Related Links

CALL TO ORDER

The Regular Meeting of the Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) was called to order at 5:05 p.m. by Chairperson Risch in Conference Room B-104, Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), 3331 North First Street, San Jose, California. 

ROLL CALL

A quorum was present.

PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS

There were no Public Presentations.

Minutes of March 13, 2003

Member Brodsky requested the Minutes of March 13, 2003 be corrected (read from e-mail sent to Board Secretarys Office) as follows:

1)  Section 9 of the Minutes did not show his question nor the staffs answer regarding reported ridership versus the true number of public transit users.  Staff disclosed that one actual rider may be counted multiple times (i.e. one rider boarding a bus near home, transferring to LRT, working, and reversing the commute to home would be counted as four separate boardings).

2)   Missing from the Minutes are Members Kishimoto and Perrys suggestions that some better means of measurement would be in order.  Perhaps their suggestions mirrored my concern that in a valley with over 800,000 regular daily commuters (total available market), we have no methods to measure what percentage of key market segments are being served.  (Clearly, it is not the 17% assumed by dividing ridership by TAM).  It was for that reason I suggested analysis at locations of high commuter activity, (my term being centers of gravity).  To improve market penetration, one must first determine accurate levels of useful market service at both activity centers and our gateways.  Such information would focus efforts toward success.

3)   In Section 5, there is no reporting that, after detailing the dire state of VTA finances, Member Dixon stated that it is time for us to think outside the box.  She referred to a report that suggests cutting losses primarily by reducing service and increasing fares.  Perhaps a new focus could be directed toward improving our returns with useful and measurable service improvements.

Member Pirzynski took his seat at 5:10 p.m.

Michael P. Evanhoe, Chief Development Officer and Staff Liaison, noted that when the VTA was created and the five advisory committees established, the Board of Directors directed staff to do summary minutes.  The summary minutes are then included in the Board Packet before each Board Meeting.  Mr. Evanhoe noted that the corrections can be incorporated at the request of the Committee when the Minutes are on the Agenda for approval.

Mr. Evanhoe suggested that Member Brodskys items #1 and 2 be incorporated by amending the Minutes.  He suggested that a meeting be set up with VTAs service staff to talk about measurement methodologies.  Mr. Evanhoe noted that if Members Kishimoto and Perry would like further discussion about formulas, he would set up a meeting at VTA.

Mr. Evanhoe referred to item #3 and noted that Member Dixon is a member of the Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee and noted that Member Dixon was reporting out the findings of the Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee.   Mr. Evanhoe noted that staff did not go into any detail because we are capturing that as part of the Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee.  He noted that everything the Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee is doing gets submitted to the Board of Directors as a whole.

Member LeZotte noted it is important that the minutes, even though summary, should always reflect either a concern or a lengthy topic of conversation.  She noted this is not the first time the minutes have been amended.  Member LeZotte noted that the minutes of the Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee are just a summary.  In fact, she noted, they include no comments of the stakeholders.   Member LeZotte noted she understands the comment about the minutes being summary, but more often than not, they are sometimes lacking in substance of the conversation.  She noted that all members do not have to be quoted verbatim, as long as the essence of what the conversation was about is carried forward in the minutes to the Board.

Members Kennedy and Kniss took their seat at 5:12 p.m.

M/S/C (Dixon/Sandoval) to approve the Minutes of March 13, 2003, as amended. 

Committee Staff Report

Mr. Evanhoe reported that a Board of Directors Workshop would be held on  April 25, 2003, to discuss the findings of the Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee and the proposed budget for 2003-2004.  He encouraged the PAC to attend the Workshop.

Mr. Evanhoe reported that last week, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) approved VTA’s application for public notice and to be put on as a consent item for their May 22, 2003 Meeting.  The CTC will put VTA’s GARVEE Bond proposal before the State of California for the financing of the construction of the Coleman/I-880 Interchange and the Route 87 projects from downtown San Jose all the way to Route 85.  Mr. Evanhoe noted that the three projects would be able to go to construction in the fall.

Mr. Evanhoe referred to Member Brodsky’s question, sent via e-mail, pertaining to the Bylaws, regarding any two members can add items to the agenda.  He noted that Legal Counsel indicated that it is really the direction of the Committee.    Mr. Evanhoe noted that one Committee member could ask for an item to be agendized at a subsequent Committee meeting and indicated that two was too restrictive.  He noted that the reason for subsequent versus following is because staff may have to do research.  Further discussion will be held under Agenda  Item #9.

Upon query of Chairperson Risch, Mr. Evanhoe noted that the April 25, 2003 Board of Directors Workshop would be held on Friday at 8:30 a.m. at the Hyatt in the Mediterranean Room. 

Mr. Evanhoe noted it is anticipated that the budget would be adopted by the Board of Directors at their June 5, 2003 Meeting.

On order of Chairperson Risch, there being no objection, the Committee Staff Report was received.

NOTE:  M/S/C MEANS MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED AND, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

Chairperson's Report

Chairperson Risch referred to his memorandum sent to PAC based upon comments he received from other Members.

Chairperson Risch referred to a comment he received and noted that the memo was not suggesting that anyones conversation be stifled or that we try to limit what we are doing, only trying to make the meetings more efficient.  He noted that the Committee could, at any time, suggest that the Chair lengthen a discussion. 

Member Perry noted the idea of having a hub and spoke system with the Committee dealing privately with staff rather than airing discussions in the public is directly contradictory to the whole notion of open government.

The Committee discussed the merits of discussing technical questions with staff before the meeting versus during the meeting.  Chairperson Risch reviewed the discussion and indicated his intent is not to stifle discussion but to keep the meetings efficient and productive.

The Committee discussed the need to orient new members and expressed concern about the time limitations imposed on the PAC meetings due to the Cities Association monthly meeting.

Mr. Evanhoe encouraged members to e-mail their questions to him and noted he would get the answers and get back to everyone.

The Committee discussed potential Brown Act issues and the use of e-mail as a serial discussion.

Members discussed recent experiences with their respective councils.

Legislative Report

Kurt Evans, Government Affairs Manager, reported that President Bush recently sent his budget plan for FY 2004 to Congress.  He provided a report on the funding for transportation and the proposed major restructuring of the transit program.

Mr. Evans provided a report on SB 541 (Torlakson) State Gas Tax, AB 1500 (Diaz) Petroleum Pollution Clean-Up and Prevention Act, and AB 1065 (Longville) City Streets: Assessments.

Upon query of Member Kennedy, Mr. Evans provided a status report on the Metropolitan Transportation Commissions (MTCs) proposed gas tax.

Upon query of Member Kishimoto, Mr. Evans provided a report on SCA 2 (Torlakson) Local Transportation Sales Taxes.

Mr. Evans provided a report on ACA 7 (Dutra) Local Transportation Sales Taxes and ACA 9 (Levine) Local Government Taxation.

On order of Chairperson Risch, there being no objection, the Legislative Report was received. 

The Agenda was taken out of order.

Fare Modifications for FY 2003-2004

Scott Buhrer, Chief Financial Officer, reported that VTA had the Business Review Team look at its operations last summer and noted that one of their key findings was that VTA should increase its farebox recovery ratio.  Mr. Buhrer referred to the Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee and noted that the consultants have also recommended that VTA should increase its farebox recovery ratio. 

Mr. Buhrer reported that farebox recovery ratio is a very significant policy decision for the Board, because what it really is saying is explicitly, what percentage of the operations and maintenance costs should be paid for by the users of the system versus what percentage of the operating costs should be paid for by taxpayers. 

Mr. Buhrer reported that VTA has a low average fare per boarding.  He noted that VTA looked at how some of its numbers compared with other comparable agencies in the Bay Area as well as how they compared with other comparable agencies across the Country.  Mr. Buhrer reported that the reason why VTA has a lower average fare per boarding, compared to other agencies, is because VTA has historically given much larger discounts for the youth and senior and disabled fare categories.  Further, VTA has priced its monthly passes at a lower multiple than other comparable agencies.

Mr. Buhrer referred to the March 21, 2003 Board of Directors Workshop and noted that the Board of Directors felt that the impact of moving the discounts in the multiples to levels that would be indicated by referencing comparable agencies, resulted in too harsh of an impact on the senior and disabled. 

Mr. Buhrer reported that VTA had proposed that the day passes for senior and disabled would be increased from their current level of $1.25 to $2.25 and monthly passes would be increased from $11 to $22.50.  He reported that the Board of Directors directed staff to analyze the impacts of having the senior and disabled day passes at $1.75 and the monthly pass at $17.50. 

Mr. Buhrer reported that the Board of Directors directed staff to look at other options that would potentially make up the revenue impact from reducing the senior and disabled fares.  When VTA looked at that, the initial staff proposal was estimated to generate some $4.1 million in additional revenue.  When VTA looked at the reduced revenue that would come from the modifications that the Board of Directors asked staff to look at, it was at $3.7 million.  VTA then looked at what other changes that could be done that would achieve the $4 million target.  VTA looked at increasing the adult cash fare to $1.75.  The initial proposal was to increase the adult cash fare from $1.40 to $1.50.  Moving the adult cash fare to $1.75 would generate approximately the $4 million target, but it had a lot of other unanticipated effects that were not desirable.  Mainly, it would undercut some of the objectives that we had in terms of bringing the other discounts in line with where we thought that long-term VTA should be going.  Further, it would have a much greater impact on the paratransit community, whose fares are all based on multiples of the adult cash fare.  By law, the paratransit fares cannot exceed two times the adult cash fare.  Mr. Buhrer clarified that is for basic paratransit services. 

Mr. Buhrer reported that VTA offers a number of paratransit services that exceed the federal requirement.  When offering services that exceed the federal requirement, for example, same day service or open returns, you are not limited in what you can price for the services.  The Board of Directors went through an exhaustive process of the Paratransit Improvement Plan to determine what the premium service prices should be.  What VTA found, when applying the $1.75, was that on one hand it helped make up the revenue target, but it certainly had a substantial impact on the paratransit community.  VTA did not recommend the $1.75 change in the adult cash fare.

Mr. Buhrer noted that VTA looked at a more moderate approach and he referred to the revised staff alternative, which would move the day pass to $2 and the monthly pass to $20.

Mr. Buhrer reported that a number of public meetings have been held, noting the meeting tonight at 7:00 p.m. in Palo Alto.  He noted that the comments received to date are similar to the reaction of the Board of Directors that the impact on the senior and disabled is inequitable.

Mr. Buhrer reported VTA received comments from the Committee for Transit Accessibility (CTA).  He noted that the Chairperson of CTA was disturbed that VTA was proposing that ECO Pass would not extend to paratransit services for residential ECO Pass holders or San Jose State University.  He noted that VTA is taking it under advisement.

Upon query of Chairperson Risch, Mr. Buhrer noted that staff is here tonight to solicit input as to the reaction to the fare proposals on the table.  He noted that the fare proposal would come back to the May 2003 Standing Committees and Advisory Committees, and forwarded to the Board of Directors at their  June 5, 2003 Meeting to be implemented August 1, 2003.

Upon query of Member Brodsky, David Sausjord, Revenue Services Manager, noted that the average number of monthly passes sold to seniors/disabled is approximately 10,000.

Member Brodsky queried about the average number of discounted tickets sold to seniors/disabled, how many in senior/disabled category pay cash.  Mr. Buhrer noted it is approximately 350,000 year, approximately 1,000 a day.

Member Brodsky queried about the cost of paratransit round trip service.   Mr. Buhrer directed attention to Attachment D, ADA Paratransit Fares, and noted that the one-way paratransit trip is the one that is limited by federal law to being able to charge at two times the adult cash fare.  The other services are premium services that are not limited.  Mr. Buhrer reported that these relationships were established by the Board of Directors when considering changes to the Paratransit Program and the indexing is actually included in the tariff.  Once the Board of Directors makes a decision on the adult cash fare, the numbers become much more mathematical.

Upon query of Member Brodsky, Mr. Buhrer noted that VTA does not offer a monthly pass for paratransit.  He noted that the cost per trip for paratransit is $30 and the yearly cost to provide ADA paratransit service is $32 million.

Member LeZotte referred to Mr. Buhrer’s comments made regarding the reaction received from the public being very similar to the Board with regards to seniors and adult.  She noted it did not appear to her that he was taking that into consideration.  Mr. Buhrer noted it is because this proposal was developed before the public meetings.  The public meetings have taken place over the last week and a half and the memo was written at the beginning of the public comment period.

Member LeZotte directed attention to Attachment D and noted that it does not reflect, to her, what the Board requested.  Mr. Buhrer noted it is reflected in the third column from the left. 

Member LeZotte noted that she remembers a very lengthy discussion with regard to the youth fares and indicated that she does not see a major change in the youth fares.  She noted there was a major discussion about San Jose State and the youth.

Member LeZotte noted what she is not seeing reflected is that there is still any give of VTA with regard to dealing with the comments both by the Board and the public.  A 100% increase in fares to seniors and disabled is what is suggested, even though it is talked about in terms of discount.

Member LeZotte noted that there was information provided to Mayor Springer with regard to what revenue does each of these proposals get us.  Mr. Buhrer noted that the information could be included as an additional attachment.  Member LeZotte noted a concern that it appeared to her that the only thing VTA went forward with was the suggestion that VTA looked at only one change and how it showed itself as opposed to a couple of different things, the youth, the ECO Pass.

Mr. Buhrer noted that when looking at developing fare policy, the Board is going to need to take into account, long term, what is the appropriate percentages of discounts that they want to provide for different categories of customers.

Member Sandoval noted she was surprised that the analysis by Booz Allen & Hamilton was not able to give any real numbers.  She directed attention to Page 10 of 11, Paragraph 2, “Due to the current Silicon Valley economic conditions, we’re not sure what the recovery period might be.”  She noted if a firm were employed to run numbers, she would think they would be able to generate some kind of different scenarios.

Member Kniss left the meeting at 6:08 p.m.

Member Kennedy noted that this is a very complex issue that the Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee and the Board has been wrestling with.  The fundamental question is, how much of a responsibility does VTA have to provide a social service.  Is it a social service supporting entity or should the social systems for paratransit come from other sources.

Member Kishimoto noted it would be helpful if she had a better idea of knowing the percentage of revenue boardings for youth, seniors, adults and disabled.  She queried about information on the demographics of each segment.  Mr. Buhrer noted that VTA has the demographics of the estimated amount to ridership that occur from each fare payment type.  Mr. Buhrer noted that he could provide information on the percentage of boardings that occur for youth, seniors, adults, and disabled.

Member Kishimoto noted in regards to the business segment, VTA might want to concentrate more on the quality of service.

Member Perry noted he would feel much more comfortable in saying yes to fare changes, if he felt that something was being done to address the structural and operational problems within the organization.

Member Kishimoto queried if a performance audit was conducted.  Mr. Buhrer noted that the consultants for the Ad Hoc Financial Stability have not conducted a performance audit.  The consultants have looked at staffing levels in the aggregate compared to what data is available and what is called the National Transit Data Base.

Member Dixon encouraged Members to attend the Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee Meetings.  She encouraged Members to attend the April 25, 2003 Board of Directors Workshop.

Member Kennedy suggested Members Perry and Kishimoto be given the specific reports, presented to the Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee, focusing on administrative costs. 

Upon query of Member Dixon, Mr. Evanhoe requested that the Board Secretary’s Office provide PAC copies of the Draft Recommendations. 

Member Brodsky noted he checked on operating costs, which is $5.84 per ridership.  A person with one transfer, taking a round trip, is over $20 a day and picking somebody up and driving them back is $32 a day per person.  He noted there must be ways that we can look at this, it is a lot of money.  There should be some economies of scale.  He noted that it could be discussed at another meeting.  Member Brodsky noted that the information regarding operating costs was taken from the 2003 Second Quarter Performance Measures.

On order of Chairperson Risch, there being no objection, the proposed transit and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) paratransit fare modifications for implementation August 1, 2003 was discussed.

FY 2003/04 Transportation Fund for Clean Air Program Manager Fund (TFCA 40%) Project Allocations

Mr. Evanhoe reported that this is an annual process VTA does with the clean air fund.  The Board of Directors established criteria that a percentage of the fund would go to the Bicycle Program.

Mr. Evanhoe noted that the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) approved the item this afternoon and recommended the PAC support the Committee recommendation.  He noted that the subcommittee of the TAC made the recommendation to the full TAC. 

Member LeZotte left the meeting at 6:25 p.m.

Marcella Rensi, Sr. Transportation Planner, provided an overview of the  FY 2003/04 Transportation Fund for Clean Air Program Manager Fund  (TFCA 40%) Project Allocations   

M/S/C (Kennedy/Pirzynski) to recommend the Board of Directors approve programming $2.7 million in Transportation Fund for Clean Air Program Manager (TFCA 40%) funds to the Competitive Projects and to the Tier 1 Bicycle Projects in the FY 2003/04 cycle.

Modified FY 2003-04 Congestion Management Program, Budget and Member Agency Fees

Members Caserta and Pirzynski left the meeting at 6:26 p.m.

and a Committee of the Whole was declared.

Mr. Evanhoe reported that the Modified FY 2003-04 Congestion Management Program, Budget and Member Agency Fees went before the TAC today, noting that the TAC recommended approval of the Budget.

Carolyn Gonot, Congestion Management Program Deputy Director, provided a report on the actions taken today at the TAC Meeting. 

Ms. Gonot noted that the staff responded to the comments from the TAC and PAC.  She provided an overview of the Modified FY 2004-04 Congestion Management Program Work Program, Budget and Member Agency Fees.  She noted that the Member Agency Fees were reduced 18 percent. 

Ms. Gonot reported that staff had recommended the removal of the Countywide Deficiency Plan from the Program.  She reported that discussion was held with TAC today regarding the Countywide Deficiency Plan and it was determined that staff could develop the Countywide Deficiency Plan with minimal amount of consultants.  Ms. Gonot noted the Countywide Deficiency Plan would be included in the Program 

Member Kennedy left the meeting at 6:28 p.m.

Chairperson Risch queried about the feasibility of reducing Member Agencies beyond the 18 percent proposed.  Mr. Evanhoe noted it would be very difficult to do and would require the Board to decide which programs/projects would be cut. 

Member Dixon left the meeting at 6:31 p.m. 

On order of Chairperson Risch, there being no objection, the Committee of the Whole received a report to recommend the Board of Directors approve the modified FY 03-04 Congestion Management Program Work Program, Budget and Member Agency Fees.

Amendment of Policy Advisory Committee Bylaws

Chairperson Risch requested that the Amendment of the Policy Advisory Committee Bylaws be postponed until the full Committee is in attendance.

Member Perry noted that one point of clarification of Item #9 was that there was already a motion to amend the Bylaws.  He noted that as he understood it, the Bylaws had already been amended, including the point that any two members may place any item on the next agenda.  Mr. Evanhoe noted the discussion held with General Counsel and indicated that General Counsel said that “any two members” placing an item on the next agenda was too restrictive.

Member Perry noted that he does not believe that General Counsel can remove the authority of people to place something on the next agenda.  They may grant further authority perhaps that any one of us can put it on the next agenda.  Member Perry noted that a vote was taken on whether it is the next agenda or not and the vote was 13 - 3 for the next agenda.  Mr. Evanhoe noted that General Counsel intervened and that is why the Bylaws are back on the agenda. 

Mr. Evanhoe noted that the Bylaws would be placed on next month’s agenda and then General Counsel can explain why she made the recommendation.

Member Kishimoto directed attention to Page 5 of 8, §5.8, Matters Not Listed On the Agenda Requiring Committee Action, first paragraph, and noted that the following statement: “The Committee may take action on items not appearing on the posted agenda under any of the following conditions”, does not clarify if the Committee needs to be a majority of the Committee or one person.  Mr. Evanhoe noted General Counsel will be at next month’s meeting.

Chairperson Risch noted the issues are clear and will follow-up with Mr. Evanhoe and General Counsel.

Member Brodsky noted his concurrence with Member Perry and noted that one of the intents was that it would go as soon as possible.

Chairperson Risch clarified that the two issues are “next agenda” and “one versus two”.

On order of Chairperson Risch, there being no objection, the Committee of the Whole deferred to approve amending the Policy Advisory Committee Bylaws to the May 8, 2003 Meeting.

Status of the Downtown East Valley Santa Clara/Alum Rock Corridor Project

Mr. Evanhoe suggested that the Committee postpone the Status of the Downtown East Valley Santa Clara/Alum Rock Corridor Project.

On order of Chairperson Risch, there being no objection, the Committee of the Whole deferred the Status of the Downtown East Valley Santa Clara/Alum Rock Corridor Project to the May 8, 2003 Meeting.

Programmed Projects Quarterly Monitoring Report for January -  March 2003

On order of Chairperson Risch, there being no objection, the Committee of the Whole received the Programmed Projects Quarterly Monitoring Report for January March 2003.

Proactive CMP Reviewed and Approved Projects Monthly Status Report

Samantha Swan, Transportation Planner II, directed attention to the following revised document distributed: Responses to Selected Projects Reviewed by VTA, February 2003.  She noted that the document contained in the Agenda Packet was dated August 2002.

Upon query of Chairperson Risch, Ms. Swan noted that VTA was pleased with the results given by NASA in terms of the development.

On order of Chairperson Risch, there being no objection, the Committee of the Whole received the Proactive CMP Reviewed and Approved Projects Monthly Status Report. 

Announcements

Vice Chairperson Sandoval directed attention to the VTA Elected Officials Reference Guide 2003 and noted that she does not need the document because the Cities Association has developed a new roster and that is their role.  She noted that the VTA Board Rotation Master Calendar contained in the Elected Officials Reference Guide 2003 could be placed on line.

Vice Chairperson Sandoval noted that VTA generates a lot of paper on a lot of projects.  She noted that it might be more beneficial to have one sheet and/or agenda book that indicates that committee minutes can be viewed on VTAs website.

Vice Chairperson Sandoval suggested that the Amendment of the Policy Advisory Committee Bylaws be placed at the beginning of the May 8, 2003 Agenda.

Member Brodsky thanked Mr. Evanhoe for the work the Agency is doing on the section of the road between Highway 101 and Brokaw Road.

On order of Chairperson Risch, there being no objection, the meeting was adjourned at 6:49 p.m.

                                            VTA Board of Directors