HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-10-2013 MTC Agenda Packet
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
MASS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
990 Palm Street, City Hall
Council Hearing Room
2:30 p.m.
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
CALL TO ORDER
Chair calls the meeting to order.
ROLL CALL OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND STAFF
Chair: Elizabeth Thyne
Vice-Chair: Vacant
Committee Members:
Jody Frey (Disabled) Todd Katz (Member at Large)*
Dominique Bonino (Cal Poly) James Thompson (Technical)
Sara Sanders (Student) Louise Justice (Alternate)
Randoll White (Business) Anthony Pinkerton (Alternate)
Elizabeth Thyne (Senior)
Staff: John Webster, Sr., Transit Manager
Dee Lawson, Transportation Assistant
1
July 10, 2013 Regular meeting MTC agenda
Page 2 of 3
2
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
None
PUBLIC COMMENTS (10 min.)
At this time, members of the public may address the Committee on items not on the agenda, not
to exceed three minutes per person. Items raised are generally referred to the staff and, if
action by the Committee is necessary, may be scheduled for a future meeting.
The Chair will provide the opportunity for the public to address items on the agenda.
A. CONSENT ITEMS
Consent Items can be approved by a single vote by the Committee. Any member of the Committee
can pull and discuss any individual consent item.
A-1 Approval of minutes from May 8, 2013 5 min
B. DISCUSSION ITEMS
B-1 Land Use and Circulation Element Update. 50 min
B-2 Mobility education-training update-Ridership Development Consultants 15 min
C. ACTION ITEMS
C-1 Adoption of Policy for the Transportation of Electronic Personal
Assistive Mobility Devices by Persons with Disabilities on SLO Transit. 15 min
D. INFORMATION ITEMS
D-1 Transit Manager’s Report 10 min
D-2 Operating - Performance Reports (Attachment “A”) 10 min
MEMBER’S COMMENTS 15 min
Service Complaints: Complaints regarding bus service or routes are to be directed
to the Transportation Assistant at 781-7531. Reports of complaints/commendations
are available to the public upon request.
2
July 10, 2013 Regular meeting MTC agenda
Page 3 of 3
3
NEXT MEETING DATE/LOCATION
September 11, 2013 2:30 pm-4:30 pm,
Council Hearing Room, 990 Palm Street
ADJOURNMENT
G:\Transportation-Data\_Unsorted Stuff\Transportation\Transportation Committees\MTC Committee\FY 2014\JULY 10-2013\1-Draft MTC
Agenda,REGULAR MEETING July 10- 2013-.docx
3
Page 1 of 1 Regular meeting July 10, 2013 MTC Agenda item A-1 1
Item: A-1
DATE July 10, 2013
TO: Mass Transportation Committee
FROM: John Webster, Transit Manager
SUBJECT: APPROVE DRAFT MEETING MINUTES
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve May 8, 2013 regular meeting minutes.
G:\Transportation-Data\_Unsorted Stuff\Transportation\Transportation Committees\MTC Committee\FY 2014\JULY 10-2013\2-AGENDA
ITEM A-1 REG MEETING July 10--2013- APPROVE MINUTES COVER SHEET.docx
4
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
MASS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
COUNCIL HEARING ROOM
990 PALM ST.
WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2013
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Elizabeth Thyne called the meeting to order at 2:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Elizabeth Thyne, James Thompson, Jody Frey, Todd Katz, Sara Sanders,
Randol White, Dominique Bonino, Anthony Pinkerton, Louise Justice
Absent
Staff: John Webster
ANNOUNCEMENTS
The City Clerk swore in new members James Thompson, Sara Sanders, Randol White,
Dominique Bonino, and Anthony Pinkerton
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments.
A. CONSENT ITEMS
A-1. Approval of March 13, 2013 Regular Meeting
Ms. Justice noted that she was incorrectly marked as “absent,” stating she had just arrived
late.
Mr. Katz moved to approve the minutes as amended. Mr. Thompson seconded the
motion. The motion passed unanimously.
5
B. DISCUSSION ITEMS
There were no discussion items.
C. ACTION ITEMS
C-1. MTC Meeting Schedule for FY 2014
Mr. White moved to approve the schedule as submitted. Mr. Thompson seconded the
motion. The motion passed unanimously.
C-2. MTC Election of Officers for FY 2014
Ms. Justice nominated Ms. Thyne as returning Chairperson. Mr. Katz seconded the
nomination. There were no other nominations. Ms. Thyne was unanimously elected
Chairperson.
Ms. Thyne nominated Mr. Katz as Vice Chairperson. Ms. Justice seconded the
nomination. There were no other nominations. Mr. Katz was unanimously elected Vice
Chairperson.
D. INFORMATION ITEMS
D-1. Transit Manager’s Report
D-2. Operating-Performance Reports
Mr. Webster presented highlight discussion on the reports as presented, as well as
outlining additional ridership data.
He reported a concern about the Cal Poly ridership being down from the high rate of
riders last year. He stated staff was monitoring the situation and working with Cal Poly
representatives for the fall 2013 Week of Welcome (WOW)
Ms. Justice asked what happens when riders board with an expired pass. Mr. Webster
discussed the over/under payment system and the discretion drivers had in a given
situation.
She also reported that the fare box system had been down over the weekend.
John Guyton, First Transit, clarified the issues and reiterated a commitment of capturing
all fare box revenue.
Mr. Webster discussed in specific:
Ridership and Performance Reports
6
Vehicle Replacement Updates
Transit Facility Safety and Security Project
Bus Stop Improvement Project
Bus Stop Safety and Security Project
SLO Transit Automatic Passenger Counter
New Freedom FTA 5317 Grant
Downtown Transit Center Study
Joint RTA/SLO Transit Short Range Transit Plan
April Ridership and Fuel Tables
He also discussed marketing budget and campaigns.
Ms. Thyne requested that a light be installed at the Laurel/Orcutt shelter. Mr. Webster
indicated that staff would evaluation the location to see if a solar light could be installed
when funding is available.
Mr. Katz noted there were often altercations taking place at the same stop.
Mr. Pinkerton outlined some of the restrictions and rules that were enforced at the
Maxine Lewis Shelter, whose many clients use the Laurel/Orcutt Shelter.
MEMBER COMMENTS
Mr. Thompson asked if there was cheaper gas purchasing available. Mr. Webster stated
the only less expensive option would be to buy in bulk and store locally, which the City
was unable to do. He also indicated that the majority of the transit fuel purchases were
diesel fuel.
Each new member briefly introduced themselves and discussed their background.
The meeting adjourned at 3:55 p.m. to the regular meeting of July 10, 2013 to be held at
2:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lisa Woske, Recording Secretary
7
1
Item: B-1
DATE July 10, 2013
TO: Mass Transportation Committee
FROM: Peggy Mandeville, Principal Transportation Planner
SUBJECT: Land Use and Circulation Element Update.
The City is undertaking a focused update of its General Plan Land Use and
Circulation Elements. The Circulation Element describes how the City plans to
provide for the transportation of people and materials within the community and
beyond. The document expresses the community’s preferences for current and
future conditions and directions. As a City advisory body that assists with an
ongoing program of public transit, the Committee’s input during this process is
very important. With several new members joining the Committee, now is a good
time to update the Committee on the project and seek some preliminary feedback.
At the MTC meeting staff will make a presentation introducing multi-modal level
of service (MMLOS) which is a method to identify how all modes of travel- cars,
transit, bicycles and pedestrians perform in a community. The analysis uses data
such as a street sections, traffic signal timing, the posted speed limit, bus headways
(timing between bus arrivals), traffic volumes, transit patronage, and pedestrian
volumes to better understand the way people traveling by different modes interact
within a shared right of way environment as well as the trade-offs that need to be
considered due to right-of-way limitations as the community considers where
growth can occur in the future.
In addition to this presentation, staff will review the existing Circulation Element
Transit Service policies (attached) with the Committee and receive input regarding
any suggested changes. Because the City’s Short Range Transit Plan includes
several long term strategic issues that should be considered as part of future
planning efforts, excerpts from the Short Range Transit Plan have also been
attached for the Committee’s information.
8
9
10
11
12
Page 1 of 4 Regular meeting July 10, 2013 MTC Agenda item A-1 1
Item: C-1
DATE July 10, 2013
TO: Mass Transportation Committee
FROM: John Webster, Transit Manager
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF POLICY FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF
ELECTRIC PERSONAL ASSISTIVE MOBILITY DEVICES BY PERSONS
WITH DISABILITIES ON SLO TRANSIT.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve a policy to permit persons with disabilities who use Electric Personal
Assistive Mobility Devices (EPAMDS) as mobility devices to transport the devices
on SLO Transit vehicles and recommend city transit staff make technical
amendments to the policy to further its intent.
Background
The U.S. Department of Transportation issued disability law guidance in 2005
requiring transit operators to accommodate Segway brand EPAMDs when used by
persons with disabilities as a mobility aid unless such transport poses a direct threat
to the safety of others. The guidance further permits transit operators to adopt their
own policies regarding such accommodation.
Staff has developed a policy to accommodate the transport of EPAMDS as defined
by Section 313 of the California Vehicle Code, when used by persons with
disabilities as a mobility aid. Under the policy, the method of verifying of a
person's eligibility to board with an EPAMD is similar to that for the verification
of service animals. If an operator has a doubt that the user is disabled and uses the
EPAMD as a mobility device, the operator may ask the customer if the EPAMD is
being used as a mobility device. If the customer says it is, the operator must allow
the customer to board with the EPAMD.
13
Page 2 of 4 Regular meeting July 10, 2013 MTC Agenda item A-1 2
POLICY FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF ELECTRIC PERSONAL
ASSISTIVE MOBILITY DEVICES (EPAMD)
Effective Date: July 11, 2013; the rules by which a SLO Transit passenger may
transport an electric personal assistive mobility device (EPAMD) using the bus.
These devices may only be transported using the SLO Transit system by persons
with disabilities who use the devices as a mobility aid. Nothing in this policy
prohibits SLO Transit from taking additional steps to ensure the safety of staff,
passengers and the public.
I. DEFINITION
An electric personal assistive mobility device, or EPAMD, is a self-balancing,
non-tandem two-wheeled device that is not greater than 20 inches deep, 25 inches
wide and 60 inches high; can turn in place; is designed to transport only one
person, and has an electric propulsion system averaging less than 750 watts
(1 horsepower), the maximum speed of which, when powered solely by a
propulsion system on a paved level surface, is no more than 12.5 miles per hour. A
Segway HT is an example of an EPAMD.
II. POLICY STATEMENT
SLO Transit generally prohibits the transport of EPAMDs using the transit
system. An exception is made to permit persons with disabilities who use the
devices as mobility aids to access the bus with their EPAMDs, subject to
the terms of this Policy.
III. RULES FOR USE AND OPERATION
SLO Transit allows EPAMDs to be transported on the bus system subject
to the following requirements:
a) EPAMDs may only be transported using the bus system by persons with
disabilities who use the device as a mobility aid. The method of verification
of a person's eligibility to board with an EPAMD is similar to that for the
verification of service animals (SOP D-32). If an operator has a doubt that
the user is disabled and uses the EPAMD as a mobility device, the operator
may ask the customer if the EPAMD is being used as a mobility device. If
the customer says it is, the operator must allow the customer to board with
the EPAMD. If an operator still has a doubt that the user is disabled and uses
the EPAMD as a mobility device, the operator shall contact dispatch to
report suspected abuse of this Policy.
14
Page 3 of 4 Regular meeting July 10, 2013 MTC Agenda item A-1 3
b) EPAMDs may only be transported on ADA vehicles by individuals who are
certified to use ADA.
c) Passengers may not ride an EPAMD onboard a bus, lift, or ramp. EPAMDs
must remain "off" while onboard the vehicle.
d) EPAMDs must be secured for transport on the bus system.
e) A person shall not transport an EPAMD with willful or wanton disregard
for the safety of persons or property.
f) EPAMDs shall not be transported using the bus system by anyone under the
influence of intoxicating substances, including alcohol or drugs.
g) EPAMD users must leave their devices on the bus in case of an emergency
that requires vehicle evacuation.
h) The wheelchair securement area on buses is open to individuals with
disabilities and particularly those individuals using a wheelchair or an
EPAMD, on a first come, first served basis. If both wheelchair securement
positions are occupied, the customer will be instructed by the operator to
wait for the next bus.
IV. VEHICLE BOARDING AND DEBOARDING
a) Lift-equipped fixed-route buses: The bus operator shall not board a
customer with an EPAMD unless a wheelchair securement position is
vacant. The bus operator will deploy the lift so a customer may either pull
or push the EPAMD onto the lift. The customer must, without assistance
from the bus operator, maneuver the EPAMD onto the lift. The customer
must accompany the EPAMD on the lift but may not ride the EPAMD on
the lift or ramp. The customer may need to lower his or her head to avoid
hitting the top of the door opening when the lift is in motion. On reaching
the bus floor, the customer must maneuver the EPAMD, without assistance
from the bus operator, to the wheelchair securement area. The same
procedure will be followed in reverse for deboarding.
b) Ramp-equipped low-floor buses: The bus operator will deploy the ramp
so a customer may either pull or push the EPAMD onto or off the bus.
V. EPAMD SECUREMENT
a) Fixed-route buses: The customer shall position the EPAMD in the
wheelchair securement area. The EPAMD shall be positioned with the
handlebar resting on the folded seat bottom and against the seatback to
prevent rearward movement. The bus operator shall secure the EPAMD with
15
Page 4 of 4 Regular meeting July 10, 2013 MTC Agenda item A-1 4
securement straps to prevent movement. The customer shall sit in the closest
available seat to the EPAMD. If no seats are available, the customer shall
stand as close to the EPAMD as possible.
VI. FARE
This policy and resulting use of an EPAMD shall not impact fares required for use
of the SLO transit System.
VII. Policy amendments: City transportation staff is authorized to approve
contractor training methods, develop customer advisory materials and make
technical administrative amendments to the policy to further its intent.
G:\Transportation-Data\_Unsorted Stuff\Transportation\Transportation Committees\MTC Committee\FY 2014\JULY 10-2013\2-AGENDA
ITEM C-1 REG MEETING July 10--2013- MOBILITY DEVICE COVER SHEET.docx
16
Item: D-1
TO: Mass Transportation Committee
FROM: John Webster, Sr., Transit Manager
DATE: July 10, 2013
SUBJECT: Transit Manager’s Report
The Transit Manager’s Report will include highlights of issues and ridership
data from May-June 2013.
Ridership and performance reports (D-2 Attachment “A”)
2013 Transit Enterprise fund review
One June 12, 2013 the Council accepted and approved the three recommendations
contained in the staff report. The following is from the original staff report.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Review and accept the 2013 Transit Enterprise Fund Review;
2. Conceptually approve the 2013-14 Transit Enterprise Fund budget, with
final action on June 17, 2013 with the adoption of the 2013-15 Financial
Plan;
3. Authorize the City Manager or her designee to negotiate and approve
(consistent with the existing agreement) three one-year contract extensions
with First Transit, Inc. to perform operations and maintenance for 2013-14,
2014-15, and 2015-16 FY.
REPORT IN BRIEF
This report presents the annual Transit Enterprise Fund review and key issues that
may have an effect on the overall health of the fund. Overall, the Transit Fund is
forecast to end 2012-13 with a modest year-end working capital amount to assist
with operations and minor capital expenditure project needs. The Transit Fund is
able to maintain the minimum 20% reserve level in working capital in accordance
with the City Financial Management policies in addition to supporting capital
improvement program projects and significant program operating changes
17
Attachment 1
Page 2
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
contained in this report and fund analysis as attached. Finally, the City of San Luis
Obispo’s Transit Fund continues to provide a viable mobility option for residents
and visitors. A wide range of users continue to receive services, including
commuters, transit-dependent riders, students, disabled, and elderly.
This report will briefly touch on some of the accomplishments of the past year,
provide information on all Transit Fund revenues and funding concerns and address
overall transportation operations. In addition, this report seeks Council approval of
three one-year contract extensions with First Transit, Inc. to perform SLO Transit
operations and maintenance.
DISCUSSION
Transit Accomplishments in 2012-13
Although the Transit Fund Review primarily reports on financial and budgetary
information, it is important to reflect on the accomplishments that have occurred
during the past fiscal year. Council approval of the Transit Fund budget allows
SLO Transit to provide continued services and support. The following is a list of
highlights that SLO Transit has been able to accomplish in the 2011-12 fiscal year.
Ridership
It is projected that SLO Transit total ridership will exceed one million
riders with projected ridership of 1,088,000 patrons in 2012-13.
1. Mobility Training - New Freedoms Grant
Staff received an initial grant from the Federal Transit Administration
(Section 5317) in the amount of $20,000 to increase marketing and
training services to the elderly. The City moved forward with the
outreach program and in April 2009 awarded a contract to Ridership
Development Consultants (RDC) for expanded marketing and
outreach to the City’s stakeholders. Staff has continued to submit
successor grant applications in order to continue the existing mobility
program and Council approved a successor agreement with RDC on
June 7, 2011. During 2012-13, RDC held eight informational,
outreach and training sessions for senior and disabled rider education
(through April 2013.) RDC direct outreach has included over 200
telephone, email or in person contacts and provided printed ridership
18
Attachment 1
Page 3
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
tools to over 150 participants this year. Program marketing and
informational materials are available at over a dozen locations
throughout the City. As a result, SLO Transit has experienced an
increase in ridership (through April 2013) of approximately 70%
(52,018 vs 88,430) in this segment as compared to the same period in
2009-10 before the start of this grant funded program.
2. Ad Hoc Marketing Committee
The Mass Transportation Committee (MTC) Marketing Ad Hoc
committee for SLO Transit met with Cal Poly faculty and students to
seek Trolley marketing assistance from the University. In March, the
MTC members reviewed four Cal Poly class marketing plan
presentations and recommended that some presented materials be
incorporated into the Trolley Marketing efforts in 2013-14.
3. New Transit buses
Two new 40’ transit vehicles were placed into service in March 2013.
These new vehicles incorporate into their design the latest state of the
art safety features and one vehicle is equipped with a luggage rack for
use mainly on routes that service the Maxine Lewis Memorial Shelter
on Orcutt Street and the Prado Day center at Prado Raod. This feature
will help reduce items such as carts and large bags currently stored in
the main aisle and improve safety regarding accidents due to trips/falls
for passengers who are boarding and departing.
4. Capital projects
Bus stop improvement projects included modifications to the Prado
Road bus stop that expanded the area behind the bus shelter to reduce
or eliminate passengers standing in the road during peak periods. A
12- month security camera pilot project was installed at the
Downtown Transit Center (DTC) in May, and City Transportation and
IT staff will be responsible for system monitoring and evaluation of
camera performance during the pilot period. Staff will make a final
recommendation at the end of the pilot project whether to continue the
installation and also utilize the information to evaluate a
comprehensive city-wide program for use at additional bus stops.
19
Attachment 1
Page 4
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
Other projects included a new access gate leading to the transit
facility, improved transit facility lighting and a portable generator.
Transit Revenues
State Budget Impacts
Overall, the Governor's proposed State budget does not make any significant
changes to funding for transportation or public transit. However, any further
reduction of funding to the City, Cal Poly or the SLO Regional Transit Authority
could have a significant impact on service levels for 2013-14 and beyond.
San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA)
SLO Transit shares State and Federal funding for transit services with RTA. This
Joint Powers Association (JPA) Agreement allocates annual “off the top" funding
to RTA from State Transportation Development Act (TDA) funding. The recently
adopted 2013-14 RTA budget approved an increase to RTA by approximately
$676,192, thereby decreasing available resources for SLO in 2013-14.
Representatives from RTA, San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG)
and SLO Transit continue to work on options for funding that would maximize
transit service provisions for each agency.
State Transportation Development Act
The State Transportation Development Act (TDA) is comprised of two sources of
funding for transportation programs. The first, Local Transportation Fund (LTF), is
derived from ¼ cent collected in retail sales taxes. The second, State
Transportation Assistance (STA), is derived from the statewide sales tax on diesel
fuel. Both of these funds are distributed to the regions by the State. The regional
agency, SLOCOG, then allocates this amount to each of the seven cities, the
County, SLOCOG, and the Consolidated Transportation Services Agency for the
San Luis Obispo region. LTF funds are apportioned according to population for
public transit, street/road improvements and bikeway/pedestrian facilities. STA
funds are formula-based and used for public transit purposes.
The State budget has yet to be approved and therefore the State Controller
projected STA funding allocation remains preliminary at this time. Preliminary
20
Attachment 1
Page 5
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
data represents a decrease of STA funding of approximately $96,090 (-35%) over
2012-13 FY. The County Auditor LTF projections are higher than originally
estimated with a one-time significant increase of approximately $625,384 (+28%)
in 2013-14 over the previous year. This increase is largely attributed to a one-time
carryover of funding, which is not anticipated in future years. With a proposed
fund reserve, the County Auditor has increased the LTF allocations for
jurisdictions. This allocation is a one-time increase in LTF funding and as such
will not become the new base for subsequent years. Overall, the total State transit
funding is anticipated to increase by 22% in 2013-14 over the previous year. Staff
will evaluate additional service priorities and capital projects as part of the next
Program of Projects.
Federal Funding
On May 13, 2013 the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) published a Federal
Register Notice describing the FY 2013 apportionment of FTA funds based on the
Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (FY 2013
Appropriations) which provides funds for the full 2012-13 fiscal year, and as
applicable, reflects sequestration triggered by the Balanced Budget and Emergency
Deficit Control Act of 2011. The final 2012-13 apportionments are slightly higher
than the current revenue estimates. Any remaining funding at the end of the fiscal
year will be designated as carryover and made available to be programmed during
the next Program of Projects cycle in September 2013.
Program of Projects
The Transit Fund analysis anticipates a slight increase in the level of FTA 5307
funding apportionment for the upcoming 2013-14 fiscal year as a result of the final
2012-13 apportionments posted on May 13, 2013. This projection provides
adequate support for operating assistance and preventive maintenance functions for
SLO Transit only. New capital projects have been projected as part of the
Program of Projects (POP) in the 2013-14 fiscal year. Also, additional projects
may be brought forward as part of a revised POP if Federal funding allocations
come in higher than projected. Any reduction in Federal operating assistance will
need to be offset with potential service reductions or other cost savings measures.
Subsidies
Cal Poly Subsidy Agreement
21
Attachment 1
Page 6
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
The City successfully negotiated a five-year Subsidy Agreement with Cal Poly
which began on July 1, 2011. The SLO Transit budget projection for the 3rd year of
the agreement in 2013-14 includes a 1.96% increase in Cal Poly subsidy and 3% in
each of the remaining two years. If the State budget significantly affects Cal Poly's
ability to fund the Subsidy Agreement, the City and the University have agreed to
meet and discuss potential program modifications or service level reductions. Cal
Poly has not indicated that this will be necessary for the coming year.
Trolley Operations
While the funding form the Community Promotions program was eliminated in FY
2012-13 there are sufficient Transit operating funds to continue trolley service
through the end of October 2013. Ridership on Fridays and Saturdays continue to
decrease when compared to the same July-April period last year. When trolley
services conclude in October, staff will evaluate the trolley ridership data to
determine if further service adjustments are warranted and whether to resume
Friday and Saturday trolley services again in April 2014. This will also allow time
for the new Cal Poly materials to be incorporated into the Trolley Marketing
efforts in 2013-14 and to evaluate the impact. Thursday trolley service remains
productive but ridership was down during the same July-April period last year.
Purchased Transportation
First Transit Contract
On June 6, 2006 the City Council approved a three-year contract with First Transit,
Inc. to provide Purchased Transportation for operations and maintenance services
for SLO Transit for the period July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2009. This agreement
included a possibility of seven one-year extensions and authorized the City
Manager to execute the agreement. In February 2012, Council approved a contract
extension (4th option year) through June 30, 2013. The City was not required to
modify service levels at that time as there were no significant increases in the
City’s contribution to RTA.
Staff is recommending that Council approve the final three extension years
available in the current agreement effective July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2016.
The First Transit proposal is a 2.83% increase in FY 2013-14 over the current year
contract costs for transit services, and comes with the recognition by First Transit
that it is aware of the current financial difficulty facing the City. A comparison of
22
Attachment 1
Page 7
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
the rates for the three extension terms is provided in Table 1 below. The actual
three year cost total increase is 8.27%. As a comparison, when the City circulated
the last Invitation for Bids (IFB) in 2005, the two other proposals received
provided an overall cost increase of approximately 30%.
Table 1 – Purchased Transportation Annual Contract Costs
Year Not-to-Exceed
Cost
Administrative
Rate
Per
Not-to-
Exc
eed
Cost
Per Mile
Total
Cost
%
Increase
(Decrease)
2011-12 $886,266 $2.585$1,000,031 $1,886,297 3.0%
2012-13 $932,508 $2.672$1,003,377 $1,965,890 4.2%
2013-14 $956,982 $2.705$1,064,556 $2,021,549 2.8%
2014-15 $966,205 $2.805$1,104,168 $2,070,373 2.4%
2015-16 $982,020 $2.913$1,146,454 $2,128,475 2.8%
Overall, the City is very satisfied with the level of service and professionalism that
First Transit has provided the City for the last twelve years. First Transit has been
a fair and responsive contractor as well as a safe operator of the City’s bus fleet.
The First Transit contract contains many innovative ideas that previously led them
to be the consensus candidate contractor for SLO transit services. Highlights of
these elements are:
1. Passenger Attitude and Service. The overwhelming philosophy in the
current First Transit contract was that passengers come first. As First Transit
professed in consideration for the City’s current contract, First Transit puts
quality first.
2. Driver Attitude and Service. First Transit recognizes the value of its
experienced drivers. First Transit has innovative employee incentive
programs that are designed to increase morale of the employees. First
Transit will continue to proactively hire and train new drivers and also retain
quality drivers that will perform the City’s transit service.
3. Maintenance Tracking Software and Hardware. First Transit is an industry
leader in the use of innovative techniques and information services to keep
costs low. First Transit will continue to provide a maintenance software
23
Attachment 1
Page 8
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
package that will monitor the preventative maintenance and overall health of
each SLO Transit vehicle. This software tracks vehicle performance and
helps optimize parts distribution and cost recovery. This information has
helped the City to better schedule major vehicle rehabilitation and
replacement.
It is for these reasons stated above in conjunction with the modest proposed
contract cost increases that staff recommends Council approve the extension
agreements. There is a high likelihood that if staff is required to rebid for the
transit operating services that the costs will come in higher. Staff will return to
Council in 2015-16 to seek approval to issue a formal Request for Proposal (RFP)
for transit operations and maintenance.
Transportation Operations
Continued Volatility in Fuel Costs
Fuel costs are once again very volatile as experienced in 2008 and 2010 when fuel
prices increased significantly to almost $5 per gallon. Although fuel prices were
showing stabilization in April, staff projects fuel costs will continue to rise over the
next year. Projected fuel costs in 2013-14 are $4.08 per gallon and $4.21 per gallon
in 2014-15, with an average of 114,000 gallons of diesel fuel purchased in a fiscal
year. Staff projects this budget to be adequate, however outside market influences
make this assumption difficult to control. Should fuel prices increase significantly
above staff projections for fuel prices per gallon, staff will return to Council with
identified service-level reductions or possible use of Transit Fund working capital
reserves.
General Government
The newly revised Cost Allocation Plan resulted in a cost reduction of
approximately 24% for FY 2013-14 over the current year. This cost reduction is
attributed to the change in methodology for how the City calculates direct and
indirect charges for Enterprise Funds that receive General Fund program support.
The Cost Allocation Plan, which also affects the performance of farebox ratio, is
considered a Central Service plan by the Federal Transit Administration and does
not require its review or certification.
24
Attachment 1
Page 9
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
Short Range Transit Plan
The City Council adopted the Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) update in 2009.
As a result of funding constraints, all available revenues are allocated to support
SLO Transit operating services. No new initiatives or increase in services, as
recommended in the SRTP, have been included in the Transit Enterprise Fund
analysis. These recommendations will be addressed and brought forward to
Council as funding sources are identified. RTA has submitted an application for
FTA funding in order to conduct a first time ever “joint” SRTP that will include
SLO Transit operations and make recommendations for potential service
efficiencies.
Farebox Ratio
With the service fare increase approved in 2009, SLO Transit’s farebox ratio was
projected to stabilize in 2010-11 and beyond. Staff also projected the renegotiated
Cal Poly Subsidy Agreement would be a key component in meeting the State
required 20% farebox ratio for the SLO Transit system. In the 2012-13 fiscal year
farebox ratios are projected to meet the 20% requirement and expected to remain
stable if revenue estimates are met. Should farebox ratios begin to consistently fall
below the 20% required level, the City could be subject to a State funding penalty
and reduced transit funding revenues. If the farebox ratio projections consistently
remain below 20%, a fare increase may be necessary so as not to endanger future
funding levels.
Staffing Related Assumptions
Increased City PERS contributions that will be initiated on July 1, 2013 are
integrated into the fund review. Additional staff savings of 2% are estimated in
2014-15 and 2.5% in 2015-16 and beyond. A 2.25% non-staffing savings is
calculated every other year, in 2014-15 and 2016-17. An estimated 1% PERS
employer paid contribution is noted in 2014-15 and an additional 1% in 2015-16
and beyond.
FISCAL IMPACT
As shown in the 2013 Transit Enterprise Fund Analysis (Attachment 1), staff is
projecting the 2013-14 fiscal year to end with a modest year-end working capital.
25
Attachment 1
Page 10
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
Funding continues to be lean and highly dependent upon Federal and State grants
and final budget appropriations. While staff does not project any service-level
reductions for SLO Transit at this time, the projected revenue forecasts give very
little capacity for funding variations. Due to one-time-only funding increases, as
well as other cost savings and a minimal capital improvement program, the fund is
projected to finish 2012-13 fiscal year with a small amount of positive cash flow.
These projections are dependent upon revenues provided by the State and Federal
budgets, which have yet to be approved.
Changes in Financial Position is included as part of the 2013 Transit Fund Review
and show that overall revenues are projected to meet or exceed expenditures in
2012-13, leaving a positive year-end balance of $1,515,100. Should the final
Federal apportionment be significantly reduced from projected levels, use of transit
reserve fund may be needed to support this deficit for the immediate shortfall.
The revised 2012-13 budget and projected funding for the 2013-14 Fiscal Year
includes assumptions of revenues in key funding sources that have seen significant
reductions by State budget take-aways over the past three years. With the one-time
State funding increases for FY 2014, the fund is projected to end the 2013-14 fiscal
year with a year-end working capital of $2,061,500. A conservative budget is
proposed, which minimizes capital projects, defers bus replacements and maintains
year-end reserves to address minor shortfalls in revenues.
Maintaining year-end working capital reserve funding is prudent for the following
three reasons:
Minimizing service-level impacts as a result of State and Federal budget
reductions
Minimizing service-level impacts as a result of purchased transportation
operations and maintenance contract costs
Weathering volatile fuel prices
2013 Transit Fund Report
I. OVERVIEW
26
Attachment 1
Page 11
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
This report presents the financial position of the Transit Enterprise Fund, based on
the 2011-13 Financial Plan operating program budget, projected 2012-13 year-end
funding, and recommends operating program and capital project requests to
address the identified needs in the Transit Services program in the 2013-15
Financial Plan.
While the State budget proposal does not make any significant changes to project
funding for transportation, the ever-turbulent Federal budget situation continues to
delay the final Federal Transit Administration (FTA) apportionment for transit-
related program funding. As a result, the Transit Enterprise Fund program moves
cautiously into the 2013-14 fiscal year but is optimistic that the estimated level of
Federal funding will be approved.
Staff is projecting a year free of service reductions but one that is contingent on
outside influences ultimately determining if service changes or fare increases may
be necessary. Staff will be monitoring the budget situation closely, and return later
in the year with any changes or reductions that require Council consideration.
Capital expenditures will be limited to projects that can be funded from grant
revenues, keeping the local match required to a minimum, and preserving as much
for operating expenses as possible. If needed, the capital purchases can be deferred,
in the short-term, freeing up funds intended to be used as a local match.
Staff currently forecasts the 2012-13 budget as balanced, with revenues meeting or
exceeding expenditures. However, volatile fuel costs, additional costs associated
with contract rebidding, increase subsidy to the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit
Authority (RTA) and unresolved issues at the State and Federal levels would affect
transit funding levels. Staff continues to monitor the budget situation closely, and
will return later in the year with any changes or reductions that need to be
considered.
2013-15 FINANCIAL PLAN
Summary of Operating Programs
Below is the summary of the 2013-15 Financial Plan operating budget projections
for the Transit Services Enterprise Fund.
27
Attachment 1
Page 12
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
2012-132013-142014-152015-162016-172017-18
RevisedBudgetBudgetProjectedProjectedProjected
Staffing240,900 229,500 226,900 227,500 228,100 228,400
Contract Services 2,515,300 2,545,300 2,609,600 2,683,700 2,834,000 2,903,000
Other Operating Expenses 70,300 82,300 82,200 81,100 81,300 81,400
SOPC - Contract Serivces - 80,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000
SOPC - Education / Training - 4,300 - - - -
Estimated Savings (Staffing & Non)(9,200) (5,700) (8,900) (5,700)
PERS Contribution 1,400 2,800 2,800 2,800
Minor Capital - - - - - -
Operating Budget2,826,500 2,941,400 2,930,900 3,009,400 3,157,300 3,229,900
The Fund Analysis includes two significant operating program changes (SOPC).
One SOPC recommendation is to increase contract services funding for the SLO
Transit Short Range Transit Plan. The second SOPC is a recommended increase in
education and training to attend relevant transit operations training for staff.
The operating budget as reflected above shows a reduction in staffing expenditures
as a result of employee concessions and increase in contract costs for purchased
transportation services, fuel and one-time contract services support in 2012-13
during an interim leave of the Deputy Director of Public Works. A significant
change to SLO Transit’s operating expenditures is accounted for in General
Government by the change in methodology for calculating direct and indirect
charges as part of the City’s Cost Allocation Plan.
The City successfully negotiated a five-year Subsidy Agreement with Cal Poly
which began on July 1, 2011. The SLO Transit budget projections for the 2012-13
fiscal year include a 4% increase in the Cal Poly subsidy. If the State budget
significantly affects Cal Poly's ability to fund the Subsidy Agreement, the City and
the University will undertake discussions on potential program modifications or
service-level reductions.
Capital Improvement Program
Below is the summary of the 2013-15 Financial Plan capital project budget
projections for the Transit Enterprise Fund. .
The table below shows the 2013-15 Capital Improvement Program and
assumptions for capital projects in the Transit Fund. The City has been successful
in acquiring some outside grant funding to assist in various transit facility
28
Attachment 1
Page 13
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
improvement capital projects, including vehicle replacements, in 2010-11 fiscal
year as shown in table below. There are three bus replacement capital projects
scheduled in the 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16. There is one fleet addition
Transit Sedan with Wheelchair lift anticipated in 2013-14. Other State and Federal
Revenue will support various Finance and Information Technology capital projects
for technology upgrades. As with past practice, the City will continue to rely on
grants for capital projects and will to augment the proposed Transit capital
program of projects to be reflective of actual grant funding received.
2013-142014-152015-162016-172017-18
BudgetBudgetProjectedProjectedProjected
Auto Bus Passenger Counters-$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Bus Stop Shelter Replacements 346,600$ -$
Transit Facility Expansion 43,200$ -$ 347,000$ -$ -$
SLO Transit Bus Replacements (#0201, 0203, 0202)474,100$ 484,900$ 495,700$
SLO Transit Sedan w/ Wheelchair Lift 58,300$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Bus Stop Equipment Signage & Cameras 23,100$ 31,300$ 31,300$ 31,300$ 31,300$
Firewall Replacement 3,500$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Document Management 2,200$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Network Security Upgrades 3,100$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Enterprise Storage Growth 600$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Network Switching Upgrades -$ 9,500$ -$ -$ -$
Microsoft Office Replacement -$ 2,800$ -$ -$ -$
Storage Capacity Upgrade & Replacement -$ -$ -$ -$ 14,400$
954,700$ 528,500$ 874,000$ 31,300$ 45,700$
Transit Capital Program
Revenues, Subventions and Grants
State transit funding is predicted to increase for this fiscal year 2012-13 as a result
of the better than expected sales/gas tax/excise tax revenues and one-time
carryover funding, which resulted in an increase in State revenues of
approximately 11% over current year. However, this increase in funding is
somewhat offset by an increase in the City’s subsidy to the San Luis Obispo
Regional Transit Authority (RTA). Federal revenues are expected to be about the
same as previous year’s allocation, however; if the final Federal apportionment is
significantly reduced from projected, the Transit Enterprise Fund year-end reserves
will be needed to support the deficit for the immediate shortfall. Staff has included
projections of expenditures in the operating budget that are realistic, but if
exceeded, will cause funding hardship.
29
Attachment 1
Page 14
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
While staff does not project any service-level reductions for SLO Transit at this
time, the projected revenue forecasts give very little capacity for funding
variations. Due to one-time-only funding increases, as well as other cost savings
and a minimal capital improvement program, staff is projecting to finish 2012-13
fiscal year with a small amount of positive cash flow. These projections are
dependent upon revenues provided by the State and Federal budgets, which have
yet to be approved.
Transit Revenues 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18
Budget Budget Projection Projection Projection
Investment and Property Revenues 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800
Subventions and Grants
TDA Grants (LTF, STA)1,977,400 1,243,400 1,261,000 1,299,400 1,338,500
Other Grants (ARRA, Prop 1B, Other)222,700 30,300 30,300 30,300 30,300
FTA Grants1,918,700 1,764,000 2,079,400 1,474,300 1,503,400
Service Charges 650,800 669,500 695,300 724,000 745,000
Other Revenues 5,000 4,000 4,000 - -
Total Revenues 4,780,400 3,717,000 4,075,800 3,533,800 3,623,000
ASSUMPTIONS
The following assumptions have been used to forecast the Transit Enterprise Fund
analysis. The discussion below provides detail for the key assumptions used to
generate the changes in financial position as provided as Exhibit A. It is important
to note the proposed budget is a “snapshot” of current funding and expenditure
projections as of May 2012. The following discussion focuses on major issues that
could have an affect the Transit Enterprise Fund next fiscal year. These
assumptions have been incorporated into the 2013-15 budget projections.
General Government Assumptions
Minimum working capital (reserve) should equal at least 20% of the total
Operating Program expenditures according to the City's fiscal policy. Based upon
this policy, the minimum reserve level should be approximately $600,000 to
$700,000. The year-end working capital exceeds the minimum reserve policy
levels.
General Assumptions include:
30
Attachment 1
Page 15
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
a. One-time payment of California Joint Powers Insurance Association
(CJPIA) of $17,600 in 2013-14 (placed in Other Sources)
b. 1% PERS Employer Paid Contribution in 2014-15 and an additional
1% PERS Contribution in 2015-16 and beyond. (expense
incorporated into Transportation Operating Expenditures)
c. Non-staffing savings of 2.25% in 2014-15 and 2016-17. (expense
incorporated into Transportation Operating Expenditures)
d. Staffing savings of 2% in 2014-15 and 2.5 % in 2015-16 and beyond.
The Transit Enterprise Fund will commit all available transit funding to SLO
Transit and will carryover any unused funding for use in subsequent years and to
maintain an adequate year-end fund balance (reserve) to help weather budget
uncertainties.
Revenue Assumptions
Fare Revenue
Fare increases adopted by the City Council in April 2009 continue to help bring in
revenue to meet expenses and the farebox recovery ratio of 20% required by the
State. SLO Transit has proposed a conservative budget based upon revenue
projections. There is little ability for adjustment should the State and Federal
allocations come in significantly lower than projected. Staff will return to Council
for proposed service-level reductions or rate increases the decrease in revenues is
significant. A 3% annual growth in bus ridership revenues for 2013-14 fiscal year
based upon past experience with an increase in ridership due to rising fuel costs.
This Fund Analysis assumes no fare increases in revenue projections.
State Mandated Farebox Ratio
With the fare increase approved in 2009, SLO Transit’s farebox ratio was projected
to stabilize in 2010-11 and beyond. Staff projected the renegotiated Cal Poly
Subsidy Agreement would be a key component in meeting the required 20%
farebox ratio for the SLO Transit system. The 2012-13 farebox ratio is projected at
19.7%. This decrease in farebox ratios was a direct result of a change in the City’s
methodology for calculating direct and indirect charges for Enterprise Funds that
receive General Fund program support. The revised Cost Allocation Plan has
decreased the amount appropriated for General Fund support services in 2013 and
beyond. Staff projects the that stability in revenues will support the ability to meet
or exceed farebox ratio requirements in the future.
31
Attachment 1
Page 16
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
Cal Poly Subsidy
The City successfully negotiated a five-year Subsidy Agreement with Cal Poly
which went into effect on July 1, 2011. The Fund Analysis assumes Cal Poly
subsidy per set contract rate through 2015-16 and assumes a 5% subsidy increase
in 2016-17 and 3% in 2017-18. If the State budget significantly affects Cal Poly's
ability to fund the Subsidy Agreement, the City and the University will undertake
discussions on potential program modifications or service-level reductions. That is
not assumed to be necessary as part of the Fund Analysis.
Trolley Operations
While the one year funding by the Tourism Business Improvement District (TBID)
was eliminated in FY 2012-13 there are sufficient Transit operating funds to
continue this service through the end of October 2013. Ridership on Fridays and
Saturdays continue to decrease when compared to the same July-April period last
year. When trolley services conclude in October, staff will evaluate the trolley
ridership data to determine if further service adjustments are warranted and
whether to resume Friday and Saturday trolley services again in April 2014. This
will also allow time for the new Cal Poly materials to be incorporated into the
Trolley Marketing efforts in 2013-14 and to evaluate the impact. Thursday trolley
service remains productive but down during the same July-April period last year.
Transportation Development Act
The Transportation Development Act (TDA) is comprised of two sources of
funding for transportation programs, Local Transportation Funds (LTF) and State
Transportation Assistance (STA) funding. LTF is derived from ¼ cent collected in
retail sales taxes. STA is derived from the statewide sales tax on diesel fuel. Both
of these funds are distributed to the regions by the State.
The State budget has yet to be approved and therefore the State Controller
projected STA funding allocation remains preliminary at this time. Preliminary
data represents a decrease of STA funding of approximately $96,090 (-35.10%)
over 2012-13 FY. This projection assumes an allocation increase for the San Luis
Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA) of 13% in 2013-14 and 16% in 2014-15.
Representatives from RTA, San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG)
and SLO Transit continue to work on options for funding that would maximize
transit service provisions for each agency.
32
Attachment 1
Page 17
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
The County Auditor LTF projections are higher than originally estimated with a
one-time significant increase of approximately $625,384 (+25%) in 2013-14 over
the previous year. This increase is largely attributed to a one-time carryover of
funding, which is not anticipated in future years. Conservative funding levels
assumed in FY 2016 and beyond, back to lower historical levels.
Federal Transit Administration
Federal Transit Assistance (FTA) funding is formula-based upon population and
service level categories. As of this writing, the Federal Government has yet to
adopt the final fifty percent of transit Section 5307 appropriations for the 2012-13
fiscal year. Indications are that the final transit apportionments will remain at
current levels.
The Fund Analysis projects FTA funding of $1,918,700 in 2013-14 and $1,764,000
in 2014-15. This Federal funding will be used for operating assistance of SLO
Transit services and various capital projects such as bus shelter replacements,
transit facility expansion and bus replacements.
Transportation Operating Expenses
Contract Services
The Fund Analysis assumes a modest 3% increase in Purchased Transportation
costs in 2013-16 and 2017-18 and a 7% in 2016-17 the first year of a new contract.
The current contract for Purchased Transportation is set to expire June 30, 2013.
Staff is recommending the contract be extended through to 2016-17.
Fuel
Fuel costs continue to be volatile and are difficult to predict. Staff has projected
fuel costs in 2013-14 at $4.08 per gallon and $4.21 per gallon in 2014-15 with an
average of 114,000 gallons of diesel fuel purchased in a fiscal year. Staff projects
this budget to be adequate, however outside market influences make this
assumption difficult to control. Should fuel prices increase significantly above
staff projections for fuel prices per gallon, staff will return to Council with
identified service-level reductions or possible use of Transit Fund working capital
reserves.
33
Attachment 1
Page 18
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
General Government
The newly revised Cost Allocation Plan resulted in a reduction of approximately
24% for FY 2013-14 over the current year. This reduction is attributed to the
change in methodology for how the City calculates direct and indirect charges for
Enterprise Funds that receive General Fund program support. The Cost Allocation
Plan, which also affects the performance of farebox ratio, is considered a Central
Service plan by the FTA and does not require FTA review or certification.
Short Range Transit Plan
The City Council adopted the Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) update in 2009.
As a result of funding constraints, all available revenues are allocated to support
SLO Transit operating services. No new initiatives or increase in services, as
recommended in the SRTP, have been included in the Transit Enterprise Fund
analysis. These recommendations will be addressed and brought forward to
Council as funding sources are identified. RTA has submitted an application for
FTA funding in order to conduct a first time ever “joint” SRTP that will include
SLO Transit operations and make recommendations for potential service
efficiencies.
Mobility Training – New Freedoms Grant
This program is fully funded by Federal Transportation Assistance (5317) grant
funding. Staff has continued to submit successor grant applications in order to
continue the existing mobility program. In 2012-13, RDC has held at least 8
informational, outreach and training sessions for senior and disabled rider
education in FY 2012-13. RDC direct outreach has included over 200 telephone,
email or in person contacts and provided printed ridership tools to over 150
participants this year. Program marketing and informational materials are available
at over a dozen locations throughout the City. As a result, SLO Transit has
experienced an increase in ridership (through April 2013) of approximately 70% in
this population segment as compared to the same period in 2009-10 before the start
of this grant funded program.
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Expenses
The Transit Fund analysis anticipates a conservative level of Federal funding
apportionment for in the 2013-14 fiscal year. This modest revenue projection will
provide support for operating assistance, preventive maintenance functions for
SLO Transit and some capital improvement projects. New capital projects have
34
Attachment 1
Page 19
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
been projected as part of the Program of Projects (POP) in the 2013-14 fiscal year
and additional projects may be brought forward as part of a revised POP if Federal
funding allocations come in higher than projected. Reductions in Federal funding
would require deferring of capital projects, or potential service reductions or other
cost savings measures.
Ridership Assumptions
It is projected that SLO Transit total ridership will once again, for the seventh
consecutive year, exceed the one million riders target with a projected 1,088,000
ridership in 2012-13.
Evening Service
The Evening Service program is estimated at approximately 28,368 miles at an
annual net cost to the Transit Services program (minus fare revenues) of $147,360
annually. The Evening Service program does not deliver significant additional
revenue to assist with farebox recovery ratios. The Transit Enterprise Fund
analysis does not include any assumptions in reductions for Evening Service
program levels at this time. Overall, SLO Transit fare rates and revenues are
adequate to support current operations for the 2013-14 fiscal year. Should revenue
sources decline significantly from projected, staff will return to Council with
recommendations for service-level reductions or fare modifications as necessary.
Trolley Operations
The one-year funding by the Tourism Business Improvement District (TBID) was
eliminated in FY 2012-13. Ridership on Fridays and Saturdays continue to
decrease when compared to the same July-April period last year. When trolley
services conclude in October, staff will evaluate the trolley ridership data to
determine if further service adjustments are warranted and whether to resume
Friday and Saturday trolley services again in April 2014.
LOOKING TO THE FUTURE
State, Federal and Regional Budget Impacts
Overall, the projected revenues from the State, Federal and Regional governments
are sufficient to support transit service operations. Grant funding amounts are
estimated based upon the latest information provided by the government. Actual
Federal, State (LTF Increase & STA) allocations are unknown but are expected in
35
Attachment 1
Page 20
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
September 2013. Should funding estimates be below projected, staff may
recommend deferring bus replacements and other capital projects or fare increases.
The last fare increase occurred in 2010.
TDA Performance Audit
Triennial performances are a requirement for the continued receipt of State TDA
funds for public transit under the California Public Utilities Code. The last State-
mandated performance triennial audit of SLO Transit was for fiscal years 2008-
2010. A finding of the audit review period, noted the budget and staffing resources
devoted to this function did not provide for target marketing, branding, positioning,
or updates to the March 2004 Marketing Plan. The finding recommended an
increase in funding resources to develop and implement a marketing and public
information program to attract new riders, generate advertising revenue, and
inform the public about service changes likely to result from implementation of
SRTP recommendations.
An Ad Hoc Mass Transportation Committee reviewed and updated the SLO
Transit Marketing plan in March 2011 and recommended that the City “Hire a full
time city staff person, assigned to the Transit Division, Department of Public
Works to implement the goals, objectives and strategies of the SLO Transit
Marketing Plan Update.” This recommendation has not been brought to Council
as additional funding needed to implement it has not been identified. Other
recommendations such as working with Cal Poly students and staff to produce
media ads for a marketing campaign have proven successful for the fixed route
system. Another joint project was recently completed with a focus on Trolley
operations and media ads created by a Cal Poly marketing class to increase trolley
ridership.
Other Unknowns
Volatile Fuel Prices
Staff continues to exercise prudent judgment in projecting budgets for fuel needed
for the SLO Transit system. Volatile fuel prices continue to pose challenges in
balancing the budget. Staff will continue to analyze fuel trends and make budget
adjustments as necessary.
36
Attachment 1
Page 21
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
Cost Allocation Plan
The change in methodology for how the City calculates direct and indirect charges
for Enterprise Funds that receive General Fund program support has had an impact
on the Transit Fund’s overall operating costs. These changes also affect the Fund’s
required farebox ratio. While the FTA does not require FTA review or
certification of the City’s Cost Allocation Plan, future modifications in the way the
General Government allocation is calculated could have an impact on the Fund’s
ability to meet farebox requirements.
Purchased Transportation
The current contract for Purchased Transportation with First Transit, Inc. is set to
expire June 30, 2013. Staff is recommending the contract be extended through to
2016-17. Staff will solicit proposal for services at that time and award return to
Council to award contract. Purchased Transportation contract costs are unknown
but are estimated with a 7% increase over the current contract costs.
EXHIBIT A – Changes in Financial Position
37
Attachment 1
Page 22
July 10, 2013 Regular MTC meeting
CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION - TRANSIT FUND
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18
Actual
Year-End
Revised Budget Budget Budget Projection Projection Projection
Revenues
Investment and Property Revenues24,100 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800
Subventions and Grants
TDA Grants (LTF, STA)1,177,500 1,592,000 1,977,400 1,243,400 1,261,000 1,299,400 1,338,500
Other Grants (ARRA, Prop 1B, Other)620,600 4,600 222,700 30,300 30,300 30,300 30,300
FTA Grants1,419,700 1,873,900 1,918,700 1,764,000 2,079,400 1,474,300 1,503,400
Service Charges626,500 639,400 650,800 669,500 695,300 724,000 745,000
Other Revenues35,900 5,000 5,000 4,000 4,000 - -
Total Revenues3,904,300 4,120,700 4,780,400 3,717,000 4,075,800 3,533,800 3,623,000
Expenditures
Operating Programs
Transportation2,617,000 2,826,500 2,941,400 2,930,900 3,009,400 3,157,300 3,229,900
General Government476,500 416,900 320,400 329,300 329,300 329,300 329,300
Total Operating Programs3,093,500 3,243,400 3,261,800 3,260,200 3,338,700 3,486,600 3,559,200
Capital Improvement Plan Projects826,300 415,300 954,700 528,500 874,000 31,300 45,700
Total Expenditures3,919,800 3,658,700 4,216,500 3,788,700 4,212,700 3,517,900 3,604,900
Other Sources (Uses)
% PERS Employer Contribution (1,400) (2,800) (2,800) (2,800)
Estimated Non-Staffing Savings 4,700 3,200
Estimated Staffing Savings 4,500 5,700 5,700 5,700
Potential MOA Adjustments - - - - - - -
Savings
Loss on Disposition - - - -
Other Sources (Uses)7,400 (17,600) -
Total Other Sources (Uses)7,400 - (17,600) - - - -
Revenues and Other Sources (Over/Under)
Expenditures and Other Uses (8,100) 462,000 546,300 (71,700) (136,900) 15,900 18,100
Working Capital, Beginning of Year 998,700 990,600 1,452,600 1,998,900 1,927,200 1,790,300 1,806,200
Working Capital, End of Year Fund Reserves 990,600 1,452,600 1,998,900 1,927,200 1,790,300 1,806,200 1,824,300
20% Minimum Reserve Fund Balance - Operating Costs 652,360$ 652,040$ 667,740$ 697,320$ 711,840$
Available WC for 1x Capital Expenses or other 1,998,900$ 1,927,200$ 1,790,300$ 1,806,200$ 1,824,300$
Farebox Ratio (20% State Transit Development Act Requirement)
Total Fares / Total Operating Expenditures 20.3%19.7%20.0%20.5%20.8%20.8%20.9%
38
July 10, 2013 MTC agenda item D-1
G:\Transportation-Data\_Unsorted Stuff\Transportation\Transportation Committees\MTC Committee\FY 2014\JULY 10-2013\5-AGENDA
ITEM D-1 DRAFT MTC Transit Manager's Report, July 10-2013.docx
23
Vehicle replacement updates: In FY 2013-14 a 2000 model F250 will be
replaced as the current vehicle has over 100,000 miles. This vehicle is used by
maintenance staff in support of bus operations.
Other Capital Projects:
Transit Facility Safety-Security project (CAL-EMA funded $48,000) includes
safety and security improvements to the existing SLO Transit facility located at 29
Prado Road and the grant funds were received on June 4, 2012.
A sole source swipe card access system for the facility entrance doors was
approved by the City Manager using Deep Blue Integration. They have been used
exclusively over the past three years to service the access and control systems
throughout the City as is very familiar with the City’s access control and security
software applications, Hirsch and Milestone. IT staff has been very satisfied with
the work performed by Deep Blue as well as their quick response time and
professional service. Integration with existing city owned security systems was a
key factor in choosing Deep Blue Integration as the new equipment must work
with systems already installed and will reduce costs as it will not require additional
spare parts to be kept in stock from a different system manufacturer. The new
system will seamlessly integrate into the existing City Hirsch Milestone security
system already in place at the Emergency Communications Center and is
anticipated to be installed by the end of August.
Additional projects under consideration include a security camera system that will
need further IT steering committee review before moving forward depending on
the remaining budget.
Bus Stop Improvement project (PTMISEA-Prop 1B funded $25,689) Funding is
for improvements to existing bus stops including shelters, benches, kiosks, lighting
etc. A 12 month DTC pilot camera project (1-IP camera) has been installed and
was operational on May 1, 2013. City staff including enforcement will be able to
access this camera according to the city policy guidelines. Other bus amenities are
under evaluation to complete this grant.
Bus Stop Safety and Security Project (CAL-EMA funded $32,140) The SLO
Transit system has approximately forty-nine (49) bus shelters. This project
39
July 10, 2013 MTC agenda item D-1
G:\Transportation-Data\_Unsorted Stuff\Transportation\Transportation Committees\MTC Committee\FY 2014\JULY 10-2013\5-AGENDA
ITEM D-1 DRAFT MTC Transit Manager's Report, July 10-2013.docx
24
proposes to install solar lighting inside some shelters or on existing sign poles. The
project may also include the installation of electronic Automatic Vehicle Locator
(AVL) signs and wireless video monitoring systems at selected stops. The State
bond sale was completed in November 2012 but funding has been delayed due to
inter State issues with their last audit.
SLO Transit Automatic Passenger Counters ($54,516)
This was a consent item (C8) on the SLO Council April 16, 2013 Agenda and was
approved by Council and is awaiting the sale of bonds
40
05
/
0
1
/
1
2
05
/
3
1
/
1
2
0
5
/
3
1
/
1
3
07
/
0
1
/
1
2
07
/
0
1
/
1
1
05
/
0
1
/
1
3
05
/
3
1
/
1
2
0
5
/
3
1
/
1
3
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
C
h
a
n
g
e
Fi
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
C
h
a
n
g
e
To
T
o
T
o
T
o
Ta
b
l
e
A
:
R
i
d
e
r
s
h
i
p
T
r
e
nd
s
b
y
F
a
r
e
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
P
e
r
i
o
d
Fi
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
F
a
r
e
38
,
6
1
9
3
9
,
5
5
6
3
9
2
,
3
1
2
4
0
5
,
6
3
2
2.
4
3
%
3
.
4
0
%
Ca
l
P
o
l
y
T
o
t
a
l
80
,
2
4
6
7
9
,
3
2
0
6
6
7
,
4
2
6
6
3
1
,
1
0
2
-1
.
1
5
%
-
5
.
4
4
%
RE
V
E
N
U
E
1
R
i
d
e
P
a
s
s
1
7
4
.
2
3
%
-
9
.
2
7
%
97
26
6
1,
3
4
8
1,
2
2
3
1-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
20
.
7
2
%
-0
.
8
4
%
69
5
83
9
7,
1
1
2
7,
0
5
2
3-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
-4
6
.
3
2
%
-7
.
9
6
%
36
7
19
7
3,
2
7
8
3,
0
1
7
5-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
5.
5
9
%
-1
5
.
2
6
%
14
3
15
1
1,
9
8
6
1,
6
8
3
7-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
-4
2
.
1
8
%
-2
7
.
5
8
%
14
7
85
1,
0
9
5
79
3
31
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
18
.
5
5
%
18
.
1
5
%
1,
7
5
7
2,
0
8
3
15
,
9
6
4
18
,
8
6
1
31
-
D
a
y
S
t
u
d
e
n
t
P
a
-1
1
.
9
7
%
-0
.
0
8
%
1,
4
4
5
1,
2
7
2
11
,
9
9
6
11
,
9
8
6
Am
t
r
a
k
-6
6
.
6
7
%
0
0
33
11
Ca
l
P
o
l
y
-1
.
3
4
%
-5
.
6
7
%
79
,
8
1
4
78
,
7
4
2
66
4
,
8
0
2
62
7
,
0
7
9
CP
I
n
v
a
l
i
d
C
a
r
d
33
.
8
0
%
53
.
3
2
%
43
2
57
8
2,
6
2
4
4,
0
2
3
DA
P
P
a
s
s
-1
4
.
5
0
%
0.
7
5
%
1,
5
0
3
1,
2
8
5
12
,
4
7
4
12
,
5
6
7
Pa
s
s
O
v
e
r
r
i
d
e
9.
8
0
%
-2
5
.
0
9
%
29
6
32
5
2,
8
7
4
2,
1
5
3
Pu
n
c
h
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
5.
4
1
%
76
.
8
6
%
74
78
60
5
1,
0
7
0
Pu
n
c
h
S
D
P
a
s
s
0.
0
0
%
-3
7
.
3
6
%
26
26
53
8
33
7
Re
g
D
a
y
P
a
s
s
17
.
7
7
%
9.
7
1
%
1,
9
0
2
2,
2
4
0
17
,
9
3
8
19
,
6
8
0
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
P
a
s
s
5.
1
9
%
5.
9
5
%
6,
3
8
0
6,
7
1
1
57
,
5
1
8
60
,
9
4
3
Re
g
u
l
a
r
C
a
s
h
-2
.
1
3
%
-9
.
1
3
%
8,
4
0
7
8,
2
2
8
88
,
8
5
8
80
,
7
4
8
SR
/
D
I
S
C
a
s
h
4.
2
7
%
6.
9
0
%
2,
7
3
8
2,
8
5
5
27
,
8
7
0
29
,
7
9
4
SR
/
D
I
S
P
a
s
s
-2
.
4
0
%
7.
9
2
%
8,
1
9
9
8,
0
0
2
79
,
8
7
7
86
,
2
0
4
Pr
a
d
o
T
o
k
e
n
12
.
0
7
%
4.
0
7
%
75
4
84
5
7,
5
5
0
7,
8
5
7
NO
N
-
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
Fr
e
e
R
i
d
e
E
v
e
n
t
-
1
6
.
6
7
%
-
2
2
.
7
6
%
6
5
10
,
7
9
0
8,
3
3
4
Fr
e
e
R
i
d
e
r
s
32
.
7
5
%
6.
9
7
%
1,
1
4
5
1,
5
2
0
11
,
6
9
8
12
,
5
1
3
Fr
e
e
T
o
k
e
n
10
9
.
0
9
%
-1
3
.
2
8
%
11
23
12
8
11
1
Ne
w
c
o
m
e
r
-5
0
.
0
0
%
21
0
.
0
0
%
36
18
26
0
80
6
Pr
o
m
o
P
a
s
s
33
3
.
3
3
%
99
.
2
6
%
6
26
13
5
26
9
Tr
a
n
s
f
e
r
s
-3
.
7
6
%
-0
.
3
7
%
1,
6
7
7
1,
6
1
4
18
,
1
3
7
18
,
0
6
9
VI
P
5.
7
1
%
0.
6
1
%
80
6
85
2
8,
5
1
9
8,
5
7
1
Yo
u
t
h
40
0
.
0
0
%
19
4
.
2
9
%
2
10
3,
7
3
1
10
,
9
8
0
TO
T
A
L
0.
0
1
%
-2
.
1
7
%
11
8
,
8
6
5
11
8
,
8
7
6
1,
0
5
9
,
7
3
8
1
,
0
3
6
,
7
3
4
41
05
/
0
1
/
1
2
05
/
3
1
/
1
2
0
5
/
3
1
/
1
3
07
/
0
1
/
1
2
07
/
0
1
/
1
1
05
/
0
1
/
1
3
05
/
3
1
/
1
2
0
5
/
3
1
/
1
3
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
C
h
a
n
g
e
Fi
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
C
h
a
n
g
e
To
T
o
T
o
T
o
Ta
b
l
e
B
:
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
H
o
u
r
s
a
n
d
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
M
i
l
e
s
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
P
e
r
i
o
d
Fi
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
0.
0
1
%
-2
.
1
7
%
Pa
s
s
e
n
g
e
r
s
11
8
,
8
6
5
.
0
0
11
8
,
8
7
6
.
0
0
1,
0
5
9
,
7
3
8
.
0
0
1,
0
3
6
,
7
3
4
.
0
0
-0
.
3
8
%
-2
.
7
0
%
We
e
k
d
a
y
10
9
,
6
7
1
.
0
0
10
9
,
2
5
6
.
0
0
95
7
,
8
8
5
.
0
0
93
2
,
0
6
0
.
0
0
4.
6
9
%
3.
0
4
%
Sa
t
u
r
d
a
y
5,
2
8
3
.
0
0
5,
5
3
1
.
0
0
57
,
9
3
7
.
0
0
59
,
7
0
1
.
0
0
4.
5
5
%
2.
4
1
%
Su
n
d
a
y
3,
9
1
1
.
0
0
4,
0
8
9
.
0
0
43
,
9
1
6
.
0
0
44
,
9
7
3
.
0
0
-0
.
1
7
%
-1
.
0
5
%
Re
v
e
n
u
e
H
o
u
r
s
3,
0
0
2
.
9
0
2,
9
9
7
.
7
5
30
,
4
6
8
.
8
6
30
,
1
5
0
.
3
0
-0
.
2
4
%
-1
.
3
5
%
We
e
k
d
a
y
2,
6
4
2
.
8
6
2,
6
3
6
.
5
5
26
,
0
4
8
.
2
8
25
,
6
9
5
.
9
8
0.
0
0
%
1.
6
0
%
Sa
t
u
r
d
a
y
20
7
.
7
2
20
7
.
7
2
2,
3
8
3
.
6
8
2,
4
2
1
.
8
7
0.
7
6
%
-0
.
2
2
%
Su
n
d
a
y
15
2
.
3
2
15
3
.
4
8
2,
0
3
6
.
9
0
2,
0
3
2
.
4
5
0.
1
8
%
-1
.
1
4
%
Pa
s
s
e
n
g
e
r
s
p
e
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
H
o
u
r
s
39
.
5
8
39
.
6
6
34
.
7
8
34
.
3
9
1.
9
6
%
10
.
8
8
%
Re
v
e
n
u
e
M
i
l
e
s
35
,
7
9
4
.
0
0
36
,
4
9
6
.
0
0
32
9
,
0
6
8
.
0
0
36
4
,
8
8
7
.
0
0
1.
9
9
%
11
.
7
1
%
We
e
k
d
a
y
31
,
4
4
4
.
0
0
32
,
0
7
1
.
0
0
28
1
,
2
5
0
.
0
0
31
4
,
1
9
7
.
0
0
2.
1
0
%
8.
5
8
%
Sa
t
u
r
d
a
y
2,
4
2
3
.
0
0
2,
4
7
4
.
0
0
24
,
9
4
9
.
0
0
27
,
0
8
9
.
0
0
1.
2
5
%
3.
2
0
%
Su
n
d
a
y
1,
9
2
7
.
0
0
1,
9
5
1
.
0
0
22
,
8
6
9
.
0
0
23
,
6
0
1
.
0
0
-1
.
9
1
%
-1
1
.
7
7
%
Pa
s
s
e
n
g
e
r
s
p
e
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
M
i
l
e
s
3.
3
2
3.
2
6
3.
2
2
2.
8
4
42
06
/
0
1
/
1
2
06
/
3
0
/
1
2
0
6
/
3
0
/
1
3
07
/
0
1
/
1
2
07
/
0
1
/
1
1
06
/
0
1
/
1
3
06
/
3
0
/
1
2
0
6
/
3
0
/
1
3
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
C
h
a
n
g
e
Fi
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
C
h
a
n
g
e
To
T
o
T
o
T
o
Ta
b
l
e
A
:
R
i
d
e
r
s
h
i
p
T
r
e
nd
s
b
y
F
a
r
e
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
P
e
r
i
o
d
Fi
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
F
a
r
e
36
,
4
6
7
3
8
,
4
5
8
4
2
8
,
7
7
9
4
4
4
,
0
9
0
5.
4
6
%
3
.
5
7
%
Ca
l
P
o
l
y
T
o
t
a
l
22
,
3
5
8
3
4
,
3
6
7
6
8
9
,
7
8
4
6
6
5
,
4
6
9
53
.
7
1
%
-
3
.
5
3
%
RE
V
E
N
U
E
1
R
i
d
e
P
a
s
s
-
6
5
.
4
3
%
-
1
2
.
4
6
%
81
28
1,
4
2
9
1,
2
5
1
1-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
15
.
7
5
%
0.
6
6
%
71
1
82
3
7,
8
2
3
7,
8
7
5
3-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
-3
3
.
2
1
%
-9
.
8
5
%
26
5
17
7
3,
5
4
3
3,
1
9
4
5-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
-5
6
.
0
7
%
-1
8
.
5
3
%
17
3
76
2,
1
5
9
1,
7
5
9
7-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
-7
2
.
5
3
%
-3
1
.
0
3
%
91
25
1,
1
8
6
81
8
31
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
2.
9
2
%
16
.
7
3
%
1,
6
4
2
1,
6
9
0
17
,
6
0
6
20
,
5
5
1
31
-
D
a
y
S
t
u
d
e
n
t
P
a
-6
1
.
5
4
%
-2
.
4
5
%
48
1
18
5
12
,
4
7
7
12
,
1
7
1
Am
t
r
a
k
-1
0
0
.
0
0
%
-6
7
.
6
5
%
1
0
34
11
Ca
l
P
o
l
y
52
.
6
9
%
-3
.
7
8
%
22
,
2
5
5
33
,
9
8
2
68
7
,
0
5
7
66
1
,
0
6
1
CP
I
n
v
a
l
i
d
C
a
r
d
27
3
.
7
9
%
61
.
6
4
%
10
3
38
5
2,
7
2
7
4,
4
0
8
DA
P
P
a
s
s
-1
7
.
2
5
%
-0
.
8
3
%
1,
2
0
0
99
3
13
,
6
7
4
13
,
5
6
0
Pa
s
s
O
v
e
r
r
i
d
e
48
.
5
0
%
-2
0
.
3
0
%
20
0
29
7
3,
0
7
4
2,
4
5
0
Pu
n
c
h
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
27
4
.
5
5
%
93
.
3
3
%
55
20
6
66
0
1,
2
7
6
Pu
n
c
h
S
D
P
a
s
s
-1
8
.
6
0
%
-3
5
.
9
7
%
43
35
58
1
37
2
Re
g
D
a
y
P
a
s
s
-1
.
7
2
%
8.
6
1
%
1,
9
1
8
1,
8
8
5
19
,
8
5
6
21
,
5
6
5
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
P
a
s
s
17
.
8
7
%
6.
9
1
%
5,
0
3
6
5,
9
3
6
62
,
5
5
4
66
,
8
7
9
Re
g
u
l
a
r
C
a
s
h
-3
.
0
1
%
-8
.
6
6
%
7,
2
8
4
7,
0
6
5
96
,
1
4
2
87
,
8
1
3
SR
/
D
I
S
C
a
s
h
7.
3
4
%
6.
9
4
%
2,
6
8
4
2,
8
8
1
30
,
5
5
4
32
,
6
7
5
SR
/
D
I
S
P
a
s
s
4.
9
4
%
7.
6
7
%
7,
1
7
3
7,
5
2
7
87
,
0
5
0
93
,
7
3
1
Pr
a
d
o
T
o
k
e
n
16
.
9
7
%
5.
1
7
%
70
7
82
7
8,
2
5
7
8,
6
8
4
NO
N
-
R
E
V
E
N
U
E
Fr
e
e
R
i
d
e
E
v
e
n
t
-
5
0
.
0
0
%
-
2
2
.
7
7
%
2
1
10
,
7
9
2
8,
3
3
5
Fr
e
e
R
i
d
e
r
s
35
.
6
1
%
9.
4
5
%
1,
1
1
2
1,
5
0
8
12
,
8
1
0
14
,
0
2
1
Fr
e
e
T
o
k
e
n
-2
0
.
0
0
%
-1
3
.
7
7
%
10
8
13
8
11
9
Ne
w
c
o
m
e
r
-7
7
.
7
8
%
14
1
.
6
4
%
81
18
34
1
82
4
Pr
o
m
o
P
a
s
s
62
.
5
0
%
95
.
3
6
%
16
26
15
1
29
5
Tr
a
n
s
f
e
r
s
6.
3
4
%
0.
1
5
%
1,
5
3
0
1,
6
2
7
19
,
6
6
7
19
,
6
9
6
VI
P
2.
6
9
%
0.
7
8
%
78
2
80
3
9,
3
0
1
9,
3
7
4
Yo
u
t
h
19
.
5
0
%
11
3
.
7
4
%
3,
1
8
9
3,
8
1
1
6,
9
2
0
14
,
7
9
1
TO
T
A
L
23
.
8
0
%
-0
.
8
0
%
58
,
8
2
5
72
,
8
2
5
1,
1
1
8
,
5
6
3
1
,
1
0
9
,
5
5
9
43
06
/
0
1
/
1
2
06
/
3
0
/
1
2
0
6
/
3
0
/
1
3
07
/
0
1
/
1
2
07
/
0
1
/
1
1
06
/
0
1
/
1
3
06
/
3
0
/
1
2
0
6
/
3
0
/
1
3
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
C
h
a
n
g
e
Fi
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
C
h
a
n
g
e
To
T
o
T
o
T
o
Ta
b
l
e
B
:
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
H
o
u
r
s
a
n
d
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
M
i
l
e
s
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
P
e
r
i
o
d
Fi
s
c
a
l
Y
e
a
r
23
.
8
0
%
-0
.
8
0
%
Pa
s
s
e
n
g
e
r
s
58
,
8
2
5
.
0
0
72
,
8
2
5
.
0
0
1,
1
1
8
,
5
6
3
.
0
0
1,
1
0
9
,
5
5
9
.
0
0
22
.
6
4
%
-1
.
4
1
%
We
e
k
d
a
y
51
,
2
1
6
.
0
0
62
,
8
0
9
.
0
0
1,
0
0
9
,
1
0
1
.
0
0
99
4
,
8
6
9
.
0
0
20
.
6
3
%
4.
3
8
%
Sa
t
u
r
d
a
y
4,
7
6
4
.
0
0
5,
7
4
7
.
0
0
62
,
7
0
1
.
0
0
65
,
4
4
8
.
0
0
50
.
0
5
%
5.
3
1
%
Su
n
d
a
y
2,
8
4
5
.
0
0
4,
2
6
9
.
0
0
46
,
7
6
1
.
0
0
49
,
2
4
2
.
0
0
1.
6
2
%
-0
.
8
4
%
Re
v
e
n
u
e
H
o
u
r
s
2,
5
3
6
.
9
6
2,
5
7
8
.
1
0
33
,
0
0
5
.
8
2
32
,
7
2
8
.
4
0
0.
0
8
%
-1
.
2
4
%
We
e
k
d
a
y
2,
1
2
4
.
9
9
2,
1
2
6
.
6
0
28
,
1
7
3
.
2
7
27
,
8
2
2
.
5
8
0.
0
0
%
1.
4
4
%
Sa
t
u
r
d
a
y
25
9
.
6
5
25
9
.
6
5
2,
6
4
3
.
3
3
2,
6
8
1
.
5
2
25
.
9
5
%
1.
6
0
%
Su
n
d
a
y
15
2
.
3
2
19
1
.
8
5
2,
1
8
9
.
2
2
2,
2
2
4
.
3
0
21
.
8
2
%
0.
0
4
%
Pa
s
s
e
n
g
e
r
s
p
e
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
H
o
u
r
s
23
.
1
9
28
.
2
5
33
.
8
9
33
.
9
0
-5
.
3
2
%
9.
5
1
%
Re
v
e
n
u
e
M
i
l
e
s
30
,
5
5
0
.
0
0
28
,
9
2
4
.
0
0
35
9
,
6
1
8
.
0
0
39
3
,
8
1
1
.
0
0
-4
.
6
6
%
10
.
3
4
%
We
e
k
d
a
y
25
,
8
0
4
.
0
0
24
,
6
0
1
.
0
0
30
7
,
0
5
4
.
0
0
33
8
,
7
9
8
.
0
0
-1
5
.
5
0
%
6.
1
4
%
Sa
t
u
r
d
a
y
2,
8
0
6
.
0
0
2,
3
7
1
.
0
0
27
,
7
5
5
.
0
0
29
,
4
6
0
.
0
0
0.
6
2
%
3.
0
0
%
Su
n
d
a
y
1,
9
4
0
.
0
0
1,
9
5
2
.
0
0
24
,
8
0
9
.
0
0
25
,
5
5
3
.
0
0
30
.
7
6
%
-9
.
4
2
%
Pa
s
s
e
n
g
e
r
s
p
e
r
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
M
i
l
e
s
1.
9
3
2.
5
2
3.
1
1
2.
8
2
44
Su
m
m
a
r
y f
o
r
J
u
l
y 2
0
1
2
-
J
u
n
e
2
0
1
3
Be
t
w
e
e
n
7
/
1
/
2
0
1
2
a
n
d
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
1
3
Re
v
e
n
u
e
R
i
d
e
r
s
R
6
A
/
B
T
r
o
l
l
e
y
R
6
A
/
B
E
R
4
A
E
R
3
E
R
2
E
R
6
A
R 1
R
2
R
3
R
4
R
5
To
t
a
l
Special
R
6
B
1
R
i
d
e
P
a
s
s
1,
2
5
1
14
2
24
7
27
0
26
4
30
6
0
6
0
0
4
8
00
4
1-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
7,
8
7
5
53
8
2,
0
4
7
1,
8
6
2
1,
4
7
9
1,
4
8
7
28
41
0
45
86
10
6
210
13
5
3-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
3,
1
9
4
29
7
59
6
92
7
48
1
61
5
32
15
0
20
61
26
230
10
1
5-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
1,
7
5
9
70
24
0
40
4
46
5
45
2
26
1
0
9
17
16
60
53
7-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
81
8
55
21
9
26
0
11
4
12
3
5
3
0
4
13
9
20
11
31
-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
20
,
5
5
1
1,
1
4
8
4,
4
4
9
5,
2
8
3
3,
9
4
0
4,
1
6
2
70
14
4
0
23
3
31
1
31
6
1530
34
2
31
-
D
a
y
S
t
u
d
e
n
t
P
a
12
,
1
7
1
1,
2
3
1
73
4
96
0
4,
1
0
1
4,
6
9
8
12
5
0
0
29
95
95
20
10
1
Am
t
r
a
k
11
0
0
1
1
7
1
0
0
0
0
0
00
1
Ca
l
P
o
l
y
66
1
,
0
6
1
8,
5
5
0
5,
2
6
6
10
,
0
9
3
17
8
,
2
9
3
16
8
,
9
4
0
11
1
,
3
3
9
9,
2
6
4
13
50
3
1,
5
6
8
26
,
6
2
8
37,3830
10
3
,
2
2
1
CP
I
n
v
a
l
i
d
C
a
r
d
4,
4
0
8
73
73
12
6
1,
0
3
2
1,
3
2
9
77
9
44
0
5
7
13
9
2680
53
3
DA
P
P
a
s
s
13
,
5
6
0
1,
8
7
9
3,
9
5
3
2,
0
6
8
2,
2
3
2
2,
7
9
2
39
42
0
62
11
7
17
9
560
14
1
Pa
s
s
O
v
e
r
r
i
d
e
2,
4
5
0
23
3
50
6
73
8
33
8
33
6
41
12
0
36
81
69
380
22
Pu
n
c
h
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
1,
2
7
6
20
2
29
4
32
1
23
8
18
5
5
0
0
1
10
15
40
1
Pu
n
c
h
S
/
D
P
a
s
s
37
2
10
2
10
0
91
44
27
1
0
0
1
1
0
10
4
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
D
a
y
P
a
s
s
21
,
5
6
5
2,
0
5
7
5,
1
0
3
7,
3
4
8
3,
2
1
1
2,
9
8
8
35
67
0
10
9
25
2
15
6
310
20
8
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
P
a
s
s
66
,
8
7
9
5,
8
2
7
13
,
7
6
7
21
,
3
2
1
11
,
6
5
4
10
,
9
5
2
21
2
21
0
0
48
4
1,
1
0
6
50
5
1220
71
9
Re
g
u
l
a
r
C
a
s
h
87
,
8
1
3
7,
6
5
2
12
,
0
6
6
15
,
8
5
6
17
,
4
8
1
20
,
0
9
2
47
0
53
6
9,
3
5
9
48
3
93
6
1,
2
7
1
4030
1,
2
0
8
S/
D
C
a
s
h
32
,
6
7
5
4,
2
2
1
6,
7
1
3
8,
9
7
5
4,
8
2
3
5,
8
4
0
38
68
1,
1
3
8
14
9
34
8
20
2
360
12
4
S/
D
3
1
D
a
y
P
a
s
s
93
,
7
3
1
11
,
3
3
2
25
,
6
9
2
30
,
5
8
1
10
,
9
4
1
11
,
4
0
8
37
5
40
6
0
47
9
1,
2
7
6
45
7
1040
68
0
Pr
a
d
o
T
o
k
e
n
8,
6
8
4
12
0
4,
5
1
3
2,
8
6
1
70
7
30
2
3
3
1
31
10
1
11
70
24
No
n
-
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
R
i
d
e
r
s
Fr
e
e
R
i
d
e
E
v
e
n
t
8,
3
3
5
92
5
1,
7
4
3
2,
0
9
6
1,
4
0
6
1,
5
1
8
54
4
3
95
14
1
56
540
24
0
Fr
e
e
R
i
d
e
r
s
14
,
0
2
1
1,
6
9
8
3,
2
4
1
2,
5
6
8
2,
6
5
3
2,
7
9
3
89
10
8
45
7
95
11
1
63
610
84
Fr
e
e
R
i
d
e
T
o
k
e
n
11
9
4
25
27
14
18
1
2
3
0
0
1
00
24
Ne
w
c
o
m
e
r
82
4
79
21
1
28
3
11
3
11
9
2
4
0
1
3
2
30
4
Pr
o
m
o
P
a
s
s
29
5
30
61
51
46
69
17
2
0
2
3
4
20
8
SL
O
T
r
a
n
s
f
e
r
s
19
,
6
9
6
1,
1
5
7
5,
4
5
5
7,
1
0
5
3,
0
6
0
2,
1
8
9
16
86
0
43
16
9
11
2
310
27
3
VI
P
9,
3
7
4
1,
7
8
2
1,
5
1
1
4,
1
6
7
78
2
95
0
10
9
2
23
10
4
3
00
31
Yo
u
t
h
14
,
7
9
1
3,
2
3
5
1,
3
4
7
3,
5
5
8
2,
9
5
3
3,
3
0
9
23
24
1
26
7
45
31
10
15
Pa
g
e
1
o
f
8
Pr
i
n
t
e
d
a
s
o
f
:
7
/
2
/
2
0
1
3
1
2
:
0
5
:
2
4
P
M
45
Su
m
m
a
r
y f
o
r
J
u
l
y 2
0
1
2
-
J
u
n
e
2
0
1
3
Be
t
w
e
e
n
7
/
1
/
2
0
1
2
a
n
d
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
1
3
Re
v
e
n
u
e
R
i
d
e
r
s
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
R
6
A
/
B
T
r
o
l
l
e
y
R
6
A
/
B
E
R
4
A
E
R
3
E
R
2
E
R
6
A
R
1
R
2
R
3
R
4
R
5
To
t
a
l
Special
R
6
B
1
R
i
d
e
P
a
s
s
0.
1
%
0.
3
%
0.
2
%
0.
2
%
0.
1
%
0.
1
%
0.
0
%
0.
1
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
1
%
0.
0
%
0.0%0.0%
0.
0
%
1-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
0.
7
%
1.
0
%
2.
0
%
1.
4
%
0.
6
%
0.
6
%
0.
0
%
0.
4
%
0.
0
%
1.
5
%
1.
2
%
0.
3
%
0.1%0.0%
0.
1
%
3-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
0.
3
%
0.
5
%
0.
6
%
0.
7
%
0.
2
%
0.
2
%
0.
0
%
0.
1
%
0.
0
%
0.
7
%
0.
9
%
0.
1
%
0.1%0.0%
0.
1
%
5-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
0.
2
%
0.
1
%
0.
2
%
0.
3
%
0.
2
%
0.
2
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
3
%
0.
2
%
0.
1
%
0.0%0.0%
0.
0
%
7-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
0.
1
%
0.
1
%
0.
2
%
0.
2
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
1
%
0.
2
%
0.
0
%
0.0%0.0%
0.
0
%
31
-
D
a
y
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
1.
9
%
2.
1
%
4.
4
%
4.
1
%
1.
6
%
1.
7
%
0.
1
%
1.
3
%
0.
0
%
7.
9
%
4.
5
%
1.
0
%
0.4%0.0%
0.
3
%
31
-
D
a
y
S
t
u
d
e
n
t
P
a
s
s
1.
1
%
2.
3
%
0.
7
%
0.
7
%
1.
6
%
1.
9
%
0.
1
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
1.
0
%
1.
4
%
0.
3
%
0.0%0.0%
0.
1
%
Am
t
r
a
k
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0%0.0%
0.
0
%
Ca
l
P
o
l
y
59
.
6
%
15
.
6
%
5.
3
%
7.
8
%
70
.
5
%
68
.
1
%
97
.
8
%
81
.
9
%
0.
1
%
17
.
1
%
22
.
5
%
87
.
4
%
96.3%0.0%
95
.
3
%
CP
I
n
v
a
l
i
d
C
a
r
d
0.
4
%
0.
1
%
0.
1
%
0.
1
%
0.
4
%
0.
5
%
0.
7
%
0.
4
%
0.
0
%
0.
2
%
0.
1
%
0.
5
%
0.7%0.0%
0.
5
%
DA
P
P
a
s
s
1.
2
%
3.
4
%
3.
9
%
1.
6
%
0.
9
%
1.
1
%
0.
0
%
0.
4
%
0.
0
%
2.
1
%
1.
7
%
0.
6
%
0.1%0.0%
0.
1
%
Pa
s
s
O
v
e
r
r
i
d
e
0.
2
%
0.
4
%
0.
5
%
0.
6
%
0.
1
%
0.
1
%
0.
0
%
0.
1
%
0.
0
%
1.
2
%
1.
2
%
0.
2
%
0.1%0.0%
0.
0
%
Pu
n
c
h
R
e
g
P
a
s
s
0.
1
%
0.
4
%
0.
3
%
0.
2
%
0.
1
%
0.
1
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
1
%
0.
0
%
0.0%0.0%
0.
0
%
Pu
n
c
h
S
/
D
P
a
s
s
0.
0
%
0.
2
%
0.
1
%
0.
1
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0%0.0%
0.
0
%
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
D
a
y
P
a
s
s
1.
9
%
3.
8
%
5.
1
%
5.
6
%
1.
3
%
1.
2
%
0.
0
%
0.
6
%
0.
0
%
3.
7
%
3.
6
%
0.
5
%
0.1%0.0%
0.
2
%
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
P
a
s
s
6.
0
%
10
.
7
%
13
.
7
%
16
.
4
%
4.
6
%
4.
4
%
0.
2
%
1.
9
%
0.
0
%
16
.
4
%
15
.
9
%
1.
7
%
0.3%0.0%
0.
7
%
Re
g
u
l
a
r
C
a
s
h
7.
9
%
14
.
0
%
12
.
0
%
12
.
2
%
6.
9
%
8.
1
%
0.
4
%
4.
7
%
85
.
1
%
16
.
4
%
13
.
4
%
4.
2
%
1.0%0.0%
1.
1
%
S/
D
C
a
s
h
2.
9
%
7.
7
%
6.
7
%
6.
9
%
1.
9
%
2.
4
%
0.
0
%
0.
6
%
10
.
3
%
5.
1
%
5.
0
%
0.
7
%
0.1%0.0%
0.
1
%
S/
D
3
1
D
a
y
P
a
s
s
8.
4
%
20
.
7
%
25
.
6
%
23
.
5
%
4.
3
%
4.
6
%
0.
3
%
3.
6
%
0.
0
%
16
.
2
%
18
.
3
%
1.
5
%
0.3%0.0%
0.
6
%
Pr
a
d
o
T
o
k
e
n
0.
8
%
0.
2
%
4.
5
%
2.
2
%
0.
3
%
0.
1
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
1.
1
%
1.
4
%
0.
0
%
0.0%0.0%
0.
0
%
Ri
d
e
r
s
h
i
p
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
R
6
A
/
B
T
r
o
l
l
e
y
R 6A/B E
R
4
A
E
R
3
E
R
2
E
R
6
A
R
1
R
2
R
3
R
4
R
5
To
t
a
l
Special
R
6
B
Re
v
e
n
u
e
1,
0
4
2
,
1
0
4
45
,
7
2
9
86
,
5
7
8
11
0
,
3
4
6
24
1
,
8
3
9
23
7
,
0
4
1
11
3
,
6
2
4
10
,
8
6
2
10
,
5
1
1
2,
6
8
3
6,
3
9
0
30
,
2
0
8
38,6600
10
7
,
6
3
3
No
n
-
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
67
,
4
5
5
8,
9
1
0
13
,
5
9
4
19
,
8
5
5
11
,
0
2
7
10
,
9
6
5
21
2
45
6
49
1
26
6
57
6
27
2
1520
67
9
1,
1
0
9
,
5
5
9
54
,
6
3
9
10
0
,
1
7
2
13
0
,
2
0
1
25
2
,
8
6
6
24
8
,
0
0
6
11
3
,
8
3
6
11
,
3
1
8
11
,
0
0
2
2,
9
4
9
6,
9
6
6
30
,
4
8
0
38,8120
Ad
j
u
s
t
e
d
T
o
t
a
l
10
8
,
3
1
2
1,
1
0
8
,
7
8
9
54
,
6
3
9
10
0
,
1
1
8
13
0
,
1
8
7
25
2
,
8
5
9
24
8
,
0
0
0
11
3
,
8
3
7
11
,
3
1
8
10
,
3
1
4
2,
9
4
6
6,
9
6
6
30
,
4
8
0
38,8130
Un
a
d
j
u
s
t
e
d
T
o
t
a
l
s
10
8
,
3
1
2
Pa
g
e
2
o
f
8
Pr
i
n
t
e
d
a
s
o
f
:
7
/
2
/
2
0
1
3
1
2
:
0
5
:
2
4
P
M
46
Su
m
m
a
r
y f
o
r
J
u
l
y 2
0
1
2
-
J
u
n
e
2
0
1
3
Be
t
w
e
e
n
7
/
1
/
2
0
1
2
a
n
d
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
1
3
Ri
d
e
r
s
h
i
p
b
y
D
a
y
T
y
p
e
We
e
k
d
a
y
s
99
4
,
8
6
9
54
,
4
7
5
80
,
6
0
4
10
4
,
3
3
7
22
1
,
9
4
4
21
8
,
8
0
1
11
3
,
8
3
6
3,
9
9
5
9,
5
3
2
2,
9
4
9
6,
7
9
2
30
,
4
8
0
38,8120
10
8
,
3
1
2
Sa
t
u
r
d
a
y
s
65
,
4
4
8
0
10
,
4
2
1
14
,
3
2
5
16
,
3
7
8
15
,
7
4
0
0
7,
3
2
3
1,
2
6
1
0
0
0
00
0
Su
n
d
a
y
s
49
,
2
4
2
16
4
9,
1
4
7
11
,
5
3
9
14
,
5
4
4
13
,
4
6
5
0
0
20
9
0
17
4
0
00
0
1,
1
0
9
,
5
5
9
54
,
6
3
9
10
0
,
1
7
2
13
0
,
2
0
1
25
2
,
8
6
6
24
8
,
0
0
6
11
3
,
8
3
6
11
,
3
1
8
11
,
0
0
2
2,
9
4
9
6,
9
6
6
30
,
4
8
0
38,8120
To
t
a
l
10
8
,
3
1
2
Mi
l
e
a
g
e
b
y
D
a
y
T
y
p
e
-
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
We
e
k
d
a
y
33
8
,
7
9
8
29
,
2
2
6
32
,
5
3
5
37
,
1
6
5
79
,
2
6
6
88
,
0
5
3
17
,
5
0
3
4,
2
7
8
2,
1
9
3
3,
9
9
1
6,
1
5
7
11
,
4
8
0
8,1530
18
,
7
9
8
Sa
t
u
r
d
a
y
29
,
4
6
0
0
5,
3
7
1
5,
8
1
3
6,
9
0
0
7,
1
5
1
82
2,
9
2
3
1,
2
2
0
0
0
0
00
0
Su
n
d
a
y
25
,
5
5
3
0
5,
0
6
3
5,
9
2
7
7,
0
5
9
7,
2
3
3
0
0
17
4
0
0
0
097
0
39
3
,
8
1
1
29
,
2
2
6
42
,
9
6
9
48
,
9
0
5
93
,
2
2
5
10
2
,
4
3
7
17
,
5
8
5
7,
2
0
1
3,
5
8
7
3,
9
9
1
6,
1
5
7
11
,
4
8
0
8,153
To
t
a
l
97
18
,
7
9
8
Wh
e
e
l
c
h
a
i
r
s
a
n
d
B
i
c
y
c
l
e
s
Bi
k
e
23
,
6
9
4
87
6
3,
3
4
7
4,
5
1
7
4,
5
0
4
5,
9
6
2
1,
1
5
6
20
9
0
13
8
39
6
67
2
580
1,
3
3
7
Wh
e
e
l
c
h
a
i
r
2,
9
5
0
50
0
37
2
1,
2
8
8
52
1
23
5
7
2
0
1
4
12
3
5
Mi
l
e
a
g
e
b
y
D
a
y
T
y
p
e
-
N
o
n
-
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
We
e
k
d
a
y
21
,
7
1
2
1,
9
8
2
1,
9
2
1
1,
2
5
1
4,
8
1
2
5,
1
8
4
97
4
52
2
52
6
0
83
2
90
9
1,04563
1,
6
9
1
Sa
t
u
r
d
a
y
1,
9
7
1
0
30
2
35
3
36
0
36
7
6
30
0
27
1
0
0
0
100
2
Su
n
d
a
y
1,
4
4
5
0
30
9
35
1
39
4
36
0
0
0
31
0
0
0
00
0
25
,
1
2
8
1,
9
8
2
2,
5
3
2
1,
9
5
5
5,
5
6
6
5,
9
1
1
98
0
82
2
82
8
0
83
2
90
9
1,055
To
t
a
l
63
1,
6
9
3
R
6
A
/
B
T
r
o
l
l
e
y
R 6A/B E
R
4
A
E
R
3
E
R
2
E
R
6
A
R 1
R
2
R
3
R
4
R
5
To
t
a
l
Special
R
6
B
Ho
u
r
s
b
y
D
a
y
T
y
p
e
-
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
We
e
k
d
a
y
27
,
8
2
3
2,
6
9
5
2,
9
8
4
3,
1
1
8
5,
6
4
6
6,
3
2
4
1,
9
9
4
48
9
28
6
25
9
30
1
89
7
818
2,
0
1
1
Sa
t
u
r
d
a
y
2,
6
8
2
22
50
1
50
2
54
2
54
9
22
33
8
16
0
3
3
10
9
22
Su
n
d
a
y
2,
2
2
4
22
47
8
51
1
55
2
55
9
22
0
35
3
3
10
9
22
32
,
7
2
8
2,
7
3
9
3,
9
6
3
4,
1
3
1
6,
7
3
9
7,
4
3
2
2,
0
3
7
82
8
48
1
26
5
30
7
91
7
835
To
t
a
l
2,
0
5
4
Ho
u
r
s
b
y
D
a
y
T
y
p
e
-
N
o
n
-
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
We
e
k
d
a
y
1,
4
3
1
16
7
14
9
17
3
25
4
27
3
79
31
46
0
47
38
48
12
7
Sa
t
u
r
d
a
y
16
8
0
26
35
30
30
0
23
23
0
0
0
0
0
Su
n
d
a
y
12
7
0
27
36
31
31
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
1,
7
2
6
16
7
20
1
24
3
31
5
33
3
79
54
73
0
47
38
48
To
t
a
l
12
7
Pa
g
e
5
o
f
8
Pr
i
n
t
e
d
a
s
o
f
:
7
/
2
/
2
0
1
3
1
2
:
0
5
:
2
5
P
M
47