HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/16/1999, C12 - THE CITY'S TRIP REDUCTION INCENTIVE PROGRAM (TRIP) council
j agcnaa Repom 12
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
FROM: Ann Slate,Director of Human ResourslN"
Prepared By: Jill Sylvain, Human Resources Analy
SUBJECT: The City's Trip Reduction Incentive Program(TRIP)
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Receive status report on the City's Trip Reduction Incentive Program (TRIP) and approve
continuation of TRIP for an additional 2 years.
DISCUSSION
In February of 1998,the City Council approved the Trip Reduction Incentive Program(TRIP)
for an eighteen month trial period and directed staff to return with a report on the program's
impacts on work trips and staff operations. Over the past eighteen months,staff has monitored
the program in accordance with Council direction and has prepared the following report that
details the program's impacts and the effectiveness of the various voluntary trip reduction
activities. Underscoring all trip reduction activities was the goal of maintaining and improving
public service and workforce productivity at the same time that trip reduction goals were being
pursued.
Backeround
The City's Circulation Element, adopted in November of 1994,calls for the implementation of
voluntary trip reduction programs for employers throughout San Luis Obispo. The City Council,
at that time,wanted the City, as an employer,to be a model for other employers and to encourage
voluntary trip reduction efforts throughout the community. Toward that end,the Council
established a target Average Vehicle Ridership(AVR)of 1.70. This was higher than the 1.50
AVR the Air Pollution Control District(APCD)had attempted to implement locally beginning in
the early 1990's.
In May of 1995,Rule 901 was adopted by the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District.
This rule was adopted in compliance with State law and required agencies to establish employer-
based trip reduction programs. As required by rule 901, the City adopted its own trip reduction
regulations which mandated a 1.50 AVR(the AVR mandate covered all employers within the
county with 100 or more employees). In October of 1995 the rule was repealed which served to
prohibit cities and other public agencies from establishing mandatory employer based trip
reduction programs. The APCD continues to pursue voluntary trip reduction programs with the
larger employers throughout the county, e.g., Cal Poly, SLO County, and PG&E/Diablo Canyon.
C12-1
Council Agenda Report—Trip Reduction Incentive Program
Page 2
In October, 1996, a"Trip Reduction Committee"made up of employees from various City
departments,representatives from Human Resources and Administration, and a Department
Head representative was formed. The committee met seven times to review materials prepared
by technical staff, evaluate alternatives and surveys, and decide on a course of action. The
committee reasoned that since this trip reduction program is a voluntary program only those
activities that would be of interest to employees could be expected to enjoy a reasonable level of
employee participation. Questionnaires were sent to City employees that identified sixteen trip
reduction activities; employees were asked what their level of interest was in each activity.
From the results of these surveys, committee members were asked to evaluate each of the
activities using the following criteria: hard costs, employee interest level,perceived management
support, ease of implementation, trip reduction benefits and ability to monitor. From this the
primary programs were developed.
A survey was conducted with 85%of all regular City employees responding to the questionnaire
that asked them to describe how they travel to work during a specific week. The results
demonstrated the City's workforce had an AVR of 1.45. This showed that a significant number
of City employees were already involved in the trip reduction activities that were currently
available,namely alternative work schedules and free transit passes in exchange for the City
employee parking permits. However,participation levels were still short of the City's goal of
achieving an AVR of 1.70
Based on the survey data and the AVR information, the Trip Reduction Committee developed a
program that was presented to the City Council for approval in May of 1997. The City Council:
1. Granted conceptual approval of the program recommended by the Trip Reduction Committee
that included the six activities(see Attachment A)listed below:
• Selective Work-At-Home Program(Telecommuting)
• Compressed Work Schedules(Flex Time)
• Adjusted Work Schedules
• Guaranteed Ride Home Program
• Cash Incentives and Increased Time Off Program
• Expanded Wellness Program Benefits
2. Directed staff to prepare administrative guidelines and related performance monitoring
features for the recommended activities.
Staff moved forward and developed the necessary guidelines and monitoring activities and on
February 20, 1998 the City Council approved the TRIP Employee Manual that outlines the
C12-2
Council Agenda Report—Trip Reduction Incentive Program
Page 3
program for administering the trip reduction activities and established an eighteen month trial
period. After several city-wide meetings and training sessions for supervisors TRIP began in
May of 1998.
AVR Survey- A Success Story
As a condition of Council's approval of TRIP, the performance monitoring efforts were to
include an AVR update. Another AVR survey was distributed to all City employees in October
of this year to determine if TRIP had made an impact on the AVR.. As mentioned earlier, the
original survey, conducted in October, 1996, had placed the City's AVR at 1.45.
Again,the 1999 survey form asked for the same information about how employees got to and
from work during a specific week. In addition questions were asked in both surveys that focused
on employees' attitudes about using alterative transportation to assist staff in understanding
what does and does not motivate employees to make changes in their commuting habits.
The survey results were extremely positive(see attachment B for work site and combined data).
The City's AVR has risen from 1.45 in October, 1996 to 1.62 in October, 1999. The City is very
close to meeting the target AVR goal of 1.70. Staff at the APCD (who calculate the AVR) stated
the City's AVR is.the highest of any major employer in the county. APCD staff also reports that
only 10 additional employees need to participate per day to achieve the 1.70 goal.
TRIP Analysis
The following is an analysis of the utilization for each of the six elements of the TRIP and the
impact they have had on improving the City's AVR.
Selective Work-At-Home Program (Telecommuting)
Currently only one City employee is formally telecommuting. According to the Department
Head, the employee spends one day per week working from her home writing reports, RFP's
and working on the department's budget. Telecommuting has worked extremely well,in this
case, because the employee is linked electronically to the department.
Compressed Work Schedules(Flex Time)
According to the APCD staff,our data demonstrates that this,by far,is the single biggest factor
contributing to our strong AVR showing. Our strength in this activity is due,in part,to the fact
that the majority of the City's police and fire department employees work on shifts of 12 hours
(police)and 24 hours (fire). In addition to that,most City employees now participate in a 9/80
schedule,which eliminates a work trip every other week.
Since the implementation of TRIP,the Administration and Finance Departments have authorized
9/80 schedules. Currently every department has employees on some form of a compressed work
C12-3
Council Agenda Report—Trip Reduction Incentive Program
Page 4
schedule. In surveying Department Heads on the impacts of flex schedules on departmental
operations,only one noted minor inconvemences.in scheduling meetings on Fridays. Another
Department Head reported that her department was able to extend customer service hours and
availability to the public at their front counter by 1 '/z hours per day due to flex schedules.
Adjusted Work Schedules
Since work schedules can be adjusted on a case-by-case basis with the approval of the supervisor
and department head, staff does not track the number of employees making minor adjustments to
their schedules. It is considered an important part of any trip reduction program because if the
City expects employees to use alternative forms of transportation some flexibility must allowed
to accommodate bus, car or van pool schedules, etc.
Guaranteed Ride home Program
Survey results indicate that being able to"get home" in an emergency situation is a major factor
for many employees in deciding whether or not to use alternative transportation. Using a City
vehicle to get home in an emergency has happened about 10-15 times in the last 18 months.
Though not used to a great extent, it is considered an important component of TRIP.
Cash Incentives and Increased Time OfjProgram
To date 48 employees have signed up and received either cash or added paid vacation time for
their year-long efforts at using alternative transportation between 2 and 5 days per week. Car and
vanpools are the most commonly used form of alternative transportation, e.g. 22 employees are
currently vanpooling from north county to the corporation yard each day. Since the inception of
TRIP the total cash paid to the 14 employees(who chose to receive cash)is$2,450.
It appears that at least as many employees (48) are currently working toward receiving an
incentive for their second year of efforts.
Expanded Wellness Program Benefits
During the first year of TRIP,2 employees participated in this portion of the program. Currently
no one is enrolled.
Conclusion
With this program,the City of San Luis Obispo has established itself as a leader in employer
based trip reduction programs in the county. APCD staff reports that no other trip reduction
program in the county has demonstrated the positive impact on their AVR as well as TRIP. We
frequently receive requests for copies of our TRIP manual from other agencies,and have
received numerous comments about how comprehensive and organized it is. Becoming a
"model"for trip reduction programs and being able to demonstrate that we`walk our talk" were
C12-4
Council Agenda Report—Trip Reduction Incentive Program
Page 5
important goals the City set out to achieve. Based upon the program's performance as
demonstrated by the AVR and with no significant impacts to productivity or departmental
operations,this program can be considered a success.
Granted the City has yet to reach our 1.70 AVR goal but we are close and with continued support
from the City Council it is within our reach. If TRIP is continued for another 2 years the Human
Resources Department staff will be visiting departments to remind them of the program benefits
and to encourage more employees to sign up for this voluntary program. Staff will return to the
Council in 2 years with a status report and an updated AVR.
FISCAL EWFACT
Because the TRIP began in the middle of a fiscal year, the Department of Human Resources was
able to absorb the cost of the program for 1997-98. Total costs that year were$2,545. Currently
(1999-2000) $3,000 have been allocated to cover the hard costs of the program.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Discontinue the TRIP. This is not advised because the program is doing what it was
supposed to do -reduce the number of trips City employees make to and from work in their own
vehicles. In light of this, the hard cost of the program($3000 per year) is reasonable.
2. Eliminate one or more of the six elements of the program. This is not recommend, again,
because the program is working and the results of the employee survey indicate that each of the
elements are being used by employees to varying degrees.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A-TRIP Activities
Attachment B - Survey Results by Work Site and Summary
The TRIP manual is available for review in the Council office
C12-5
ATTACHMM "A"
TRIP REDUCTION INCENTIVE PROGRAM(te)ACTB=S
SELECTIVE WORK AT-HOME PROGRAM(Telecommuting)
On a selective basis,with department management and CAO approval, City employees may
volunteer to routinely work at home for up to 1 day per week.
COMPRESSED WORK SCHEDULES(Flex Time)
On a selective basis and with department management approval, City employees may volunteer
to work a compressed work schedule that reduces their number of work days per week. In
general, 9/80 schedules are the City's benchmark standard for employees under this program.
However, limited application of 4/10 scheduling may be considered for field workers.
ADJUSTED WORSSCHEDULES
Employees may request that they be allowed to make minor adjustments to their work schedules
so that they can effectively utilize alternative transportation to get to and from work.
Minor adjustments are those not exceeding 30 minutes in duration and may include changes to
the work start and departure times and to the scheduling and duration of the lunch break. Lunch
breaks must be at least 30 minutes long. Time allocated for break periods may not be combined
with minor schedule adjustments to extend the period of absence. This activity does not change
the number of hours an employee works per day.
GUARANTEED RIDE HOME PROGRAM
City employees who use alternative transportation to travel to and from work will be allowed to
use City-owned passenger vehicles to get home in cases of personal emergencies or unplanned
(but approved) changes in work schedules. This program is also available to members of car or
vanpools when designated drivers must unexpectedly leave work and other pool members may
find themselves without a ride.
CASH INCENTIVES AND INCREASED TIME OFF PROGRAM
City employees who use alternative transportation to travel to and from work are eligible for the
following benefits:
Employees that use alternative transportation at least 1 day per work week throughout a year
(average weekly use)may choose to receive $50 cash or 4 hours of additional vacation.
Employees may choose$100 or 8 hours of vacation for using alternative transportation at least
2 days per week; $150 or 12 hours of vacation for using alternative transportation at least 3 days
per week and$200 or 16 hours of vacation for using alternative transportation at least 4 days per
week.
Employees enrolled in this program are not eligible for the Expanded Wellness Program Benefits
described below.
C12-6
It should be noted that the activities that involve cash incentives require detailed record keeping
which includes a"contract"between the employee and his/her supervisor confirming the
commitment to use alternative transportation for the full year to be eligible to receive the
incentive.
EXPANDED WELLNESS PROGRAM BENEFITS
Employees who are enrolled in the Wellness Program may receive additional cash
reimbursement benefits when they use altemative transportation that involves a direct physical
fitness activity(such as walking, running or riding a bike) for trips to and from work.
For those participating, cash reimbursement provided by the Wellness Program will increase to
$100 per half year of$200 per year.
ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES
There are other activities beyond those outlined in the TRIP manual that the City also continues
to encourage and/or support. They include: (1) continuing to provide employees who give up
their employee parking permit monthly bus passes for SLO Transit or the regional bus system;
(2)installing additional bike lockers at work sites where they are needed and.(3)joining the
Ride-On's Transportation Management Association(TMA).
C12-7
A1TAC>M(EN'P "By'
City of San Luis Obispo AVR
Fall 1999 Commute Survey
Facilitv I Resonses I Mondav I Tuesdav Wednesd!MThursday Friday acili Av
955 Morro 38 1.93 1.85 1.75 1.83 2.55 1.98
C" Hall 58 1.52 1.32 1.30 1.33 1.53 1.40
Corp Yard 67 1.89 1.69 1.63 1.60 1.82 1.73
Fire 53 1.49 2.35 1.32 2.09 1.32 1.71
Police 83 1.75 1.50 1.35 1.32 1.35 1.45
Recreaboo 14 1.44 1.26 1.20 1.26 1.76 1.38
Water 20 2.29 2.04 1.31 1.94 2.20 1.96
Whale 3 1.73 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.15
CityAveragl 336 1.74 1 1.70 1 1.43 1.59 1 1.67 1 1.62
Notes: 1. Survey conducted during October 1999.
2. A total of 336 respondents were surveyed
3. City Averages (city wide)are weighted averages based on the ratio of the number of responses
per facility to the total number of responses.
C12-8