. These changes may include changes to trip start and end times and minor routing adjustments. Continue expanding service on Premium Services, specifically State Street, Vista and Fairview. These changes may include improvements to some, or all, of these services and may be accompanied by changes in other services that enhance the overall network performance. Draft proposals for expanded fixed route service in Meridian. Coordinating with Meridian staff, VRT will prepare proposals for service expansion in Meridian consistent with ValleyConnect 2.0. Draft proposals for Canyon County service reduction and expansion based on budget forecast needs and revenues. Address forecasted shortfall in service contributions for Route 44. Draft proposals that improve transit accessibility to and from Eagle and explore transportation options for the other Highway 44 communities that are commensurate with forecasted revenues. Since that time, VRT staff has further refined those concepts but is not ready at this time for a formal draft service change proposal. VRT is currently working with city staff in Boise, Meridian, and Eagle to expand fixed-route services in those communities. In Boise, staff is considering extending 15 minute service on State Street all day and potentially expanding weekend service on Best in Class routes. Staff has also begun conversations with Boise about coordinating the potential extension of services to the City of Meridian, with potential new service investments from Meridian. In Meridian, staff is considering new service between Ten Mile and Eagle, serving downtown Meridian and the growing centers north of the I-84. These investments may be leveraged by changes to other Ada County services to better connect the region. In Eagle, staff is working to identify potential stakeholders to expand peak hour transit service between Eagle and Boise. 700 NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

110 ITEM VII-F Staff Recommendation/Request: For information and discussion. No action at this time. Implication (policy and/or financial): These service changes are designed to better serve the residents of the Treasure Valley and move the Ada and Canyon County toward the vision in ValleyConnect 2.0. Project Schedule: Jan 2019: Jan Feb 2019: Feb Mar 2019: May-June 2019: July 2019: Sep 2019: Dec 2019: Establish 2019 service change objectives Develop initial concepts Collect jurisdiction feedback on concepts and priorities and draft budget implications Draft service changes Final service change proposal Board approval Implement changes More Information: Stephen Hunt, Principal Planner, , 110

111 Service Change Implementation Schedule ITEM VII-F 1 In order to successfully complete a service change Valley Regional Transit needs to closely coordinate their planning activities with local jurisdiction s budget development. The chart below outlines the service change schedule and highlights those activities where coordination with local jurisdictions will be the greatest. Major service change milestones are shown in bold. Establish objectives Review current performance Review ValleyConnect 2.0 Develop Initial Concepts October-December* January Jurisdiction/Stakeholder & Board Member Briefings & Forecasted Budget Implications Draft service allocation and capital funding requests Draft Service Change Feb-Mar April Open House/Solicit Public Comment Apr-Jun Public Comment Report Jurisdiction/Board Member Briefings Incorporating Potential Changes Final Service Change Proposal Public Hearing/Solicit Public Comment Public Comment Report Jurisdiction/Board Member Briefings VRT Board Action/Approval Public Outreach/Information Campaign Implement Service Change Jun June July Jul-Aug Sep Sep September Nov-Dec* December* *Note that activity on the next years service change will begin before the current service change process is implemented 111

112 ITEM VII-G Date: March 17, 2019 Topic: Public Transportation Program and Federal Funding Summary: Public Transportation Programming is coordinated through the VRT Executive Board and the Board of Directors by reviewing, prioritizing, and implementing prioritized projects in the region s various plans, e.g. Long Range Plan a.k.a. Communities in Motion (CIM) 2040 Public Transportation 2.0, Short Range Plan aka ValleyConnect 2.0 (Vc2.0), Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP), Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), IT / ITS Plan, Unified Program Work Plan (UPWP), public transportation providers yearly budgets, etc. Appropriations are made by Congress each year, depending on the adopted Federal Transportation Bill, which is currently referred to as the Fixing America s Surface Transportation (FAST Act). The FAST Act is a five-year bill which was approved December 3, Therefore, this bill/act is scheduled to end by the beginning of the fiscal year 2021 (FY21). A new transportation bill will either be presented and adopted or this bill could be extended. The appropriations for FY19 for our region were finalized last week. Based on the appropriations, the Boise and Nampa Urbanized Areas both received additional funding and will see this funding level for FY19, and should see this funding level for FY20. FTA Apportionments (shown in $1000) FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 FY2018 FY2019 FY2020 FY2021 FY2022 Boise 5307 LU 3,458 3,503 3,503 3,293 3,293 3,432 4,610 4,610 3,432 3,432 Nampa 5307 SU 2,287 2,354 2,354 2,405 2,450 2,512 2,555 2,555 2,512 2,512 Boise 5310 LU Nampa 5310 SU Boise 5339 LU Nampa 5339 SU Totals 6,882 6,958 6,937 6,740 6,818 7,233 8,561 8,725 7,375 7,375 Difference Notes/Assumptions: - FY13 through FY19 are actual posted amounts - Shown as Federal portion only (no local match shown) - Outlying years are estimated based on current year funding appropriation 700 N. E. 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

113 ITEM VII-G Staff Recommendation/Request: Information only Staff will review needs to maintain existing service and meeting the goals of ValleyConnect 2.0; those findings will be presented to the Executive Board for review and input on how to allocate the additional funding for FY19 and possibly FY20. Implication (policy and/or financial): The additional appropriation for FY19 and FY20 will affect upcoming public transportation budgets. More Information: Contact: - Rhonda Jalbert, Development Director, , rjalbert@valleyregionaltransit.org 113

114 ITEM VII-H TOPIC: FY20 Capital Budget Preparation DATE: March 18, 2019 Summary: As the Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA) for Ada and Canyon counties, Valley Regional Transit (VRT) is focused on giving the VRT Board a comprehensive understanding of all funded and unfunded public transportation capital needs in the region. There are several State of Good Repair, new or enhanced public transportation capital projects competing for the limited available capital funding for public transportation projects. The Transit Asset Management (TAM) Plan (adopted 12/3/2018) acknowledges the importance of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funds allocated to Ada & Canyon Counties in the continued operation of public transportation services in the region. The plan also requires an analytical process to prioritize all regional public transportation assets. This prioritization process is used to improve and maintain all public transportation assets in a State of Good Repair. The VRT Board of Directors reviews and approves this prioritization on an annual basis as part of the budget development process. The following outlines the process for both State of Good Repair asset management and the determination of priorities for capital required to support enhancing services in the region. State of Good Repair / Transit Asset Management The VRT Board of Directors approved the Regional Transit Asset Management (TAM) Policy and Plan for scoring and prioritizing public transportation assets, setting targets, and thereby creating corresponding capital projects. Staff, and other regional public transportation providers, conducted an inventory of all real property assets, classified them according to FTA definitions and scored the assets according to the scoring criteria for Regional Public Transportation Assets Policy and Plan. The attached data will inform the prioritization in the FY2020 capital budget. In addition to the score, VRT evaluates each asset based on the critical systems listed below. 1. Safety-critical systems A system whose failure may result in injury, loss of life or serious environmental damage. 2. Mission-critical systems - A system whose failure may result in the failure of some goal-directed activity. 700 NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

115 ITEM VII-H 3. Business-critical systems - A system whose failure may result in very high costs for the business using that asset. TAM Scores and Capital Budget VRT adopted the TAM target of 2.5 for most of the asset categories. Table 1 shows the summary of projects, by project type, in the large urban, small urban and regional areas. The regional category consists of both large and small urban projects. The table shows the assets broken out by the TAM scores and running total showing the cumulative costs needed to achieve the current 2.5 target. All assets that fall below the 2.5 score are considered deferred maintenance. The deferred maintenance for regional public transportation assets is $35.4 million, based on the 2019 scores. Facilities and rolling stock replacements make up the greatest percentage of the deferred maintenance expenses. Below is a summary of the projects contributing to those expenses by large and small-urban area. The detail pertaining to the expense categories are in Table 2. Large Urban Area The Orchard maintenance facility, constructed in 1998, is the base of operations for the Boise fixed-route and paratransit services. Based on the FY2019 TAM scores there is a total of $4.8 million in projected projects scoring below 2.5. These projects include routine upgrades and improvements, storm water redesign, and CNG fueling system rebuild and upgrades. The fueling system projects make up $3.2 million of the total facilities projects. VRT initiated a review, this winter, on electric vehicles and the implications of changing fueling technology on the facilities investments. The Boise State facility, constructed in 1965, makes up $3.4 million in capital projects. Boise State staff is unable to pull current rolling stock vehicles into the facility due to the height restrictions of the facility to complete even minor repairs and preventative maintenance. FY 2019 is the first year VRT ranked fixed bus stops in the TAM scoring process. VRT estimates the total expenses in the large-urban area for bus stops is $5.2 million. Fixed route rolling stock makes up $10 million in needed investments to both VRT and Boise State fixed route services rolling stock to get to the 2.5 target score. Commuteride vans require $300K in investment to achieve a 2.5 target for existing vehicles. Currently, Commuteride is operating with a 30 percent spare ratio, which is very high for public transportation. ADA paratransit (demand response) requires $1.8 million in investment to replace all vehicles with scores under 2.5. VRT staff is conducting additional analysis on regional facilities, fuel technology and the implications on the current deferred maintenance and funding shortfalls. In addition, 115

116 ITEM VII-H VRT is evaluating federal funding sources available for competitive grants to fund the shortfall. Staff will also be incorporating Boise Greenbike assets into the system. Small Urban Area The Happy Day Transit Center is the base of operations in Canyon County. VRT purchased and completed the first renovation in The facility requires substantial work to improve the facility based on the 2.5 target. Recent investments have upgraded elements to bring the facility into compliance with ADA requirements. The roof at the facility needs to be replaced, the awning needs to be repair, and the storefront glass needs to be replaced, including the customer doors into the lobby. Estimates for projects are $3.5 million. VRT staff continues to monitor the facility and the systems within the facility. The limiting factor for achieving the 2.5 target in Canyon County is a lack of local funding to match federal funds. Regional Area The regional area projects can utilize both large and small urban federal funding sources. Projects with a TAM score below 2.5 include specialized transportation vehicles and technology software and hardware projects. Estimates of these projects make up $3.4 million in deferred maintenance. In addition, there is need for $1 million in inter-county bus stop improvements. A summary of the TAM expenses, by systems, are in Table 3. The table shows 65 percent assets under a score 2.5 fall within one of the critical systems. Providers are responsible for designating the critical system an asset falls under. This area will be further refined in future scoring processes. ValleyConnect 2.0 Enhancement Projects ValleyConnect 2.0 is Valley Regional Transit s response to the region s travel needs. It is a blueprint for service and capital projects aimed at lowering the cost of urban transportation and providing the freedom to move without every trip requiring a private automobile. The goals of Vc2.0 are: 1. Provide safe and reliable multi-modal transportation choices considering the entire trip from origination to destination. 2. Prioritize investments in efficient fixed route service that expands public mobility while leveraging, maximizing and enhancing the utilization of the existing transportation assets and resources. 3. Ensure comprehensive transportation choices and access that support economic growth and enhanced quality of life for the region 116

117 ITEM VII-H Vc2.0 also states, to prioritize projects according to the following six prioritization themes: Safety/compliance; Maintenance; Complete and enhance the fixed-route network; Supporting capital and programs concurrent with service investments; Supportive of plans; and Partner readiness. State of Good Repair projects/needs addresses items of safety/compliance and maintenance. Staff has prepared a preliminary listing of capital projects supporting the last three themes above. Those projects are listed in Table 4. Facilities and rolling stock make up the greatest percentage of the proposed ValleyConnect 2.0 (Vc2.0) capital projects. Table 4 is a summary of the projects contributing to those expenses by large and small-urban area. FY 2020 Available Funding Large-Urban Area Funding (includes federal and local amounts) Table 5 shows the available federal and local funds available in FY2020 for capital projects is $2.3 million. These funding sources include Sections 5307 and 5339 federal formula fund and Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds. Small-Urban Area Funding (includes federal and local amounts) Table 5 shows the federal and local funding for small urban projects in FY2020 is $1.6 million. These funding sources include Sections 5307 and 5339 federal formula fund and Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds. Table 6 shows the total funding currently programmed in the Transportation Improvement Program and available from FY 2020 through FY2024 to fund public transportation assets is $16.9 million. The total amount needed to bring all current assets to a score of 2.5 is $35.4 million. This leaves a $16.6 million shortfall. Staff Recommendation/Request: This is an information only item. Staff will be outlining findings and next steps for consideration in the upcoming and future budgets to assist the VRT Board in developing priorities for capital funding. Implication (policy and/or financial): Funding will be allocated in the VRT FY20 Budget based upon input from VRT governing bodies. Highlights: Transit Asset Management Policy - Approved September 24, 2018 Transit Asset Management Plan Approved December 3, 2018 ValleyConnect 2.0 Approved April 2,2018 March 4,

118 ITEM VII-H Executive Board Information Item - Presented TAM/State of Good Repair Scoring and Outcomes Complete April 1, 2019 Executive Board Information Item - Present ValleyConnect 2.0 Projects Board of Directors Information Item Present update of FY20 Capital Projects based upon information from TAM/State of Good Repair Scoring and ValleyConnect 2.0 Implementation May, 2019 Executive Board Information Item Present FY20 Capital Projects List Executive board Information Item TAM Targets for FY20 Regional Technical Advisory Committee - Action Item - TAM Targets for FY20 June, 2019 Executive Board Action Item Present FY20 Capital Projects List Executive board Action Item TAM Targets for FY20 Regional Technical Advisory Committee - Action Item - TAM Targets for FY20 July, 2019 COMPASS Board of Directors - Action Item - TAM Targets for FY20 Federal Transit Administration - Submission of TAM Targets for FY20 More Information: Rhonda Jalbert, Development Director, , rjalbert@valleyregionaltransit.org 118

119 ITEM VII-H Table 1 Regional Public Transportation Assets by TAM Score TAM 0.0 to 2.5 (2019 Scores) Total Per TAM Score UZA Description TAM Scores Running Total LU Equipment 97,000 LU Boise State Facilities 3,095,000 LU Rolling Stock -- Boise State 140,000 LU Rolling Stock -- Demand Response 100,000 LU Facility - Fueling System 206,850 LU Total 0.0 to 0.5 3,638,850 3,638,850 TAM Group Total UZA Description TAM Scores Total Per TAM Score Running Total SU Canyon Facility - Office and Shop 1,325,000 SU Total 0.0 to 0.5 1,325,000 4,963,850 UZA Description TAM Scores Total Per TAM Score Running Total Reg IT- Hardware and Business Enterprise 531,500 Reg Total 0.0 to ,500 5,495,350 5,495, UZA Description TAM Scores Total Per TAM Score Running Total LU Rolling Stock - Demand Response 300,000 LU Rolling Stock - Fixed-route 3,920,000 LU Facility - Office and Parking Lot 105,000 LU Facility - Fueling System 513,300 LU Facility - Bus Stops 375,000 LU Facility - Boise State 230,000 LU Total 0.6 to 1.0 5,443,300 10,938,650 TAM Group Total UZA Description TAM Scores Total Per TAM Score Running Total SU Facilities - Office and Shop 840,000 SU Rolling Stock - Fixed Route 100,000 SU Equipment - Shop 50,000 SU Total 0.6 to ,000 11,928,650 UZA Description TAM Scores Total Per TAM Score Running Total Reg IT Hardware and ITS Projects 545,739 Reg Total 0.6 to ,739 12,474,389 6,979, UZA Description TAM Scores Total Per TAM Score Running Total LU Facility - Office and Shop Improvements 506,500 LU Facility - Bus Stops 3,140,000 LU Facility - Fueling System 544,800 LU Equipment - AVL GPS Boise State 50,000 LU Total 1.1 to 1.5 4,241,300 16,715,689 TAM Group Total UZA Description TAM Scores Total Per TAM Score Running Total SU Facility - Shop 465,000 SU Facitlity- Bus Stops 1,050,000 SU Total 1.1 to 1.5 1,515,000 18,230,

120 ITEM VII-H UZA Description TAM Scores Total Per TAM Score Running Total Reg Rolling Stock - Specialized Transportation 949,000 Reg Facilities - Intercounty bus stops 608,000 Reg Total 1.1 to 1.5 1,557,000 19,787,689 7,313, UZA Description TAM Scores Total Per TAM Score Running Total LU Rolling Stock - Demand Response 800,000 LU Rolling Stock - Fixed Route 2,450,000 LU Rolling Stock - Commuter Vans 87,200 LU Equipment - Support Vehicle 55,000 LU Facilities - Bus Stops 1,595,000 LU Facilities - Fueling System rebuild 1,500,000 LU Facilities - Office and Shop 463,000 LU Facilities - Boise State 15,000 LU Total 1.6 to 2.0 6,965,200 26,752,889 TAM Group Total UZA Description TAM Scores Total Per TAM Score Running Total SU Facilities - Office and Shop 175,000 SU Equipment - Shop 50,000 SU Total 1.6 to ,000 26,977,889 UZA Description TAM Scores Total Per TAM Score Running Total Reg Facility - Region Office 300,000 Reg ITS - Hardware and Software 1,281,000 Reg Facilities - Bus Stops Intercounty 90,000 Reg Total 1.6 to 2.0 1,671,000 28,648,889 8,861, UZA Description TAM Scores Total Per TAM Score Running Total LU Rolling Stock - Fixed Route 3,470,000 LU Rolling Stock - Demand Response 600,000 LU Rolling Stock - Commuter Vans 213,300 LU Facilities - Shop and Office 587,000 LU Facilities - Bus Stops 109,000 LU Facilities - Fueling System 377,000 LU Equipment Support Vehicles - Fareboxes 593,590 LU Total 2.0 to 2.5 5,949,890 34,598,779 TAM Group Total UZA Description TAM Scores Total Per TAM Score Running Total SU Facilities - Shop 680,000 Rollingstock - Fixed Route 100,000 SU Total 2.0 to ,000 35,378,779 UZA Description TAM Scores Total Per TAM Score Running Total Reg IT - Hardware and Software 30,000 Reg Total 2.0 to ,000 35,408,779 6,759,

121 ITEM VII-H Table 2 Capital with Scores up to 2.5 Total Rolling Stock Equipment Facilities Total $ 240,000 $ 628,500 $ 4,626,850 $ 5,495, $ 4,320,000 $ 595,739 $ 2,063,300 $ 6,979, $ 949,000 $ 50,000 $ 6,314,300 $ 7,313, $ 3,337,200 $ 1,386,000 $ 4,138,000 $ 8,861, $ 4,383,300 $ 623,590 $ 1,753,000 $ 6,759,890 Total Capital $ 13,229,500 $ 3,283,829 $ 18,895,450 $ 35,408,779 Rolling Stock with Scores up to 2.5 Large Uban Small Urban Regional Total Fixed Route 9,980, ,000 10,180,000 Demand Response 1,800,000 1,800,000 Commuter Van 300, ,500 Specialized 949, ,000 Total Rollingstock 12,080, , ,000 13,229,500 Facilities with Scores up to 2.5 Large Urban Small Urban Regional Total Boise State 3,340,000 3,340,000 VRT Fueling Systems 3,141,950 3,141,950 VRT Shop, Office, Site 1,661,500 3,485, ,000 5,446,500 Fixed Route Bus Stops 5,219, , ,967,000 Total Facilities 13,362,450 4,183,000 1,350,000 18,895,450 Table 3 Regional Assets Critical Categories TAM Scores 0.0 to 2.5 Safety Critical 60,739 Mission Critical 4,083,450 Business Critical 18,842,329 Total Critical Systems 22,986,518 % Total 65% 121

122 ITEM VII-H Table 4 Funding Year Funding Source Project Federal Share Local Share Total Cost Estimated Cost COMMENTS LU/SU 2 Shared Vehicles - Witco $ 108,800 $ 27,200 $ 136,000 $ 136,000 Additional Vehicles LU 2 Transit Vehicles for Fairview Service $ 792,000 $ 198,000 $ 990,000 $ 990,000 Additional Vehicles LU 2 Transit Vehicles for Meridian Service $ 792,000 $ 198,000 $ 990,000 $ 990,000 Additional Vehicles LU 1 Transit Vehicle for Eagle Service $ 396,000 $ 99,000 $ 495,000 $ 495,000 Additional Vehicle LU/SU Vehicle Propulsion Technology - Implement/Pilot Electric Vehicles - 6 Vehicles $ 1,680,000 $ 420,000 $ 2,100,000 $ 2,100,000 Additional Cost $350K/Vehicle ROLLING STOCK TOTAL $ 3,768,800 $ 942,200 $ 4,711,000 $ 4,711,000 INFRASTRUCTURE & EQUIPMENT SU Passenger Facilities - New stops & shelters for Fairview Service $ 140,000 $ 35,000 $ 175,000 $ 175,000 New Stops & Shelters SU Passenger Facilities - New stops & shelters for Meridian Service $ 200,000 $ 50,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 New Stops & Shelters SU Passenger Facilities - New stops & shelters for Eagle Service $ 120,000 $ 30,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 New Stops & Shelters LU $ 24,000 $ 6,000 $ 30,000 Shop Equipment - Scissor Lift SU $ 8,000 $ 2,000 $ 10,000 $ 40,000 New Equipment INFRASTRUCTURE TOTAL BIKE SHARE TOTAL PROPOSED ValleyConnect 2.0 CAPITAL UNFUNDED NEW OR ENHANCED PROJECTS UNFUNDED NEEDS ROLLING STOCK BIKE SHARE $ 152,000 $ 38,000 $ 190,000 $ 190,000 Equipment - Topeka Bikes - Paint $ 24,000 $ 6,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 IT / ITS PLAN - TECHNOLOGY $ 24,000 $ 6,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 IT / ITS PLAN - TECHNOLOGY TOTAL CAPITAL NEEDS TOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 3,944,800 $ 986,200 $ 4,931,000 $ 4,931,000 SUBRECIPIENT PROJECT TOTAL Subrecipients Boise State - AVL/GPS $ 28,000 $ 7,000 $ 35,000 $ 35,000 Enhancement $ 28,000 $ 7,000 $ 35,000 $ 35,000 N:\Programming\CIP\FY20\Table 1 New or enhanced capital projects for Page FY20 1 of 1 3/20/

123 ITEM VII-H Table 5 Federal and Local Funds by Federal Sources 5307LU FY20 STP-TMA Total LU 295,000 $ 439,000 $ 1,541,000 $ 2,275,000 FY21 295, ,000 1,541,000 2,275,000 FY22 295, ,000 1,449,000 2,183,000 FY23 295, ,000 1,449,000 2,183,000 FY24 295, ,000 1,449,000 2,183,000 Total $ 5339LU $ 1,475,000 $ 5307SU FY20* 5339SU 7,429,000 STP-U TOTAL SU 1,413,000 $ 232,000 $ FY21* 1,413, ,000-1,645,000 FY22 1,407, ,407,000 FY23 1,413, ,413,000 FY24 1,413, ,413,000 Total $ 2,195,000 $ $ 7,059,000 $ 159,000 $ 464,000 $ 159,000 $ 1,804,000 7,682,000 * Note - Italics denotes funds allocated to ACHD for Commuteride Vans Table 6 Funding Available Vc2.0 Needs Variance TAM Needs Total LU, SU and Local FY20 $ 4,079, $ 5,495,350 $ FY21 3,920, ,979,039 FY22 3,590, ,313,300 FY23 3,596, ,861,200 FY24 3,596, ,759,890 Total $ 18,781,000 Total $ 35,408,779 $ 123 7,226,000 7,226,000 ($23,853,779)

124 ITEM VII-I TOPIC: Mobile Ticketing DATE: March 20, 2019 Summary: Valley Regional Transit is currently undergoing a fare simplification and restructure project. Part of this project is to simplify the current fare structure and breakdown barriers to accessing valid fare media. Mobile ticketing was identified as one solution to start addressing many of the current barriers to accessing fare media, and potentially increase fare revenue. Mobile ticketing will give riders the ability to purchase fare media anywhere, anytime via a smart phone app. Currently there are several barriers to getting valid fare media into riders hands. Those barriers include: Riders need to have exact cash to purchase a single trip or one-day pass on the bus. There are no cashless options to purchase a fare on the bus. A rider has to travel to an outlet to purchase a paper pass to use a debit/credit card. Main Street Station does not accept cash. Main Street Station has a $10 credit/debit card minimum. Riders cannot easily purchase a ticket on the go. Valley Regional Transit conducted a competitive procurement process to identify a mobile ticketing vendor. In February 2019, the VRT Executive Board approved Resolution VEB to Masabi. Masabi is a global leader in mobile ticketing and has been providing mobile ticketing solutions since Masabi is currently delivering their Justride platform for mobile ticketing to over 30 agencies around the world. With Masabi mobile ticketing our riders will be able to easily purchase multiple types of fares and passes all from their mobile device. VRT will deploy mobile ticketing for the ValleyRide system using driver visual validation. It will allow drivers to quickly and easily validate a mobile ticket and for the passenger to board. Visual validation allows VRT to deploy mobile ticketing without investing in additional on-board software. Next Steps VRT staff has begun conversations with Masabi to determine what passes will be sold on mobile devices. VRT staff has a goal to implement mobile ticketing in May VRT staff will ensure strong communication, coordination and collaboration during the implementation of mobile ticketing with ValleyRide system operators in 700 NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

125 ITEM VII-I Caldwell and Boise, as well as the finance and customer service staff in Meridian. Staff Recommendation/Request: This is an information item only. Implication (policy and/or financial): The goal for the mobile ticketing pilot will be to increase fare revenue and ridership to at minimum cover the 4.5% cost-sharing percentage provided to Masabi. Highlights: January 2019 Fare tariff update: approved January 7, 2019 by VRT Board of Directors Informational memo provided to VRT Executive Board: January 7, 2019 Informational memo provided to the Regional Advisory Committee: January 15, 2019 February 2019 Resolution VEB approved by VRT Executive Board March 2019 May 2019 Design, testing and training May 2019 Implementation More Information: Leslie Pedrosa, Operations Director, , 125

126 ITEM VII-J TOPIC: Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan DATE: March 20, 2019 Summary: The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has published the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan (PTASP) Final Rule, which requires certain operators of public transportation systems that receive federal funds under 49 U.S.C to develop a safety plan that includes the processes and procedures to implement Safety Management Systems (SMS). A Safety Management System (SMS) is a comprehensive, collaborative approach to manage safety. It brings management and labor together to control risk better, detect and correct safety problems earlier, share and analyze safety data more effectively, and measure safety performance more precisely. The Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan (PTASP) final rule will become effective on July 19, Transit agencies will be required to certify they have an approved safety plan in place by July 20, The final rule states that transit agencies that operate one-hundred or fewer vehicles in peak revenue service may have the State Department of Transportation develop a safety plan on their behalf or they may opt to develop their own. This final rule also requires transit operators to set safety performance targets based on the safety performance measures in the National Public Transportation Safety Plan (NSP). Staff will send to Idaho Transportation Department, VRT s current Safety Security and Emergency Preparedness plan for review. Following the review by Idaho Transportation Department, a meeting will be scheduled with VRT staff to determine what items may need to be incorporated into the State Plan and what items are missing from VRT s current plan. Staff will examine VRT s current Safety Security and Emergency Preparedness Plan to determine which areas of the plan can be modified to meet SMS criteria, following the meeting with Idaho Transportation Department. Idaho Transportation Department is scheduled to have the statewide plan in place by July Once the statewide plan is released, VRT Staff will assess the potential impact to safety policy development should VRT adopt the Idaho Transportation Department statewide safety plan, or if VRT will develop a regional Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan (PTASP). Staff will present all findings of the assessment to the Executive Board. Staff will look to the Executive Board to recommend if VRT should adopt the state sponsored plan or develop a regional safety plan independent of the State of Idaho. 700 NE 2nd Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID p: f:

127 ITEM VII-J Staff will present the final product based upon recommendations from the Executive Board to the VRT Board of Directors for a final adoption of the ITD Safety Plan or a regional Safety Plan. Once the final Safety Plan is adopted, VRT staff will ensure strong communication, coordination and collaboration tactics are prepared for implementation. Staff Recommendation/Request: This is an information item only. Implication (policy and/or financial): Valley Regional Transit will be required to have a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan (PTASP) in place by July 20, Staff will determine if what the financial implications may be. Highlights: June 2019 VRT Staff will present an information item to the VRT Executive Board following a complete assessment of the Idaho Transportation Department s proposed statewide safety plan with a recommendation to either adopt the statewide plan or to develop a regional Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan (PTASP). July 2019 two options 1. VRT Staff will present an action item for the VRT Executive Board to recommend approval of the state sponsored safety plan to the VRT Board of Directors. 2. Information item - Present an outline to the VRT Executive Board of a Regional Safety Plan. For More Information: Leslie Pedrosa, Operations Director, , lpedrosa@valleyregionaltransit.org 127

128 128 ITEM VII-J

129 129 ITEM VII-J