HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/20/1995, C-4 - CONSIDERATION OF A NEW REGIONAL TRANSIT FUNDING FORMULA. ��� �Illylllll��l� lllllll city Or San S OBISPO Meeting Date: 6/20/95
u� COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Item Number:
FROM: Michael D. McCluskey, Director of Public Works "
VIA: Harry Watson, Transit Manager
Prepared by: Reinie Gwin, Transportation Technicianr�-,
SUBJECT: Consideration of a new regional transit funding formula.
CAO RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution ratifying the new regional transit funding
formula.
DISCUSSION:
Background
Over the past several years many attempts have been made to modify the formula used for the
contribution of TDA funds to regional transit from the seven members of the Joint Powers Agreement
(JPA). Prior efforts to change the funding formula have resulted in disagreement among the members
of the JPA.
The existing funding formula (Attachment B) for each SLORTA route is a complex combination of:
a) 65% based on population of three jurisdictions and 35% based on passenger chiles.
b) Straight percentage
c) Equal shares
d) 60% population and 40% population excluding the County
e) County pays 100%.
Trying to simplify the complex formulas has been an objective of the SLOCOG agencies for some time.
The issue has been studied and debated frequently in the past. Chapter 3, of SLORTA's Transit District
Feasibility and Funding Formula Study (Attachment C) is representative of previous attempts to change
the funding formulas. The study looked at various combinations and permutations of funding formulas.
Each formula studied affected the funding required of the various member agencies - some positively;
other negatively. As SLORTA's by-laws require a unanimous vote to change the formulas, none of the
alternative funding formulas could gain support of all the jurisdictions.
A new funding formula has been prepared by the SLOCOG staff. The new formula described in
Attachment A, in general, reduces most agency contributions to the SLORTA budget. However, the
County of San Luis Obispo's contribution to the budget does increase, and the overall size of the
SLORTA budget at $1,564,675 remains the same.
The effect of the proposed formula reduces the complex combination of formulas into one. The County
pays 49%, SLO City pays 18% and the balance is paid by the remaining Cities based on their population
as a percent of the County total.
Although this new formula benefits all jurisdictions except the County in the short term, only a continued
containment of the SLORTA budget will benefit all jurisdictions for the long term. Additionally, as the
City's population as a percentage of the County's total drops, our percentage draw of the TDA total also
drops. This results in an increasing percentage of our TDA going to support SLORTA leaving a smaller
funding source (our primary source) for SLO Transit.
FISCAL EMPACT:
Proposed new funding formula results in a$25,056 savings to the City for the 1995-1996 fiscal year only,
and future savings are dependent upon future SLORTA budgets.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution
Attachment A, proposed funding formula & SLOCOG cover letter
Attachment B, existing funding formulas
Attachment C, previous study to change formulas
RESOLUTION NO. (1995 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
RATIFYING A NEW REGIONAL TRANSIT FUNDING FORMULA
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo endorses the proposed funding formula prepared by
SLOCOG; and
WHEREAS, the funding formula provides a savings to the City of San Luis Obispo for fiscal
year 95-96;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, as follows:
1. Approve new funding formula for regional transit.
Upon the motion of , seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was adopted this day of , 1995
Mayor Allen Settle
ATTEST:
Diane Gladwell, City Clerk
APPRO1/®AS TO FORM:
m
L'-�-3
Attachment A
San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority
Funding Formula Proposal
One of the main constraints on service Improvements and/or efficiencies for SLORTA bus services(both CCAT
and Runabout) are related to the current funding formulas, as service efficiencies are restricted by the
"boundaries"related to each route's funding formula. If the formulas are revised as proposed in Column 4
below,•transit staff will be able to modify routes to reduce costs and/or to increase ridership.
The Table below identifies current TDA allocations for each SLORTA member jurisdiction,current member
contributions to SLORTA, and a formula based on a fixed percentage contribution from the County and the
City of San Luis Obispo.
Column 1 shows the current population(1994 Department of Finance figures).
Column 2 shows the total TDA allocated to each jurisdiction this current fiscal year(1994195).
Column 3 shows each jurisdiction's 1994195 contribution to SLORTA.
Column 4 shows the effects of a formula recommended by SLOCOG that allocates 49%of the costs of regional
transitto the County,181/6 to the City of SLO,and then splits the balance required among the remaining cities
based upon their percentage of the population of these cities. This formula was selected among a number
of similar alternative formulas,as this formula benefits all cities at the least cost to the County.
It is proposed that SLORTA develop a"minimum level of service", perhaps four round trips on each of the
main transit"corridors". The system would provide for funding this "basic" service level, which would
become the backbone of the regional fixed route system. If a greater level of service is desired for a particular
transit corridor,a formula would be developed to allow the affected jurisdictions to exercise this option. This
arrangement would allow transit staff to recommend service adjustments to the Board to make the existing
services more efficient,rather than being restricted by an individual city's funding participation. Additionally,
this would lead to an overall reduction in the regional transit budget It is suggested here that the basic level
of service remain constant throughout a five year period based on a short range transit plan,unless resulting
efficiencies, unusual circumstances or the unmet needs process dictates a change in the basic regional
service plan.
Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Co1a' n>`4; '
Population Total TDA In 1994 SLORTA ' F'ro:posed:; '
1994 Contribution Fortnufa49lf8;z
Arroyo Grande 15,146 290 204 86,723
Atascadero 24.342 492,663 130,976
Grover Beach 12,464 235p249 71,366
Morro B 10,021 204,083 61,016
Paso Robles 20,948 425,636 123,530 ''> >'"i>1�2432"
Pismo Beach 7,977 152,333 45,675
SLO City 43,704 890,452 319,684 '€294'G26v
SLO County 99,898 1,846 769 725,705
Totals 234,500 $49537,387 $1,564,675 "<>$ 664A 6l
Sari Luis ,.- bis P,Q .Council of k.3 3rn-1en s
Regional:Transportation-Planning Agency ,.,- `
-_1Vletropolitan-Planning Organization M°�°BaY
Paso xobic.
Pismo Beach -
Con estiozllVlana errient A enc :Sar;Luis Obispo
' . . Sat+Luis Obispo Comity .
April 10,-1995
q. :aECE1VED
JohnDunn,CityAdministrator..
City of San Luis Obispo
::`990 Palm Street ,� TION
San Luis Obispo,-CA 93401 :. ppNllt..ST1
08
RE SLORTA Funding Formulas. !
Dear IMr.Dun6;
In February SLOCOG.dlrected': staff to forward'a. new.regional transit funding formula to."all member
jurisdictions for their.ratification: : .Over the:past several years.a- number of.'consultant'.studies have .
recommended.a,regional;funding formula to enhance the efficiency, flexibility,.and effectiveness•of the :
..regional
tem.
Prior efforts to modify the formula have failed,as all previous efforts had both winners.and losers. As you
may recall, at the February meeting .SLOCOG was presented with several optional formulas for.funding "
regional transit services within San Luis Obispo County. The.options were developed as part of Phase I of
SLORTA's Short Range Transit Plan prepared by"Stephen A Nukes&Associates"a consulting agency hired .:
by SLOCOG.to resolve this issue on.behalf of SLORTA. The option approved by SLOCOG reduces the
contribution to SLORTA for seven jurisdictions. This option is displayed in Column 4 of Attachment A:":'
.The objective'of modifying the forniulas.is.twofold:'1) to provide'relief to city SLORTA JPA members by .
reducing or minimizing their overall TDA contributions.iii the Regional Transit Authority, and 2)to,provide
route pIanners,wM the flexibility needed to reduce or eliminate inefficient routes,and/or modify.routes.that
have it potential.forincreased rideri'MIs ' If.the new formulas are implemented .all city RT.A.member
jurisdictions will see a decrease in their TD.A contributions to SLORTA.
"As you probably know,the currenifunding formulas have been deliberated for several years and as a result,
have.'been the'subject of.several consultant projects, the ,latest being the.'June.'94 Regional Transit: ..
Improvement Study prepared by Nelson/Nygaard Consulting Associates. Unfortunately the funding issue was
not resolved at the close of that study and SLOCOG staff vias directed by the Board to resolve the'f6n8ing .
issue before developing the service plan(Phase ll of the Short 12ange.Transii Plan).
We would like•to take this opportunity to formally request that you agendize'this funding formula item for.
delibefation by-your n
City Council as:soori as pos'sible."The SLORTA Joint Powers Agreement requires that
all affected members of.the JPA(in this proposal-each of the.seven cities.and the bouiity) agreeto any
modifications to the'funding formulas before they can be,implemented. ''We are asking that each City Council,
approve Option 4 in AttachmentA..twill be available.along with the Regional Transit Manager-Alan Cantrell=
to presentthe item to your Council and answer any question concerns they may hive :;Please don't hesitate`
:to call me it 781=4219,.or.Alan`at:781--.4465.if,you'would like.to discuss the merits-of the funding formula.'
modification as they relate to the City of San Luis Obispo.
• Y, :4 -
Slnce
rely .. .. _ -
_ r
•
J \
aid.
Je�
Ronald L De CarII -
ExecuWe�rector. . pii;,Boln¢{j.C7-777
fm�id:
::41(
11 cm nctne qt 763 an'r ,;C ni; cr,n ra grdn1 ♦ TPi. (R(l51 791-4219 *FaX:�(g(l5) 791-5703
_0 "l7
N
cu
LO OR
M p qq �
O
cu U
N c� a)
c c
g rn
U j c
.a
N N
•O :3 X
CD
t
C
U
r (D � O
'- U
t cu-OCN) t o U)
.. \ o N C .`IT CN 00
N
o c� ~ Inti c0 .r U
O MMM N 0 - _
a)
CL M
M c OO O
O a) O o c
as d E C C. a) a .-. O O
z C a) v) c O C C
-0 Q) a) O Z' o v : A
0 Q. �, co y , � a
a R N a) _ y cv O (� cn U o p.
a 3 N L 7 m U :U N .n CL
a)
CD 0
No
o- tII c � 0 a) U NO
Uol
. c`no o cnci� O� c� U Q CD o U
Ao (n rn cn a) CD
>+O C O a C O O C (U yca C O C . C
a)
m � U � m 0 � v � 0 OVm 0 0
N pJ J O N J V U o, 0 o JU U
0co0 M00 � m � CU0 o0NmO O
-� 2cncn cn � cn0 cn ¢ acn aC7acnccnn cA
y v N
r+ T- Ir-
ti co O Cd
� O r
e- r-
C-4
ATTACM ENT C
CHAPTER 3. FUNDING FORMULAS
The funding formulas for regional fixed route service have been a subject of concern for
over a decade. In 1989 four separate systems were merged into one regional service
and became known as CCAT. Currently there are 7 CCAT routes funded with five
different funding formulas. Figure 3-1 presents the existing formulas. It should be noted
that these formulas were forged from historic precedent and political consensus. They
are not intended to provide an equitable distribution of costs based on the distribution
of service received.
Figure 3-1
Current Regional Funding Formulas
Route Jurisdictions Formula
7 Morro Bay 65% based on population of the three jurisdictions and 35% based
San Luis Obispo on passenger miles
SLO County
8 San Luis Obispo Straight percentage:
Morro Bay San Luis Obispo 33.4%
SLO County Morro Bay 3.7%
Cuesta College SLO County 35.2%
Cuesta College 27.7%
9 San Luis Obispo All costs to be paid in equal shares
Atascadero
Paso Robles
SLO County
10 & 14 Arroyo Grande 60% based on the population of each jurisdiction and 40% based
Grover City on the population of each jurisdiction excluding the County
Pismo Beach
San Luis Obispo
SLO County
11 & 12 SLO County County pays 100% of the costs
The failure to have a single system-wide funding formula has resulted in several
problems. Most important, routes cannot be significantly expanded or changed without
a new agreement being reached. There is no mechanism for adding new routes, since
there are no formulas for new services. Finally, the ability for CCAT to expand is
constrained by the jurisdiction with the least amount of available resources, since
regional formulas require participation from all jurisdictions being served. For example,
C-�t-7
NELsoMNYGAARD CONSULTING ASSOCIATES 3-1 JULY, 1994
SLO REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY FEASIBILITY AND FUNDING FORMULA STUDY
Route 9 is constrained by the fact that the cities of San Luis Obispo and Atascadero
currently commit all their TDA funds to transit. Expanding Route 9 cannot happen
without reducing local services into those cities.
Despite these problems, previous efforts to amend funding formulas have failed. A
100% consensus vote of SLORTA members is required to change the formulas. Since
virtually all alternatives involve at least some jurisdictions paying more for transit, it is
difficult to reach a consensus on a new formula.
The funding formula issue was examined by JKaplan and Associates in 1991. JKaplan
recommended three alternative scenarios for a system-wide funding formula. These
scenarios included:
a 50% of cost allocated to each jurisdiction based on its percentage of the
county's population, and 50% allocated based on the residency of passengers
0 50% based on population, and 50% based on the number of passenger miles
traveled by each passenger from a certain area of the county
a 25% based on population, 25% based on residency, and 50% based on
passenger miles
The objective of the JKaplan study was to develop a formula that was simple to use,
easy to administer, and would apportion costs in an equitable manner.
SLOCOG staff reviewed the JKaplan report and modified the recommended formulas
and added two new formulas, resulting in the following five funding options:
1) 100% of the cost based on daily service miles (the number of miles that buses
travel within each jurisdiction each day)
2) 50% based on daily service miles and 50% based on population
3) 75% based on daily service miles and 25% based on population
4) 100% based upon population
5) Population served by each route
As part of the current regional funding study the Nelson\Nygaard team updated the
SLOCOG alternative funding scenarios (using the adopted FY 1993/94 SLORTA budget)
and then compared them to the existing formulas.
NELSONINYGAARD CONSULTING ASSOCIATES 3-2 JLILY, 1994
SLO REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY FEASIBILITY AND FUNDING FORMULA STUDY
3.1 FUNDING SCENARIOS BASED ON DAILY SERVICE MILES
Figure 3-3 lists the current daily service miles for each CCAT route as well as the total
system mileage allocated by jurisdiction. SLO County accounts for over 2/3 of the
system mileage. 16% of the mileage is allocated to the City of San Luis Obispo, 7% to
Morro Bay, and the rest is evenly distributed between the remaining cities. Mileage was
manually calculated using a San Luis Obispo County map.
Figure 3-3
Daily Service Miles Allocated by Jurisdiction
CCAT Routes
RT.T 1 RT.8 RT.9 RT. 10 RT. 11 RT. 12 RT. 14 Total
Jurisdiction DSM DSM DSM DSM DSM DSM DSM DSM %
Arroyo Grande 0 0 0 13.8 0 0 19.8 33.6 2%
i44ascatl0 0 0 75 0 0 0 0 75.0
Grover Beach 0 0 0 12 0 0 3.9 15.9 1
MORo9ajM 38.5 24 0 0 01 52 0 114.5
Paso Rabies 0 0 27.5 0 0 0 0 27.5 2%
iSto'9ach' 0 0 0 7.5 0 0 12 19.5 k x t•%
San Luis Obisp 21 110 45 28.5 12 30 21 267.5 16%
175 210.4 197.5 72 29 326 135.31 1145.2 1.
Total Miles 1 234.5 1 344.4 1 345.0 1 133.8 41.0 1 408.0 1 192.01 1698.7
(1)Daily service miles are calculated by multiplying the number of route miles times the number of trips/day
Figure 3-4 shows the TDA funding split by jurisdiction under the current formulas and
compares it to the five funding formula options listed on page 3-2. For funding formula
alternatives 1, 2 and 3, the funding requirements decrease for all jurisdictions except
Morro Bay and SLO County which increase in all three scenarios. The amount of
increase for Morro Bay ranges from 42% under option 2 to 72% under option 1. This
is unacceptable given that Morro Bay currently allocates all of its TDA funds for transit
services, and increases in SLORTA contributions would require a decrease in its own
local service. San Luis Obispo County's funding level would increase between 1,5-43%
for these three alternatives. For the remaining :six jurisdictions allocations would
decrease between 14-60%. However, funding Formula #4, based on population, would
result in an increased share for all jurisdictions except the County. Funding splits based
on the percentage of population served by individual routes results in significant
decreases for all jurisdictions except for Morro Bay, whose contribution would remain the
same, and for the City of San Luis Obispo, whose contribution would increase 34%.
Com- 9
NELSONINYGAARD CONSULTING ASSOCIATES 3-4 JULY, 1994
SLO REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY FEASIBILITY AND FUNDING FORMULA STUDY
The 1993 population estimates for all of the jurisdictions in the County are presented in
Figure 3-2. The TDA resources distributed by SLOCOG are distributed based on these
population figures.
Figure 3-2
1993 County Population Estimates(1)
.».�;:..v .!.i' ... .:::
,<:.J..:i'.i:.:::::.::::::F.. ...:,....,.....liL. ......,.. .:'iii:'niiiii.Y:.
tr1Sd 1G
i4 rit :.<:<.:,,.
. :::.::.:::.:::.::::::�.::,:, .. : ori
;:Ccu'n
::::...........
n...........n:...... A.:::..:Jl:n?:A: }'u..C.i:.i:;.i:.inYf)Y:.Y.i:i:ii.:!n:iy::::::::
Arroyo Grande 15,050 7%
Atascadero 24,100 11%
Grover Beach 12,200 5%
Morro Bay 9,975 4%
Paso Robles 20,800 9%
Pismo Beach 7,900 3%
San Luis Obispo 43,400 19%
SLO County (2) 94,900 42%
TOTAL 228,325 100%
(1) Data is an estimate taken from the 1994 Regional Profile Addendum
(2) Includes unincorporated areas of the County
NELSONINYGAARD CONSULTING ASSOCIATES 3-3 JULY, 1994
r
L
CL Ul) Ir
p' n m m ^ O1 omi v n
j2 4b aR ccIn a0m)z LO 0FF vc� ciom m
g w a W 0 w w 0 mw v
0 r a
2 Y+
m N r T N W N H cV
C 7 W N 0 r r PJ ' r
12 m U
Z U p
Q li
c G m r� P O m P O m N
3 O r n O N 10 A Q
m nH m O
�k a
W w w w c CWO
O
�+ r
w
C h N O P h C m 0
Q� cn
C 7 Pf Pf VI 10 1�l P1 N
� U a
li
w
q OI P co m 0 N N N
M d m m CN N m t0 P c7
O 0 r O 1� LL] c7 O! Q
` c7 d m a0 fO7 r tG t0 fV
cc Ln N W mw 1A W W W Nw CA R m?
co G r N w w 1(y
LL 6
• _ C U T T aR
eq m
N B n1 T T T Q
-I I
v
O U o E
C
m
O t0 P N m Ol N m T N m
Y n m T m m c7 q, m ..
o e m U, C', Q r N v E
C N a
C m N 0 N O m
.a # H w Tw w w w w Nw mw q E
w
� m
LL e � gnNmuiNV
L m
U
U o E O
O 7R a c y
Nm U') (0 m N e7 0
O 0 O m O
0 ci C m m 01 O N P Q 3. m Z
Q r o c rn ui O rn c"1 n M m 5 F-
I� � O w1wIS ww N 9 v
H w to o y
Q _
toCY
a' 17 m to N t(0 O�1 m N C c7 m O V
C �F c0 O C 07 O1 Q] C m a m - C
Q 7 C hw N mw N m m 0 W m u m
Z U LL. n 44 404 M m e C1
l z 0
W p a 2
C6 V
0 2
cc
c w m = m y
o a m m W
J o m m 2 g d O o E
'o m m p m m m m LL $ Z
z W o ep, E p
m
a a C7 O. S Cn 7
SIO REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY FEASIBILITY AND FUNDING FORMULA STUDY
In addition to Morro Bay, Atascadero, and the City of San Luis Obispo currently spend
all of their TDA money on transit. Thus, they have no additional funds available to
increase their contribution to SLORTA.
3.3 SUMMARY
Under four of the five funding formula alternatives (1, 2, 3 & 5), SLO County's share of
CCAT's costs would increase between 15-44%. Since these formulas are tied to
mileage it is only logical that the County would have the largest increase in costs
(compared to the existing formula) as most of the CCAT system operates within the
County's jurisdiction. Using a pure population formula, the County's share would drop
by 12% compared to its present contribution.
All of the jurisdictions, except for SLO County and Morro Bay, would have a reduction
in funding contributions when a mileage calculation method is used as in funding formula
alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 5 A formula based on population served by CCAT's routes
provides a reduction for most of the jurisdictions except for the City and County, which
would increase 34% and 27%, respectively.
None of the alternative funding formulas result in a cost sharing arrangement which is
affordable by all jurisdictions. Under Option 5, Morro Bay and Atascadero do not have
TDA resources to cover their share of CCAT's costs, and under Option 5, the City of San
Luis Obispo could not cover its required contribution. In summary, the alternative
formulas do not provide the necessary relief for the cities that fully expend their TDA
resources on transit, nor do they offer a cost-sharing arrangement that would be
satisfactory to each jurisdiction.
NELsoNWYGAARD CONSULTING ASSOCIATES 3-6 .IDLY, 1994