Introduction. Future options and choices by Jarrett Walker

Transcription

1 Committee of the Whole - Workshop September 7, 2017 TR File no Introduction Two parts to this workshop Deepdive into the current state of Burlington Transit Future options and choices by Jarrett Walker Until some of the current state issues are resolved, there is little point in pursuing any of the options for change This is the first time in many years we have been able to obtain a comprehensive assessment of the state of Transit. The picture is deeply worrisome. 1 Current State Analysis of Burlington Transit *Comparator data used in this presentation is sourced from the 2015 CUTA factbook 2 1

2 Golden Age for Transit Transit Investment highest in Canadian history Federal PTIF Funding, Increased P. Gas Tax Transit is #1 priority of Toronto Citizens Transit imbedded in the Official plan Transit is a key to intensification Grow Bold A City that Moves in strategic plan 905 municipalities list Transit as a key priority Age Friendly Plan recommends better Transit Millennials are less inclined to own cars 3 Jarrett Walker Review of network in 2017 As a City Grows so does Transit Investment $ Municipal Contribution Per Capita (City Size by Population) $ $ $80.00 $60.00 $40.00 $20.00 $ City size by population <50k Burlington 50k 150k 150k 400k 400k 2000k Source 2015 CUTA Factbook 4 2

3 Presentation: Current State Mindset / Awareness This presentation This presentation Strategy Budget Business Plan 5 Funding Overview $ Municipal Contribution Per Capita $ $80.00 $60.00 $40.00 $20.00 $ Source: 2015 CUTA Factbook If the goal is to minimize the subsidy to transit, then on a per capita basis Burlington is doing quite well. Compared to peer agencies, the municipal contribution to transit is very low. ~Jarrett Walker and Associates 6 3

4 We Offer Less Service Service Hours per Capita Source: 2015 CUTA Factbook 7 BT has lower operating costs $ Operating Cost Per Vehicle KM $6.00 $5.00 $4.00 $3.00 $2.00 $1.00 $ Source: 2015 CUTA Factbook 8 4

5 Service Increase Reduced Reliability 170, , , ,000 Burl. Service Hours (excl handivan) Resources 150, , , ,000 Burl 2012 Burl 2013 Burl 2014 Burl 2015 Burl 2016 Service Service A key issue with (Burlington s) existing network is that about two thirds of existing service does not have sufficient layover and recovery to Resources ensure reliable operations. Resources ~Jarrett Walker and Associates 9 Effectiveness Ridership 2,300,000 Burlington 5 Year Transit Ridership Trend 2,200,000 2,100,000 2,000,000 1,900,000 1,800,000 1,700, Ridership 2,254,540 2,212,841 2,064,312 1,949,813 1,898,105 Provincial Gas Tax and PTIF Funding is based on ridership 10 5

6 Ridership GTHA Comparators Source: 2016 TTC Report Burlington Ridership in 2016 was 1.89M another 3% reduction 11 Price Elasticity Impacts Demand $3.50 $3.00 $2.50 $2.00 $1.50 $1.00 $0.50 $ Average Fare Charged Source: 2015 CUTA Factbook $3.75 Burlington Cash Fare Trend $3.50 $3.25 $3.00 $2.75 $

7 $5,900,000 $5,700,000 $5,500,000 $5,300,000 $5,100,000 $4,900,000 Lower Revenues Offset By Fuel BT Fare Revenue Trends $4,700, Projected Budget $5,273,870 $5,491,400 $5,701,230 $5,109,500 $5,109,500 Actual $5,148,542 $5,010,376 $5,004,364 $4,860,344 $4,909,500 $2,650,000 $2,550, $2,450,000 $2,350,000 $2,250,000 $2,150,000 $2,050,000 $1,950,000 $1,850,000 $1,750,000 Fuel Budget Projected Budget $2,429,922 $2,372,500 $2,543,000 $2,161,880 $1,867,500 Actual $2,293,574 $2,450,180 $2,022,390 $1,820,317 $1,947, Provincial Gas Tax Used for Operating % of PGT used for Operating (balance used for Capital) 44% 42% 40% 38% 36% 34% 32% 30% Provincial Gas Tax Revenue was adjusted for consistency due to accounting accrual changes 14 7

8 Transit Capital No Municipal Funding 70% 3 Year Municipal Capital Contribution as a % of Total Capital Cost 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Burlington St. Catharines York Region Oakville Durham Region GTHA Average Brampton Mississauga Source: CUTA Factbook Budget Funding Changed For 2006, the tax levy provision to the transit reserve funds has been removed. This has resulted in a decrease of $1,505,000, in the transit budget. More recently, senior levels of government are providing funding for transit ~ Finance Report (F 3/06): Ontario Transit Vehicle Program : Discontinued in 2011 Federal Gas Tax Dedicated Transit Funding : Discontinued in 2008 Federal Gas Tax: Council reduced from 30% to 20% in 2012 Provincial Gas Tax to promote transit growth: Declining ridership 16 8

9 Capital Use of Both Gas Taxes $1,600,000 $1,400,000 $1,200,000 $1,000,000 $800,000 $600,000 $400,000 $200,000 $0 FGT Allocated to Transit $1,450,000 $1,400,000 $1,350,000 $1,300,000 $1,250,000 $1,200,000 $1,150,000 $1,100,000 PGT Allocated to Transit Capital *Note: PGT guidelines to be used for transit growth adjusted $1,050,000 $1,000,000 for accounting method change Source: Page 265 of 2017 Capital Budget Book *Eligible transit revenue includes growth funding. Minimal expenses for growth. **Need is for replacement but only funding available is Fed Gas Tax. 18 9

10 Funding Gap Has Increased $5,000,000 Aug 2017 Estimated Transit Capital Cumulative Funding Gap $0 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 Current Forecast 2017 Budget Book $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000, Staffing Review $ Maximum Operator Wage $32.00 $30.00 $28.00 $26.00 $24.00 $22.00 $20.00 Burlington Greater Sudbury Guelph St. Catharines Oakville Kingston Hamilton Brampton Mississauga 20 10

11 170,000 Service Changes Squeeze Service Burl. Conventional Service Hours Service 165, , , , , , ,000 Resources Burl 2012 Burl 2013 Burl 2014 Burl 2015 Burl 2016 Resources Service 2,150 Burl. Service Hours Service per FT Driver 2,100 2,050 Resources 2,000 1,950 Resources 1,900 Resources Burl 2012 Burl 2013 Burl 2014 Burl 2015 Burl Casual Operators Part Time staff are paid less lower municipal contribution Part Time staff average over 44 hours per week Poor working conditions: no minimum hour guarantee need to be available 7 days a week reduced benefits schedule hdl given Friday prior to start of the week 56% annual turnover rate for casuals Significant recruitment and training time and costs Regular FT staff need to cover turnover overtime 22 11

12 $450,000 $400,000 $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 Impact of Staffing Overtime Budget Variance $ Projected Variance $28,676 $49,472 $94,133 $327,951 $424, % Sick Cost as a % of FT Salary 4.0% 3.5% 3.0% 2.5% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% Current 23 Transit Operator Working Hours Weekly Pay Staff 25 Staff w/ Highest Hours Hours Worked ESA Exemption Max Current ESA Limit Overtime Threshold FT FT FT FT FT FT FT FT FT FT FT FT FT FT FT FT PT PT PT PT PT PT PT PT PT 24 12

13 Transit Supervision Review 25.0 Operations Supervisor Spans (FT Drivers / Supervisor) Burl Transit Oakville Transit Brampton TTC Source: 2015 CUTA data and Agency Staffing Reports Over 50% of service hours Operations Supervisors work alone 25 Maintenance Supervisor Coverage Supervised 39% Not Supervised 61% Burlington Transit, with only one maintenance supervisor has the least supervisor coverage of the transit systems interviewed, which have up to 3 supervisors on staff for similar garage hours as Burlington ~Transit Consulting Network

14 Maintenance Review 600,000 Vehicle Km s Per Licensed Mechanic 500, , , , ,000 Hamilton St. Brampton Guelph Mississauga GTHA Catharines Average Barrie Durham Region Kingston Oakville Burlington Industry standard preventative maintenance should be 72 inspections per month BT performs 12 1/5 th of industry standards Transit Consulting Network, Mechanics Can t Keep Up 24,500 Veh Hours per Mechanic 24,000 23,500 23,000 22,500 22,000 21,500 21,000 Burl 2012 Burl 2013 Burl 2014 Burl 2015 Burl 2016 $550, $500,000 $450,000 $400,000 $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 External Services Budget Actual $276,025 $267,676 $285,105 $488,181 $457,361 Budget $286,600 $295,080 $304,280 $324,280 $308,500 $1,000,000 $900,000 $800,000 $700,000 $600,000 $500,000 $400,000 $300,000 $200,000 Parts Budget Actual $544,43 $482,37 $573,14 $817,17 $920,17 Budget $428,97 $400,47 $417,70 $463,60 $471,

15 Admin Support Has not Kept Up 170,000 Burl. Conventional Service Hours 165, , , , , , ,000 Burl 2012 Burl 2013 Burl 2014 Burl 2015 Burl 2016 $9.40 $9.20 $9.00 $8.80 $8.60 $8.40 $8.20 $8.00 $7.80 $7.60 Admin Cost per Veh Hour Burl 2012 Burl 2013 Burl 2014 Burl Strategy Operating In Reactive Mode Generally, Burlington Transit should consider less reactive activities in order to concentrate on forward looking business planning ~2016 Data Analytics Audit (Internal Audit) 30 15

16 Summary Service hours have expanded, largely funded by reducing, or not increasing, critical back end functions, hence the low comparative cost of operations Financially un sustainable operation with declining revenues and increasing costs, saved each year largely by low gas prices Cost has increased while service quality is poor (primarily redeemed only by the exceptional commitment of the drivers) Ridership is in serious decline, 16.5% decline in last four years, continuing to decline Service was expanded with an FTE cap, resulted in creative staffing solutions that were costly, inefficient, (largely casuals) and in turn negatively impacted service quality. 31 Summary Continued No Capital budget for vehicle replacement as of 2019 We relied on Provincial and Federal programs to fund capital with zero municipal contribution to capital. Most of those other funding programs have ended. Transit operators routinely working over 50 hours, sometimes 60 hours a week. Serious safety concerns. Casuals working an average of 42 hours a week, yet 56% annual turnover. Serious deficiencies in maintenance, particularly preventative maintenance. Serious deficiencies dfii i in supervision, ii with mechanics often working alone, and supervisors often unable to leave the building. Until very recently, planning has been entirely reactive, with routes and service plans often shaped by squeaky wheel forces, rather than good system planning

17 The Choice Current State: Burlington Transit is providing poor service, for fewer people each year, at an increasingly higher cost, and running major deficits that are hidden by fuel costs. It is not sustainable. The Choices: 1. Either cut back service levels to provide more reliable service, improve maintenance, improve supervision, and change driver makeup, 2. Fund dthe service at a level lthat t allows the current service to be sustainable, and addresses the poor service quality that is impacting ridership. 33 Critical Next Steps Focus on stabilizing our current operation Making changes to maximize existing resources Improving service delivery and reliability Identify quick wins Pre budget Council report to address immediate staffing issues Budget 2018 Business Cases Focus on Stability 34 17

18 Future Direction Change Management Plan (SOP s) Maximize i use of current technology Jarrett Walker 2019 Route Network Design Development of 5 year business plan Development and Tracking of KPI s Future Growth Strategy Leveraging emerging urban mobility technology 35 18