Related Links

The Regular Meeting of the Committee for Transit Accessibility (CTA) was called to order at 1:05 p.m. by Chairperson Morrow in Building A, Auditorium, Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), 3331 North First Street, San Jose, California.

ROLL CALL

Members Present
Adam Byrnes, staff aide representing Cindy Chavez (Ex-Officio Board Liaison)
Emma Eljas
Linda Gallo
Sandra Gouveia
David Grant
Katie Heatley (Ex-Officio)
Troy Hernandez
Marjorie Jensen
David Julian
Martin Lasich
Allen F. Marcillet
Laura Michels
Aaron Morrow, Chairperson
Thomas Slack
Barbara Stahl, Second Vice Chairperson
Randy Tamez

Members Absent
Barbara Rhodes, First Vice Chairperson

A quorum was present.

INTRODUCTION OF AUDIENCE MEMBERS

Received introductions from the audience including: Jose Padilla, VTA Information Technology; Francisco Salvador, VTA Information Technology; Art Douwes, VTA Maintenance Engineering; Jim Wilhelm, VTA Maintenance Engineering; Doug Beley, VTA Acting Chief Technology Officer; David Terrazas, VTA Marketing and Public Affairs; Julia Jones, VTA Accessible Services; Jim Unites, VTA Operations Planning; Mike Hursh, VTA Operations Maintenance Deputy Director; Walter Schinke, Silicon Valley Independent Living Center; Steve Johnstone, VTA Operations Senior Management Analyst;  Mark Thomas, VTA Operations Training; Joonie Tolosa, VTA Operations Analysis; Dan Smith, VTA Chief Operating Officer; and Martin Bishop, Director of N.E.E.D. Project.

PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS

Martin Lasich, Interested Citizen, expressed concern and referenced an incident on Thursday, July 6, 2006 when a bus operator did not stop to pick up him and his wife at the bus stop.  Mr. Lasich expressed concern and stated that bus operators have not stopped and passed him by on several occasions.  Sam Lau, Operations Deputy Director, responded that staff would speak with Mr. Lasich after the meeting to obtain the information to forward his concern to staff to be addressed.

Member Michels took her seat at 1:11 p.m.

Walter Schinke, Silicon Valley Independent Living Center, expressed concern and stressed the importance for operators to provide assistance and secure mobility devices with the restraint system on the bus vehicles.   Mr. Schinke expressed concern and noted that Personal Care Assistants (PCA’s) should not have to secure the mobility devices with the restraint system on the bus vehicles.  Mr. Schinke suggested that the operators are periodically briefed regarding their job duty to secure the mobility devices with the restraint system on the bus vehicles.

Board of Directors Report

Adam Byrnes, staff aide representing Cindy Chavez (Ex-Officio Board Liaison) reported that at the June 15, 2006 Board of Directors Special Meeting, the Board approved the Expenditure Plan, which included a Senior/Disabled Program.   Mr. Byrnes stated that VTA would work collaboratively with the CTA Committee to address the Senior/Disabled Program. 

Member Tamez queried when VTA and CTA would begin to work on the Senior/Disabled Program.   Mr. Byrnes responded that staff would look into when the work is scheduled to begin and provide the information to the Committee.  

Member Tamez queried about the amount of funding allocated to theSenior/Disabled Program.   Mr. Byrnes responded that staff would follow up and provide the information to the Committee.  

The Agenda was taken out of order.

Semi-Annual Legislative Update

The Semi-Annual Legislative Update was deferred. 

Committee Staff Report

Camille Williams, Accessible Services Manager and Staff Liaison, referenced the
March 8, 2006 CTA Minutes, noting the motion to recommend that VTA provide an
800-telephone number for customers to call to report non-operating lifts.   Ms. Williams commented that David Terrazas, Jim Unites, and Francisco Salvador have worked to have the 800-telephone number in place, which would become effective August 1, 2006. 
Ms. Williams stated that the caller would call in and follow the prompts then the call would be forwarded to the front of the queue then an individual would provide assistance.

Member Slack queried if the caller would be able to speak to a live person.   Ms. Williams responded, “yes” that a caller would be able to speak with a live person during and after business hours.

Member Marcillet referenced Member Lasich’s complaint and queried if callers would be able to use the 800-telephone to log a complaint.   Jim Unites, Operations Planning Program Manager, responded that the Committee requested an 800-telephone number for customers to call to report non-operating lifts.  All customer service and complaint calls can be addressed by calling VTA’s 321-2300 or VTA’s regular 800-telephone number, which would be answered by Customer Service during regular business hours and after business hours those calls are transferred to VTA’s 24-hour Operations Control Center (OCC).  Mr. Unites noted that the Committee requested an 800-telephone number for customers to call to note that they are stranded and report non-operating lifts.

Member Lasich inquired why a bus would be on the road if the vehicle were out of service.   Mr. Lau responded that some buses are out of service when the operator has completed his work hours and is off duty so the vehicle is heading back to the bus yard.  Mr. Lau commented that when operators are in revenue service they are required to stop for customers unless they have a full load of passengers then the operator contacts OCC to note the full load of passengers on the vehicle.

Member Grant expressed concern regarding his complaint last month related to the automated Annunciator system not working properly on Line 81.  Member Grant provided the information to staff for a response but he has not received feedback.  He stressed the importance for staff to provide feedback and follow through with a response. 

Member Gallo responded that she attended an operator’s training last week and was told that the Global Positioning System (GPS) technical mechanic repairs the Annunciator System.   Member Gallo noted that the operator, vehicle, and technical mechanic must all be present at the same time in order for the Annunciator System on the vehicle to be repaired. 

Mike Hursh, Operations Maintenance Deputy Director, apologized to Member Grant and noted that staff does take comments and complaints seriously in an effort to address the concern.  Staff is currently working on the concern and has identified some GPS and Annunciator System problems so the vendor has been contacted to address the concerns.  VTA has met with SamTrans who has the same system and has identified software updates to install in VTA’s system.  Mr. Hursh noted that staff intends to continue working on the issues to address concerns and gave his commitment that staff would contact Member Grant with a progress report.

Member Slack stressed the importance for staff to provide feedback and follow through with a response to issues and concerns.   Mr. Hursh responded that he would look into the matter and find out why the feedback did not occur.

Member Gallo queried about the process to repair the Annunciator System.  Mr. Hursh responded that there are two levels of maintenance that are completed.  VTA mechanics can work on the first level of maintenance but the vendor completes the bench level maintenance repair work on the Annunciator System.  Mr. Hursh stated that the issue with Line 81 is due to a programming error so the system is not triggering the announcements but staff is currently working to address the issue.

Member Tamez requested that the Annunciator System update be agendized on the next CTA Agenda to provide the Committee with the opportunity to take action.   Member Tamez stressed the importance for operators to call the stops when the Annunciator System is not working properly. 

Member Tamez stated that OUREACH drivers are required to conduct a review of the vehicle before they start their route and queried if VTA operators are conducting a review of their vehicles before they start their route.   Mr. Hursh responded, “yes” that VTA operators are required and do review their vehicles before they start their route. Mr. Hursh stated that staff randomly polls bus vehicles throughout the day to ensure that the equipment is working properly. 

Member Tamez queried about the driver reports on the bus equipment and requested that the reports be provided to the Committee.  Mr. Hursh responded that staff would compile sample information for the Committee.

Member Tamez asked what staff is doing with the report information on the bus equipment.  Mr. Hursh responded that the operator completes a pre-inspection and defect card, which is turned in at the end of their route assignment.  The pre-inspection and defect card information is entered into the system and a work order is generated so that a mechanic can investigate and repair the defect.

Chairperson Morrow noted that the Annunciator System would be forwarded to the August 9, 2006 CTA Meeting for Committee discussion. 

Member Slack asked how staff knows that the operators are completing the
pre-inspection of the bus vehicles.   Mr. Hursh responded that the operators are required to turn in a pre-inspection card and sign it.  The California Highway Patrol (CHP) randomly audits VTA to ensure that the pre-inspection cards are being completed.  Supervisors and managers randomly conduct a gate check to ensure that equipment is working properly and to observe that the drivers complete their pre-inspection of their bus vehicles.  

Member Lasich queried if the operators are required to call out every stop on the bus route.  Mr. Lau responded that the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires that a major change in direction or major transfer points are to be called out but not every single stop.  Mr. Lau stated that the operators have a call stop sheet, which has all the major stops and transfer centers that are required to be called out by the Annunciator System or operator.

Member Lasich asked how a visually impaired individual would be able to know when their bus stop was being approached if the operators are not calling out the stops. 

Ms. Williams announced that the San Antonio Light Rail Station platform has been retrofitted and is scheduled to be re-opened on Wednesday, July 26, 2006.  Ms. Williams invited the CTA Committee Members to attend the event.

Joonie Tolosa, Operations Senior Management Analyst, provided a brief overview on the June 2006 VTA Ridership Report.  The June 2006 Ridership Report reflects increases in both bus and light rail ridership.  Bus ridership has increased 2.1 percent and light rail increased 22.1 percent with a total of $39.2 million for the entire fiscal year.

Chairperson’s Report

Chairperson Morrow commented that VTA is seeking feedback on how to improve its website.   Chairperson Morrow requested volunteers to participate on the website task force and provide input on VTA’s website changes.  Chairperson Morrow noted that Members Tamez, Julian, First Vice Chairperson Rhodes, and Chairperson Morrow volunteered to serve on the website task force.

Chairperson Morrow noted that the Organizational and Financial Performance Audit RFP has been completed and the evaluation team has selected a consultant.  The results will be forwarded to the CTA Committee in August.

Chairperson Morrow noted that the Committee has received information related to Member Tamez’s concerns regarding the Paratransit Financial Assessment.   Chairperson Morrow noted his decision to conduct a special meeting in September regarding the issues surrounding Member Tamez’s concerns.  Chairperson Morrow asked the Committee on behalf of staff if it was acceptable for staff to meet with Member Tamez before the special meeting in September to receive clarification regarding Member Tamez’s concerns.   Member Tamez responded that it would not be appropriate since it is public information that needs to be addressed in an open forum with the Committee and public. 

Chairperson Morrow noted that CTA would conduct their regular scheduled meeting and the special meeting in September.  Chairperson Morrow stated that the special meeting would be scheduled and the information would be provided to the Committee.

Member Tamez expressed concern and stressed the importance for VTA staff and CTA to work collaboratively to address Committee issues and concerns.  Dan Smith, Chief Operating Officer, responded that staff’s intention is to streamline the report process to ensure that the information would be provided to the Committee in a timely manner.

Member Tamez suggested that a financial review sub-committee be formed to discuss the issues, which would be reflected in the meeting record and conducted in an open and public forum.  Member Tamez noted that the information could be forwarded and reported to the CTA Committee. 

Member Jensen suggested that the financial review discussion be part of the regular scheduled September 13, 2006 CTA Meeting due to Committee interest in the matter.  Member Jensen expressed concern that an additional Committee meeting would negatively impact Committee Members schedules.

Member Eljas suggested that the Committee give responsibility to a smaller sub-committee to meet regarding the financial review discussion then report to the entire CTA Committee to review and take action as a group.

The Committee agreed to conduct the financial review discussion at the regular scheduled September 13, 2006 CTA Meeting. 

Mr. Smith commented that staff’s intention was to streamline the financial review report to ensure that the information would be provided to the Committee in a timely manner.  Ms. Williams stated that the intent was to receive clarification regarding Member Tamez’s concerns related to the financial review as well as to streamline the information process and provide the information to the Committee in a timely manner.

Minutes of June 7, 2006              

Member Tamez referenced the June 7, 2006 CTA Meeting Minutes, Page 4, Line 20, noting the discussion from Terry Applegate and stated that the minutes do not reflect
Ms. Applegate’s comment that VTA violated the Brown Act due to staff presenting an item that was not agendized nor do they reflect Member Tamez’s concurrence of the comment.   Chairperson Morrow responded that he would review the June 7, 2006 CTA Meeting tape regarding Member Tamez’s concerns.     

Member Grant referenced the June 7, 2006 CTA Meeting Minutes and queried when the Committee would receive information regarding the system cost per total hours of other local transit agencies as a basis of what VTA’s total costs are compared to its neighbors.

Ms. Williams responded that staff is currently working on the concern and would provide a status update progress report to the Committee.

The Committee deferred the Minutes of June 7, 2006 to the August 9, 2006 CTA Meeting.

BUSINESS REFERRED TO COMMITTEE BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS/GENERAL MANAGER

VTA Securement Task Force Meeting

Steve Johnstone, Operations Senior Management Analyst, provided a brief overview of the VTA Securement Task Force Meeting.   Mr. Johnstone commented that the VTA Securement Task Force met on June 23, 2006 and July 7, 2006.   Mr. Johnstone stated that the focus is to work on refining VTA’s Policy Statement, which has been forwarded to CTA, Transit Planning and Operations (TP&O) Committee, and VTA Board of Directors. 

Mr. Johnstone commented on the Policy Statement for Mobility Aid Securement on VTA Buses (Draft – 7/5/2006), noting that effective January 1, 2007, VTA requires that persons using mobility devices ride with their devices secured while passengers in VTA’s coaches.

The policy applies to all mobility devices that VTA is able to secure.  It does not apply to those devices that cannot be secured.  If tie-down equipment does not fit or is broken, the users of mobility device aids will be allowed to ride.

VTA bus operators must verify that all mobility devices are secured while the bus is in motion, except as stated above.  The driver must secure the mobility aid, or must ensure proper securement if performed by the passenger or attendant.

VTA recommends, but does not require, that users of mobility devices use the lap and/or shoulder belts available on all buses.  The driver will assist with lap and shoulder belts if desired by passenger.

All VTA buses accommodate wheelchairs, scooters, and similar mobility aids up to 30 inches wide and 48 inches long, weighing 600 pounds or less when occupied, per Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) regulations.  Users of mobility aids exceeding these limits may be denied access if they create any safety, maneuverability, mechanical problems, or which may become a direct threat to others.  Wheelchairs may not be transported with seats in a fully reclined position.

Mr. Johnstone commented on the draft, noting that for their safety, passengers using three-wheeled scooters are strongly encouraged, but not required, to transfer to a regular bus seat whenever possible as recommended by most scooter manufacturers.  The scooter will then be secured in the wheelchair area.

All mobility aids must be secured to the floor of VTA buses during transportation.  Passengers who do not comply with this policy may be denied transportation, according to federal ADA regulations.

VTA passengers using mobility aids are encouraged to take advantage of the VTA wheelchair marking and tether strap program.

Mr. Johnstone commented on the Sign Description, noting that this is the description of the sign that will be displayed in the coaches when the securement policy goes into place.   The sign will be 9”x5” with a blue background and white lettering and will have the following wording: “Effective January 1, 2007 - All mobility devices must be secured on VTA buses.   VTA also recommends passengers in mobility devices use lap and shoulder belts provided.”

Member Slack queried if the mobility device cannot be secured in the vehicle is the operator permitted to proceed with the mobility device unsecured.   Mr. Johnstone responded, “yes” and if the operator proceeds without securing the mobility device then the operator is required to contact OCC to advise that the vehicle is proceeding with a mobility device that is unsecured.

Member Jensen queried about the mobility device 600 pounds regulation.   Mr. Johnstone responded that according to the ADA guidelines a transit agency may deny service if the combined weight of an individual and the mobility device exceed 600 pounds.

Member Grant expressed concern regarding the absence of the fourth tie down in bus vehicles.  Mr. Johnstone responded that staff has conducted survey inspections and the fourth tie down is present in the bus vehicles and the groove used in the securement is clear. Member Grant expressed concern that the operators are unwilling to use the fourth tie down restraint.  Member Grant stressed the importance of the operators providing assistance to the customers.  Member Grant stated that securement is an important safety issue that must be addressed.  Mr. Johnstone thanked Member Grant for bringing the issue to staff’s attention. 

Mr. Lau stressed the importance for customers to provide relevant information to VTA when reporting an incident, such as the operator badge number, line route, day and time of the incident to ensure that the incident is addressed.

Member Grant stressed the importance for staff to provide feedback and follow through with customer complaints.   Member Grant referenced the June 7, 2006 CTA Minutes, noting the importance for the Committee to receive a report from the Accessible Services Department regarding customer complaints and how the concerns are addressed. 

Member Grant expressed concern that the Customer Service Department does not respond to customer complaints and noted that there is no follow through by VTA regarding customer complaints.  David Terrazas, Customer Service Manager, extended an offer to provide the Committee with the Customer Service process procedures starting from when a call is received to how it is processed through the agency and the assigned callbacks to customers.  Mr. Terrazas stated that Customer Service receives about 100,000 calls per month regarding general information and customer concerns.  Staff works diligently to respond to each one promptly.  There are times when there is a delay due to research efforts to address issues and concerns.  Chairperson Morrow suggested that Mr. Terrazas meet with Member Grant regarding the issues and concerns.

Chairperson Morrow referenced VTA’s CARE report and requested a flow chart showing where the CARE reports are routed once they have been entered into the system and how they are being addressed.  Member Tamez suggested that the flow chart include whether the complaint was responded to and any notes entered into the system regarding the complaint by the Information Service Representative (ISR).

Member Tamez queried about who determines whether the individual and mobility device 600 pounds limit.  Member Tamez asked if there was a scale or if the operator makes the determination regarding the weight.  Ms. Williams responded that the weight limit is based on ADA requirements and lift equipment standards, noting that the lift equipment would malfunction if the weight exceeds the 600 pounds limit.

Member Tamez queried if other accommodations are made to assist if the individual and mobility device exceed the 600 pounds limit.   Upon inquiry from Ms. Williams,
Ex-Officio Member Heatley responded that OUTREACH has multiple lifts to address reasonable accommodation issues and concerns.  Ex-Officio Member Heatley stated that the smallest lift available accommodates the ADA standard weight not to exceed the 600 pounds limit.  OUTREACH’s type II vehicles accommodate 1100 pounds and have a wider lift.  Ex-Officio Member Heatley noted the importance for reasonable accommodation to be built into the flexibility of the policy. 

Mr. Johnstone referenced the November 3 – 5, 2006 Abilities Expo for Northern California related to the lift equipment and noted staff’s attempt to accommodate most mobility devices in both dimensions and weight.   Mr. Johnstone noted that staff has been working to address training and customer service sensitivity issues through the Verification of Transit Training (VTT) program.  Mr. Johnstone noted that the Policy Statement for Mobility Aid Securement on VTA Buses addresses safety concerns, and VTA is moving forward to ensure a safer transit for all passengers.

Member Tamez expressed concern regarding the operator’s ability to determine if the mobility devices are able or not to be secured in the bus vehicle.   Member Tamez queried if there was a way to use a secret rider to verify that operators are fairly determining if the mobility devices are able or not to be secured in the bus vehicles.  Mr. Johnstone responded that with the voluntary policy and at the Abilities Expo staff was able to secure every one of the 70 plus mobility devices, which included a Segway device. 

Mr. Johnstone commented that if staff identifies a trend that certain operators are establishing a pattern of inability to secure mobility devices on the bus vehicles, then it would be questioned since experience suggests that VTA is able to secure most mobility devices on VTA’s vehicles. 

Member Marcillet referenced the May 4, 2006 VTA Board of Directors Minutes, Page 13, Agenda Item # 10., Public Presentation, regarding information presented and read into the record, noting, “There is no ADA, federal, state or local laws requiring mandatory restraints on buses, trains or light rail vehicles for mobility-impaired devices.” Member Marcillet referenced the operator’s sensitivity training manual, noting that Federal Regulation 37.165(b): “The Authority cannot deny transportation to a wheelchair or its user because the device cannot be restrained satisfactorily in the securement device.” 

Member Marcillet referenced Federal Regulation 37.163(d): “If a lift is inoperative, the vehicle must be removed from service before the next service day and the lift must be repaired unless (37.163(e) no spare vehicle is available and removing the vehicle will reduce provided service.  The vehicle can remain in service no longer than three days (72 hours) from the day the inoperative status was discovered.”  Member Marcillet commented that it is a labor issue related to having enough mechanics to work on the equipment problems.

Member Marcillet referenced Federal Regulation 37.163(f): “When a vehicle with an inoperative lift is on a fixed route with a headway of more than 30 minutes before the next accessible vehicle, the Authority shall promptly provide alternative transportation to customers with disabilities that require the lift.”  Member Marcillet stated that there is a rule and policy for everything and contingency for everything and noted that it falls through the cracks when there is a volume issue and/or labor shortage but the riders are the ones who are negatively impacted.  Member Marcillet stressed the importance to work to address the difficulties.

Mr. Johnstone commented that there are many issues on a daily basis but VTA strives through its policies to promote good customer service for all its customers. 

Evaluation of Prototype Securement Device Design submitted by Mr. Martin Bishop

Martin Bishop, N.E.E.D. Project, requested that Mr. Hursh read his written statement into the record:

“CTA Members, Today I am here seeking your endorsement of
Supervisor Jim Beall and Chairman of the Board of Supervisors’ letter to VTA General Manager Michael Burns to take advantage of the delay of implementation of mandatory restraints of wheelchairs and mobility devices on buses until January 2007.  The purpose of this letter from Supervisor Beall to Michael Burns is to determine whether any new types of securement devices are readily available which will mitigate injuries to coach operators who must apply the four-point restraint system, which results in payment of workmen’s compensation, mitigate damages to wheelchairs from this four-point restraint system, to mitigate disruption of bus schedules resulting in the general ridership for making their bus transfer connections so that they can arrive at work on time.  The intent of Supervisor Beall’s letter is to open up the possibility of a RFP (request for proposal) or RFB (request for bid) from other manufacturers which will be to their financial benefit to introduce universal securement device that will mitigate driver injuries, wheelchair damages and delay of schedules.

CTA members and colleagues, I had a meeting on Monday, June 5, with General Manager Burns and staff.   At this meeting General Manager Burns made it perfectly clear that he would in no way, shape or form allow any VTA staff time, not even one minute, towards seeking any type of restraint system and that VTA will implement the current securement system adopted by the VTA Board of Directors. 

This decision by Mr. Burns completely rejects Supervisors Jim Beall’s letter.  For this reason I am here today, 1) seeking your endorsement of Supervisor’s Beall’s letter and 2) your recommendation to VTA staff to begin in earnest to seek out and seek and find if a new restraint system is available or can be manufactured by securement device makers similar to what is on roller coaster cars.

Committee members, I am a long term member and former Chair of the Ad Hoc Committee on Transportation for the Mobility Impaired, your predecessor to the CTA.  The Ad Hoc Committee came into existence in 1976 or 1978.  I was instrumental during my tenure as a co-founder of the paratransit plan, the introduction of low-floor buses, the introduction of low-floor light rail vehicles and writing the policy on securement devices on wheelchairs on buses that is reflected and preferred, but not required.

Committee members, if the current policy of mandatory 4-point restraints comes into effect, it will do more harm than good in the form of unintended consequences.  Prior to your endorsement of the Q restraint system as the safest, least expensive device available, a committee was unintentionally or intentionally misinformed that all due diligence had been taken into consideration, which is essentially misleading or, at the worst, a misrepresentation of the truth.

Advisory Committee, in a rush to insure that a securement device be put in place to avoid lawsuits from mobility device passengers falling over and getting injured, VTA staff did not fully take into consideration driver injuries, damages to wheelchairs, damages to mobility devices, and delay of bus schedules.  The literature that I have passed out here shows from a risk management standpoint that even on a very small scale, there are driver injuries and mobility device problems associated with the roll out of securement devices.  Members, what needs to be done at this time is a cost benefit analysis, which would include obtaining information from other county transit districts that have mandatory tie down securement policies and which will show actual costs associated with driver workmen’s compensation claims and damages mobility devices and delay of bus schedules.  Combined costs over a 3 to 5 year period are estimated to be $2.3 million and will only continue to rise, which compares to a
$2.1 million lawsuit over a 23 year period with a zero mandatory restraint policy.

CTA Committee members, what is before us at this time is the opportunity to correct an error with regards to mandatory restraints and put in place a new type of restraint system that will mitigate problems outlined in Supervisor Beall’s letter that at this time needs your endorsement and, in addition, your directive to the VTA staff to work with me through Jim Unites and Edna Pampy who have been my liaison to Transit Administrative Staff, while I continue to put into place what needs to be done with technical issues that need to be addressed for this to work.  Thank you for your time and consideration.  Martin Bishop.”

Mr. Bishop requested that Mr. Hursh read Supervisor Beall’s letter.   Chairperson Morrow stated that CTA is not in a position to take a position regarding a recommendation for a RFP.  The VTA Board of Directors has already taken a position regarding Mr. Bishop’s preliminary design. 

Chairperson Morrow recommended that CTA does not endorse Mr. Bishop’s preliminary design for the following reasons: It does not meet ADA standards; VTA is a public transit agency and not a research and development facility; and VTA does not have the current resources nor the current capital to do the type of analysis that must be taken on this issue. 

Member Grant noted his belief that VTA has a vested interest to find fault with the preliminary design since they do not want to redo what was already implemented.   Member Grant stated that VTA prefers their Q’Straint System and noted that it would cost more money to change the restraint system. 

Mr. Hursh responded that staff is not here to find fault with Mr. Bishop’s proposal and noted that VTA does not have the engineering resources or design team or the ability to adequately respond to his design proposal.  Staff has provided Mr. Bishop with a list of restraint device manufacturer contacts and universities that are in the forefront of investigating and developing the technology.

M/S/F (Morrow/Gouveia)on a vote of 7 Ayes to 5 Noes to 2 Abstentions to recommend that CTA does not endorse Mr. Bishop’s preliminary design for the following reasons: It does not meet ADA standards; VTA is a public transit agency and not a research and development facility; and VTA does not have the current resources nor the current capital to do the type of analysis that must be taken on this issue.   Members Michels and Slack abstained. 

Member Jensen queried about Mr. Bishop’s preliminary design.  Ms. Williams responded that the preliminary design is in the conceptual stage.  Chairperson Morrow stated that Mr. Bishop is seeking a RFP for bids to have the design built.  Member Jensen stressed the importance for VTA to be open to options for improvements.

Jim Wilhelm, Maintenance Engineer, who commented that Mr. Bishop’s design is not practical and noted that Mr. Bishop is proposing that VTA go out to the market issue a request for bids to manufacturers to bring ideas to VTA regarding a new type of restraint device. 

Mr. Wilhelm continued that the University of Pittsburgh and the Cleveland Clinic are two other research institutions that have had teams of engineers and designers trying to find improved ways of retraining wheelchairs, without yet finding designs they can show to be superior to belt securement system.

Ms. Williams commented that additional information is provided in the Committee Agenda Packet and clarified that Mr. Bishop’s preliminary design proposal has not been built nor tested and developed.   Staff has conduct a very in-dept feasibility study to find out if the design is worth pursuing.   Ms. Williams noted that the design is not available to try nor does VTA have the resources to design, build, and develop a new type of restraint system.

Member Tamez suggested that this item be tabled until the technology is available on the market, and then the Committee could bring the item back at a later date for discussion.  

Upon inquiry from Member Marcillet, Ex-Officio Member Heatley commented that the issue is complex and has many challenges.   Ex-Officio Member Heatley stressed the importance for the CTA Committee to encourage VTA to work on this issue through the American Public Transit Association (APTA), and utilize resources such as the Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP) funds.

Ex-Officio Member Heatley expressed concern regarding operator injuries and workers’ compensation claims related to the securement restraint system.   Ex-Officio Member Heatley expressed concern regarding large business and liability issues related to damages to mobility devices as well as employee and customer injuries.   Ex-Officio Member Heatley stressed the importance to conduct a cost benefit analysis related to the securement restraint system.

Second Vice Chairperson Stahl stressed the importance for CTA to be open to options and consider the use of different methods.   Second Vice Chairperson Stahl stated that the intent of the Policy is safety for the passengers.

Member Grant stressed the importance for staff to look for a better way to secure mobility devices then through the use of the tie down restraint system.   Member Grant expressed concern regarding the possible liability issues related to employee injuries that may stem from the use of the tie down restrain system.

Mr. Bishop stated that VTA’s securement device restraint system could result in operator injuries and encouraged the CTA Committee to review the information in their Committee Packet regarding workers’ compensation claims associated with wheelchair services for passengers.

The Committee agreed to table the item without taking any action and to bring the item back at a later date for discussion. 

NOTE:    M/S/F MEANS MOTION SECONDED AND FAILED.

U.S. Department of Transportation Notice of Proposed Rulemaking request for comments regarding changes to American with Disabilities Act (ADA) Paratransit Regulations

Camille Williams, Accessible Services Manager, provided a brief overview of the
U.S. Department of Transportation Notice of Proposed Rulemaking request for comments regarding changes to American with Disabilities Act (ADA) Paratransit Regulations. Ms. Williams commented that on June 19, 2006 the Committee for Transit Accessibility Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Sub-Committee consisting of Members Morrow, Rhodes, and Ex-Officio Member Heatley met to develop comments regarding the Department of Transportation’s Notice of Proposed/Rule Making, which will be submitted to the FTA before July 28, 2006. 

Ms. Williams noted that the CTA Committee may make additional comments but they must be submitted to Ms. Williams no later than noon Thursday, July 13, 2006 in order for staff to update the documents. 

VTA Website Improvements

Mr. Terrazas provided a brief overview of the VTA Website Improvements. 
Mr. Terrazas commented that a survey has been placed on VTA’s Website and copies of the Website Survey were distributed to the CTA Committee as reference information.   The project to update VTA’s Website is an agency-wide effort, which will be developed in close coordination with all the departments within VTA as well as with the CTA Committee.

Mr. Terrazas continued that VTA’s last major update of its website occurred in
March 2002 with additional, individualized site improvements for specific website elements occurring on an ongoing basis since that time.  Mr. Terrazas noted that staff worked collaboratively and directly with CTA Member Barbara Rhodes to place on-line VTA’s On-Board Take One Rider Guide.  Mr. Terrazas stated that staff looks forward to working collaboratively with the CTA Committee to implement further improvements.

VTA’s website generates approximately 1.6 million annual visits; provides information regarding VTA services, schedules, maps, programs, and projects; offers visitors ability to submit online comments to VTA regarding current service activities. 

VTA’s last major update of its website occurred in March 2002 with additional, individualized site improvements for specific website elements occurring since then.   November 2005 VTA began posting online versions of onboard publications and developed an interactive map for VTA Park and Ride Lots.  VTA also introduced a pilot program for teachers to apply online for VTA’s Class Pass Program, which VTA provides complimentary field trip passes to Santa Clara County students.  VTA is now initiating a comprehensive review of vta.org for a complete website update as a result of suggestions received at RIDE Task Force meetings and through comments submitted to VTA by the general public. 

Mr. Terrazas commented that as part of the comprehensive review, VTA is soliciting input from stakeholder groups and is particularly interested in receiving input from the CTA and the disabled community.

Mr. Terrazas stated as a result of these priorities VTA has identified several tasks to assist in the development of website improvements, which include: 1) for on-line customer survey to identify website preferences and suggested improvements; 2) Design enhancements to improve the page layout of website content and to improve website navigation; and 3) Improved organization of website content categories to provide relevant and useful information for VTA passengers and the general public, essentially making it more user friendly to assist customers in finding information on-line.

Each of these tasks will require significant public input to deliver a website that best meets the needs of all community members.   As a result, tasks will include a public outreach element to identify suggested improvements that have the broadest impact. 

Mr. Terrazas commented that on June 26, 2006 VTA developed an online customer survey posted to www.vta.org, which is currently up and has received over 200 responses from the general public.

Mr. Terrazas commented that VTA staff has sent information via electronic mail (e-mail) to the Santa Clara Valley Blind Center, Peninsula Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired, California Council of the Blind, and other disability groups to inform others of VTA’s Website Survey for input and comment.  Mr. Terrazas encouraged the Committee to let staff know of any specific groups that should receive the link to the VTA Website Survey in order to provide input and comment on the improvements.

During the months of September and October VTA will host three focus groups to prioritize suggested website improvements.   Participating groups will include members of the disabled community, individuals familiar with VTA’s website and services and individuals with limited familiarity with VTA’s website and services.  One of the questions on the survey asks if the individual would like to participate in a focus group so staff is receiving a lot of responses. 

Staff will consider the suggested improvements and then in November a smaller group will be assembled to consider in detail the elements suggested.   The actual focus groups will take place from September through November 2006.  

Mr. Terrazas commented that upon completion of the focus group review, VTA will create improved design features, which will include an update of the site navigation bar to provide direct links to frequently requested web pages and to complete design enhancements on the home page. 

Mr. Terrazas stated that through utilizing input from focus groups and online survey responses, VTA will better structure content to match visitor interests and create more efficient links to quickly access requested information.  Public presentations will be presented to the VTA Board of Directors and at Committee meetings, including the CTA Committee, which will take place to highlight the new website prior to the planned January 2007 release date.

Member Slack expressed appreciation to staff for soliciting input from blind organizations and queried if VTA has an individual on an on-going basis to assist to ensure that the website is user friendly for visually impaired individuals. 

Member Slack recommended that First Vice Chairperson Rhodes participate in the website improvement project and noted the importance of having an individual with visual impairments to provide input from the beginning to help address relevant issues.   Mr. Terrazas responded that First Vice Chairperson Rhodes is part of the focus groups and has worked collaboratively with VTA in the past regarding improvements to VTA’s Website.  Mr. Terrazas stated that the survey does ask for individuals who utilize a screen reader to identify the types of readers that are being utilized by the users.

Member Slack noted that he would provide staff with a name of an individual who would be beneficial in the focus groups off-line after the CTA Committee meeting. 
Mr. Terrazas expressed appreciation to Member Slack for the focus group recommendation.

Second Vice Chairperson Stahl stressed the importance for VTA’s Website to be accessible to individuals who are not computer literate. 

Member Grant queried if it was possible to make comments, compliments, and/or complaints utilizing the website and send a copy of the information to the user’s
e-mail.   Mr. Terrazas stated that staff would look into that option and added that it seems reasonable and doable. 

Terry Applegate, Interested Citizen, referenced the time schedule for comments and queried about the efforts to ensure that the public is made aware of the survey in order to provide comments.  Mr. Terrazas responded that in addition to posting the survey to VTA’s Website, staff e-mailed copies of the website survey to various groups and customers who have provided comments to VTA in the past to solicit comments. Mr. Terrazas encouraged interested parties to provide the names of groups who should receive outreach to provide their comments on the survey for VTA’s Website improvement project.

Member Eljas suggested that VTA utilize a portion of radio announcements to solicit individuals who have never visited vta.org.  Mr. Terrazas responded that those individuals are a key group that staff intends to solicit input and comments.

Chairperson Morrow left his seat at 2:44 p.m. and
Second Vice Chairperson Stahl presided over the meeting.

Paratransit Operations – Vehicles, Fueling, Facility, and Vendor Contract

Jim Unites, Operations Planning Program Manager, provided a brief overview of the
Paratransit Operations – Vehicles, Fueling, Facility, and Vendor Contract.  Mr. Unites commented that at the April 6, 2006 VTA Board of Directors Regular Meeting, Chairperson Chavez requested staff provide an informational memorandum to the Board of Directors examining the possibility of shared fuel purchase to extend VTA’s benefit of not paying gasoline sales tax to OUTREACH.  Mr. Unites commented that staff responded that it would provide a comprehensive memorandum to the VTA Board of Directors and copy the CTA Committee on efforts by VTA and OUTREACH regarding fuel, facilities, vehicles, and vendor costs.

Mr. Unites commented that VTA does not and has never provided paratransit service directly, since July 1993, VTA has contracted with OUTREACH, Inc., a local
non-profit agency, to provide paratransit broker services. 

Chairperson Morrow took his seat at 2:48 p.m.
and Second Vice Chairperson Stahl relinquished her seat as Chairperson
and Chairperson Morrow presided for the remainder of the meeting.

Mr. Unites continued that at the April 6, 2006 VTA Board of Directors Regular Meeting, the Board approved a plan that included contracting with OUTREACH to also manage the paratransit eligibility and appeals process, simplifying the process and providing a single point of contact for customers needing paratransit services.  OUTREACH began performing these additional functions on July 1, 2006.

Mr. Unites commented that OUTREACH receives and schedules trip requests, builds daily vehicle schedules, handles daily service changes, and subcontracts and monitors the daily service provided.  Currently, OUTREACH subcontractors (ATC and Yellow Cab taxi and van service venders) provide staff for paratransit trips scheduled through OUTREACH.

Mr. Unites commented on business practices that will go into effect on January 1, 2007 and noted that VTA and OUTREACH have worked collaboratively to develop several strategies and a program.  The operational piece of the program will be implemented over the next few months in an effort to continue to provide a cost efficient and quality paratransit service to customers.

Mr. Unites stated that by procuring vehicles directly, VTA could obtain cost savings for the paratransit program.   VTA is eligible to procure vehicles at a lower cost using a master contract the State of California has developed for vehicle procurements.  Vehicle procurements for paratransit vehicles are eligible for federal grants with only a 10 percent or 20 percent local match depending on the grant source. 

Mr. Unites noted that higher vehicle financing charges and vehicle handling charges that the paratransit operations subcontractor amortize and pass on as part of their operating rate would be avoided.

VTA is proceeding with the strategy in distinct steps based on funds available in VTA’s Capital and grant programs.   The key component of the strategy is to ensure that enough vehicles are on hand for January 2007, when OUTREACH’s revised agreement with ATC, subcontractor, goes into effect.  In consultation with OUTREACH, 231 vehicles are needed for paratransit operations.  Mr. Unites noted that OUTREACH has already procured 36 of the 58 vehicles using grants from the FTA Section 5310 Elderly and Disabled Transportation program administered by the State of California. 

Mr. Unites commented that VTA and OUTREACH partnered on an application to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) to obtain a $42,000 grant to offset the procurement price for 21 of the paratransit vehicles.  This was obtained through the BAAQMD Vehicle Incentive Program, which provides a $2,000-per-vehicle subsidy for the procurement of low-emission vehicles, such as the Prius.

The VTA Board of Directors, as part of the FY 2006 and FY 2007 Biennial Budget Review, approved a total allocation of $6.2 million in the FY 2006 and
2007 Capital Budgets to procure the 173 vehicles.  The VTA Board also approved $346,000 to procure automated vehicle location/GPS equipment for each vehicle.

VTA has included the need for future paratransit vehicle replacement procurements in VTA’s Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) for federal grant and local capital planning purposes.  VTA will also pursue additional earmarked federal funds to support the program and has an FY 2007 earmark request in place for $700,000 as part of the legislative program to fund the vehicles in the future.

Mr. Unites commented that use of a publicly controlled facility would reduce paratransit expenses by eliminating the facility lease payments the OUTREACH subcontractor makes, which they then pass on to OUTREACH and VTA as part of their operating rate.

At this time ATC operates out of a leased facility on 10^th Street and noted that after review, VTA and OUTREACH have determined that a location at 100 West Younger Street (currently being leased at no cost by VTA from the County of Santa Clara) would be an appropriate location, which includes parking and a 3,000 square foot modular building.  VTA’s lease with the County for the location is at no cost in exchange for VTA allowing the County Sheriff to use some VTA property.  Mr. Unites noted that the location is centrally located, convenient to freeways, and next to Santa Clara County’s fueling station, which will be used for fueling the paratransit vehicles.

VTA, as a public transit agency, is exempt from the federal excise tax of $0.183 per gallon and part of the State Excise Tax $0.06 per gallon on fuel.   VTA’s procurement strategy was focused on providing this $0.243 per gallon benefit to paratransit operations. 

Mr. Unites commented that currently, paratransit could only take advantage of the State Excise Tax savings.  The Federal Excise Tax savings are only available to government agencies.  In this case Santa Clara County that is purchasing the fuel directly and then providing it for a government use.  For additional paratransit cost savings, VTA is working with OUTREACH on a fuel purchase arrangement with Santa Clara County for the paratransit vehicle fleet.

Mr. Unites stated that the County is able to obtain gasoline at very competitive rates, due to their bulk purchasing volume so including paratransit fueling into this mix will increase the volume and further assist in obtaining lower rates.  Since the County procures fuel directly from a fuel company and pumps it directly into the paratransit vehicles, the paratransit program would be able to take advantage of the federal fuel Excise Tax savings.  Mr. Unites noted that the County has been very cooperative in working with OUTREACH and VTA on the fueling program.

Mr. Unites commented that ATC’s current contract with OUTREACH expires at the end of December 2006 so an extension has been negotiated by OUTREACH.   The new contract amendment will be effective on January 1, 2007.  The contract has a five-year term with a 180-day termination provision by either party.  This new amendment removes cost risk items from the vendor contract by taking advantage of the VTA leveraged resources described as well as shifting some functional responsibilities to OUTREACH at a lower cost. 

Mr. Unites noted that some functional responsibilities were shifted from ATC to OUTREACH, which mainly include vehicle maintenance and fueling staff.   Vehicle maintenance would be performed through a contract with the County of Santa Clara with oversight by an OUTREACH maintenance supervisor.  The County staff maintains an extensive county fleet and also maintains VTA’s non-revenue vehicles.  OUTREACH would employ fuel attendants necessary to move vehicles to the County fueling facility. 

Mr. Unites commented that all these strategies come together in a new business model to try to control costs associated with the paratransit program starting January 2007.   These strategies have been conducted nation-wide at other properties and VTA has been working collaboratively with OUTREACH to ensure a successful program.

Member Tamez expressed appreciation and thanked staff for their diligent work to promote a successful partnership.  Member Tamez encouraged VTA and OUTREACH to continue to work together to improve the paratransit program.

Chairperson Morrow called for a point of order and directed Mr. Bishop to remove himself from the CTA Committee table and return to the audience in order for the Committee to continue with Committee business.

Member Eljas expressed appreciation and thanked VTA and OUTREACH for their work to improve the paratransit program.

Operator Training

Operator Training was deferred.

OTHER

CTA Transit System Ridership Report

There was no CTA Transit System Ridership Report.  

RIDE Task Force Meeting

Member Julian provided a brief overview on the June 28, 2006 RIDE Task Force Meeting.   Member Julian commented that the RIDE Task Force received information regarding VTA’s grant application to fund free monthly passes to qualifying low-income persons, which was approved by the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors and VTA Board of Directors for $1 million over three years.  The program would begin in October and distribute about 5,000 passes each year. 

Member Julian commented that the RIDE Task Force received a presentation on the preliminary results of the On-Board Survey of VTA bus and light rail riders conducted between October and March.   The surveyed riders rated accessibility for disabled individuals the highest rating of all the service characteristics with 90 percent of the individuals surveyed rated accessibility for disabled persons as excellent or good.  Member Julian noted that VTA would use the survey results for marketing strategies, transit demand modeling validation, and service planning.   

Member Julian commented that the RIDE Task Force discussed service improvements as a way to increase ridership with special attention to provide service to hospitals, direct service from Northeast San Jose to Downtown, non-stop bus service from the Fremont BART Station to Downtown San Jose, ECO Pass for community colleges, and real-time passenger information.

Member Julian continued that the RIDE Task Force would meet once more on
August 23, 2006 to review and comment on the draft final report, which would be forwarded to the VTA Board of Directors for consideration.

Member Julian commented that the RIDE Task Force Committee Meeting Agenda and materials are posted on VTA’s website at www.vta.org.  Member Julian stated that staff would send the June 28, 2006 RIDE Task Force minutes via electronic mail (e-mail) when they are completed.

Ms. Applegate noted that the RIDE Task Force Committee was schedule for an 18-month period and queried if the RIDE Task Force Committee was ending early.  Member Julian responded that he does not have any other information available.

CTA Workplan

Chairperson Morrow provided a brief overview of the CTA Workplan.  Chairperson Morrow commented that the August 9, 2006 CTA Agenda would include the On-Board Survey, Translink Presentation, and information on the Annunciator system.

Announcements

Mr. Thomas referenced the question that Member Lasich asked regarding how a visually impaired individual would be able to know when their bus stop was being approached.   Mr. Thomas commented that ADA guidelines state that if a customer informs the operator of their bus stop then the operator is required by law to inform the customer even if the stop is not included on the call stop sheet. 

Member Lasich stated that he does inform the operator of the bus stop where he intends to de-board.  Mr. Thomas responded that operators are instructed that this service is part of the regulation.

The Committee of the Whole adjourned the meeting at 3:01 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,