Related Links

Agenda was taken out of order.

Douglas Hailey, Californians for Justice, stated that parents and students find it difficult to afford the expensive youth monthly pass.   He noted that expensive fares are disincentives for students to ride the bus.   He noted that if transit system is more accessible and fares are more affordable, more people would ride the bus. He also stressed the importance of encouraging young people to take the bus.

Co-Chairperson Campos thanked Mr. Hailey for coming to the RIDE Task Force meeting and for his comments. 

Co-Chairperson Matthews arrived at 4:15 p.m.

Matthew Tucker, Chief Operating Officer, noted that VTA is conducting the Comprehensive Operational Analysis (COA) to find ways to increase ridership.

Kevin Connolly, Transportation Planning Manager, provided the Task Force a handout entitled “Comprehensive Operations Analysis.”  Mr. Connolly stated that the COA is a collection of studies and initiatives that aims to increase ridership and improve transit service.  The COA examines all bus, light rail, transit lines; evaluates and analyzes expansive data collected from surveys and studies; analyzes line-by-line performance; and develops scenarios for testing.  The final products of these efforts are the Service Operating Plan, Marketing Strategy, and Transit Corridor Expansion Plans.

Mr. Connolly noted that the COA’s objectives are divided into two groups:   Existing Services and Future Services.   Existing services objectives include increases in ridership, transit mode split and improvements in farebox recovery, and travel time and operational efficiency.  Future services objectives include identification of new markets, development of new corridors, improvement of integration with existing and future projects, maximization of local participation, and development of cost effective services.

The COA is an 18-24 month effort that starts with data collection, followed by analysis of data, and lastly, development of final products.   Data Collection phase includes surveys, operations and service data, and pilot services evaluation.   Staff is currently conducting the On-board Survey, which has approximately 30 questions that range from origin, destination, an option to include demographic information, and opinions about VTA services.  VTA prepared the survey in four languages and aims to obtain a significant sample of 16,000 completed surveys.  Another survey is the Customer Preference, a telephone survey that is more intensive and detailed.

The analysis of data include market segmentation, a practice used by private sectors to identify their target markets.   VTA’s market segmentation study will examine people’s attitudes, attitudinal factors, and identify potential markets.   Mr. Connolly provided examples of the market segmentation study results conducted by the transit agency in San Diego, CA.  Mr. Connolly advised that the same consultant in San Diego will perform the same services for VTA. 

Transit Expansion Policy attempts to establish policy framework on how to invest in transit in the future with supporting factors such as land-use, operational integration, ridership, and revenue expectation.   It will also identify   and evaluate potential new corridors and services and subsequently develop transit investment plans.  Service Design Guidelines evaluates existing services and explores other services that have potential in this area. 

The COA work program includes three components:   1) market assessment, which looks at surveys and how transit investments will be in the future; 2) service assessment, which examines network, routes, and ridership patterns, and; 3) operations assessment, which analyzes efficiencies and quality.   All these analyses will be taken to all advisory committees as well as stakeholders to develop service redevelopment guidelines, service operation concept, service and operating plan development, and implementation.    Mr. Connolly provided examples of the COA analyses in Long Beach, CA and Minnesota. 

Mr. Connolly discussed the timeline noting that the On-board Survey is ongoing and will be completed by March 2006, Market Segmentation Study is ongoing and will conclude in June 2006, Transit Expansion Policy commenced in November 2005, Service Design Guidelines will begin on February 2006, and COA will begin in July 2006.

Member Julian referred to the market survey and commented that the approach is abstract and out of reality.   He added that the groups targeted for this survey do not include seniors and disabled.   These are important sectors and a transit agency has the social responsibility to provide transportation to the majority of the people in the community.  He urged that these sectors be considered in future presentations.

Mr. Tucker responded that the surveys target the both users and the non-users of the transit system of the County, regardless of their demographics.   The market segmentation will identify users and non-users.   It would help determine costs and strategies to motivate the public to use the transit system.  Therefore, the intent of the study is not to exclude but include all the population in the County. 

Member Moore thanked staff for conducting the survey and commented that it is a good idea. However, he expressed concern that the survey is too long that people may not want to fully complete it.   He encouraged staff to find ways to make the survey shorter.    He suggested including in the map land-use issues, mapping time of day, and essential services such as hospitals and day cares. 

Member Brownstein referred to Slide #15 – COA, and commented that the output of the analyses involves creativity, values, judgments, and analytical work.   He inquired about the stakeholders’ involvement in the process. 

Mr. Tucker responded that staff intends to use the community-based approach wherein the community, key stakeholders, VTA, and consultants collaboratively determine and design how transit services will be like in the future, regardless of the existing services.   The output will be a work plan for staff in the next five to ten years.

Upon inquiry of Member Applegate, Mr. Connolly responded that there are several consultants for the different components of the COA.   Specific to the survey, the consultant is New Stats Inc., the same consultant who performed the survey in 2000.   The languages used for the survey were English, Spanish, Chinese, and Vietnamese.    Mr. Tucker added that staff considered various and noted that a list of consultants could be provided.

Member Moore expressed support for the idea of the work plan where ideas are turned into actions.   Member Moore referred to Page 6 – Transit Expansion Policy and Investment Plans, Phase I, and suggested this action plan include that VTA offer a legislative analyst opinion about what land-use decisions would do for VTA’s ability to offer service to a given development.   He commented that VTA does not need to take a position on a given land-use issue but instead provide to the planning commissions of cities recommendations that certain densities offer a particular level of service.     Member Moore also noted the importance of changing the dynamics of car ownership in terms of cost (i.e. insurance per mile) and utilizing the information to make people favor transit more. 

Upon inquiry of Member Moore regarding the survey question on access to the bus stop, Mr. Connolly responded that the survey is focused on the “real-time” experience of the rider for that particular incident.   Mr. Connolly stated that staff is also trying to find the statistical norm for analysis purposes.

Member Kishimoto referred to San Diego’s adoption of transit strategy based on transit villages.   Member Kishimoto stated that communities have natural neighborhood centers where people tend to congregate.   She suggested that it may be helpful to examine key neighborhoods of each cities and determine the natural congregating areas.  She stressed the importance of building on the strength of the neighborhood, improving, and taking advantage of the natural patterns of walking.  She noted that the Valley is a network with hundreds of transit villages.

On order of Co-Chairperson Campos, there being no objection, the RIDE Task Force received an overview/update of the COA.

Mr. Capps discussed the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Rapid 522.   BRT is a flexible, rubber-tired rapid transit mode that combines stations, vehicles, services, running ways, and Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) elements, and creates a positive identity that evokes a unique image.   Mr. Capps provided examples of cities around the world that use BRT. 

Mr. Capps stated that BRT has unique features including special look of vehicles,  dedicated right-of-way, unique stations, unique identity, frequency and rouge, and uses ITS technology.   Key benefits include travel timesavings, high quality, high capacity service, flexibility, increased ridership, positive influence on land-use, and capital cost effectiveness.

Mr. Capps noted that VTA currently operates Rapid 522, a new service that runs from Eastridge to Palo Alto through the El Camino corridor has the following features:   bus signal priority (BSP), limited 30 stops, queue jump lanes, distinctive vehicles, 15 minutes headways, “free running” schedules, and runs Monday through Saturday.   There are currently 18 Rapid 522 vehicles with “wrapped” design and their stops have special identity.  Intensive marketing outreach effort was conducted for Rapid 522.     Mr. Capps also discussed the BSP funding and basics. 

Mr. Capps attributed the success of the Rapid 522 to its speed.   In fact, there is a  22 percent travel timesavings from Palo Alto to Eastridge compared to Line 22.    Rapid 522 is the 5^th busiest line with an average weekday passengers of 5,000 in October 2005.  Mr. Capps stated that future improvements for the Rapid 522 include upgrade of stations, more BSP’s at intersections, additional queue jump lanes, and adding new ITS to busses. 

Mr. Tucker clarified that Rapid 522 is not BRT but rather an improved service.   BRT is light rail on rubber wheels and has a much higher level of service.

On order of Co-Chairperson Campos, there being no objection, the RIDE Task Force received the presentation on Line 522/22 Corridor Performance.

Member Applegate distributed handouts regarding SamTrans’ Redi-wheels and fare information.   Member Lepe distributed handouts regarding single fare and monthly price comparison between Bay Area transit operators.

Member Applegate explained that she joined the Task Force to advocate for more accessible transit services and an equitable fare policy.   Member Applegate reviewed the prices for various VTA fares (fixed route and paratransit) and noted that there have been huge increases in fares in the past couple of years.  She expressed concern that the high fares negatively impact those on a fixed income.  

Member Applegate compared VTA fixed route fares with the City of Tucson, AZ.  She noted that although Tucson has different standards of living, their fares are less than 50 percent of VTA’s.  She also noted that Tucson’s transit agency has a fare policy where seniors, disabled, and low income riders pay a discounted rate. 

On the paratransit side, Member Applegate stated that Redi-Wheels, the agency that provides paratransit services for part of San Mateo County, has a low-income program.   She referred to the handout she distributed and noted if the customer has the forms to show proof of income supports (i.e. Supplemental Security Income (SSI) or Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI), Medi-Cal, or Temporary Aid to Needy Families from San Mateo County) they could be eligible for the fare assistance program.  Member Applegate directed attention to the sample application for visual.

Member Applegate directed attention to Member Lepe’s handout and noted that VTA, in most categories, has the highest fares in the Bay Area.

Member Brownstein inquired about an analysis that would look at different segments of the low-income population and determine the relationship between decreasing ridership and increased fares.   He suggested the idea of creating another category of fares for low-income users.

Mr. Tucker noted that the COA could be a tool to determine that type of information.   He cautioned, however, that there is difficulty in obtaining feedback from people who do not use the system anymore.  With regard to fares, Mr. Tucker emphasized that when examining fare structure, VTA’s budget should be considered since  fare is an important component in balancing the budget.  Furthermore, Mr. Tucker stated after consideration of all the discounts, VTA only collects approximately $0.90 per average boarding. 

Mr. Tucker noted that the RIDE Task Force could explore other alternatives such as the federal tax incentives that are offered to businesses to subsidize transit passes.   In the early 2000’s, the government allowed companies to subsidize up to $65 a month to defray the cost of transportation and encourage people to take public transit. 

Member Brownstein acknowledged the challenges in achieving a balance between revenues and fares and its relationship to achieving optimal economic and social goals.   He commented that higher fares are disincentives for people to use transit.  Moreover, high fares become obstacles for low-income users to functionally participate in society.  He noted that although this issue is complicated, there may be strategies that could help those people who are most vulnerable.  He noted that there may be value to creating a  sub-committee or additional staff analysis to make a stronger effort to improve this area.

Member Moore inquired about plans to segment transit dependent people and determine percentage of their income that is spent on transit.   Member Moore stated that this information, when identified, will be very vital in this discussion.  He inquired about his suggestion at the previous meeting regarding upgrading passes to create opportunity for users to realize savings.

Mr. Tucker noted that the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) has a program in place.   He noted the importance of determining what is currently available and begin discussion on what strategies to use to implement a similar program.

Member Moore referred to the VTA Take-ones and inquired if staff has intentions of putting literature about the federal incentive so that employees could potentially encourage their employers to subsidize their fares.   He stated that the application could also be part of the literature.

Mr. Tucker noted that the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) published a tool kit.   He suggested agendizing this issue as a separate item.  Staff intends to gather all the information and create a work plan.  Mr. Tucker added that it is a national on-going effort to make the program work.

Member Moore noted value of empowering the employee or rider to actively make the subsidy happen. 

Member Brownstein commented that the tax benefit program mentioned by Mr. Tucker is a good program.   He noted that one of the big challenges for this particular program is that most of low wage people do not directly work for big companies.

Member Applegate referred to the low income fare programs she presented earlier and noted that she is conducting research on three basic questions:   1) How long has the program been in place; 2) What did it take to get the program in place; and 3) What methods have been used for funding sources to offset the costs.

Mr. Tucker noted that some used a tax measure to cover some of the costs of the program.   Mr. Tucker commented that there is disparity of fares from one city to another.   Mr. Tucker stated that VTA offers to its paratransit customers free rides to fixed route services (bus and light rail).  He noted that this is a significant financial benefit for paratransit customers.

Member Lepe inquired if there is a possibility of extending the free ride program to low income people or students at off peak hours.

Mr. Tucker explained that the free fixed route service to paratransit customers is a win-win program because operation of paratransit is significantly more expensive than operation of fixed route services.  In essence, when paratransit customers choose to take fixed route services over paratransit, VTA realizes savings.  Paratransit customers, on the other hand, can save money as well and continue to maintain their freedom of catching either the bus or light rail. For other riders, a method must be identified to offset the cost.

Mr. Tucker reported that VTA is currently conducting a “Senior and Disabled Simple and Free Program” for the months of January to March 2006 where seniors and disabled can ride the bus and light rail for free during off-peak hours.   This program will provide VTA real time feedback and analysis of the programs impact to that segment of riders.

On order of Co-Chairperson Campos, there being no objection, the RIDE Task Force discussed the Fare Policy.

Mr. Tucker advised the Task Force that a summary of the December 14, 2005 meeting is provided at the table.   The comments of the Task Force will be included in the categories noted in the summary.

Mr. Tucker recommended cancellation of the RIDE Task Force meeting in February 2006 to provide sufficient time for staff to conduct analysis and provide recommendations to the Board of Directors and come back to the Task Force with a work plan.

Upon inquiry of Member Moore, Mr. Tucker noted that staff’s recommendation will address each of the categories identified together with an action items.

Member Brownstein suggested that staff try to provide the Task Force a list of staff suggestions/recommendations two weeks or so before the March 2006 meeting.

Member Julian stated that if a meeting is cancelled, there should be an additional meeting before the 18-month duration of the Task Force.   He noted the importance of a thorough discussion.  Co-Chairperson Campos responded that the Task Force could, if necessary, meet one more month, at the end of the 18-month period

On order of Co-Chairperson Campos, there being no objection, the RIDE Task Force agreed not to meet in February 2006.

ADJOURNED at 5:34 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Elaine F. Baltao, Board Assistant
VTA Board of Directors