ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015-2016
THE SAN JOAQUIN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Chair Steve Dresser City of Lathrop Vice Chair Anthony Silva City of Stockton Boardmember Jeff Laugero City of Escalon Boardmember Doug Kuehne City of Lodi Boardmember Steve DeBrum City of Manteca Boardmember Leo Zuber City of Ripon Boardmember Elbert H. Holman, Jr. City of Stockton Boardmember Moses Zapien City of Stockton Boardmember Michael Maciel City of Tracy Boardmember Katherine Miller San Joaquin County Boardmember Chuck Winn San Joaquin County Boardmember Steve J. Bestolarides San Joaquin County
EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS
Dennis T. Agar Caltrans, District 10 Gary Giovanetti San Joaquin Regional Transit District Victor Mow Port of Stockton
ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015-2016
SAN JOAQUIN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS PROFESSIONAL STAFF
Andrew T. Chesley Executive Director Steve Dial Deputy Executive Director/Chief Financial Officer Diane Nguyen Deputy Director, Planning, Programming and Project Delivery Rebecca Calija Manager of Administrative Services Kevin Sheridan Project Manager Kim Kloeb Senior Regional Planner Steve Mayo Senior Habitat Planner Tanisha Taylor Senior Regional Planner Nicole Gorham Public Communications Specialist Ryan Niblock Associate Regional Planner Yvette Davis Associate Regional Planner Kim Anderson Associate Regional Planner Phillip Brennan Regional Planner Lisa Donahue Regional Planner Phillip Brennan Regional Planner Daniel Meza Regional Planner Kari McNickle Regional Planner David Ripperda Regional Planner Teresa Garcia Planner Technician Laurel Boyd Habitat Planner Technician Grace Orosco Chief Accountant Lynnetta Castle Staff Accountant Tisha Singleton Fiscal Assistant I Kelly Bagley Fiscal Assistant II Vikram Sharma Information Services Manager Rosie Gutierrez Office Services Supervisor Katy Castro Office Assistant I Sandra Rodriguez Office Assistant I ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015-2016
TABLE76B OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE NUMBER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... ES-i CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 Requirements ...... 1 Background: Unmet Transit Needs History ...... 1 Determination of Reasonable to Meet Unmet Transit Needs ...... 1 Definitions ...... 2 Allocation Process ...... 4 CHAPTER 2 DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION ...... 6 Transit Dependent Groups ...... 6 Demographic Data - Charts and Highlights ...... 6 CHAPTER 3 COMMUNITY OUTREACH & PUBLIC COMMENT ...... 22 Public Hearings ...... 22 Community Outreach Efforts ...... 23 CHAPTER 4 ADEQUACY OF EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICES ...... 24 Overview ...... 24 Amtrak California Rail/Bus Service ...... 24 Altamont Corridor Express Rail Service ...... 24 Greyhound Bus Service ...... 24 Description of Local Public Transit Services ...... 25 Intracity Transit (Metro Hopper) ...... 29 Intercity Transit (RTD) ...... 29 County Hopper Service (RTD) ...... 29 Interregional Transit (RTD) ...... 30 Other Interregional Services ...... 30 Other Transit Related Services ...... 30 Adequacy of Existing Public Transit Systems ...... 31 CHAPTER 5 EVALUATION BY LOCAL JURISDICTION...... 33 Evaluation by Local Jurisdiction ...... 34 City of Escalon ...... 34 City of Lathrop ...... 34 City of Lodi ...... 34 City of Manteca ...... 35 City of Ripon ...... 36 City of Tracy ...... 36 City of Stockton ...... 36 Fixed Route Services: Stockton Metropolitan Area Fixed Route ...... 37 Conclusion/Recommendations ...... 37 Stockton Metropolitan Area Dial-A-Ride (DAR) ...... 38 CHAPTER 6 EVALUATION OF INTERCITY, REGIONAL, & INTERREGIONAL TRANSIT ...... 39 Intercity ...... 39 Non-Taxi Paratransit Services (Regional) ...... 40 County-Wide General Public Dial-A-Ride (GP/DAR) ...... 40 Interregional Transit ...... 40 Other Transit Services ...... 40 ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015-2016
APPENDICES7B
APPENDIX
APPENDIX A Resolution adopted by the San Joaquin Council of Governments Board of Directors and Staff Report with recommendations to the San Joaquin Council of Governments Board of Directors concerning Fiscal Year 2014-2015 Unmet Transit Needs Findings.
APPENDIX B Minutes from October 26, 2006 SJCOG Board of Directors meeting approving changes to definition of “UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS” and “REASONABLE TO MEET” criteria.
APPENDIX C Documentation of Unmet Transit Needs Hearings held by local government entities, as required by the San Joaquin Council of Governments:
1 – San Joaquin Regional Transit District 2 – Escalon 3 – Lathrop 4 – Lodi 5 – Manteca 6 – Ripon 7 – Tracy 8 – San Joaquin Council of Governments
APPENDIX D Examples of community outreach materials used to gain public participation.
APPENDIX E Unmet Transit Need comments received during community outreach process.
ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015-2016
TABLES78B
TABLE PAGE NUMBER
Table 1 Transit Systems in San Joaquin Region, By System Type ...... 4 Table 2 Total Population and Percent Change ...... 7 Table 3 Total Population and 2020, 2030, and 2035 Household Population Forecasts by Planning Area...... 9 Table 4 Age and Income, Year 2010 ...... 10 Table 5 Gender By Age By Disability ...... 17 Table 6 Employment Status By Disability ...... 18 Table 7 Licensed Drivers in San Joaquin County ...... 19 Table 8 Estimate of Licensed Drivers in San Joaquin County, Year 2010 ...... 19 Table 9 Occupied Household / Vehicles in San Joaquin County, Year 2010 ...... 21 Table 10 FY 2014-2015 Community Outreach Schedule ...... 22 Table 11 Greyhound Intercity Bus Service (February 2014) ...... 25
FIGURES79B
FIGURE PAGE NUMBER
Figure 1 Population Distribution in San Joaquin County, 2010 ...... 8 Figure 2 San Joaquin County Population 65+ ...... 12 Figure 3 Age By Gender ...... 13 Figure 4 Eligibility for Drivers Licenses in San Joaquin County...... 19 Figure 5 San Joaquin County Population without a Car ...... 20
ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Each year, pursuant to state law, as the Regional Transportation Planning Agency the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) must identify any unmet transit needs that may exist in San Joaquin County. If needs are found, a further determination must be made to determine whether or not those needs are reasonable to meet. State law requires SJCOG to ensure that reasonable needs are met before Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds are allocated to local jurisdictions for non-transit purposes. The annual unmet transit needs assessment requires SJCOG to conduct, at a minimum, the following:
Ensure that several factors have been considered in the planning process, including: size and location of groups likely to be dependent on transit, adequacy of existing services, and potential alternative services and service improvements that could meet all or part of the travel demand. Hold a public hearing to receive testimony on unmet needs. Determine definitions for "unmet transit needs" and "reasonable to meet." Adopt a finding regarding unmet transit needs and allocate funds to address those needs, if necessary, before street and road TDA allocations.
The required information must be documented and submitted to the State Department of Transportation before August 15 of the fiscal year of the allocation or within 10 days after the adoption of the finding, whichever is later. The analysis utilizes census data for the year 2012, where available, years 2010 and 2000. The census data is augmented with other pertinent data to identify the size and location of groups of people that meet SJCOG's definition of "transportation dependent." All public testimony received during public hearings and other means the public exercised to communicate unmet transit needs is summarized. In addition, this analysis uses data and information compiled in prior years' unmet transit needs analyses and transit studies to supplement current input on transit needs. The SJCOG Board of Directors must adopt a transit needs finding for the area of each TDA fund claimant after consideration of all available information. Any findings will be identified in one of the following categories: 1) There are no unmet transit needs; 2) There are unmet transit needs that are not reasonable to meet; or 3) There are unmet transit needs, including needs that are reasonable to meet. If a documented unmet transit need is revealed within a specific jurisdiction that meets the test of reasonable to meet, the following will occur: The jurisdiction’s TDA Local Transportation Funds (LTF) must be used to rectify an unmet transit need prior to using these funds for non-transit purposes such as maintenance of streets and roads; and, The addition and/or modification of the existing transit system(s) must be considered in order to resolve an unmet transit need.
ES-i
ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
The definition of an unmet transit need, as adopted by the SJCOG Board in 2006, is as follows: UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS are defined as transportation services not currently provided to those residents who use or would use public transportation regularly, if available, to meet their life expectations. This includes, but is not limited to: trips for medical and dental services, shopping, employment, personal business, education, social services, and recreation. An unmet transit need that meets the definition above and meets all of the following criteria shall be considered reasonable to meet: 1. Community Acceptance - There should be a demonstrated interest of citizens in the new or additional transit service (i.e. multiple comments, petitions, etc.).
2. Equity - The proposed new or additional service will benefit the general public, residents who use or would use public transportation regularly, the elderly population, and persons with disabilities.
3. Potential Ridership - The proposed transit service will maintain new service ridership performance measures, as defined by the Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee (SSTAC).
4. Cost Effectiveness - The proposed new or additional transit service will not affect the ability of the overall system to meet the applicable Transit Systems Performance Objectives or state farebox ratio requirement after exemption period, if the service is eligible for the exemption. The Transit Systems Performance Objectives are defined as 1) operating cost per revenue hour, 2) passengers per revenue hour, and 3) subsidy per passenger. If the exemption is not used, the service must meet minimum applicable Transit Systems Performance Objectives or farebox ratio return requirements as stated in the TDA statutes. Cost effectiveness is not applicable to transit services operating within an exemption period.
5. Operational Feasibility - The system can be implemented safely and in accordance with local, state, and federal laws and regulations.
6. Funding - The imposed service would not cause the claimant to incur expenses in excess of the maximum allocation of TDA funds.
In addition to other means employed to gain community input, thirteen (17) public hearings were held throughout the region to gain community input on unmet transit needs. The most common community input involved operational issues (i.e., bus stop locations, scheduling, etc.) or comments that revealed the need for continued education regarding the existing transit services provided. Two reoccurring comments referenced the weekend and evening service reductions in the Stockton Metropolitan Area. The comments regarding the adequacy of the existing transit system are addressed in Chapter 4 of the document.
ES-ii
ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
The unmet transit need findings specific to the jurisdictions are as follows: City of Escalon: There are no unmet transit needs. City of Lathrop: There are no unmet transit needs. City of Lodi: There are no unmet transit needs. City of Manteca: There are unmet transit needs that are not reasonable to meet. City of Ripon: There are no unmet transit needs.
City75B of Tracy: There are unmet transit needs that are not reasonable to meet.
City of Manteca There are two Unmet Transit Needs in the City of Manteca. One is the need for a stop at the Manteca Post Office and the other is a shuttle between Manteca and Lathrop. However, these unmet needs “are not reasonable to meet” during this cycle because current ridership and demand levels, as well as potential cost-effectiveness criteria. The City of Manteca will further evaluate the demand for establishing service to the southeast area of the city in the next Short Range Transit Plan update (2015). City of Tracy There is an unmet need for offering transit service from Tracy to Modesto/Manteca. However, the unmet need “is not reasonable to meet” during this cycle because current ridership and demand levels, as well as potential cost-effectiveness criteria, are insufficient to warrant additional service hours. The City of Tracy will further evaluate the demand for establishing service to the southeast area of the city in the next Short Range Transit Plan update (2015).
17BSan Joaquin Regional Transit District (SJRTD): RTD is responsible for providing transit services for the Stockton Urban Area as well as the unincorporated areas throughout the region. The examination of unmet transit needs is correlated with the specific RTD service below. Stockton Metropolitan Area (SMA) Fixed Route Service There is an unmet need for greater SMA weekend coverage and evening service hours. However, the unmet need “is not reasonable to meet” during this cycle because the City of Stockton already dedicates 100% of the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) General Apportionment to RTD for SMA services. RTD Stockton Metropolitan Area (SMA) weekend and evening service was restructured in October 2011 as a result of declining revenue streams. Current RTD weekend service consists of ten routes which includes two intercity routes. RTD will continue to examine the feasibility of adding greater weekend and evening service hours.
Additional comments addressed less frequency on existing routes, and existing routes no longer serving as many destinations as previously provided. These comments are considered Unmet Needs. However, these unmet needs are “not reasonable to meet” during this cycle because the City of Stockton already dedicates 100% of the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) General Apportionment to RTD for SMA services.
Intercity46B Services/County Hopper (Regional) There are unmet transit needs in regards to connectivity between Lathrop, Escalon, Tracy, Manteca,
ES-iii
ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
and Modesto. However, these unmet needs “are not reasonable to meet” during this cycle because current ridership and demand levels, as well as potential cost-effectiveness criteria, are insufficient to warrant additional service hours RTD will continue to examine the feasibility of adding greater weekend and evening service hours.
Non-Taxi47B Paratransit Services (Regional) There are no unmet transit needs. County-Wide48B General Public Dial-A-Ride (GP/DAR) There are no unmet transit needs. Interregional49B Services There is currently an Unmet Transit Need for transportation from Stockton to San Leandro. However, this unmet needs “is not reasonable to meet” during this cycle because current ridership and demand levels, as well as potential cost-effectiveness criteria, are insufficient to warrant additional service hours RTD will continue to examine the feasibility of adding greater weekend and evening service hours.
Other18B Transit Services There are no unmet transit needs.
0BCommunity Outreach Efforts A wide variety community outreach efforts were employed that went beyond the public hearing process to gain input. These efforts were intended to promote other opportunities for the public to communicate their Unmet Transit Needs (e.g., email, SJCOG website, survey, telephone, and letter). Examples of this effort include: Distribution of brochures and flyers to public/private/non-profit agencies throughout San Joaquin County. Use of the City of Lathrop’s utility bill mailing to distribute flyers to its citizenship. An online survey was posted on the SJCOG a website. The Unmet Transit Needs comment period for Fiscal Year (FY) 2015/2016 ended on December 3, 2014. The outreach efforts produced input from 132 individuals totaling 146 comments. Of the 146 comments, 26 did not identify a deficiency within the existing transit system. Of the remaining 120 comments; 93 are considered operational in nature, 13 are addressed by existing transit system, and 14 were considered unmet transit needs.
Additional1B Discussion Many of the comments and other information received regarding public transit within the jurisdictions were either operational in nature or identified the need for continued education regarding the existing transit services. For example, many of the comments can be addressed through existing services, but the commenter may be unaware of existing service frequency, alternative routes available, and bus stop locations. Other operational comments consisted of suggestions for new stops, modifications to routes, or the duration of service. The transit operators take these operational comments into account when planning for future services.
ES-iv
ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
The RTD, Cities of Lodi and Escalon introduced online trip planners in FY 09/10, and the San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission introduced an online trip planner in FY 10/11. These online trip planners allow riders to compare numerous transit options and better plan for their next trip on public transit. In addition, the RTD offers a texting feature for mobile devices that allows passengers to receive notifications regarding specified route schedules and delays. The introduction of these features in combination with effective marketing may lead to greater awareness of the available transit options in San Joaquin County.
Additional2B Analysis Typically, the availability of future ridership is not part of the unmet transit needs process. However, SJCOG staff examined the extent to which employment opportunities during non-traditional hours throughout the San Joaquin region exist. Chart A compares census 2000 and 2010 data on the time of the day an individual goes to work. The greatest increase in work related travel begins between the times of 12:00 AM through 5:29 AM. This most likely represents the bulk of the travel going over the Altamont Pass. The departure times between the hours of 6:30 AM through 6:59 AM and 7:30 AM through 7:59 AM saw little growth and a decrease in drivers leaving to work, respectively. However, the departure time between 7:00 AM and 7:30 AM increased by 16%. The departure work times of 12:00 PM through 3:59 PM and 4:00 PM through 12:00 AM represent the time blocks most likely associated with swing and graveyard shifts. As compared to the other entire home to work departure times, the potential work related ridership associated with non-traditional working hours is greater than any other work related need. This information offers insight regarding the current and future potential need for public transit during non-traditional hours, and supports the further examination of the need for this type of transit service. Chart A
ES-v
ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
35,000 Time Leaving Home to go to Work 30,000 Increased (16%) Increased 2000 25,000 (15%) Increased 2010 (12%) People
20,000 Increase of
Increased d 15,000
10,000Number
5,000
0
Time of Day Leaving to Work
ES-ii
ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
Requirements3B Each year, pursuant to state law, the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) must identify any unmet transit needs that may exist within San Joaquin County. If unmet needs are identified, a further determination must be made as to whether or not those needs are reasonable to meet. 1 State law, as presented in the Transportation Development Act (TDA)F F, requires SJCOG to ensure that reasonable needs are met before Local Transportation Funds (LTF) are allocated for non-transit purposes. In conducting the annual transit needs assessment, SJCOG's role is to perform the following: 1. Ensure that several factors have been considered in the planning process, including size and location of groups likely to be dependent on transit, adequacy of existing services, and potential alternative services and service improvements that could meet all or part of the travel demand. 2. Hold a public hearing to receive testimony on unmet needs. 3. Determine definitions for "unmet transit needs" and "reasonable to meet." 4. Adopt a finding regarding unmet transit needs and allocate funds to address those needs, if necessary, before street and road allocations. The required information must be documented and submitted to the State Department of Transportation. It is the intent of this report to provide evidence that SJCOG has complied with the actions required by law.
Background:19B UnmetU U Transit Needs History Unmet transit needs became a consideration in 1978 when the TDA was changed to require a specific transit finding before allocation of local TDA funds for other non-transit purposes. Since that time, SJCOG has conducted surveys, online surveys, presentations, mailers, studies, and annual hearings to identify needs, and to determine the reasonableness of funding new or alternative services. Even though SJCOG's Unmet Transit Needs findings are made on an annual basis, the assessment process is ongoing. To further the public participation process, SJCOG requests that each member agency hold at least one public hearing on transit needs. The San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) sponsors a series of public hearings throughout the Stockton Metropolitan Area and unincorporated areas of San Joaquin County. SJCOG has adopted definitions regarding "Unmet Transit Needs" and "Reasonable to Meet" unmet transit needs. Refer to Appendix B for minutes from the October 26, 2006 SJCOG Board of Directors meeting documenting the approval of changes to the Unmet Transit Need Definitions.
Determination20B of Reasonable to Meet UnmetU U Transit Needs Currently, there are two (2) tests that need to be applied before the SJCOG Board of Directors can determine that an Unmet Transit Need is considered reasonable to meet. First, the Board has
1 Transportation Development Act, Statutes and California Codes of Regulations, California Department of Transportation Division of Mass Transportation, March 2009
Page 1 Chapter 1 Introduction ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
to make a finding that there is indeed an unmet transit need, regardless of what means are necessary to meet it. Second, once the need is identified, a quantifiable assessment of reason- ableness must be performed. The assessment involves applying the potential transit service to the set of criteria included in the “Reasonable to Meet” definition. The assessment involves comparing the additional service to existing services provided by the transit operator. If the additional service meets all of the criteria identified in the reasonable to meet definition, the unmet transit need would be deemed reasonable to meet. TDA funds for that jurisdiction would need to be set aside to meet that need.
Definitions21B The Transportation Development Act does not clearly define "Unmet Transit Needs" or "Reasonable to Meet." However, the TDA does state, "The fact that an identified transit need cannot be fully met based on available resources shall not be the sole reason for finding that a transit need is not reasonable to meet." The following definitions were approved by the SJCOG Board of Directors at their October 26, 2006 Board Meeting. The definitions were developed by a subcommittee composed of members from the Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee (SSTAC). The SSTAC felt the prior definitions, which were adopted in 2005, did not completely serve the transit dependent community, and that the new definitions accommodate the transit dependent more efficiently. Definition50B of Unmet Transit Needs The following definition was approved by the SJCOG Board in October 2006: UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS are defined as transportation services not currently provided to those residents who use or would use public transportation regularly, if available, to meet their life expectations. This includes, but is not limited to: trips for medical and dental services, shopping, employment, personal business, education, social services, and recreation. Persons representing various social service agencies, with additional input from transit operators, first developed the framework of this definition. The definition was then modified and approved in October 2006, after a recommendation was made by the SSTAC. The committee felt that this modified version would better serve the transit dependent community. 51B Definition of “Reasonable to Meet” Unmet Transit Need Parameters for “reasonable to meet” were identified in a similar manner. Social service agency representatives, transit operators and public officials felt that: 1. Persons should have an equal opportunity to provide themselves with the necessities to sustain life; 2. Any transportation system should be based on the feasibility of a continuing service; 3. Any transportation system must enjoy some degree of community acceptance; 4. A transportation system must not prove excessive in capital and operating costs; 5. A transportation system should be provided when a need is demonstrated; and, 6. Any service provided should be able to be funded on both a short and long-term basis. System performance, economy, equity, and available funding are considered when defining "reasonable to meet," as noted in the above statements. Any of these factors may be used to
Page 2 Chapter 1 Introduction ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
support or deny a finding of "reasonable to meet." If, based on these factors, reasonable needs are suspected; then SJCOG's formally adopted definition is employed: An unmet transit need that meets the definition above [definition of unmet transit need] and meets all of the following criteria shall be considered reasonable to meet: 1. Community Acceptance – There should be a demonstrated interest of citizens in the new or additional transit service (i.e. multiple comments, petitions, etc.). 2. Equity – The proposed new or additional service will benefit the general public, residents who use or would use public transportation regularly, the elderly population, and persons with disabilities. 3. Potential Ridership – The proposed transit service will maintain new service ridership performance measures, as defined by the Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee (SSTAC). 4. Cost Effectiveness – The proposed new or additional transit service will not affect the ability of the overall system to meet the applicable Transit Systems Performance Objectives or state farebox ratio requirement after exemption period, if the service is eligible for the exemption. The Transit Systems Performance Objectives are defined as 1) operating cost per revenue hour, 2) passengers per revenue hour, and 3) subsidy per passenger. If the exemption is not used, the service must meet minimum applicable Transit Systems Performance Objectives or farebox ratio return requirements as stated in the TDA statutes. Cost effectiveness is not applicable to transit services operating within an exemption period. 5. Operational Feasibility – The system can be implemented safely and in accordance with local, state, and federal laws and regulations. 6. Funding – The imposed service would not cause the claimant to incur expenses in excess of the maximum allocation of TDA funds. Within the definition, an unmet transit need cannot be found unreasonable solely based upon economic feasibility. If the unmet need is indeed found reasonable to meet, then the unmet transit need shall be funded before any allocation is made for streets and roads within the jurisdiction. Within these parameters, the seven presently operating TDA-subsidized public transit systems in San Joaquin County fall into seven categories defining transit system types as shown in Table 1.
Page 3 Chapter 1 Introduction ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
Table 1 Transit Systems in San Joaquin Region, By System Type
System Type Public Transit System
1) Interregional Transit San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD)
2) Intercity Transit RTD
3) Urban Fixed Route RTD
4) Small Urban (population 50,000 - Lodi GrapeLine 200,000) Lodi Dial-A-Ride Tracy Tracer Tracy Tracer Paratransit Manteca Transit Manteca Transit Dial-A-Ride
6) Rural Escalon eTrans Ripon Blossom Express RTD - General Public Dial-a-Ride
7) Non-Taxi Paratransit (not general RTD - SMA ADA Dial-a-Ride public) Dial-A-Ride Lodi VineLine
2B
Allocation Process The SJCOG Board of Directors must adopt a finding for the area of each Local Transportation Fund claimant, after consideration of all available information, including information presented at the public hearings. This finding can have three outcomes: 1. There are no unmet transit needs; 2. There are unmet transit needs that are considered not reasonable to meet; or, 3. There are unmet transit needs that are considered reasonable to meet. Reference must be made to the definitions adopted and the efforts undertaken in the planning process to identify transit dependent groups and service improvements. In addition, these needs are not to be compared with transit system operational issues and street and road needs when making a determination of transit needs that are reasonable to meet.
Page 4 Chapter 1 Introduction ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
After the determination is made for the area of each claimant, SJCOG may allocate funds to the claimant based on the following: 1. Some or all for transit purposes; 2. Some or all to be held in reserve; or, 3. Some or all for roads, streets, and other purposes. These allocation options depend upon the specific determination made for each claimant area. If a finding is made that a need exists and that it is reasonable to meet, some funds must be allocated for transit before any funds are allocated for streets and roads.
Page 5 Chapter 1 Introduction ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
CHAPTER 2 DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Transit4B Dependent Groups Per the Transportation Development Act, Unmet Transit Needs findings must include an annual assessment of the size and location of identifiable groups likely to be transit dependent. Including but not limited to, the elderly, the disabled, including individuals eligible for paratransit and other special transportation services pursuant to Section 12143 of Title 42 of the United States Code, and persons of limited means, including, but not limited to, recipients under the CalWORKs program. For the purposes of this document: Elderly are considered to be individual’s age 65 years old and older. The terms "disability" refers to persons who because of physical or mental impairment are unable to drive automobiles or use public transit which is not specifically tailored to meet their needs. Persons of limited means are considered having incomes below the poverty threshold as defined by the federal government.
Demographic23B Data - Charts and Highlights The determination of the size and location of identifiable groups likely to be “transit dependent” is based on 2012 Census data, where available, the American Community Surveys, 2000 Census, and other pertinent data. The demographic data relevant to determining unmet transit needs in San Joaquin County is presented in the form of tables and maps. The American Community Survey replaced the decennial census long form in 2010. The long-form previously collected decennially, will now collect detailed questions about socioeconomic and housing characteristics on an annual basis. The function of the decennial census will be to provide counts of people for the purpose of congressional apportionment and legislative redistricting. The primary purpose of the ACS is to measure the changing social and economic characteristics of the U.S. population. The use of the ACS data in this chapter will provide “snapshots” of our region’s socioeconomic characteristics. The decision to select one-year, three-year, or five-year ACS “snapshots” is dependent on whether the intent is to reflect the most current data (e.g., one-year ACS) or a statistically more accurate “snapshot” (e.g., lower margin of error) over a larger period of time. In this chapter, Tables 2 and 3 present an overview of population growth in San Joaquin County. Figure 1 illustrates graphically how the population is dispersed throughout the incorporated and unincorporated areas in San Joaquin County. The most rapid population increases between the 2000 and 2010 Census have occurred primarily in the southern portion of San Joaquin County in proximity to the I-205 and SR-120 corridors. The City of Lathrop experienced a 72% increase in population from 2000 to 2010 while the Cities of Manteca, Ripon, and Tracy experience growth of approximately 40% during the same period. Not evident from the data, but important in terms of eligibility for receiving Federal Transit Administration (FTA) 5307 funding, the cities of Tracy and Lodi exceeded 50,000 people in FY
Page 6 Chapter 2 Demographic Information ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
02/03. The City of Manteca exceeded 50,000 in FY 04/05. As a result, each of these cities are now considered an urbanized area and are eligible for (FTA) 5307 funds for planning, capital, and operating assistance for their public transit system. Population forecasts suggest that the Tracy and Manteca Planning Area populations will exceed 100,000 by the year 2020 and 2030, respectively. Pursuant to Senate Bill 716 (enacted 2009), cities with a population of 100,000 or more within a county that has a population of 500,000 or more will be required to expend 100% of the Local Transportation Funds (LTF) apportionment for public transit purposes. The California Department of Finance annual city and county population estimates will be used to identify when the population threshold has been met. SB 716 represents a fundamental change in the manner in which public transit will be financed in the future.
Table 2 Total Population and Percent Change
% Annual Planning Pop. Pop. % Change Change Area 20001 20101 2000-2010 2000-2010 Stockton City 243,771 291,707 19.7% 2.0% Lodi City 56,999 62,134 9.0% 0.9% Manteca City 49,258 67,096 36.2% 3.6% Tracy City 56,929 82,922 45.7% 4.6% Escalon City 5,963 7,132 19.6% 2.0% Ripon City 10,146 14,297 40.9% 4.1% Lathrop City 10,445 18,023 72.6% 7.3% Total Incorporated 433,511 543,311 25.3% 2.5% Total Unincorporated 130,087 141,995 9.1% 0.9%
County Total 563,598 685,306 21.59% 2.2% Sources: 1 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census Bureau
Page 7 Chapter 2 Demographic Information ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
Figure 1 Population Distribution in San Joaquin County, 2010
Page 8 Chapter 2 Demographic Information ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
Table 3 Total Population and 2020, 2030, and 2035 Household Population Forecasts by Planning Area
Total Population – Actual1 Total Population Forecasts2 Planning Area 2000 2010 2020 2030 2035 Stockton 243,771 291,707 363,427 404,260 438,121 Lodi 56,999 62,134 81,576 85,904 88,764 Manteca 49,258 67,096 83,373 99,816 112,720 Tracy 56,929 82,922 96,603 112,095 121,557 Ripon 10,146 14,297 22,522 25,629 27,739 Escalon 5,963 7,132 9,461 10,524 11,040 Lathrop 10,445 18,023 30,257 50,116 60,284 Unincorporated 130,087 141,995 119,879 132,425 126,156 County 563,598 685,306 807,099 920,768 986,382 Sources: 12000 and 2010 are actual U.S. Census of Population Counts. 2 2020, 2030, and 2035 forecasts derived from the Planning Center. *Note: Household Population does not include persons in Group Quarters.
Table 4 presents 2008-2012 American Community Survey (ACS 5-year) data on population, by age and income characteristics. This data is important to this analysis because studies have shown that age and income have a high correlation with automobile usage and transit dependency. Persons age 65 and over are separated as a subset of the total population figures. In some jurisdictions, these individuals become eligible for transit services solely based on their age. In others, they qualify for reduced fares because of their age. In either case, they are recognized as a select group of people who may have special transportation needs met through public transportation. Poverty statistics in ACS products adhere to the standards specified by the Office of Management and Budget in Statistical Policy Directive 14. The Census Bureau uses a set of dollar value thresholds that vary by family size and composition to determine who is in poverty. Further, poverty thresholds for people living alone or with nonrelatives (unrelated individuals) vary by age (under 65 years or 65 years and older). The poverty thresholds for two-person families also vary by the age of the householder. If a family's total income is less than the dollar value of the appropriate threshold, then that family and every individual in it are considered to be in poverty. Similarly, if an unrelated individual's total income is less than the appropriate threshold, then that individual is considered to be in poverty.
Page 9 Chapter 2 Demographic Information ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
Table 4 Age and Income, Year 2010
Persons: age 65+ & Planning Population Persons: % total Persons: % total Areas 20101 age 65+ population Low Income2 population Low Income2 % Stockton 286,761 27,757 9.68 66,929 23.3 3,634 0.54 Lodi 61,932 7,946 12.83 10,709 17.3 777 0.12 Manteca 67,179 6,555 9.76 6,491 9.7 326 0.05 Tracy 81,844 6,165 7.53 7,859 9.6 397 0.06 Escalon 7,133 1047 14.68 892 12.5 164 0.02 Ripon 14,000 1,730 12.36 1,303 9.3 62 0.01 Lathrop 16,316 1,215 7.45 1,213 7.4 126 0.02 Total Incorp. 535,165 52,415 9.79 95,396 17.83 5,486 0.82 Total Unincorp. 137,100 17,975 13.11 22,542 16.44 1,291 0.19 County 672,265 70,390 10.47 117,938 17.5 6,777 1.01 Total/Average Source: 1 U.S. Census Bureau, 2008-2012 American Community Survey-5 Year. 2 Poverty status is determined by comparing annual income to a set of dollar values called poverty thresholds that vary by family size, number of children and age of householder. If a family's before tax money income is less than the dollar value of their threshold, then that family and every individual in it are considered to be in poverty. For people not living in families, poverty status is determined by comparing the individual's income to his or her poverty threshold. The poverty thresholds are updated annually to allow for changes in the cost of living using the Consumer Price Index (CPI-U). They do not vary geographically.
The 2008-2012 ACS data reflects that approximately 10 percent of San Joaquin residents are over 65, approximately 17 percent of residents are of low income, and that approximately one percent of all residents are over 65 and of low income. 51 percent of San Joaquin County residents age 65 years or older live in either the Stockton or Lodi planning areas, while 26 percent live in the unincorporated areas of the county. In 2012, the following represents the percentage of people age 65 or older in each planning area in relationship to the County total population of people age 65 or older: 1. Stockton City 39.4% 2. Lodi City 11.3% 3. Manteca City 9.3% 4. Tracy City 8.8% 5. Escalon City 1.5% 6. Ripon City 2.5% 7. Lathrop City 1.7% 8. Unincorporated Area 25.5%
Figure 2 illustrates graphically how the 65 and older population is dispersed through the incorporated and unincorporated areas of San Joaquin County.
Table 4 also indicates that the Cities of Lodi, Escalon, and Ripon have the largest percentage of
Page 10 Chapter 2 Demographic Information ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
residents 65 and older in relationship to the jurisdictions total population.
1. Stockton City 9.2% 2. Lodi City 12.8% 3. Manteca City 9.8% 4. Tracy City 7.5% 5. Escalon City 14.7% 6. Ripon City 12.4% 7. Lathrop City 7.5% 8. Unincorporated Area 9.8%
While the 65 and above population in the cities of Lodi, Escalon, Ripon represent only 15 percent of the elderly population, the elderly population within these cities comprises approximately 40 percent of their elderly population.
The 2008-2012 ACS data also reflects, over 66% of all low income people live in either the Stockton or Lodi planning areas while 19% live in unincorporated areas of the county. In 2012, the following represents the percentage of low income people within each planning area in relationship to the County low income population total:
1. Stockton City 56.7% 2. Lodi City 9.1% 3. Manteca City 5.5% 4. Tracy City 6.7% 5. Escalon City 0.8% 6. Ripon City 1.1% 7. Lathrop City 1.0% 8. Unincorporated Area 19.1%
There are 3,634 low-income seniors living in Stockton. This represents 53.6% of all low-income seniors in San Joaquin County. Outside of Stockton, there is a relatively high concentration of low-income seniors in the unincorporated areas of the county (19%) and the City of Lodi (11.5%). The countywide average percentage of low-income seniors is 1.01%.
Figure 3 presents population pyramids for each jurisdiction within San Joaquin County. Figure 3a, San Joaquin County Age by Gender (2012) provides a reference point for jurisdictional comparison.
Page 11 Chapter 2 Demographic Information ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
Figure 2 San Joaquin County Population 65+
Manteca
Lathrop
Page 12 Chapter 2 Demographic Information ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
Figure 3 Age By Gender Source: 2014 and 2015 U.S. Census A) San Joaquin County, CA Population by Age & Gender(2014 & 2015) 85 years and over ‐1.68%0.95% ‐1.70%1.17% 75 to 79 years ‐2.04% 1.59% Male: ‐2.54% 2.18% 67 to 69 years ‐1.98% 1.70% Female: ‐1.50%1.39% 62 to 64 years ‐2.68% 2.54% ‐1.99% 1.91% 55 to 59 years ‐5.66% 5.38% ‐6.49% 6.50% 45 to 49 years ‐6.94% 6.94% ‐6.64% 6.73% 35 to 39 years ‐6.66% 6.46% ‐6.56% 6.42% 25 to 29 years ‐6.61% 6.80% ‐3.93% 4.15% 21 years ‐1.30%1.47% ‐1.41%1.53% 18 and 19 years ‐3.03% 3.30% ‐4.98% 5.45% 10 to 14 years ‐8.04% 8.64% ‐7.87% 8.42% Under 5 years ‐7.75% 8.37% ‐10% ‐8% ‐6% ‐4% ‐2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
B) Escalon, CA Population by Age & Gender(2014 & 2015) 85 years and over ‐2.26% 1.06% ‐2.34% 1.61% 75 to 79 years ‐2.84% 2.44% Male: ‐3.00% 2.38% 67 to 69 years ‐2.18% 1.72% Female: ‐1.71%1.18% 62 to 64 years ‐2.48% 2.98% ‐1.93% 2.01% 55 to 59 years ‐6.31% 6.54% ‐8.62% 7.37% 45 to 49 years ‐7.16% 7.75% ‐6.55% 6.11% 35 to 39 years ‐5.64% 6.11% ‐6.33% 5.51% 25 to 29 years ‐5.64% 6.89% ‐3.39% 4.25% 21 years ‐1.24% 1.49% ‐0.94%1.69% 18 and 19 years ‐2.64% 3.39% ‐4.93% 5.34% 10 to 14 years ‐8.20% 8.61% ‐7.02% 6.74% Under 5 years ‐6.66% 6.83% ‐10% ‐8% ‐6% ‐4% ‐2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
Page 13 Chapter 2 Demographic Information ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
C) Lathrop, CA Population by Age & Gender(2014 and 2015) 85 years and over ‐0.63% 0.34% ‐0.72% 0.54% Male: 75 to 79 years ‐1.44%0.97% ‐1.87% 1.50% Female: 67 to 69 years ‐1.53%1.09% ‐1.18% 1.16% 62 to 64 years ‐2.12% 1.99% ‐1.54% 1.51% 55 to 59 years ‐4.82% 4.63% ‐6.39% 6.13% 45 to 49 years ‐6.72% 7.34% ‐7.36% 7.92% 35 to 39 years ‐7.29% 7.81% ‐7.84% 7.15% 25 to 29 years ‐7.29% 6.41% ‐3.84% 4.04% 21 years ‐1.22% 1.37% ‐1.45% 1.32% 18 and 19 years ‐3.15% 3.76% ‐5.20% 5.78% 10 to 14 years ‐8.75% 9.61% ‐8.71% 8.95% Under 5 years ‐8.94% 8.68% ‐10% ‐8% ‐6% ‐4% ‐2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
D) Lodi, CA Population by Age & Gender(2014 and 2015) 85 years and over ‐2.87% 1.62% ‐2.57% 1.59% 75 to 79 years ‐2.61% 1.97% Male: ‐3.01% 2.56% 67 to 69 years ‐2.25% 1.81% Female: ‐1.55% 1.36% 62 to 64 years ‐2.85% 2.59% ‐1.92% 1.98% 55 to 59 years ‐5.72% 5.80% ‐6.70% 6.70% 45 to 49 years ‐6.62% 6.56% ‐6.07% 5.95% 35 to 39 years ‐5.81% 6.10% ‐6.61% 6.78% 25 to 29 years ‐7.02% 7.23% ‐3.90% 4.43% 21 years ‐1.24% 1.38% ‐1.20% 1.42% 18 and 19 years ‐2.65% 2.81% ‐4.60% 4.89% 10 to 14 years ‐7.06% 8.32% ‐7.62% 7.73% Under 5 years ‐7.54% 8.44% ‐10% ‐8% ‐6% ‐4% ‐2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
Page 14 Chapter 2 Demographic Information ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
E) Manteca, CA Population by Age & Gender(2014 and 2015) 85 years and over ‐1.34% 0.72% ‐1.46% 0.90% 75 to 79 years ‐1.93% 1.63% ‐2.67% 2.06% Male: 67 to 69 years ‐1.95% 1.59% ‐1.41% 1.34% Female: 62 to 64 years ‐2.62% 2.56% ‐1.97% 1.75% 55 to 59 years ‐5.34% 5.37% ‐6.94% 7.18% 45 to 49 years ‐7.54% 7.67% ‐6.99% 7.31% 35 to 39 years ‐6.95% 6.50% ‐6.40% 6.37% 25 to 29 years ‐6.79% 6.74% ‐3.86% 3.85% 21 years ‐1.31% 1.42% ‐1.42% 1.59% 18 and 19 years ‐3.13% 3.12% ‐4.91% 5.61% 10 to 14 years ‐8.26% 8.73% ‐7.39% 7.86% Under 5 years ‐7.41% 8.14% ‐10% ‐8% ‐6% ‐4% ‐2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
F) Ripon, CA Population by Age & Gender(2014 and 2015) 85 years and over ‐2.39% 1.27% ‐2.23% 1.26% 75 to 79 years ‐2.27% 1.58% ‐2.57% 2.11% Male: 67 to 69 years ‐2.03% 1.83% ‐1.36%1.55% Female: 62 to 64 years ‐3.10% 2.33% ‐2.08% 2.23% 55 to 59 years ‐6.10% 6.56% ‐7.31% 8.09% 45 to 49 years ‐7.79% 8.06% ‐7.72% 6.99% 35 to 39 years ‐7.03% 6.39% ‐5.67% 5.21% 25 to 29 years ‐4.83% 4.96% ‐3.03% 3.74% 21 years ‐0.77%0.89% ‐1.27%1.40% 18 and 19 years ‐2.67% 3.27% ‐5.34% 5.74% 10 to 14 years ‐8.48% 9.38% ‐7.57% 8.31% Under 5 years ‐6.37% 6.83% ‐10% ‐8% ‐6% ‐4% ‐2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12%
Page 15 Chapter 2 Demographic Information ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
G) Stockton, CA Population by Age & Gender(2014 and 2015) 85 years and over ‐1.69% 0.91% ‐1.63% 1.10% 75 to 79 years ‐1.92% 1.43% Male: ‐2.35% 2.05% 67 to 69 years ‐1.92% 1.62% Female: ‐1.47% 1.35% 62 to 64 years ‐2.65% 2.46% ‐2.00% 1.85% 55 to 59 years ‐5.72% 5.14% ‐6.00% 5.80% 45 to 49 years ‐6.38% 6.20% ‐6.18% 6.26% 35 to 39 years ‐6.50% 6.36% ‐6.62% 6.62% 25 to 29 years ‐7.16% 7.50% ‐4.44% 4.66% 21 years ‐1.50% 1.63% ‐1.58% 1.66% 18 and 19 years ‐3.22% 3.57% ‐5.04% 5.48% 10 to 14 years ‐7.90% 8.60% ‐8.01% 8.69% Under 5 years ‐8.13% 9.05% ‐10% ‐8% ‐6% ‐4% ‐2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
H) Tracy, CA Population by Age & Gender(2014 and 2015) 85 years and over ‐0.92% 0.42% ‐1.01% 0.67% 75 to 79 years ‐1.38%0.94% Male: ‐1.79%1.41% 67 to 69 years ‐1.41%1.23% Female: ‐1.13%0.98% 62 to 64 years ‐1.96% 2.02% ‐1.61%1.60% 55 to 59 years ‐4.79% 4.60% ‐6.39% 6.76% 45 to 49 years ‐8.30% 8.40% ‐8.38% 8.31% 35 to 39 years ‐8.26% 7.53% ‐7.16% 6.42% 25 to 29 years ‐5.75% 5.81% ‐3.35% 3.45% 21 years ‐1.02%1.38% ‐1.32%1.39% 18 and 19 years ‐2.95% 3.24% ‐5.53% 6.07% 10 to 14 years ‐9.18% 9.83% ‐8.63% 9.33% Under 5 years ‐7.76% 8.21% ‐15% ‐10% ‐5% 0% 5% 10% 15%
Page 16 Chapter 2 Demographic Information ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
Table 5 provides data on individuals with disabilities by gender and age. This information is from the 2009-2013 ACS data includes non-institutionalized persons, age 5 and older, who have a "disability." Individuals were asked if they, or others in the household, had a health condition that has lasted for 6 or more months which makes it difficult to go outside of the home alone. Persons that have such a difficulty as a result of a health condition are said to have a mobility limitation. Increased public transportation would be an asset to those who have a mobility limitation. Table 5 Gender By Age By Disability
San Joaquin County Estimate % over San Joaquin Estimate % over total County total Total: 684,141 Total: 684,141 Male: 337,804 49.38% Female: 346,337 51.07% Under 5 years: 27,566 8.16% Under 5 years: 26,298 7.59% With a disability 119 0.04% With a disability 240 0.07% No Disability 27,447 8.13% No Disability 26,058 7.52% 5 to 17 years: 74,384 22.02% 5 to 17 years: 71,111 20.53% With a disability 4,086 1.21% With a disability 2,260 0.65% No Disability 70,298 20.81% No Disability 68,851 19.88% 18 to 64 years 204,029 60.40% 18 to 64 years 208,006 60.06% With a disability 22,029 6.52% With a disability 22,000 6.35% No Disability 182,000 53.88% No Disability 186,006 53.71% 65+ 31,825 9.42% 65+ 40,922 11.82% With a disability 12,203 3.61% With a disability 17,205 4.97% No Disability 19,622 5.81% No Disability 23,717 6.85% Total Male Population 26,234 7.77% Total Female 24,500 7.07% with Disability* Population with Disability* Total Population with 50,734 7.42% Disability* Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2009-2013 American Community Survey-5 Year *Totals of age 18 to 64.
Page 17 Chapter 2 Demographic Information ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
Table 6 expands on the number of individuals in San Joaquin County between the ages of 18 and 64 by their disability and employment status. The 2009-2013 ACS data identifies that 412,035 residents are between the ages of 18 and 64 and that approximately 44,029 (10 percent) have a disability. Of those with a disability, 27 percent are employed, 9 percent are unemployed, and 59 percent are not in the workforce. Those residents without a disability make up 89 percent of those between the ages of 18 and 64. Of this group 67 percent are employed, 12 percent are unemployed, and 21 percent are not in the workforce.
Table 6 Employment Status By Disability
Total Population 18 to 64 years 412,035 With a Disability 44,029 Employed 12,902 Unemployed 4,242 Not in Labor Force 26,885 No Disability 368,006 Employed 246,445 Unemployed 44,176 Not in Labor Force 77,385 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2009-2013 American Community Survey-5 Year
SJCOG's definition of transit dependent focuses on individuals who, by virtue of their age, income, or disability, are not adequately served by the automobile. Information from the last available version of a summary from Caltrans entitled “Travel and Related Factors in California” was used as a foundation for identifying the incidence of individuals that are transportation-dependent. According to the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), in 2000 there were 331,333 driver licenses issued to San Joaquin County. This number represents approximately 81 percent of the population age 16 years and older. This means that approximately 19 percent of eligible drivers in San Joaquin County did not have a driver's license. In 2010, there were 401,985 licensed drivers, approximately 79 of the population 16 and older. The percentage of eligible drivers that do not have driver’s licenses increased from 19 percent in 2000 to 21 percent in 2010. This differs from the 1990 to 2000 trend in which the number of eligible drivers that did not have a driver’s license decreased from 27 percent to 19 percent. The information is outlined in Tables 7 and 8 and Figures 4 and 5 displays this trend. Overall, this information reflects the slight decrease in licensed drivers. The decrease could be contributed to many factors such as birth and death rate, changes in family income, disabled individuals, migration of residents in or out of the county, or the availability of public transportation. Ultimately, the need for more public transportation continues to be necessary.
Page 18 Chapter 2 Demographic Information ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
Table 7 Licensed Drivers in San Joaquin County
Age 2000 Number of Percent of 2010 Number of Percent of Population1 Drivers Population Population3 Drivers Population Licenses2 Licenses4 0 – 15 155,044 0 0.0% 178,128 0 0.0% 18+ 408,554 331,333 81.1% 507,178 401,985 79.3% All 563,598 331,333 58.8% 685,306 401,985 58.7% Source: 1 2000 U.S. Census of Population for age groups. 2 Community Indicators of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Risk, San Joaquin County 2004, Center for Applied Research Solutions (CARS), Inc. 3 2010 U.S. Census Bureau 4 Drivers License Outstanding by County as of December 31, 2010, California Department of Motor Vehicles
Table 8 Estimate of San Joaquin Residents without a Driver’s License Year 2010
Population of San Joaquin County 685,306 Percent of County Number of drivers licenses1 401,985 58.7% Population under the age of 182* 178,128 25.9% Population remaining w/out 105,193 15.3% drivers licenses Source: 1 Drivers License Outstanding by County as of December 31, 2010, California Department of Motor Vehicles 2 2012 U.S. Census Bureau*Note: Data was only available regarding 18 year olds and under.
Figure 4 Eligibility for Drivers Licenses in San Joaquin County
58.7% Population under the age of 16 15.3% Population with drivers licenses 25.9% Population eligible for drivers licenses
Figure 4 As shown by the above graph, approximately 15% of the population potentially needs public transit services while 59% of San Joaquin’s population has a driver’s license and would potentially use transit if it was available and convenient. This percentage does not include those people who have a license but share a car and sometimes are in need of public transit.
Page 19 Chapter 2 Demographic Information ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
Figure 5 San Joaquin County Population without a Car
Page 20 Chapter 2 Demographic Information ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
Table 9 displays the amount of occupied households in San Joaquin County, the average amount of occupants in each household, and the average number of vehicles per household.
Table 9 Occupied Household / Vehicles in San Joaquin County, Year 2012
Jurisdiction Occupied Percent of Occupied
Households Households
Stockton 90,469 42.3 Lodi 21,894 10.2 Manteca 21,909 10.3 Tracy 23,570 11.0
Escalon 2,612 1.2 Ripon 4,702 2.2 Lathrop 4,280 2.0 Unincorporated 44,196 20.7
1 Total Occupied Households 213,632 Average # of Occupants 3.14 No. of Vehicles in San Joaquin County2 376,218 Average # of Vehicles per Household 1.76 Average # of Drivers per Household 1.93
Source: 1 Occupied Households: U.S. Census Bureau, 2008-2012 American Community Survey-5 Year 2 Estimated Vehicles Registered by County for the Period of January 1 through December 31, 2013 California Department of Motor Vehicles
Page 21 Chapter 2 Demographic Information ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
CHAPTER 3 COMMUNITY OUTREACH & PUBLIC COMMENT
Public5B Hearings SJCOG requests that each member government agency hold at least one public hearing on unmet transit needs in the area under its jurisdiction. The public hearing must be held at a time and a place that is convenient and accessible for the elderly, transit dependent, and physically challenged. The San Joaquin Regional Transit District is responsible for the Stockton Metropolitan Area Intracity, Intercity, Interregional, and Rural Transit services. As such, the District is required to hold unmet transit needs hearings in Stockton and throughout unincorporated San Joaquin County. In addition, SJCOG holds a final unmet transit need public hearing before its SSTAC. There were 17 public hearing held between the SJRTD, local jurisdictions, and SJCOG to solicit public comments on unmet transit needs and a 18th meeting was held to review the Draft Report. Table 10 outlines dates, times and locations of hearings held throughout the region. Proof of publication of hearings and minutes if testimony was provided can be found in Appendix C. Table 10 FY 2014-2015 Community Outreach Schedule
Date of Location of Sponsoring Time of Hearing Hearing Jurisdiction Hearing October 6, 2014 City Council Chambers Lathrop 7:00 p.m. October 7, 2014 Ripon City Council Ripon 7:00 p.m. October 21, 2014 Tracy Transit Station Tracy 10:30 p.m. October 21, 2014 City Council Chambers Tracy 7:00 p.m. October 21, 2014 City Council Chambers Manteca 7:00 p.m. November 3, 2014 Tracy Transit Center RTD 5:30 p.m. November 4, 2014 Downtown Transit Center RTD 5:00 p.m. November 5, 2014 Carnegie Forum Lodi 7:00 p.m. November 5, 2014 Lodi Public Library RTD 5:30 p.m. November 6, 2014 Manteca Transit Center RTD 5:30 p.m. November 6, 2014 Morada Area Assoc. Monthly Meeting RTD 7:00 p.m. November 7, 2014 Downtown Transit Center RTD 10:00 a.m. 10:00 a.m. & November 10, 2014 San Joaquin County Office of Education RTD 2:40 p.m. November 10, 2014 Christian Life Center RTD 3:45 p.m. November 12, 2014 UJ’s Family Restaurant RTD 5:15 p.m. November 17, 2014 City of Escalon Escalon 7:00 p.m. December 3, 2014 SJCOG Stockton 2:30 p.m.
Page 22 Chapter 4 Adequacy of Existing Transit Services ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
Community Outreach Efforts A wide variety of community outreach efforts were employed that went beyond the public hearing process to gain public input. These efforts intended to promote other opportunities for the public to communicate their unmet transit needs (e.g., email, SJCOG website, survey, phone, and letter). Examples of this effort include: Distribution of brochures and flyers to public/private/non-profit agencies throughout San Joaquin County. Use of the City of Lathrop’s utility bill mailing to distribute flyers to its citizenship. An online survey was posted on the SJCOG website.
Refer to Appendix D for examples of community outreach materials that were developed and distributed. Analysis of Comments Received The outreach efforts produced input from 132 individuals totaling 146 comments. Of the 146 comments, 26 did not identify a deficiency within the existing transit system. Of the remaining 120 comments; 93 are considered operational in nature, 13 are addressed by existing transit system, and 14 were considered unmet transit needs. A listing of the comments received during this unmet transit needs cycle are found in Appendix E.
Page 23 Chapter 4 Adequacy of Existing Transit Services ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
CHAPTER 4 ADEQUACY OF EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICES
Overview6B SJCOG is required by the Transportation Development Act to analyze the adequacy of the existing public and specialized transportation services including privately and publicly provided services. All cities and the unincorporated areas in San Joaquin County are served by a public transit system. These systems range in size and complexity from approximately 175 buses operated by RTD to the single van operated by volunteer drivers for the City of Ripon. Transportation services are also available on a more limited basis through national carriers such as Amtrak California and Greyhound Bus. Neither of these services is under the jurisdiction of the SJCOG. They are discussed here only to give the reader a more complete description of available ground-based public transit services in San Joaquin County.
Amtrak26B California Rail/Bus Service Amtrak California is an intercity passenger rail service connecting San Joaquin County to points west and south of the County via rail, and to points across the nation, albeit with Amtrak California bus connections. The "San Joaquin" Amtrak California trains travel north and south in the central San Joaquin Valley, connecting Bakersfield to Oakland with a stop Stockton, which is one of two Amtrak California stops in the County. The route also includes dedicated feeder bus service connecting Stockton to San Jose through Tracy, and connecting Stockton to Sacramento. Service is also available from the Lodi Station north to Sacramento. The current schedule (February 2014) for the Amtrak California San Joaquin includes six daily southbound trains to Bakersfield and two northbound trains to Sacramento. Additionally, four thruway buses to Sacramento are offered.
Altamont27B Corridor Express Rail Service For westbound passengers, the Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) train provides access to the Silicon Valley and the Livermore Valley. Four trains depart from Stockton in the morning westbound: #01, #03, #05, and #07. The four trains return in the evening, #04, #06, #08, and #10, from San Jose to their point of origin in Stockton. ACE stops in Lathrop/Manteca, Tracy, Vasco Road, Livermore, Pleasanton, Fremont, California’s Great America Theme Park, Santa Clara, and terminates at the San Jose Diridon Station. Connections can be made to Caltrain, Capitol Corridor, and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority located at the Diridon Station.
Greyhound28B Bus Service Greyhound Bus services, shown in Table 11, provides service to the cities of Stockton, Lodi, and Tracy. Connections serving the cities of Escalon, Lathrop, and Ripon do not currently exist. As of March 2005, Greyhound eliminated Manteca as a destination along its service routes. Greyhound provides service for San Joaquin residents to destinations throughout California and the rest of the Country.
Page 24 Chapter 4 Adequacy of Existing Transit Services ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
Table 11 Greyhound Intercity Bus Service (February 2014)
Destinations: Number of Trips per day from: Stockton Lodi Tracy
Stockton ---- 3 2
Lodi 2 ---- 1
Tracy 1 1 ----
Description29B of Local Public Transit Services The San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) and the cities within the San Joaquin region have provided local transit services for decades. Overall, the types of public transit services operated by different jurisdictions and the RTD can be described as follows: 1) General public fixed route; 2) General public Dial-A-Ride; 3) Intracity with available route deviation (Metro Hopper); 4) Intercity; 5) Intercity with available route deviation (County Hopper); and, 6) Paratransit (ADA and Senior and Disabled) Dial-A-Ride. For the purpose of this report, paratransit refers to a transit service tailored to meet specialized transit needs in accordance with ADA paratransit requirements detailed in Part 37 of the Americans with Disabilities Act. These specialized needs generally relate to transit accessibility and require vehicles to be lift-equipped or have other access accommodations. Often, paratransit services are referred to as "Senior & Disabled" service. This can be misleading since not all senior or persons with disabilities may qualify or even need the specialized paratransit service since many are capable of using general public transit services. RTD provides a broad range of transit services that benefit all of the cities and the unincorporated areas. Details regarding these services and the connectivity of communities throughout the region will be addressed in this chapter. The public transit service opportunities within San Joaquin County by jurisdiction are as follows: City52B of Escalon The City of Escalon operates eTrans flexible Fixed Route and Dial-A-Ride services from 7:15 AM to 5:14 PM Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. The City contracts their transit services with San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) whom subcontracts the operations and maintenance. eTrans flexible Fixed Route, Route 1, operates between the Main Street Escalon Park-n-Ride Lot and Modesto at Vintage Faire Mall on Dale Road and Veneman Avenue, five times a day each weekday.
eTrans Escalon Dial-A-Ride provides door to door service within the City of Escalon and connects riders to the Stanislaus Regional Transit (StaRT) Eastside Shuttle and Riverbank Dial-A-Ride
Page 25 Chapter 4 Adequacy of Existing Transit Services ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
services at Jacob Myers Park in the City of Riverbank.
eTrans Route 1 connects to Modesto Area Express (MAX), Ripon Blossom Express, Stanislaus Regional Transit (StaRT) bus routes and Modesto Area Dial-A-Ride in Modesto at McHenry Avenue and Standiford Avenue and/or Dale Road and Veneman Avenue.
eTrans offers cash fare, daily, 10-ride passes, and monthly passes. The Dial-A-Ride fare is $1.50 for the general public and $0.75 for seniors and passengers with disabilities. Route 1 fare to Modesto is $3.00 and an additional $1.00 for route deviations. Route 1 fare for seniors and passengers with disabilities is $1.50. City53B of Lodi The City of Lodi offers GrapeLine Fixed Route and Dial-A-Ride service, as well as VineLine ADA paratransit service for certified passengers. The service provides coverage within Lodi city limits, Woodbridge, and specific destinations in Acampo. GrapeLine Fixed Route service has five weekday routes, four weekend routes and three express routes.
Weekly Fixed Route service operates Monday to Friday from 6:30AM to 7:19PM; Express routes operate weekdays from 6:10 AM to 7:46 AM and from 2:18 to 3:26 PM. Weekend hours are Saturday from 7:30 AM to 9:22 PM and Sunday from 8:30 AM to 4:22 PM. VineLine ADA paratransit and Dial-A-Ride service operates Monday to Friday from 6:10 AM to 7:30 PM; Saturday from 7:30 AM to 9:30 PM; and Sunday from 8:30 AM to 4:30 PM.
Lodi GrapeLine offers a cash fare, 10-ride passes, and monthly passes. The Fixed Route fare is $1.25 for the general public and $0.60 for seniors and passengers with disabilities. Dial-A-Ride fares are $7.00 for the general public and $2.00 for seniors and passengers with disabilities. These fares apply to travel within the City limits. For fares within the service area but outside the City limits (such as Woodbridge and particular destinations in Acampo) there is a surcharge of $1.50.5
City of Manteca Manteca Transit began intra-city operations on November 1, 2006. The current fleet consists of seven cutaway buses. The service includes three fixed-routes and Dial-A-Ride. The service operates Monday-Friday between the hours of 6:00 AM and 7:00 PM. General Public Dial-A-Ride operates on Saturday between the hours of 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM. All Manteca Transit vehicles are wheelchair accessible and bicycle racks are available on all buses.
Manteca Transit offers cash fare and monthly and ten-ride passes. The Fixed route fare is $1.00 for the general public, $0.75 for youth, and $0.50 for seniors and passengers with disabilities. Dial-A-Ride fares are $2.00 each way. Monthly passes are sold on the buses and at the City’s Parks & Recreation Department, cost for the passes are as follows: $35 for general public, $28 for youth, $28 for senior and passengers with disabilities and $60.00 for Dial-a-Ride. Also available on all buses and at the City’s Parks & Recreation Department are the 10-ride passes, $9.00 for general public, $7.00 for youth, $4.00 for seniors and passengers with disabilities, $20.00 for Dial-a-Ride.
City of Lathrop The City of Lathrop does not operate a transit service; however, SJRTD provides Lathrop residents
Page 26 Chapter 4 Adequacy of Existing Transit Services ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
with connections to the Cities of Stockton, Lodi, Manteca, Tracy via Intercity Route 797 and County Hopper Route 90 and 97. City56B of Ripon In March 2013, the City of Ripon began offering new expanded transit opportunities through the Blossom Express bus service. This is a Deviated fixed Route Service which currently operates between 9:25 AM and 2:43 PM on Tuesdays and Thursdays. All the routes include service to the Ripon Save Mart Shopping Center, Ripon Library, Post Office, Senior Center, as well as many other locations in the City. Additionally, the Modesto route includes service to Vintage Faire Mall, Kaiser Hospital and Clinic and Target Shopping Center. The bus is also equipped with two bicycle racks on the front of the bus for passenger use.
Ripon Transit is equipped with a passenger ramp for mobility devices and meets ADA requirements. We can accommodate up to two mobility devices per trip. Please check with the City for size and weight limits of mobility devices. Deviations can be made within ¾ mile of a regular bus stop. Deviation reservations must be made at least one day in advance during regular business hours: Monday-Thursday: 8:00am-5:00pm. Information and Reservation Line: (209) 253-5357. Bus driver is limited to two (2) deviations per trip. Deviations are an additional charge: General Public: Standard Fare PLUS $2.00 each way; Qualified half-fare Riders: Half Fare PLUS $1.00 each way (Discount does not apply to students).
Ripon Transit offers cash fare, tickets, and discounted booklets of one-way passes and full-day passes. The fixed route fare is $2.00 for the general public and students, qualified half-fare of $1.00 for seniors and passengers with disabilities, Medicare Card and $0.00 for children under 4 years of age and Personal Care Assistants (PCA). Occasional specials are offered at various times during the year. For example, Summer Travel Special is offered during the months of July and August at a reduced rate.
City57B of Tracy The City of Tracy offers a combination local fixed bus route and Paratransit/Dial-A-Ride service called TRACER. The current fleet consists of 13 buses and 2 minivans providing service to four fixed-routes, two commuter routes, and TRACER Paratransit bus service in the City. Routes A, B, C and D run Monday through Friday, from 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM, and Saturdays, 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM. Routes A and B also run additional peak period service every 30 minutes between 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM Monday through Friday. Route D offers three peak route services to accommodate ACE passengers and students. Commuter routes E makes two round trips in the morning and two in the late afternoon Monday through Friday. Commuter F route makes one round trip in the morning and two in the late afternoon Monday through Friday. Most stops are located near residential areas, major retail businesses, hospitals, and public school locations.
Tracer Transit offers cash fare, Day pass, 10-ride, and Weekly passes. The passenger fares are $1.25 for adults, $1.00 for students, $0.50 cents for seniors and disabled persons, and free for ADA attendants and children under 6
The City of Tracy also offers a paratransit service and is available to persons with disabilities/ADA Certified, who, because of their disability or health-related condition, cannot independently board, ride and/or disembark from an accessible fixed route transit bus or cannot get to or from a boarding or disembarking location, and seniors (65+). Certification by the City of Tracy is required to become a paratransit customer in accordance with the ADA. Seniors can secure certification and
Page 27 Chapter 4 Adequacy of Existing Transit Services ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
qualify for the service by simply filling out an application. The TRACER Paratransit subsidized taxi program is a complementary service to the TRACER Paratransit bus service. It operates during the hours that the TRACER Paratransit bus service is not in operation. Customers must also be certified to use this service. Those who wish to use the subsidized taxi program must purchase a book of taxi coupons. TRACER Paratransit/Dial-a-Ride fares are $1.50 for seniors (65+)/disabled/ADA riders or Medicare card holders. City of Stockton For years, the San Joaquin Regional Transit District, or RTD, (formally known as SMART and SJRTD) has provided a variety of services to Stockton residents. The services included a fixed route and Dial-A-Ride within the Stockton area, and an interregional commuter service to destinations in the Silicon Valley and north to Sacramento. On October 26, 1993, the Stockton Metropolitan Transit District received authorization from the SJCOG Board of Directors to become a countywide service provider. On December 7, 1993, the County Board of Supervisors approved annexation to the Transit District. RTD Board of Directors authorized the expansion of the district to serve countywide on January 4, 1994, which involves a service delivery area of 1,448 square miles. While the Stockton Metropolitan Area (SMA) represents a high transit need potential, it also benefits from the highest level of transit service in San Joaquin County. Within San Joaquin County, RTD offers thirty-seven (37) routes that serve the SMA (including BRT), eight (8) Stockton Area deviated fixed routes, one (1) intercity fixed route, six (6) countywide deviated fixed routes, eleven (11) interregional commuter fixed routes, and Stockton Metro and countywide rural Dial- A-Ride (DAR) service for persons that meet the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) eligibility criteria. Downtown Stockton is the hub for many RTD routes, including the intercity buses. Construction on the RTD Downtown Stockton Transit Center was completed in December 2006. The transit center includes an off-street bus facility located on Weber Avenue between Sutter, Channel, and California Streets. The primary purpose of the center is to provide bus passengers with better access to downtown and the ability to make timed transfers to connecting bus routes serving other areas. On March 19, 2006, RTD began the Phase I operation of its Downtown Transit Center, the passenger boarding area. The majority of on-street bus stops at the corner of Channel and Sutter moved off the street and into the Downtown Transit Center’s Passenger Boarding Platforms. With the completion of Phase II of the Downtown Transit Center (which includes the building and one more bus lane) the few remaining on-street stops at the “Pulse” have moved to the Downtown Transit Center. The completion of RTD’s Downtown Transit Center also lays the groundwork for the new Metro Express Service, a form of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). Metro Express Route 40, BRT Phase 1, runs along the Pacific Avenue corridor connecting to the Downtown Transit Center (DTC) in the Stockton Metropolitan Area. Metro Express service operates on weekdays from approximately 5:37 AM to 9:55 PM with 10 minutes between buses for the majority of the day and on weekends from approximately 8:00 AM to 7:00 PM with 20 minutes between buses for the majority of the day. In January 2011, Metro Express 44 (BRT Phase 2) began operating along Airport Way corridor from the DTC to the Stockton Metropolitan Airport. Since August 2013, it operates as far as Ralph Avenue, serving “B” and 8th Streets. The Metro Express 44 extends the high frequency service of Metro Express 40 to south Stockton residents and businesses. Metro Express
Page 28 Chapter 4 Adequacy of Existing Transit Services ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
44 service operates on weekdays from approximately 6:00 AM to 7:45PM with 20 minutes between buses during peak hours and 30 minutes for the remainder of the day. Saturday and Sunday service operates from approximately 8:00 AM to 6:57PM with buses running every 30 minutes. In July 2012, RTD expanded its Metro Express service providing trips on Hammer Lane. Metro Express Hammer Lane (Route 43) is RTD’s third BRT route and operates along the corridor previously served by Routes 73 and 743. Express 43 service operates weekdays from approximately 5:25 AM to 7:43 PM with 15 minute intervals between peak hours and every 30 minutes for the remainder of the day. Saturday and Sunday service operates from approximately 8:12 AM to 6:51PM. Effective January 2013, riders can board and transfer at the Hammer Triangle Station. RTD offers cash fare, daily, and 31-day passes. The passenger fare for the SMA fixed route is: $1.50 for adults; seniors (65+)/disabled are $0.75 cents; and children under four (4) years of age ride free. A 31-day passes is $65.00 and the 31-day student pass is $40.00. For the SMA DAR service, the passenger fare is a $3.00 per ride. Cost for deviations is $1.00. The service hours are approximately 5:37AM to 9:55PM on weekdays. Currently, there are eleven (11) Park-&-Ride lots, three of them leased by RTD, throughout San Joaquin County to complement RTD’s interregional service. The area also benefits from service available through two major private taxi companies. Intracity Metro Hopper Service (RTD) The Metro Hopper is a deviated fixed route bus service serving popular destinations throughout the Stockton city limits. The Metro Hopper has eight (8) routes, and operates Monday through Friday, from approximately 8:00AM to 6:00PM, and buses run hourly. Each bus can deviate from its normal route a distance of up to one (1) mile in order to accommodate ADA certified passengers. Within these one-mile deviation windows, the service covers approximately 75% of the Stockton Metro Area for ADA-certified customers. Fares for the Metro Hopper service are the same as described above. Intercity60B and Interregional Transit Services (RTD) The intercity service provided by RTD is a comprehensive network of routes throughout the region that interconnects the Cities of Lathrop, Lodi, Manteca, Ripon, Stockton, and Tracy. Route 23 connects with Lodi GrapeLine and SCT/LINK buses at the Lodi Station in Downtown Lodi. All buses are wheelchair accessible. The commuter public transit services offers travel outside of the region north to Sacramento, and west to different locations in the greater Bay Area. There are four (4) other interregional services outside of those provided by RTD providing mobility to the residents of the San Joaquin region. These services include: Amtrak California, Greyhound, , Blossom Express and ACE.
County31B Hopper Service (RTD) In addition to the primary intercity network, RTD offers the County Hopper Service. RTD Hopper is a deviated fixed route bus service connecting Tracy and Lathrop to Stockton via routes 90 and 97; Ripon and Manteca to Stockton via Route 91, and Lodi to Stockton via route 93. The Hopper replaces RTD Countywide General Public Dial- A-Ride (DAR) during Hopper service hours, in the areas covered by the Hopper service.
Page 29 Chapter 4 Adequacy of Existing Transit Services ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
Most RTD Hopper Routes will deviate up to ¾’s of a mile for ADA certified passengers not able to reach the fixed route stops. Hoppers will deviate up to three times per trip, not to exceed two deviations per person. The County Hopper service offers four (4) weekday routes and two (2) weekend routes and follows the same fare structure as the above-described SMA Metro Hopper service. Deviations, up to ¾’s of a mile are an additional $1.00 per deviation. Countywide Rural General Public Dial-A-Ride still serves the area where the County Hopper is unavailable.
Interregional32B Transit (RTD) This service consists of eleven long-distance commuter coaches that take patrons from locations principally along the Interstate 5/205 and State Route 99 corridors to major employment sites in the Bay Area and Sacramento regions. At the end of the business day, the trips are reversed. RTD staff originally developed the interregional routes through outreach efforts to major employers and Employee Transportation Coordinators (ETCs) in the planning of this service. The ETCs surveyed their employees to see how many came from San Joaquin County. When enough employees from San Joaquin County expressed interest in taking a commuter coach from "here to there," RTD designed an interregional route to fit work schedules. Currently, RTD's interregional coaches travel to the following destinations (note that some buses stop at multiple destinations such as BART and Mountain View): - Lockheed (3 buses) / Northrop-Grumman in Sunnyvale (1 bus) - Tracy Depot (3 buses) - BART's Dublin Pleasanton Station (1 bus, 8 trips) - Downtown Sacramento (2 buses) - Livermore (1 bus) Unlike the Intercity buses, the Interregional services are not route deviation services. Commuter services are exempt from the ADA provisions calling for complementary service, however, all RTD’s Commuter buses are equipped with wheelchair lifts. The buses pick up patrons at a number of park- and-ride lots that SJRTD is leasing by use of Measure K funds.
Other7B Interregional Services SCT/Link, operated by the Sacramento County Department of Transportation, connects the cities of Lodi, Galt, Elk Grove, and Sacramento. The SCT/Link connects the Lodi GrapeLine bus service, RTD bus service, Rio Vista Delta Breeze, e-Tran in Elk Grove, and Sacramento Regional Transit. Buses run every hour on the hour on Monday through Friday from 6:25 AM to 5:20 PM. Lodi has transfer agreements with SCT/Link for trips to Sacramento, Elk Grove, and Galt on the fourth Wednesday of each month. Escalon eTrans has transfer agreements with Modesto Area Express, Stanislaus Regional Transit (now merged with Riverbank-Oakdale Transit Authority), and Modesto Dial-A-ride for travel into Stanislaus County.
Other3B Transit Related Services Through SJCOG, a transit referral support service called Commute Connection is available. The public can obtain free informational services including: a match list of commuters, carpools, vanpools, telecommuting services, bike, walk, public transit, park and ride information, posters, brochures, and preferential parking program. This service is dedicated to helping commuters, employers and local governments find and use alternatives to driving alone.
Page 30 Chapter 4 Adequacy of Existing Transit Services ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
Other specialized transit services are provided by various social service agencies such as El Concilio, United Cerebral Palsy of San Joaquin/Calaveras/Amador Counties, ARC San Joaquin, Valley CAPS, and Community Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired. These agencies offer services for work programs and daily life activities.
Adequacy8B of Existing Public Transit Systems The adequacy of existing transit services involved is determined by reviewing information received from the following sources: Comments received during the Unmet Transit Needs community outreach process. Public comment and discussions during the Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee (SSTAC) and Interagency Transit Committee (ITC) meetings. Public input received by SJCOG’s Commute Connection Department. Newspaper articles. The public mass transit operations serving the San Joaquin region provided over 5.0 million unlinked passenger trips during fiscal year 2013-2014. All transit operators dedicate financial resources to maintain and improve passenger amenities. The more bus stops that have protective shelters from the weather and seating provide more comfort for the ridership. Over the past few years, many changes have been made to the mass public transportation system throughout the region as a result of declining state and local funding sources that support transit operations, such as: the State Transit Assistance fund, decreased Local Transportation Fund, and decreased Measure K. RTD, the Escalon eTrans, Lodi GrapeLine, and Tracy TRACER all experienced either route terminations, reductions in service hours, and/or fare increases as a result of the decline in transit funding. Public comment and other forms of information are crucial in determining the adequacy of existing transit services. Comments received through the public outreach process can be categorized into one of the following three categories: Educational related – identifies the need for continued education on the existing transit services available. Operational related – identifies potential shortcomings in the existing system. Potential unmet needs – identifies geographic areas that are either not served or underserved by the existing transit system. The public outreach process provides San Joaquin County transit operators with valuable information that can be used to validate as well as improve services. The constructive input received from the community is relayed to the public transit providers in an effort to alert them of the concern and allow the opportunity to improve overall service satisfaction. Based on this analysis, the adequacy of the existing transit systems is healthy and providing needed transportation to San Joaquin County residents. Unresolved and chronic operational issues associated with the transit system can be viewed as a deficiency that supports an unmet transit need. However, the current definition of an unmet transit need does not support this notion. Outside of the definition of an Unmet Transit Need, the public’s expressed satisfaction with the services assists in determining the adequacy of the overall transit system. This type of information is typically derived from the information sources previously mentioned and is associated with the efficiency and quality of the delivery of transit services. However, it is possible that respondents
Page 31 Chapter 4 Adequacy of Existing Transit Services ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
may not be aware of other variables affecting a particular service and the availability of other transit service options.
Page 32 Chapter 4 Adequacy of Existing Transit Services ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
CHAPTER 5 EVALUATION BY LOCAL JURISDICTION
As compared to the input used to determine the adequacy of existing services, only the input that meets the definition of an Unmet Transit Need is used in the evaluation section. This includes the evaluation of potential unmet transit needs gleamed from the following sources: Consultation with the SSTAC. Demographics of those that would most likely depend on public transit. Information used to make a determination of the adequacy of the existing public and specialized transportation services. Analysis of potential alternative public and specialized transportation service improvements. Specific comments received through the public input process. For purposes of evaluation, potential unmet transit needs are correlated to the transit system serving that jurisdiction. For each jurisdiction, the analysis is broken into three (3) parts. 1) Current Input - This includes comments at public hearings, reports, and other information received regarding the adequacy of transit services specific to each local jurisdiction.
2) Discussion - Drawing upon information found in the first three sections, the Discussion Section assesses validity of the unmet transit needs. In addition, the number of times the issue was echoed by other unduplicated testimony is documented.
3) Conclusions/Recommendations - The "Conclusions and Recommendations" state whether or not local unmet transit needs exist, and if they do, whether or not they are reasonable to meet. Currently, there are two (2) tests that need to be applied before the SJCOG Board of Directors can determine that an Unmet Transit Need is considered reasonable to meet. First, the Board has to make a finding that there is indeed an unmet transit need, regardless of what means are necessary to meet it. Second, once the need is identified, a quantifiable assessment of reason- ableness must be performed. The assessment involves determining whether the additional transit service will be in general compliance with the following criteria: Within the Transportation Development Act (TDA), an unmet transit need cannot be found unreasonable solely based upon economic feasibility. Based upon the definition, unmet transit needs must meet the criteria established in the definition. The criteria are as follows: 1) Community Acceptance - There should be a demonstrated interest of citizens in the new or additional transit service (i.e. multiple comments, petitions, etc.)
2) Equity - The proposed new or additional service will benefit the general public, residents who use or would use public transportation regularly, the elderly population, and persons with disabilities.
3) Potential Ridership - The proposed transit service will maintain new service ridership performance measures, as defined by the Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee (SSTAC).
Page 33 Chapter 5 Evaluation by Local Jurisdiction ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
4) Cost Effectiveness - The proposed new or additional transit service will not affect the ability of the overall system to meet the applicable Transit Systems Performance Objectives or state farebox ratio requirement after exemption period, if the service is eligible for the exemption. The Transit Systems Performance Objectives are defined as 1) operating cost per revenue hour, 2) passengers per revenue hour, and 3) subsidy per passenger. If the exemption is not used, the service must meet minimum applicable Transit Systems Performance Objectives or farebox ratio return requirements as stated in the TDA statutes. Cost effectiveness is not applicable to transit services operating within an exemption period.
5) Operational Feasibility - The system can be implemented safely and in accordance with local, state, and federal laws and regulations.
6) Funding - The imposed service would not cause the claimant to incur expenses in excess of the maximum allocation of TDA funds. If the unmet need is indeed found reasonable to meet, then the TDA Local Transportation Funds for that jurisdiction would need to be set aside to address the need.
Evaluation9B by Local Jurisdiction
Current34B Input – City of Escalon The City of Escalon allowed for public testimony at the November 17th, 2014 City Council meeting. No public input regarding specific local unmet transit needs was not provided at the meeting. Conclusion/Recommendations
There are no unmet transit needs identified for the City of Escalon during this cycle.
Current35B Input – City of Lathrop The City of Lathrop allowed for public testimony at the October 6th, 2014 City Council meeting. One comment was noted below in regards to unmet transit needs. Discussion Times supported By the public
1) Need for connection between Lathrop and Manteca 1
Comment # 1 –This comment is operational in nature and does not represent Unmet Needs. Comment has been forwarded to the SJRTD for further evaluation.
Conclusion/Recommendations62B
There are no unmet transit needs identified for the City of Lathrop during this cycle.
Current36B Input – City of Lodi The City of Lodi allowed for public testimony at the November 5th, 2014 City Council meeting. No
Page 34 Chapter 5 Evaluation by Local Jurisdiction ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
public input regarding specific local unmet transit needs was provided at the meeting.
Conclusion/Recommendations63B
There are no unmet needs identified for the City of Lodi during this cycle.
Current37B Input – City of Manteca The City of Manteca allowed for public testimony at the October 21st, 2014 Council meeting. No public input regarding specific local unmet transit needs was provided at the meeting. However, additional comments were received via email, telephone call, and survey. The comments are identified below. Discussion Times supported By the public
1) Manteca does not have enough stops 1
2) Why doesn’t Manteca DAR take you to Stockton? 1
3) Route 2 needs to service Railey’s 1
4) More Bus Frequency 1
5) A stop is needed at the Manteca Post Office 1
6) Add phone numbers on buses 1
7) Translate advertising to Spanish in Manteca 1
8) Shuttle between Manteca and Lathrop 1
Comment #1 – Not specific enough to represent an Unmet Transit Need Comment #2 – The City of Manteca DAR is restricted to service only in the City of Manteca Comment #3 – Railey’s is currently being serviced Comment #4, 6, & 7 – These comments are operational in nature and do not represent Unmet Needs. Comment #5 – Represents an Unmet Transit Need. Comment #8 – Represents an Unmet Transit Need Conclusion/Recommendations There are two Unmet Transit Needs in the City of Manteca. One is the need for a stop at the Manteca Post Office and the other is a shuttle between Manteca and Lathrop. However, these unmet needs “are not reasonable to meet” during this cycle because current ridership and demand levels, as well as potential cost-effectiveness criteria. The City of Manteca will further evaluate the demand for establishing service to the southeast area of the city in the next Short Range Transit Plan update
Page 35 Chapter 5 Evaluation by Local Jurisdiction ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
(2015).
Current38B Input – City of Ripon The City of Ripon allowed for public testimony at the October 7th, 2014 Council meeting. No public input regarding specific local unmet transit needs was provided at the meeting. Conclusion/Recommendations65B
There are no unmet transit needs identified for the City of Ripon during this cycle.
Current39B Input – City of Tracy The City of Tracy sponsored two public hearings. One was located at the Tracy Transit Station at 10:30 AM on October 21, 2014 and the second was held at the Tracy City Hall on October 21, 2014 at 7:00 PM. Discussion Times supported By the public
1) Route F in Tracy Needs more frequency 1
2) I cannot walk to the nearest bus stop 1
3) Tracy to Modesto/Manteca 1
Comment # 1 –This comment is operational in nature and does not represent Unmet Needs. Comment has been forwarded to the City of Tracy for further evaluation. Comment #2 –This comment is not specific enough to represent an Unmet Transit Need or a deficiency in the existing transit system. Comment #3 – This is considered an Unmet Need.
Conclusion/Recommendations6B
There is an unmet need for offering transit service from Tracy to Modesto/Manteca. However, the unmet need “is not reasonable to meet” during this cycle because current ridership and demand levels, as well as potential cost-effectiveness criteria, are insufficient to warrant additional service hours. The City of Tracy will further evaluate the demand for establishing service to the southeast area of the city in the next Short Range Transit Plan update (2015).
Current40B Input – City of Stockton
San67B Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD): The San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) is responsible for providing transit services for the Stockton Urbanized Area. The examination of unmet transit needs is correlated with the specific RTD service.
Page 36 Chapter 5 Evaluation by Local Jurisdiction ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
The RTD sponsored four (9) public hearings in the City of Stockton at the following locations: Tracy Transit Center November 3rd, 2014 Downtown Transit Center, Stockton November 4th, 2014 Lodi Public Library November 5th, 2014 Manteca Transit Center November 6th, 2014 Morada Area Assoc. Monthly Meeting November 6th, 2014 Downtown Transit Center, Stockton November 7th, 2014 San Joaquin County Office of Education November 10th, 2014 Christian Life Center, November 10th, 2014 UJ’s Family Restaurant, November 12th, 2014
Unmet transit needs comments relating specifically to the Stockton Metropolitan Area fixed route and ADA Dial-A-Ride services on the following pages. Evaluative outcomes associated with countywide, intercity, and interregional transit services are discussed in Chapter 6. SJCOG held an Unmet Transit Needs public hearing at the December 3rd, 2013 SSTAC meeting.
Fixed10B Route Services: Stockton Metropolitan Area Fixed Route Comments received for the SMA Fixed Route services through public comment, surveys, emails, and letters from SMA residents are provided below. Discussion Times supported By the public
1) Stereos and rude music from phones 3
2) More frequency on buses 26
3) More weekend runs 13
4) Better Connectivity 16
5) More Evening Services 5
6) Better Ramps on buses 3
7) Needs for disabled are not being met 2 8) Littering at Triangle Station 1 Comments #1 -- #8 – These comments are not Unmet Transit Needs. Comments have been forwarded to RTD for further evaluation.
Conclusion/Recommendations
There is an unmet need for greater SMA weekend coverage and evening service hours. However, the unmet need “is not reasonable to meet” during this cycle because the City of Stockton already dedicates 100% of the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) General Apportionment to RTD for SMA services. RTD Stockton Metropolitan Area (SMA) weekend and evening service was restructured in October 2011 as
Page 37 Chapter 5 Evaluation by Local Jurisdiction ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
a result of declining revenue streams. Current RTD weekend service consists of ten routes which includes two intercity routes. RTD will continue to examine the feasibility of adding greater weekend and evening service hours.
Additional comments addressed less frequency on existing routes, and existing routes no longer serving as many destinations as previously provided. These comments are considered Unmet Needs. However, these unmet needs are “not reasonable to meet” during this cycle because the City of Stockton already dedicates 100% of the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) General Apportionment to RTD for SMA services.
Stockton1B Metropolitan Area Dial-A-Ride (DAR)
The San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) is responsible for providing Dial-a-Ride services for the Stockton Metropolitan Area. The examination of unmet transit needs is correlated with the specific RTD service. As stated earlier, RTD held sponsored six (6) public hearings in the City of Stockton.
Discussion Times supported By the public
1) Operator issues 4
2) Problems with dispatch 13
3) Only provides one day service 1
4) Bus drivers should know CPR 1 Comments #1 -- #4 – These comments are not Unmet Transit Needs. Comments have been forwarded to RTD for further evaluation.
Conclusion/Recommendations68B There are no unmet transit needs identified for the Stockton Metropolitan Area Dial-A-Ride during this cycle.
Page 38 Chapter 5 Evaluation by Local Jurisdiction ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
CHAPTER 6 EVALUATION OF INTERCITY, REGIONAL, & INTERREGIONAL TRANSIT In addition to providing transit service to the Stockton urbanized area, the San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) is responsible for providing intercity, regional, and interregional transportation. Similar to Chapter 5, Chapter 6 evaluates potential unmet transit needs pursuant to the definition and qualifying criteria contained in Chapter 5. The evaluation relies heavily on the specific comments received through public input at the following three (5) RTD sponsored public hearings: Tracy Transit Center November 3rd, 2014 Downtown Transit Center, Stockton November 4th, 2014 Manteca Transit Center November 6th, 2014 Lodi Public Library November 5th, 2014 Downtown Transit Center, Stockton November 7th, 2014 The comments received through the public hearings and other avenues of communication (e.g., email, phone calls, and surveys) were assessed in combination with the following: SSTAC members. Demographics of those that would most likely depend on public transit. Information used to make a determination of the adequacy of the existing public and specialized transportation services. Analysis of potential alternative public and specialized transportation service improvements. Specific comments received through the public input process. Comments received for Intercity, regional, and interregional transportation are provided in the respective sections below.
Intercity12B
Discussion Times supported By the public 1) Ripon to Stockton 1 2) Tracy Walmart and Target need more frequency on weekends 1 3) Hopper pick up time window is too small 1 4) Hoppers should be parked in numeric order by the mall and DTC 1 5) Earlier hours 1 6) Lathrop to Escalon 2 7) Tracy to Manteca 2 8) Lathrop to Manteca 19 9) Tracy to Stockton 1 10) Manteca to Modesto 1 11) Stockton to Modesto 1
Comment #1 – Route 91 services Ripon to Stockton Comments #2 - #5 – These comments are operational in nature and do not represent Unmet Needs. Comment has been forwarded to SJRTD for further evaluation. Comment #6 - #11 – Are unmet transit needs
Page 39 Chapter 6 Evaluation of Intercity, Regional, and Interregional Transit ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
Conclusion/Recommendations
There are unmet transit needs in regards to connectivity between Lathrop, Escalon, Tracy, Manteca, and Modesto. However, these unmet needs “are not reasonable to meet” during this cycle because current ridership and demand levels, as well as potential cost-effectiveness criteria, are insufficient to warrant additional service hours RTD will continue to examine the feasibility of adding greater weekend and evening service hours.
Non-Taxi Paratransit Services (Regional)
Current42B Input
No public comment was received in regard to Non-Taxi Paratransit Services (Regional).
Conclusion/Recommendations70B
There are no unmet transit needs identified for Non-Taxi Paratransit Services during this cycle.
County-Wide General Public Dial-A-Ride (GP/DAR) One comment was submitted via mail.
1) Elderly and disabled children needs are not being met in Lathrop 1
2) DAR not available in Lathrop 6 Comment #1 – These comments are operational in nature and do not represent Unmet Needs. Comment has been forwarded to SJRTD for further evaluation. Comment #2– This comment is operational in nature and does not represent an Unmet Need. Comment has been forwarded to RTD for further review.
Conclusion/Recommendations The Hopper replaces RTD Countywide General Public Dial-A-Ride (DAR), Rural Elderly & Disabled DAR, and County Area Transit (CAT) Fixed Route services during Hopper service hours, in the areas covered by the Hopper service.
Interregional15B Transit
Discussion Times supported By the public 1) Stockton to Sacramento 1 2) Request for RTD Bart Commuter to add Frequency (11am, 2pm, 3pm,5pm) 11
Page 40 Chapter 6 Evaluation of Intercity, Regional, and Interregional Transit ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION OF UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014
3) Stockton to Modesto 11am 1 4) Stockton to San Leandro 6am 1
Comment #1– Greyhound currently offers this service Comment #2 - #3 – This comment is operational in nature and does not represent an Unmet Need. Comment has been forwarded to RTD for further review. Comment #4 – Is an Unmet Transit Need Conclusion/Recommendations73B There is currently an Unmet Transit Need for transportation from Stockton to San Leandro. However, this unmet needs “is not reasonable to meet” during this cycle because current ridership and demand levels, as well as potential cost-effectiveness criteria, are insufficient to warrant additional service hours RTD will continue to examine the feasibility of adding greater weekend and evening service hours.
Other16B Transit Services No public comment was received in regard to Other Transit Services. Conclusion/Recommendations73B There are no unmet transit needs identified for Other Transit Services during this cycle.
Page 41 Chapter 6 Evaluation of Intercity, Regional, and Interregional Transit
APPENDIX A
This page will be updated after Board Decision in April 2015.
APPENDIX B
10/2006 SJCOG Board
STAFF REPORT
SUBJECT: Unmet Transit Needs Review Committee
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Approve “Unmet Transit Need” and “Reasonable to Meet” Definitions for Use in 2007-2008 Unmet Transit Needs Process, and Implement Summer Transit Planning Forum
DISCUSSION:
At the May 25, 2006 SJCOG Board meeting, the Board authorized SJCOG staff to create an ad hoc review committee to review the definitions and process for the annual Unmet Transit Needs effort. This action was prompted by the fact that although a significant amount of public comment was received during the 06/07 UTN process, there was found to be no unmet transit need that was reasonable to meet. The review committee was formed to determine whether improvements to the process or definitions were warranted.
The Unmet Transit Needs Process is a requirement of the Transportation Development Act (TDA). TDA section 99238.5 requires the regional transportation planning agency (SJCOG) to conduct an annual assessment of transit needs within its jurisdiction. The annual assessment must include provisions for one public hearing in the jurisdiction represented by the Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee (SSTAC). Prior to any allocation not directly to public transportation services, specialized transportation services, or facilities provided for the exclusive use of pedestrians and bicycles (i.e. TDA allocations made for streets and roads purposes) , SJCOG must identify the unmet transit needs of the jurisdiction and those needs that are reasonable to meet. The adopted definition of “unmet transit need” and “reasonable to meet” must be documented by resolution or in the minutes of the agency.
The Unmet Transit Needs Review Committee began meeting in August 2006 to revisit the definitions of “Unmet Transit Need” and “Reasonable to Meet.” During the review committee meetings, the committee found a need to broaden the definition of “Unmet Transit Need” and provide a more precise definition of “Reasonable to Meet” in order to focus the UTN process more specifically on Transportation Development Act (TDA) requirements. The Social Services Transportation Advisory Council (SSTAC) agreed to the revised definitions at their September 20, 2006 meeting. See Attachment A for a comparison table and brief explanation of the changes which are recommended for adoption by the board. In addition to revising the definitions, the review committee recommended changes to the annual SJCOG UTN process, and recommended the addition of summer public forums to solicit additional citizen comment.
The annual UTN effort will reflect SSTAC’s direction to continue formally soliciting public comments countywide, with the exception of the Stockton Urbanized Area. This decision was made with the recognition that the Transportation Development Act does not require a formal Unmet Transit Needs process in areas that are already using 100% of their TDA funding. In fact, many areas around the State already have a similar process in place. This does not preclude the public from submitting comments from the Stockton Urbanized Area (UZA), thus, comments received from the Stockton UZA will be directed to the San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) to be addressed either as part of the summer forums discussed below or incorporated into their existing system development process.
Recognizing the importance of maintaining a formal process for the public to comment on transit service provision, the SSTAC is also recommending the establishment of summer public forums (a formal name for these forums is still being discussed). These forums are separate from the TDA-required UTN process, but are intended to allow the public an additional opportunity to comment on public transit needs in the County. Unlike the unmet transit needs process, the summer forums will allow citizens to comment on more than just the needs of current transit services. Citizens would have the ability to comment on things such as redundancies in service, future transit needs, and current gaps in service. The summer public forums would also allow public transit operators to work collaboratively to plan for future transit needs as well as improving the efficiency and responsiveness of the existing system. For 2007, RTD, in coordination with the SSTAC and other transit service providers in the County, will initiate the summer forums in the June/July time frame. All comments received will be consolidated and submitted to the SSTAC in August. The SSTAC (or subcommittee thereof) will then review the comments and return the reviewed list to the applicable transit agency with recommendations in September. The comments will be addressed by each transit agency as part of their current system development process. The public transportation operator’s triennial performance audit and short-range transit plan are specific examples of how the public comments would be used. Since 2007 will represent the first year of this new outreach effort, the SSTAC will conduct a review of the Forums to identify areas of improvements for 2008.
In summary staff recommends: (1) revising the definition of Unmet Transit Needs; (2) revising the definition of reasonable to meet; (3) modifying the annual Unmet Transit Needs process to no longer include the Stockton Urbanized Area; and (4) institute Summer Transit Forums starting in 2007.
Prepared by: Tanisha Taylor, Regional Planner and Douglas Ito, Senior Regional Planner M:\STAFFRPT\2006\OCTOBER\BOARD\UTN _Review Committee Results_TT.doc
Attachment A
UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS Prior Definition Revised Definition UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS are defined as UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS are defined as transportation services not currently provided to transportation services not currently provided to those residents who use public transportation to those residents who use or would use public meet their life expectations. This includes trips for transportation regularly, if available, to meet their medical and dental services, shopping, employment, life expectations. This includes, but is not limited personal business, education, social services, and to: trips for medical and dental services, shopping, recreation. employment, personal business, education, social services, and recreation.
REASONABLE TO MEET Prior Definition Revised Definition REASONABLE TO MEET is not based solely upon An unmet transit need that meets the definition economic feasibility. An identified unmet transit above and meets all of the following criteria shall be need shall be determined to be “reasonable to meet” considered reasonable to meet: if determined that the transit service will be in general compliance with the following criteria: 1. Community Acceptance - There should be a demonstrated interest of citizens in the new or 1. Can be implemented consistent with the additional transit service (i.e. multiple comments, transportation improvement priorities, policies, and petitions, etc.) performance standards contained in the Regional Transportation Plan, the transit development plan, 2. Equity - The proposed new or additional service or the short-range transit plan for the area. will benefit the general public, residents who use or would use public transportation regularly, the 2. Can be implemented safely and in accordance elderly population, and persons with disabilities. with local, state, and federal laws and regulations. 3. Potential Ridership - The proposed transit service 3. The additional transit service shall not cause the will maintain new service ridership performance system of which it is a part to fail to meet measures, as defined by the Social Services systemwide performance standards including: Transportation Advisory Committee (SSTAC).
(a) The operator’s ability to maintain the required 4. Cost Effectiveness - The proposed new or fare to operating cost ratio; additional transit service will not affect the ability of the overall system to meet the applicable operating (b) The estimated number of passengers carried per cost per passenger objective or state farebox ratio service hour for proposed service shall be in the requirement after exemption period, if the service is range of other similar services provided; and eligible for the exemption. If the exemption is not used, the service must meet minimum applicable (c) The estimated subsidy per passenger shall be operating cost per passenger objectives or farebox equivalent to other parts of the transit system. ratio return requirements as stated in the TDA statutes. Cost effectiveness is not applicable to 4. When the additional transit service is considered transit services operating within an exemption separately, both the fare to operating cost ratio and period. the estimated subsidy per passenger shall not vary by more than 15% from the average for the type of 5. Operational Feasibility - The system can be service provided by the operator. implemented safely and in accordance with local, state, and federal laws and regulations. 5. The proposed service would not cause claimant to incur expenses in excess of the maximum allocation 6. Funding - The imposed service would not cause of TDA funds. the claimant to incur expenses in excess of the maximum allocation of TDA funds.
Explanation of Changes
Unmet Transit Needs
The Unmet Transit Needs definition was expanded to provide consideration of a wider scope of comments. The prior definition was targeted at identifying transit services that were not provided to residents who already use public transportation. The revised definition allows comments from those who do not currently use public transportation, but who would potentially use it if it were available.
Reasonable to Meet
The definition of reasonable to meet was revised to identify six criteria, each of which must be met to be considered an unmet need: Community Acceptance, Equity, Potential Ridership, Cost Effectiveness, Operational Feasibility, and Funding. The Community Acceptance, Equity, and Potential Ridership criteria were added to emphasize the importance of the community-level impacts of new or additional transit services. The new service ridership performance measures, identified under Potential Ridership, were intentionally left for the SSTAC to define because the need for different types of measures may change over time as the transit agencies in San Joaquin County grow. The Cost Effectiveness definition was modified to recognize the TDA cost effectiveness measures currently in use in San Joaquin County, as well as the various exemptions allowed by the TDA statute. The last two criteria, Operational Feasibility and Funding remain unchanged from the previous definition.
APPENDIX C SAN JOAQUIN REGIONAL TRANSIT DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS - AGENDA
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SAN JOAQUIN REGIONAL TRANSIT DISTRICT WILL HOLD A REGULAR MEETING AT 10:00 A.M. ON FRIDAY, JANUARY 9, 2015, IN THE BOARDROOM OF SAN JOAQUIN REGIONAL TRANSIT DISTRICT’S DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CENTER, 421 EAST WEBER AVENUE, STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA
ACCESSIBLE PUBLIC MEETINGS: San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) will make all reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities to participate in this meeting. Upon request to the General Manager/CEO, RTD will provide agenda materials in appropriate alternative formats, or disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to enable individuals with disabilities to participate in public meetings. Please send a written request, including your name, mailing address, phone number, and a brief description of the requested materials and/or preferred alternative format or auxiliary aid or service at least three (3) work days before the meeting. Requests should be sent to RTD, by mail at P.O. Box 201010, Stockton, CA 95201, by fax at (209) 948-8516, or by e-mail to [email protected]. Para información en Español, por favor llame al (209) 943-1111.
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
2. MOMENT OF SILENCE/REFLECTION
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
4. SAFETY ANNOUNCEMENT
5. ROLL CALL
6. ELECTION OF OFFICERS
7. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. EMPLOYEES OF THE MONTH Special recognition to the Administration, Maintenance, and Transportation Employees of the Month
B. EMPLOYEES OF THE YEAR Special recognition to the Administration, Maintenance, and Transportation Employees of the Year
8. PUBLIC COMMENT
Each person who addresses the Board shall not make slanderous or profane remarks to or about any member of the Board, staff, or general public. Any person who utters loud, threatening, personal or abusive language, who is unduly repetitious or engages in extended discussion of irrelevancies, or who engages in any disorderly conduct which disrupts, disturbs or impedes the orderly conduct of any Board meeting shall, at the discretion of the presiding officer or a majority of the Board, be barred from further audience before the Board during that meeting. All Public Comments shall be limited to no more than THREE MINUTES.
In addition, applause, loud noises, or any other outbursts or disruptions from the audience Agenda for Meeting of January 9, 2015 Page 2
are not allowed during or after a public comment. At the discretion of the presiding officer, those who are in violation of this protocol may be removed from the meeting.
9. REPORTS
A. MV REPORT
B. GENERAL MANAGER/CEO REPORT
C. STATE/FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE REPORT UPDATE
10. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. RESOLUTION: MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 7, 2014, REGULAR BOARD MEETING Board approval of the November 7, 2014, Regular Board of Directors Meeting minutes
B. RESOLUTION: FY 2014 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT (CAFR) AND FY 2014 SINGLE AUDIT REPORT Board approval of the FY 2014 CAFR and FY 2014 Single Audit Report
C. RESOLUTION: APPROVE THE 2015 BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULE Board approval of the 2015 Board of Directors Regular meeting schedule
D. RESOLUTION: AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER/CEO OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE AND FILE GRANT APPLICATIONS, EXECUTE GRANT AGREEMENTS, AND TO TAKE REQUIRED ACTIONS TO RECEIVE GRANT FUNDS
1. RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE GRANT APPLICATION UNDER THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ACT 2. RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE SECTION 5307 GRANT APPLICATION UNDER THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ACT 3. RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE SECTION 5309 GRANT APPLICATION UNDER THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ACT 4. RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE SECTION 5310 GRANT APPLICATION UNDER THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ACT AND A PUBLIC HEARING 5. RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE SECTION 5311 and 5311(f) GRANT APPLICATIONS UNDER THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ACT 6. RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION OF A MASTER AGREEMENT AND PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTS FOR STATE-FUNDED TRANSIT PROJECTS WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS) 7. RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER/CEO OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE AND FILE GRANT APPLICATIONS AND GRANT AGREEMENTS UNDER THE FY 2016 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT PROGRAM Board approval to authorize the General Manager/CEO to execute and file grant applications, execute grant agreements, and take such other necessary actions to receive grant funds
Agenda for Meeting of January 9, 2015 Page 3
E. RESOLUTION: ACCEPT THE FINDINGS OF THE UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS PUBLIC HEARINGS SUMMARY REPORT Board approval to accept the findings of the Unmet Transit Needs Public Hearings Summary Report
11. ACTION ITEMS
A. RESOLUTION: AWARD A CONTRACT TO VALLEY POWER SYSTEMS NORTH, INC. FOR THE PURCHASE OF 13 MOTOR COACH INDUSTRIES (MCI) ENGINES, WITH AN OPTION TO PURCHASE UP TO FOUR ADDITIONAL ENGINES IN A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $575,346.07 Board approval to award a contract to Valley Power Systems North, Inc. for the purchase of 13 Motor Coach Industries (MCI) engines, with an option to purchase up to four additional engines in a total contract amount not to exceed $575,346.07
B. RESOLUTION: APPROVE AN EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT WITH PARATRANSIT, INC. FOR LARGE URBAN AREA TRAVEL TRAINING SERVICES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $95,970.00 IN A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $685,900.00 Board approval of an Eighth Amendment to the contract with Paratransit, Inc. for Large Urban Area Travel Training Services in an amount not to exceed $95,970.00 in a total contract amount not to exceed $685,900.00
C. RESOLUTION: ADOPT JANUARY 2015 SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS Board approval to adopt the January 2015 Service Improvements
12. INFORMATION ITEMS
A. REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION CENTER (RTC) UPDATE An update will be presented on the Regional Transportation Center
B. FINANCIAL REPORTS November Financial Reports provided to the Board
13. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM DIRECTORS
14. CLOSED SESSION
A. LABOR NEGOTIATIONS
1. Conference with Labor Negotiator Agency Negotiator: Donna DeMartino, General Manager/CEO Employee Organization: Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 276
B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—EXISTING LITIGATION [Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Government Code, Section 54956.9]:
(i) San Joaquin Regional Transit District vs. DSS-2731 Myrtle LLC, et al., San Joaquin Superior Court Case No. 39-2010-00252684-CU-El-STK Agenda for Meeting of January 9, 2015 Page 4
C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Initiation litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Government Code, Section 54956.9.1 case.
15. ADJOURNMENT
NOTE: IF THE 2015 MEETING SCHEDULE IS APPROVED BY THE BOARD, THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED BOARD MEETING WILL BE HELD ON FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 2015, AT 10:00 A.M.
DATE POSTED: JANUARY 5, 2015
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 7A
Subject: Employee of the Month Page 1 of 2
SPECIAL PRESENTATION: RECOGNITION OF ADMINISTRATION, TRANSPORTATION, AND MAINTENANCE EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH – OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER
LEAD STAFF: DONNA DeMARTINO GENERAL MANAGER/CEO
FINANCIAL IMPACT: MINIMAL
BACKGROUND:
To qualify as Employee of the Month (EOM), employees must meet the following basic requirements: 1. Has been an employee for at least six months 2. Has not been selected EOM for the previous six months 3. Has a perfect attendance record for the month 4. Does not have any disciplinary action pending or in effect
RTD selects EOMs based on the following criteria: 1. Takes initiative and accepts and carries out additional responsibilities beyond regular job assignments 2. Provides exceptional internal and external customer service by being courteous and helpful 3. Projects a positive image and has a helpful and cooperative attitude 4. Exemplifies trustworthy and ethical behavior 5. Promotes a positive work environment 6. Comes to work on time, on a daily basis
The Administrative EOMs are selected as follows: 1. A member of the management team nominates employees at a monthly meeting. 2. Nominees are selected as EOM when they receive at least a 2/3 majority of the votes cast by members of the management team.
Maintenance and Transportation EOMs are selected by a majority of their respective supervisors.
There may be months where no EOM is selected for Administrative, Maintenance, or Transportation.
Every EOM receives:
. EOM watch . Certificate and acceptance photograph . RTD coffee tumbler
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 7A
Subject: Employee of the Month Page 2 of 2
RTD recognizes employees of the month by posting their photographs at each RTD facility in frames designed for EOM recognition and through a feature article with photographs in the employee newsletter, “As the Wheels Turn.”
The EOM program provides that RTD selects the Employee of the Year (EOY) from the previous 12 EOMs. RTD offers each EOY the opportunity to represent their department/division at one of the conferences of the American Public Transportation Association (APTA).
DISCUSSION:
The Employees of the Month from Administration, Transportation, and Maintenance.
OCTOBER
October Team Award: Risk Management Analyst Nancy Antonio, Human Resources Analyst Lorelei Guzman, Human Resources Specialist Sunny Pannu, Human Resources Specialist Ericka Rocha, and Administrative Assistant Judith Spiro
NOVEMBER
November Team Award: Accountant I Luciana Lindroos and Accountant I Melissa Comages
Administration: None Maintenance: Mechanic Lead A Dario Dominguez Transportation: Coach Operator Natia Brothers
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 7B
Subject: 2014 Employees of the Year Page 1 of 1
SPECIAL PRESENTATION: 2014 EMPLOYEES OF THE YEAR
LEAD STAFF: DONNA DeMARTINO GENERAL MANAGER/CEO
FINANCIAL IMPACT: MINIMAL
BACKGROUND:
The Employee of the Year (EOY) award is given to exemplary employees who take initiative, carry out responsibilities beyond regular job assignments, promote a positive image, exemplify trustworthy and ethical behavior, and provide extraordinary customer service.
The EOY awardees receive a certificate, $150.00, and an invitation to attend the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) Bus and Paratransit Conference for the Maintenance and Transportation EOYs. Administration EOYs will be invited to attend the APTA Annual Conference.
The employees who have been selected as EOYs for 2014 will be announced and recognized at the Board meeting.
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 9A
Subject: MV Report Page 1 of 1
INFORMATION ITEM: MV REPORT
LEAD STAFF: DONNA DeMARTINO GENERAL MANAGER/CEO
REPORT BY: MV TRANSPORTATION, INC.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: TO BE DETERMINED
DISCUSSION:
MV Transportation staff will provide an update.
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 9C Subject: State/Federal Legislative Report Page 1 of 9
INFORMATION ITEM: STATE/FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE REPORT UPDATE
LEAD STAFF: DONNA DeMARTINO GENERAL MANAGER/CEO
REPORT BY: JORDAN & ASSOCIATES
STATE LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
2015-2016 Legislative Sessions
December 1, 2014 marked the first meeting of the California Legislature. Legislative members convened for organizational purposes with members being sworn in, the official election of party leaders, and some members introducing new legislative proposals. Below are several brief updates related to the 2015-2016 state legislative session.
Impact of Changes to Term Limits
This session was profoundly shaped by term limits, with a majority of members entering their first or second terms. Under California’s initial term limits, lawmakers could serve a maximum of six years in the Assembly and eight years in the Senate. Now they can serve a total of 12 regardless of the house. A majority of lawmakers – 72 out of 120 –arrived with at most two years of state- level experience. The critical mass of relative newcomers reflects a shift in California’s term limit rules with dual consequences: while the incoming class of lawmakers has minimal legislative experience, it could also remain largely intact for a decade.
“I think it’s probably the most profound change in the Legislature as an institution since term limits passed,” said David Lesher, Director of Government Affairs at the Public Policy Institute of California.
No Super-Majority
Democrats still dominate both chambers; however, they no longer hold the two-thirds “supermajorities” they briefly secured in 2012.
California State Senate Leadership
President pro Tempore, Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles): The President pro Tempore, who also serves as the Chair of the Rule Committee, is the actual leader of the Senate. He or she is elected by the Members at the beginning of each Session. The "Pro Tem" is the presiding officer on the Floor, overseeing the appointment of committee members, assignment of bills, progress of legislation through the house, confirmation of gubernatorial appointees, and overall direction of policy. He or she is also the political leader of the majority party.
Minority Leader, Senator Bob Huff (R-Diamond Bar): The Minority Leader (also known as the "Republican Leader") is the second-most powerful position in the Senate. Elected by members of the Minority Caucus, he or she speaks for the Minority Party, maintains its inner discipline, and works with the President pro Tempore to set the Senate's order of business.
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 9C Subject: State/Federal Legislative Report Page 2 of 9
California State Assembly Leadership
Speaker, Assembly Member Toni G. Atkins (D-San Diego): The Speaker is the highest ranking officer of the Assembly; usually elected by the Assembly Members at the beginning of each two- year legislative session. The Speaker or his or her designee presides over Floor Session. The Speaker's powers and duties are established by the Assembly Rules.
Minority Floor Leader, Assembly Member Kristin Olsen (R-Modesto): Elected by the caucus having the second largest House membership. Generally responsible for making motions, points of order, and representing the minority caucus on the Floor.
California State Senate Committee Assignments for 2015-16 Session
At this time, Pro Tem de Leon has not announced committee chairs. Once the assignments have been made, they can be viewed by visiting: http://senate.ca.gov/committees
California State Assembly Committee Assignments for 2015-2016 Session
Speaker Atkins named Assemblyman Jim Frazier (D-Oakley) as chair of the Assembly Committee on Transportation. To view Frazier’s press release on his appointment, visit: http://asmdc.org/members/a11/news-room/press-releases
To view all Assembly Committee Assignments for 2015-2016, visit: http://asmdc.org/speaker/news-room/press-releases/speaker-atkins-announces-committee- chairs-for-the-2015-16-regular-session.
What this means for RTD: This is informational.
Will Kempton to Head the California Transportation Commission (CTC)
On December 15, 2014, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) announced that Will Kempton – a former top California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) official – will serve as Executive Director beginning January 19, 2015.
Mr. Kempton has over forty years of experience in transportation, public service, and governmental affairs. As Executive Director of the CTC, Kempton will report to the eleven- member Commission and is responsible for overseeing the Commission's staff of 17 and its annual budget of $3.8 million. The Commission is responsible for programming and funding several billion dollars annually for transportation projects throughout California in partnership with regional transportation agencies and Caltrans. The Commission is also responsible for advising the California State Transportation Agency and the California Legislature on key transportation policy matters.
To view the press release, visit: http://www.catc.ca.gov/Press_Releases/KemptonPressRelease_121514.pdf
What this means for RTD: This is informational.
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 9C Subject: State/Federal Legislative Report Page 3 of 9
Expansion of the State's Cap-and-Trade Program to Transportation Fuels
As previously reported, Assembly Bill 32 of 2006 requires that oil companies buy carbon credits for fuel they sell starting in 2015. Earlier in the year there was a heightened concern, from both Republicans and Democrats, that expanding Cap-and-Trade to transportation fuels (which account for 40 percent of California’s greenhouse gas emissions) would create volatile increases in fuel prices and ultimately hurt consumers. According to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO), by 2020 the resulting price increase likely will be 13 cents to 20 cents per gallon. The LAO notes, “the price increase could exceed 50 cents per gallon.”
During the last session of the State Legislature, Assembly Member Henry Perea (D-Fresno) introduced AB 69, which would have delayed the application of cap-and-trade emission limits to fuels; however, the legislation was not enacted prior to the close of the session.
This session, Senator Andy Vidak (R-Hanford) and Assemblyman Jim Patterson (R-Fresno), have introduced new legislation (SB 5 and AB 23, respectively) to exempt transportation fuels from the state’s cap-and-trade program.
What this means for RTD: A portion of cap-and-trade revenue is directed to transit. Expanding cap-and-trade to transportation fuels will provide more cap-and-trade revenue – increasing funding for transit; however, concerns that the expansion will cause sharp increases to the price of fuel, which hurts low and middle income drivers, may prevent this source of funding from occurring. Additionally, RTD’s fuel prices will also be impacted should the expansion move forward. Jordan & Associates staff spoke with Rajinder Shaota at the California Air Resources Board earlier this year. She explained that ARB doesn’t have estimates on the anticipated price change that will result from transportation fuels (including diesel) coming under cap-and-trade. Beginning in 2015, companies that distribute and sell fuel will be required to either buy “allowances” to offset the combustion of their fuel or they will need to take other allowable measures to comply -such as blending their fuel. Rajinder said that there are a lot of estimates out there –but they (ARB) do not agree with all the estimates they are seeing. That said, it is recommended RTD reach out to their fuel provider to request information on any cost changes that they anticipate.
Cal Facts
The non-partisan LAO recently issued Cal Facts 2014, a report providing various "snapshot" pieces of information that provide an overview of public finance and program trends in the state Cal Facts consists of a series of charts and tables that address questions frequently asked of the LAO’s office. The LAO’s report provides the following facts about transportation funding within the state:
Total transportation funding in the state will be roughly $28 billion in 2014–2015. Local governments provide half of all transportation funding in California. Local transportation funding sources include local sales taxes, transit fares, development impact fees, and property taxes. About one–fourth of the state’s transportation funding comes from the federal government, supported primarily by federal excise taxes on diesel and gasoline. San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 9C Subject: State/Federal Legislative Report Page 4 of 9
The remaining one–fourth of transportation funding comes from a variety of state revenue sources, but primarily excise taxes on gasoline.
To view the report, visit: http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2014/calfacts/calfacts-2014.pdf
What this means for RTD: This is informational.
Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP)
Caltrans has released draft guidelines for the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP). LCTOP is one of several programs that are part of the Transit, Affordable, Housing and Sustainable Communities Program established by the California Legislature (SB 862 of 2014). The LCTOP was created to provide operating and capital assistance for transit agencies to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emission and improve mobility, with a priority on serving disadvantaged communities. Approved projects in LCTOP will support new or expanded bus or rail services, expand intermodal transit facilities, and may include equipment acquisition, fueling, maintenance and other costs to operate those services or facilities, with each project reducing GHG emissions. The formula-based program has been funded at $25 million for 2014‐2015.
Eligible transit agencies should have been notified by December 1 of their share of available funds. Recipient agencies have until February 1, 2015 to submit an expenditure proposal.
To view the draft guidelines, visit: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/MassTrans/Docs-Pdfs/3228- ggrf/draft.discussion.guidelines_lctop.final.pdf
What this means for RTD: This is informational should RTD be an eligible agency. This program has the potential to fund RTD projects. If RTD has not been contacted by Caltrans, it is recommended that they inquire to see if they are an eligible agency.
FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
November Election Results and Hill Leadership Elections
Republicans took back control of the U.S. Senate in the November elections and, in the House of Representatives increased their margins substantially to the largest share of House seats since the Truman Administration. In the 114th Congress that will take office on January 3, 2015, Senate Republicans will control 54 seats, since Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) lost her runoff election on December 6 and Senator Mark Begich (D-AK) lost his election to Dan Sullivan. House Republicans will control 247 seats to Democrats’ 188 when the 114th Congress convenes on January 6, 2015.
The Senate Republican Conference, Senate Democratic Conference and House Republican Conference voted by secret ballot on November 13 to select their respective party leaders for the 114th Congress that begins in 2015. The information below provides the breakdown:
114th Congress Senate Republican Leadership
Majority Leader – Mitch McConnell (R-KY) Majority Whip – John Cornyn (R-TX) San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 9C Subject: State/Federal Legislative Report Page 5 of 9
Senate Republican Conference Chairman – John Thune (R-SD) Senate Republican Policy Chairman – John Barrasso (R-WY) Senate Republican Conference Vice Chairman – Roy Blunt (R-MO) National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman – Roger Wicker (R-MS)
114th Congress Senate Democratic Leadership
Minority Leader – Harry Reid (D-NV) Minority Whip – Dick Durbin (D-IL) Democratic Conference Vice Chair and Senate Democratic Policy and Communications Center Chair – Chuck Schumer (D-NY) Democratic Conference Secretary – Patty Murray (D-WA) Democratic Senate Campaign Committee Chairman – Jon Tester (D-MT) Strategic policy adviser to the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee – Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)
114th Congress House Republican Leadership
Speaker of the House – John Boehner (R-OH) Majority Leader – Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) Majority Whip – Steve Scalise (R-LA) House Republican Conference Chair – Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) National Republican Campaign Committee (NRCC) Chair – Greg Walden (R-OR) House Republican Policy Committee Chair – Luke Messer (R-IN)
The House Democratic Conference elected their party leaders on November 18. There were no surprises, with the same leaders being re-instated for the new Congress that will begin in January. With secret ballots, the full caucus selected Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California to serve her eighth-straight term at the top of the House Democratic Caucus power structure. Democrats also re-elected Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland and Assistant Leader James E. Clyburn of South Carolina. Caucus Chairman Xavier Becerra of California and Vice-Chairman Joseph Crowley of New York will each serve another two years in their current roles. Unless another position opens up at the table in the 115th Congress, it could be Becerra’s last term in leadership, as he is term-limited at the end of 2016.
What this means for RTD: This is informational.
Committee Election Results
The House Republican Conference ratified the roster of committee chairmen on November 19 that had earlier been approved by the party Steering Committee, while the House Democrats voted to approve their own committee ranking minority members.
House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
As expected, incumbent Bill Shuster (R-PA) retains the chairmanship of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. On the Democratic side at the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Pete DeFazio (D-OR) was named ranking member, after John Garamendi (D-CA) dropped his long shot bid for the top Democrat spot. Representative Jeff San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 9C Subject: State/Federal Legislative Report Page 6 of 9
Denham (R-CA) will remain on the committee in the coming year. The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is the House Committee responsible for crafting the MAP-21 reauthorization legislation.
House Appropriations Committee
Incumbent Hal Rogers (R-KY) was retained as chairman of the Appropriations Committee. The House Republican Steering Committee approved the list of Appropriations subcommittee chairman submitted by Chairmen Hal Rogers, including the vacant Chair of the Transportation-Housing and Urban Development Subcommittee, which will go to Representative Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL). Diaz-Balart, a Miami-area lawmaker, does not currently serve on the subcommittee, and will have to get up to speed quickly. The Appropriations Committee is responsible for crafting the annual spending bills for the Federal government agencies.
House Ways and Means Committee
Paul Ryan (R-WI) won the open spot for the House Ways and Means Committee, as expected. The Ways and Means Committee will be responsible for identifying how to pay for the next MAP- 21 reauthorization bill.
On December 15, Senate Republicans and Senate Democrats announced their committee assignments for the upcoming Congress.
Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee
Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL) will chair the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, while Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) will be the top Democrat. The committee has jurisdiction over transit issues and will be responsible for crafting the transit title of the MAP-21 reauthorization bill. Shelby showed minimal interest in transit when he previously chaired the Banking Committee.
Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) has taken a new seat on the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, which has jurisdiction over transit issues. Boxer gave up her seat on the Commerce Committee, in order to go to Banking. Boxer would have been the ranking Democrat on the Commerce Committee had she stayed.
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK) is presumed to chair the Environment and Public Works Committee which has 11 Republicans and eight Democrats. Senator Boxer will stay on the committee as the committees’ top Democrat. The Committee has jurisdiction over Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration.
Senate Appropriations Committee
Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) will remain on the Appropriations Committee, becoming fourth in seniority for the Democrats. Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) will no longer be the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, since Republicans will have the majority, and she will be the top Democrat on the committee. The Committee chair is presumed to go to Senator Thad Cochran San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 9C Subject: State/Federal Legislative Report Page 7 of 9
(R-MS). The Appropriations Committee is responsible for crafting the annual spending bills for the Federal government agencies.
Senate Finance Committee
Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) will be the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee next year, and will have a great deal of input regarding how to make solvent the Highway Trust Fund as Congress considers the MAP-21 reauthorization bill. Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) will no longer be the Chairman, but will be the top Democrat on the Finance Committee.
What this means for RTD: This is informational.
Fiscal Year 2015 U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Appropriations
On December 8, House and Senate appropriators unveiled a $1.1 trillion government-wide hybrid spending package that gave Republicans victories on financial regulations and environmental issues, but allowed Democrats to preserve funding boosts for certain federal agencies. The deal abides by budget caps set by last December’s budget deal that relieved sequestration for two years. The package includes 11 appropriations bills that fund most of the government through September 30 and a continuing resolution funding the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) through February 27. The short term funding for DHS was forced by Republicans to keep watch over the implementation of the President’s recent Executive Order on immigration.
The package of appropriations bills, dubbed the Cromnibus, narrowly passed the House on December 11 by a vote of 219-206. Certain policy riders almost derailed the spending package. One of the policy riders repeals part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform law to allow banks to directly engage in derivatives trading using federally insured deposits. The other controversial policy rider loosens limits on the amount of money people can contribute in national political parties. The Senate voted 56-40 on December 13 to approve the House passed measure – clearing the measure for the President’s signature.
Specific to transportation, the final bill appropriates $500 million for Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grants, down $50 million from last year but well above the House bill’s $100 million. The House bill had also proposed to limit the purposes of the Fiscal Year 2015 TIGER grants to highway, bridge, and port projects; the final bill continues to allow mass transit, freight and passenger rail, and other types of surface transportation infrastructure projects, but planning activities will be ineligible for TIGER funding.
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) formula grants are frozen at last year’s $8.595 billion level. The large discretionary account is new starts (Capital Investment Grants) that gets an overall appropriation of $2.12 billion under the bill, almost as high as the Senate level and $429 million higher than the House bill. But there is a rescission of $121.5 million in prior-year new start money that reduces the net total. With the inclusion of some reprogrammed prior year funds, $1.5 billion is available for projects with signed Full Funding Grant Agreements (FFGAs), $325 million is for projects where the FFGA is not yet signed but is anticipated to be signed later in Fiscal Year 2015, $172 million is available for small start projects, and $120 million is for core capacity projects. The statutory ban on new Capital Investment Grant FFGA’s with a federal share over 60 percent is maintained, but the explanatory statement of the bill says that with regard to the $325 million for pending new starts, “FTA is directed to give funding priority to San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 9C Subject: State/Federal Legislative Report Page 8 of 9 projects requiring a 40 percent or less federal share” which would give higher priority to the Orlando Sunrail, Cambridge-Bedford, and Fort Worth proposed new starts.
Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Funds were funded at $4.458 billion, the same level as last year, and the Section 5339 Bus and Bus Facilities Formula Program was funded at $427.8 million, the same level as last year. The bill also orders FTA to consider small starts and streetcars when developing guidance under 49 U.S.C. 5309(i) Program of Interrelated Projects. Another provision diverts $28 million in old pre-2012 discretionary bus money to bus rapid transit projects requested under new starts.
There is no funding in the bill for high speed rail grants, but the House-passed provision that singles out the California high-speed rail project for zero federal funding was dropped, meaning that it stays eligible for TIGER money and for the possible transfer of state highway and transit formula funding to projects that benefit the project. At Amtrak, the total amount of funding provided by the bill is $1.39 billion, the same as last year and the same as the Senate bill.
What this means for RTD: This is informational.
Transit Nominee To Be Re-Considered in the 114th Congress
On November 19, the Senate Banking Committee Chairman approved the nominations of Ms. Therese W. McMillan, of California, to be the Federal Transit Administrator at the U.S. Department of Transportation by voice vote. Ms. McMillan served as Deputy Administrator at FTA since 2009 and became Acting Administrator in July. She worked at the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in California, prior to coming to FTA. The Senate approved several nominations on December 16, but did not confirm Therese McMillan. Given the 113th Congress has ended, the President will have to resubmit her nomination when the 114th Congress reconvenes in the new year.
What this means for RTD: This is informational.
Tax Extenders/Commuter Tax Benefit
On December 3, the House passed H.R. 5771, the Tax Increase Prevention Act of 2014, by a vote of 378 to 46. The bill includes a retroactive extension of federal excise tax credits for alternative fuels for 2014. Transit agencies fueling their fleets with alternative fuels such as compressed natural gas (CNG) or liquefied natural gas (LNG) are eligible for these credits to offset operating costs.
The House bill only provides a retroactive extension of transit parity for 2014 and, given the nature of how the mass transit tax benefit is administered, transit commuters or employers are not likely to realize reduced commuting costs or tax liability for 2014. Even though the 2014 retroactive parity provision offers no immediate or practical benefit for transit commuters or employers, its inclusion in a final bill will be helpful in future discussions to make parity permanent.
The Senate voted to approve a tax extenders bill on December 16. The legislation would extend through 2014 the maximum monthly exclusion amount for transit passes and van pool benefits so that these transportation benefits match the exclusion for qualified parking benefits. The fringe San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 9C Subject: State/Federal Legislative Report Page 9 of 9 benefits are excluded from an employee’s wages for payroll tax purposes, and from gross income for income tax purposes. This is the same provision as the House extenders bill.
What this means for RTD: The lack of parity in the federal tax code for transit benefits as opposed to parking benefits has a negative effect on encouraging commuters to use transit. RTD should advocate for a permanent extension of the commuter tax benefit in the coming year at the federal level, which is in line with the efforts of the American Public Transportation Association. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SAN JOAQUIN REGIONAL TRANSIT DISTRICT FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2014
The Board of Directors of the San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) held a Regular Meeting at 10:00 a.m. on Friday, November 7, 2014, IN THE BOARDROOM OF RTD’S DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CENTER, 421 E. WEBER AVENUE, STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER Chair Restuccia called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m.
2. MOMENT OF SILENCE/REFLECTION
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
4. SAFETY ANNOUNCEMENT
5. ROLL CALL Present: Michael P. Restuccia Balwinder T. Singh Gary S. Giovanetti Joni Bauer Duane Isetti
Staff Present
Donna DeMartino, General Manager/CEO Gloria Salazar, Assistant General Manager/CFO Al Hoslett, Legal Counsel Norman Tuitavuki, Director of Operations Cameron Isaacson, Operations Superintendent Sharon Miller, Director of Procurement Shelly Valenton, Manager of Strategic Affairs Paul Rapp, Communications and Customer Relations Manager Nate Knodt, Service Development Manager Nathaniel Atherstone, Planning Manager Virginia Alcayde, Finance Manager Ericka Rocha, Human Resources Specialist Nancy Antonio, Safety and Risk Specialist Gabriel Quintero, Coach Operator Phil Schmit, Facilities Technician C Carrie McGrath, Strategic Affairs Specialist Lorena Herrera, Strategic Affairs Analyst Deffria Bass-Nwoffiah, Strategic Affairs Senior Administrative Assistant
Members of the Public Who Indicated They Were Present
Jesse Lopez Cathy Rivas Michael Harras Edward Church James Young Joe Ventura, Jr. Rev. Dewitt Brown Abbie Kenyon Karen Pasterski Alan Wagner Mary Amador
1
6. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. EMPLOYEES OF THE MONTH
Special recognition was given to Strategic Affairs Specialist Carrie McGrath, Administration Employee of the Month for September, Facilities Technician C Phil Schmit, Maintenance Employee of the Month for September, and Coach Operator Gabriel Quintero, Transportation Employee of the Month for September.
7. PUBLIC COMMENT
Jesse Lopez stated he enjoys riding on Routes 43 and 44.
Edward Church discussed the Route 40 weekend schedule.
Reverend Dewitt Brown commented passenger behavior and on the need for power outlets at bus stops so that passengers can charge their electric wheelchairs.
Alan Wagner, President of the Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 276 (ATU), discussed the RTD call center schedule, holiday bus service, and the posting of the Unmet Transit Needs Hearing fliers.
Cathy Rivas commented on the schedules for Routes 40, 43, and 44, and holiday bus service.
James Young thanked RTD for giving him opportunities to volunteer in community events.
Abbie Kenyon discussed the 31-day bus pass, Routes 76 and 77, and weekend and evening service.
Mary Amador provided suggestions on neighborhood service.
Michael Harras shared information about Rosa Parks Day.
Joe Ventura, Jr. remarked on public safety and the RTD employee of the month award.
Karen Pasterski commented on coach operator behavior.
8. PUBLIC HEARING
A. UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS AND PROPOSED JANUARY 2015 SERVICE CHANGES This public hearing is scheduled to invite public comments on Unmet Transit Needs and proposed January 2015 service changes
Chair Restuccia opened the Public Hearing on Unmet Transit Needs and Proposed January 2015 Service Changes.
Planning Manager Nathaniel Atherstone and Service Development Manager Nate Knodt
2 presented a report on the Public Hearing process. Chair Restuccia then invited the public to comment on the unmet transit needs and proposed January 2015 service changes.
After all members of the public who wished to speak had concluded their remarks, Chair Restuccia closed the Public Hearing.
Chair Restuccia stated that the public can continue submitting comments on unmet transit needs and proposed service changes through November 25, 2014.
9. REPORTS
A. MV REPORT
There was no report from MV.
B. GENERAL MANAGER/CEO REPORT
The General Manager/CEO:
Announced that RTD unveiled that morning the wrapped bus celebrating Veterans, and that for the month of November, RTD will provide a 31-day “Patriot Passes” to veterans and active duty military personnel.
Reported on RTD’s 2014 Health & Safety Fair for employees and the increase in vendor participation this year.
Discussed the activities at RTD’s third annual community Fall Festival which included community organization tables, food trucks, face painting, music, and a haunted bus.
Congratulated Chair Restuccia on his recent election to the Ripon City Council.
C. STATE/FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE REPORT
The General Manager/CEO:
Announced that American Public Transportation Association (APTA) legislative meetings are scheduled for December and March.
Stated there is a possibility for a federal transportation bill to be passed by the end of the year and that the exhaustion of the Mass Transportation Account remains unresolved.
10. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. RESOLUTION: MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 3, 2014, REGULAR BOARD MEETING Resolution No. 5549: Board approval of the October 3, 2014, Regular Board of Directors Meeting minutes
ACTION: MOTION: DIRECTOR ISETTI SECOND: DIRECTOR SINGH
3 Roll Call: AYES: Restuccia, Isetti, Bauer, Giovanetti, Singh NAYES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None
11. ACTION ITEMS
A. RESOLUTION: APPROVE THE JANUARY 2015 BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULE Resolution No. 5550: Board approval of the January 2015 Board of Directors Regular meeting schedule
ACTION: MOTION: DIRECTOR ISETTI SECOND: DIRECTOR BAUER Roll Call: AYES: Restuccia, Isetti, Bauer, Giovanetti, Singh NAYES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None
B. ORDINANCE: APPROVE AN ORDINANCE FOR ADOPTION OF THE PASSENGER CODE OF CONDUCT Ordinance No. 001: Board approval of a proposed ordinance for adoption of the Passenger Code of Conduct
ACTION: MOTION: DIRECTOR ISETTI SECOND: DIRECTOR BAUER Roll Call: AYES: Restuccia, Isetti, Bauer, Giovanetti, Singh NAYES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None
The Ordinance, which was presented and read at the Board of Directors meeting on October 3, 2014, was adopted.
C. RESOLUTION: APPROVE REVISIONS TO RULES OF PROCEDURE Resolution No. 5551: Board approval of the revisions to San Joaquin Regional Transit District’s (RTD) Rules of Procedure
The General Manager/CEO Donna DeMartino explained that removing the order of business from the Rules of Procedure would allow the General Manager and Chair of the Board the flexibility to change the order of business as needed.
ACTION: MOTION: DIRECTOR ISETTI SECOND: DIRECTOR SINGH Roll Call: AYES: Restuccia, Isetti, Bauer, Giovanetti, Singh NAYES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None
4
12. INFORMATION ITEMS
A. QUARTERLY REPORT – AWARDED CONTRACTS Director of Procurement Sharon Miller provided information on awarded contracts for the period July through September 2014
Director Isetti expressed interest in the possibility of RTD to use a local preference for the landscaping contract.
Director of Procurement Sharon Miller explained that at this time the contract must be awarded to the lowest bidder; however, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is currently looking into a local preference option and she will keep the Board informed of RTD’s ability to hire locally for this contract in the future.
B. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY (EEO) ANNUAL REPORT Human Resources Specialist Ericka Rocha provided an update on RTD’s Equal Employment Opportunity Annual Report.
C. SAFETY TEAM AND WELLNESS UPDATE Safety and Risk Specialist Nancy Antonio and Operations Superintendent Cameron Isaacson provided a presentation on the Safety Team and Wellness program.
D. REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION CENTER (RTC) UPDATE Senior Construction Manager Brad Chadwick, of Arcadis U.S. Inc., provided an update on the construction of the Regional Transportation Center (RTC).
In response to Director Isetti’s question about the likelihood of staying on schedule despite the inclement weather, Brad Chadwick stated that McCarthy Construction has taken great lengths to prepare the construction site for rain, and as long as there are no major storms within the next month, it should not be an issue.
E. FINANCIAL REPORTS Finance Manager Virginia Alcayde provided September Financial Reports to the Board.
13. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM DIRECTORS
Director Giovanetti commented on the 2014 APTA EXPO and Annual Conference events, which included a presentation on the transit advocacy web site “The Voices for Public Transit;” a forum presented by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA); a presentation called “Rethinking Urban Mobility” that promoted the idea of a community’s collective sharing of multi-modal forms of transportation; and a tour of the light rail system in Houston.
Director Singh added that during the APTA EXPO and Annual Conference, he learned about emerging technologies for storing and collecting data and sharing data between departments.
5
Director Bauer extended congratulations to RTD staff and the Strategic Affairs Department on the success of the Fall Festival, and discussed her attendance at the California Association for Coordinated Transportation (CalACT) Fall Conference.
Vice-Chair Isetti congratulated General Manager/CEO Donna DeMartino and RTD staff on the Veterans wrapped bus, the success of RTD’s Fall Festival, and expressed appreciation of these free, sponsored events that RTD has provided to the community.
Chair Restuccia remarked on his election to the Ripon City Council and expressed appreciation for the support received from the RTD Board of Directors.
14. CLOSED SESSION
Chair Restuccia announced that the Board would recess to Closed Session to discuss the following matters:
A. LABOR NEGOTIATIONS
1. Conference with Labor Negotiator Agency Negotiator: Donna DeMartino, General Manager/CEO Employee Organization: Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 276
B. LITIGATION – CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL
1. Existing Litigation, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (a). One case:
(i) San Joaquin Regional Transit District vs. DSS-2731 Myrtle LLC, et al., San Joaquin Superior Court Case No. 39-2010-00252684-CU-El-STK
C. REAL PROPERTY
1. Conference with Real Property Negotiators, pursuant to Government Code section 54956.8:
Property: Real Property located at 1602 and 1604 East Lindsay Street, Stockton, CA, being APN 153-020-36 and 27 Agency Negotiator: Donna DeMartino, General Manager/CEO Purchaser: Rabesa Mexican Products Corp. Under Negotiation: purchase price and other related items
Upon returning from Closed Session, Chair Restuccia announced that no reportable action had been taken.
15. ADJOURNMENT
Chair Restuccia adjourned the meeting at 11:55 a.m.
6 RESOLUTION NO. ____ DATED: JANUARY 9, 2015
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE BOARD MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 7, 2014
RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the Board of Directors of the San Joaquin Regional Transit District that the minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 7, 2014, be approved.
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 10B Subject: FY 2014 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) Page 1 of 1 and FY 2014 Single Audit
RECOMMENDATION: ACCEPT THE FY 2014 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT (CAFR) AND FY 2014 SINGLE AUDIT
LEAD STAFF: FINANCE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE DIRECTOR DUANE ISETTI DIRECTOR JONI BAUER
FINANCIAL IMPACT: NONE
BACKGROUND:
On Monday, December 15, 2014, the Finance and Audit Committee and Assistant General Manager/CFO Gloria Salazar met with Mann, Urrutia, Nelson, CPAs and Associates, LLP to review the audit reports for FY 2014.
Based on review and approval of the audit report on December 15, 2014, the Finance and Audit Committee recommends acceptance of the FY 2014 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and FY 2014 Single Audit.
RESOLUTION NO. ____ DATED: JANUARY 9, 2015
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE FY 2014 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT AND FY 2014 SINGLE AUDIT
RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the Board of Directors of the San Joaquin Regional Transit District that the FY 2014 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and FY 2014 Single Audit, as submitted by Mann, Urrutia, Nelson, CPAs and Associates, LLP be, and hereby is, accepted.
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 10C Subject: 2015 Board of Directors Meetings Page 1 of 2
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE SCHEDULE FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2015 BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETINGS
LEAD STAFF: DONNA DeMARTINO GENERAL MANAGER/CEO
FINANCIAL IMPACT: NONE
BACKGROUND:
The Board of Directors monthly meetings are usually scheduled on the first Friday of every month. The meeting dates may change due to conference schedule conflicts and other considerations.
DISCUSSION:
For Calendar Year 2015, staff recommends that the monthly meetings be held on the third Friday of every month to accommodate the schedule of most of the Board members. Similar to previous years and consistent with the practice of most other public agencies, staff is proposing that the November and December Board meetings be combined into one meeting.
Attached for your consideration is a schedule for the 2015 Board of Directors monthly meetings.
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 10C Subject: 2015 Board of Directors Meetings Page 2 of 2
BOARD OF DIRECTORS CALENDAR YEAR 2015 MEETING SCHEDULE
Friday, February 20, 2015 Friday, March 20, 2015 Friday, April 17, 2015 Friday, May 15, 2015 Friday, June 19, 2015 Friday, July 17, 2015 Friday, August 21, 2015 Friday, September 18, 2015 Friday, October 16, 2015 Friday, November 13, 2015*
* Board of Directors Meeting Rescheduled
RESOLUTION NO. ____ DATED: JANUARY 9, 2015
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE SCHEDULE FOR 2015 BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETINGS
RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the San Joaquin Regional Transit District Board of Directors that the schedule for the 2015 Board of Directors meetings is hereby approved.
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 10D
Subject: FY 2015 Grant Applications, Agreements, and Funds Page 1 of 1
RECOMMENDATION: AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER/CEO OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE AND FILE GRANT APPLICATIONS, EXECUTE GRANT AGREEMENTS, AND TO TAKE REQUIRED ACTIONS TO RECEIVE GRANT FUNDS
LEAD STAFF: GEORGE LORENTE GRANTS MANAGER
FINANCIAL IMPACT: TO BE DETERMINED
BACKGROUND:
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) will apply for both operating and capital assistance grant programs through the course of FY 2015. RTD currently has a blanket resolution in place for the General Manager/CEO or designee to sign applications, execute grant agreements, and take actions to meet the requirements of the grantors; however, certain grant programs specifically require RTD to obtain a separate resolution for each fiscal year that it applies for funding. RTD has compiled the required resolutions, as it has in previous years, for the grant programs for which RTD expects to file grant applications for FY 2015.
DISCUSSION:
The following resolutions will authorize the General Manager/CEO or designee to sign applications, execute grant agreements, and take actions to meet the requirements of the grantors. There are specific grant programs that require separate resolutions. Many grant programs, including those administered by the California Department of Transportation and the Federal Transit Administration, provide their notice of availability and grant application deadlines at varying times during the fiscal year. Having the general authorization and specific grant resolutions allows RTD to respond to grant funding opportunities as they become available.
RESOLUTION NO. ____ DATED: JANUARY 9, 2015
RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF FY 2015 GRANT APPLICATIONS UNDER THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ACT
WHEREAS, the Secretary of Transportation is authorized to make grants for a mass transportation program of projects; and
WHEREAS, the contract for financial assistance will impose certain obligations upon the applicant, including the provision of the local share of the project costs; and
WHEREAS, it is required by the U. S. Department of Transportation (DOT), in accordance with the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that in connection with the filing of an application for capital assistance, the applicant give an assurance that it will comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the DOT requirements thereunder; and
WHEREAS, it is the goal of San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) that minority business enterprise be used to the fullest extent possible in connection with this/these project(s), and that definite procedures shall be established and administered to ensure that minority businesses shall have the maximum feasible opportunity to compete for contracts when procuring construction contracts, supplies, equipment contracts, or consultant and other services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the Board of Directors of RTD as follows:
1. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to execute and file an application on behalf of RTD with the DOT to aid in the financing of capital assistance projects.
2. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to execute and file with such applications an assurance or any other document required by the DOT for the purposes of complying with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
3. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to furnish such additional information as the DOT may require in connection with the application for the program of projects.
4. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to schedule and hold a Public Hearing, as required by Federal Transit Act regulations, and that Notice of said Public Hearing be given by the General Manager/CEO by publishing said Notice in a newspaper of local circulation at least twice, the first publication to be no later than thirty days before the date of said Public Hearing.
Resolution No. ____ Dated: January 9, 2015 Grant under Federal Transit Act Page 2
5. That the General Manager/CEO or designee is authorized to accept and execute on behalf of RTD a grant with the DOT. RESOLUTION NO. ____ DATED: JANUARY 9, 2015
RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (DOT) FOR FY 2015 SECTION 5307 GRANT UNDER THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ACT
WHEREAS, the Secretary of Transportation is authorized to make grants for a mass transportation program of projects; and
WHEREAS, the contract for financial assistance will impose certain obligations upon the applicant, including the provision of the local share of the project costs; and
WHEREAS, it is required by the U. S. Department of Transportation (DOT), in accordance with the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that in connection with the filing of an application for capital assistance under Section 5307 of the Federal Transit Act, the applicant give an assurance that it will comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the DOT requirements thereunder; and
WHEREAS, it is the goal of San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) that minority business enterprise be used to the fullest extent possible in connection with this/these project(s), and that definite procedures shall be established and administered to ensure that minority businesses shall have the maximum feasible opportunity to compete for contracts when procuring construction contracts, supplies, equipment contracts, or consultant and other services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the RTD Board of Directors as follows:
1. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to execute and file an application on behalf of RTD with the DOT to aid in the financing of capital assistance projects, pursuant to Section 5307 of the Federal Transit Act.
2. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to execute and file with such applications an assurance or any other document required by the DOT for the purposes of complying with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
3. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to furnish such additional information as the DOT may require in connection with the application for the program of projects.
4. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to schedule and hold a Public Hearing on Federal Capital Assistance Application, as required by Federal Transit Act regulations, and that Notice of said Public Hearing be given by the General Manager/CEO by publishing said Notice in a newspaper of local circulation at least twice, the first publication to be no later than thirty days before the date of said Public Hearing.
Resolution No. ____ Dated: January 9, 2015 Section 5307 Page 2
5. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to accept and execute, on behalf of RTD, a grant with the DOT pursuant to Section 5307 of the Federal Transit Act.
RESOLUTION NO. ____ DATED: JANUARY 9, 2015
RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (DOT) FOR FY 2015 SECTION 5309 GRANT UNDER THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ACT
WHEREAS, the Secretary of Transportation is authorized to make grants for a mass transportation program of projects; and
WHEREAS, the contract for financial assistance will impose certain obligations upon the applicant, including the provision of the local share of the project costs; and
WHEREAS, it is required by the U. S. Department of Transportation (DOT), in accordance with the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that in connection with the filing of an application for capital assistance under Section 5309 of the Federal Transit Act, the applicant give an assurance that it will comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the DOT requirements thereunder; and
WHEREAS, it is the goal of San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) that minority business enterprise be used to the fullest extent possible in connection with this/these project(s), and that definite procedures shall be established and administered to ensure that minority businesses shall have the maximum feasible opportunity to compete for contracts when procuring construction contracts, supplies, equipment contracts, or consultant and other services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the Board of Directors of RTD as follows:
1. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to execute and file an application on behalf of RTD with the DOT to aid in the financing of the capital assistance projects for FY 2015, pursuant to Section 5309 of the Federal Transit Act.
2. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to execute and file with such applications an assurance or any other document required by the DOT effectuating the purposes of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
3. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to furnish such additional information as the DOT may require in connection with the application for the program of projects.
4. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to schedule and hold a Public Hearing on Federal Section 5309 Capital Assistance Application, as required by Federal Transit Act regulations, and that Notice of said Public Hearing be given by the General Manager/CEO by publishing said Notice in a newspaper of local circulation at least twice, the first publication to be no later than thirty days before the date of said Public Hearing.
Resolution No. ____ Dated: January 9, 2015 Re: Section 5309 Page 2
5. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to accept and execute, on behalf of RTD, a grant with the DOT pursuant to Section 5309 of the Federal Transit Act.
RESOLUTION NO. ____ DATED: JANUARY 9, 2015
RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (DOT) FOR FY 2015 SECTION 5310 GRANT UNDER THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ACT
WHEREAS, the Secretary of Transportation is authorized to make grants for a mass transportation program of projects; and
WHEREAS, the contract for financial assistance will impose certain obligations upon the applicant, including the provision of the local share of the project costs; and
WHEREAS, it is required by the U. S. Department of Transportation (DOT), in accordance with the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that in connection with the filing of an application for capital assistance under Section 5310 of the Federal Transit Act, the applicant give an assurance that it will comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the DOT requirements thereunder; and
WHEREAS, it is the goal of San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) that minority business enterprise be used to the fullest extent possible in connection with this/these project(s), and that definite procedures shall be established and administered to ensure that minority businesses shall have the maximum feasible opportunity to compete for contracts when procuring construction contracts, supplies, equipment contracts, or consultant and other services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the Board of Directors of RTD as follows:
1. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to execute and file an application on behalf of RTD with the DOT to aid in the financing of the capital and/or operating assistance projects for FY 2015, pursuant to Section 5310 of the Federal Transit Act.
2. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to execute and file with such applications an assurance or any other document required by the DOT effectuating the purposes of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
3. That the General Manager/CEO or designee is authorized to furnish such additional information as the DOT may require in connection with the application for the program of projects.
4. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to schedule and hold a Public Hearing on Federal Section 5310 Assistance Application, as required by Federal Transit Act regulations, and that Notice of said Public Hearing be given by the General Manager/CEO by publishing said Notice in a newspaper of local circulation at least twice, the first publication to be no later than thirty days before the date of said Public Hearing.
Resolution No. ____ Dated: January 9, 2015 Re: Section 5310 Page 2
5. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to accept and execute, on behalf of RTD, a grant with the DOT pursuant to Section 5310 of the Federal Transit Act.
RESOLUTION NO. ____ DATED: JANUARY 9, 2015
RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF APPLICATIONS WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (DOT) FOR FY 2015 SECTION 5311 AND 5311(f) GRANTS UNDER THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ACT
WHEREAS, the Secretary of Transportation is authorized to make grants for a mass transportation program of projects; and
WHEREAS, the contract for financial assistance will impose certain obligations upon the applicant, including the provision of the local share of the project costs; and
WHEREAS, it is required by the U. S. Department of Transportation (DOT), in accordance with the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that in connection with the filing of applications for operating and capital assistance under Sections 5311 and 5311(f) of the Federal Transit Act, the applicant gives an assurance that it will comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the DOT requirements thereunder; and
WHEREAS, it is the goal of San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) that minority business enterprise be used to the fullest extent possible in connection with this/these project(s), and that definite procedures shall be established and administered to ensure that minority businesses shall have the maximum feasible opportunity to compete for contracts when procuring construction contracts, supplies, equipment contracts, or consultant and other services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the Board of Directors of RTD as follows:
1. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to execute and file an application on behalf of RTD with the DOT to aid in the financing of the operating and capital assistance projects for FY 2015, pursuant to Sections 5311 and 5311(f) of the Federal Transit Act.
2. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to execute and file with such applications an assurance or any other document required by the DOT effectuating the purposes of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
3. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to furnish such additional information as the DOT may require in connection with the application for the program of projects.
4. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to schedule and hold a Public Hearing on Federal Sections 5311 and 5311(f) Capital Assistance
Resolution No. ____ Dated: January 9, 2015 Section 5311 Page 2
Applications, as required by Federal Transit Act regulations, and that Notice of said Public Hearing be given by the General Manager/CEO by publishing said Notice in a newspaper of local circulation at least twice, the first publication to be no later than thirty days before the date of said Public Hearing.
5. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to accept and execute, on behalf of RTD, a grant with the DOT pursuant to Sections 5311 and 5311(f) of the Federal Transit Act.
RESOLUTION NO. ____ DATED: JANUARY 9, 2015
RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION OF THE FY 2015 MASTER AGREEMENT AND PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTS FOR STATE-FUNDED TRANSIT PROJECTS WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS)
WHEREAS, San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) may receive state funding from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) now or sometime in the future for transit projects; and
WHEREAS, substantial revisions were made to the programming and funding process for the transportation projects programmed in the State Transportation Improvement Program, by Chapter 622 (SB 45) of the Statutes of 1997; and
WHEREAS, the statutes related to state-funded transit projects require a local or regional implementing agency to execute an agreement with Caltrans before it can be reimbursed for project expenditures; and
WHEREAS, the Caltrans uses Master Agreements for State-Funded Transit Projects, along with associated Program Supplements, for the purpose of administering and reimbursing state transit funds to local agencies; and
WHEREAS, RTD wishes to delegate authorization to execute these agreements and any amendments thereto to the General Manager/CEO or designee.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the Board of Directors of RTD as follows:
1. That the fund recipient agrees to comply with all conditions and requirements set forth in the master agreement and applicable statutes, regulations and guidelines for all state-funded transit projects.
2. That the General Manger/CEO or designee be authorized to execute the Master Agreement and all Program Supplements for State-Funded Transit Projects and any Amendments thereto with Caltrans.
RESOLUTION NO. ____ DATED: JANUARY 9, 2015
RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER/CEO OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE AND FILE GRANT APPLICATIONS AND GRANT AGREEMENTS UNDER THE FY 2016 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT PROGRAM
WHEREAS, San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) is eligible to receive Federal and/or State funding for certain transportation planning related plans through the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans); and
WHEREAS, RTD currently has a blanket resolution in place for the General Manager/CEO or designee to sign applications, execute grant agreements, and take actions to meet the requirements of the grantors; and
WHEREAS, certain grant programs specifically require RTD to obtain a separate resolution for each fiscal year that it applies for funding; and
WHEREAS, many grant programs, including those administered by the Caltrans and the Federal Transit Administration, provide their notice of availability and grant application deadlines at varying times during the fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, having the general and specific grant resolutions allows RTD to proactively respond to grant funding opportunities as they become available; and
WHEREAS, a Fund Transfer Agreement must be executed with Caltrans before such funds can be claimed through the FY 2015 Transportation Planning Grant Programs.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the Board of Directors of RTD as follows:
1. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to file and execute applications on behalf of RTD with Caltrans under the FY 2016 Transportation Planning Grant Program.
2. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to execute all Fund Transfer Agreements and any amendments thereto with Caltrans.
3. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to provide additional information as Caltrans may require in connection with the application for transportation planning projects.
4. That the General Manager/CEO or designee be, and hereby is, authorized to submit and approve a request for reimbursement of funds from Caltrans for the transportation planning project(s). San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 10E Subject: FY 2014 - FY 2015 Unmet Transit Needs Summary Report Page 1 of 8
RECOMMENDATION: ACCEPT FINDINGS OF THE UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS PUBLIC HEARINGS
LEAD STAFF: NATHANIEL ATHERSTONE PLANNING MANAGER
FINANCIAL IMPACT: NONE
BACKGROUND:
The San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) annually collects public comments regarding Unmet Transit Needs and reports the comments to the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG). The process of identifying Unmet Transit Needs and determining whether or not they are reasonable to meet is an annual requirement of SJCOG by the State Transportation Development Act (PUC Section 99238.5 and 99401.5). In support of SJCOG’s annual review, RTD conducts multiple public hearings throughout San Joaquin County and in the City of Stockton to provide the public the opportunity to provide comments in person.
DISCUSSION:
During November 2014, RTD Planning and Service Development staff conducted nine public hearings: six in Stockton, and one each in Tracy, Manteca, and Lodi.
RTD also accepted comments through telephone messages and written comments mailed, e-mailed, faxed, or delivered in person. The public comment period was closed 5:00 p.m., Tuesday, November 25, 2014. RTD received a total of 25 comments.
RTD notified the public of these hearings and the comment process through an advertisement placed in the Stockton Record and with public notices posted on RTD’s buses, website, and social media.
RTD staff provided this report to SJCOG for incorporation into the Unmet Transit Needs report for Fiscal Year 2015.
Page 1 of 8
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 10E Subject: FY 2014 - FY 2015 Unmet Transit Needs Summary Report Page 2 of 8
Summary of Public Input Unmet Transit Needs
November 2014
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) conducted nine public hearings to solicit public comments regarding Unmet Transit Needs. The intent of these hearings is to identify potential service needs that are currently not being met. These public hearings also allow the public to express comments to RTD staff regarding existing service. Staff will reply to service-related concerns individually and outside this hearing process.
RTD received a total of 25 comments from the public hearings (22), through e-mail (2), and from Facebook (1).
Table 1 – Public Hearing Locations and Attendance
Meeting Location Attendees Monday, November 3, 2014, 5:30 p.m.
Tracy Transit Center – Room 104 0 Tracy, CA 95376
Tuesday, November 4, 2014, 5:00 p.m.
Downtown Transit Center - Boardroom 3 Stockton, CA 95202
Wednesday, November 5, 2014, 5:30 p.m.
Lodi Public Library 0 Lodi, CA 95240
Thursday, November 6, 2014, 5:30 p.m.
Manteca Transit Center 2 Manteca, CA 95336
Thursday, November 6, 2014, 7:00 p.m.
Spring Fellowship Church 8 Morada Area Association Meeting Stockton, CA 95212
Friday, November 7, 2014, 10:00 a.m.
San Joaquin RTD Board of Directors Meeting 12 Downtown Transit Center - Boardroom Stockton, CA 95202
Page 2 of 8
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 10E Subject: FY 2014 - FY 2015 Unmet Transit Needs Summary Report Page 3 of 8
Monday, November 10, 2014, 10:00 a.m. and 2:40 p.m.
San Joaquin County Office of Education 6 Stockton, CA 95206
Monday, November 10, 2014, 3:45 p.m.
Christian Life Center – West Lane 0 Stockton, CA 95210
Wednesday, November 12, 2014, 5:15 p.m.
UJ’s Family Restaurant 1 Stockton, CA 95207
Table 2 – Types of Comments Received
Method Comments Public Hearing Meetings 22 Mail 0 Email 2 Phone 0 Fax 0 Walk-In 0 Facebook 1 Total 25
Page 3 of 8
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 10E
Subject: FY 2014 - FY 2015 Unmet Transit Needs Summary Report Page 4 of 8
Public Hearing Customer Comments Regarding Unmet Transit Needs
# NAME Public Hearing Date Questions/Comments Location 1 Hermanjildo Facebook Comment 10/22/2014 The biggest complaint that I've heard from my fellow Candido - Paul passengers is the limitations caused by decreased weekend Montes service and the service to French Camp (other than San Joaquin General Hospital). Does this company not realize that the township of French Camp has a large aging population that has given up driving(?) They are in need of bus services.
I feel that this company (RTD) should abolish the weekend 700 series and implement the weekday routes but in a limited service. A few years ago I recall the weekday routes would run every two hours. Even though the budget is significantly couldn't we run the routes every three hours? or four?
In addition to my past comment every morning I ride the bus to Wilcox at Waterloo to get work. I have to walk across Highway 88 which is a very dangerous thing to do! I have brought concerns to (RTD staff) about possibly implementing a stop on the south west side of that intersection. I feel very uncomfortable walking across the highway to my workplace being that traffic does not have to stop for pedestrians. Not only is it unsafe to do but it is also illegal to do considering that fact that it is technically Jay Walking. 2 Helen and Email 11/2/2014 First, I want to thank you (RTD) for the services you provide Mary Reid and the level of professionalism exhibited by your (RTD) drivers and other personnel. It is clear many of these workers care about their work and do the best they can for the consumers.
I have two or three requests for now: 1.) That the Metro Express Route 43 be continued to run later and in conjunction with the Metro 40 route. For example, if the last Metro 40 bus gets to the triangle at 9:30, then perhaps the Metro 43 last routes east and west can be at 9pm or 9:30. There are times I want to participate in a later activity along the Metro 40 route,
Page 4 of 8
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 10E
Subject: FY 2014 - FY 2015 Unmet Transit Needs Summary Report Page 5 of 8
but cannot do so because the last Metro 43 route to Mariners is at 7:30pm.
Second, it would be great to go shopping and/or consider working at Trinity Parkway Route 66 on the weekends. However, there is no SJRTD option to that shopping center on Saturday and Sundays.
Finally, not sure WHAT can be done about this ... but people need to stop littering at the bus stops and the Triangle. There are garbage cans available, but people still litter. It's ridiculous, though I am not aware of the best way to change this behavior. Maybe you all can think of some ideas. 3 Wendy Email 11/4/2014 It would be nice if (RTD) bus 80 could run later, both Cornwall northbound and southbound. At one point there was a run that left Pershing and Alpine a little after 9pm northbound and left the mall at 9:30pm. It would be nice to have the later runs again so I can make sure I can get home from events at the University of the Pacific without having to find a ride.
In addition, it would be nice if bus 745 on weekends would go all the way down Rosemarie to Quail Lakes so it would be possible to go the CVS, S-mart Foods and restaurants near Quail Lakes/Rosemarie and March Lane. The bus currently goes up Grouse Run and does not do the full loop the 61 does on weekdays. It would make a lot more sense for the 745 to do the same route the 61 does during the week, just eliminating the portion from Country Club to DTC. 4 Jesse Lopez San Joaquin RTD 11/4/2014 We are satisfied with the service RTD is providing. James Young DTC- Boardroom at Denise Maurer 5:00pm 5 2 attendees Manteca Transit Center 11/6/2014 RTD does not provide service from Manteca to Modesto. at 5:30pm RTD does not provide service from Manteca to Tracy. 6 8 attendees Spring Fellowship 11/6/2014 Morada residents do not require additional RTD transit service Church at this time. Morada Area Association Monthly Meeting at 7:00pm 7 Alan Wagner San Joaquin RTD 11/7/2014 RTD should operate more weekend and holiday service since all Board of Directors people pay taxes for transit service – including areas with no service on these days.
Page 5 of 8
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 10E
Subject: FY 2014 - FY 2015 Unmet Transit Needs Summary Report Page 6 of 8
Meeting DTC- Boardroom at 10:00am One bus operated on Labor Day and that is not enough holiday service for the city of Stockton. 8 Cathy Rivas San Joaquin RTD 11/7/2014 Life Line service provided on Labor Day was a help to some, Board of Directors but not enough service for most working people on holidays. Meeting DTC- Boardroom at 10:00am RTD does not operate nighttime Route 43 trips to connect with Route 40 at the Hammer Triangle Station. 9 Mary Amador San Joaquin RTD 11/7/2014 RTD does not operate direct service between Rose Marie and Board of Directors West Lane and on Harding between Cherokee and downtown Meeting DTC- Stockton. Boardroom at 10:00am RTD does not operate service to the Duel Vocational Institute located outside of Tracy. 10 Leona Bates San Joaquin RTD 11/7/2014 Togninali/Little John’s Creek neighborhood has no weekend Board of Directors service to attend church. Meeting DTC- Boardroom at 10:00am 11 Bernice San Joaquin RTD 11/7/2014 RTD does not operate Route 60 weekday service between the Armento Board of Directors hours of 8:50 a.m. and 12:50 p.m., gap not convenient for Meeting DTC- passengers and RTD Text info is not clear on this. Boardroom at 10:00am 12 Jesse Lopez San Joaquin RTD 11/7/2014 Is very pleased with the service (RTD) and courteous operators Board of Directors on Routes 43 and 44. Meeting DTC- Boardroom at 10:00am 13 Edward San Joaquin RTD 11/7/2014 On weekends Route 40 scheduled northbound departure from Church Board of Directors DTC is often up to 10 minutes late and missing connections at Meeting DTC- the Hammer Triangle Station with Route 43, one woman lost Boardroom at 10:00am her job due to this missed connection.
RTD should operate the Articulated buses on more daily Route 40 trips, especially at times when Delta College students are riding. 14 Rev. DeWitt San Joaquin RTD 11/7/2014 RTD should operate buses that accommodate all larger Board of Directors wheelchair and scooter sizes and provide electric charging Meeting DTC- stations to recharge motor batteries, sometimes chairs run out Boardroom at 10:00am of charge and people are stranded.
Operators should ensure that riders use appropriate language.
Page 6 of 8
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 10E
Subject: FY 2014 - FY 2015 Unmet Transit Needs Summary Report Page 7 of 8
15 Alan Wagner San Joaquin RTD 11/7/2014 RTD should retain Call Center staffing to answer public Board of Directors information calls on all service days, including weekends. Meeting DTC- Boardroom at 10:00am 16 Cathy Rivas San Joaquin RTD 11/7/2014 Route 43 should operate later trips on all service days to Board of Directors connect with all Route 40 trips at the Hammer Triangle Station. Meeting DTC- Boardroom at 10:00am 17 Mary Amador San Joaquin RTD 11/7/2014 Operate additional bus trips on Thursday and Friday. Board of Directors Meeting DTC- Operate earlier daily trips from the San Joaquin County Jail to Boardroom at 10:00am downtown Stockton 18 Abbie Kenyon San Joaquin RTD 11/7/2014 • RTD operates no transit service on West Lane between Board of Directors Harding Way and Alpine Avenue where a major charter school Meeting DTC- is located Boardroom at 10:00am • RTD does not provide mid-morning service to all schools for parent teacher conferences • RTD does not provide service to all nine Catholic Churches on weekends • RTD does not provide mid-day service on Route 76 to St. Mary’s Dining Hall for those who need free lunch meals • RTD does not provide evening transit service after dark 19 Abbie Kenyon San Joaquin RTD 11/7/2014 • Restore 30 minute frequency to Route 76 Board of Directors • Provide more bus stops on Route 77 Meeting DTC- • Provide bus stops at all major shopping malls and centers Boardroom at 10:00am • Operate more weekend service • RTD could operate more weekend service if they used Hopper type routes and part-time drivers • Operate more evening service when it is dark outside • Operate more bus trips on Routes 51 and 52 • Operate more 300 series trips so that parents can use transit to attend parent-teacher meetings on school campuses 20 James Davis San Joaquin County 11/10/2014 Badly need service to Modesto, Modesto Junior College, and Naomi Davis Office of Education the mall. Maria Escobar Venture Auditorium at was present 2:40pm Would like to see service to Modesto, to Modesto Junior College to listen and the mall. Would also like to see transportation to the city of Tracy. 21 Anthony San Joaquin County 11/10/2014 It is indeed dark when we go outside to wait for the bus. I Dickerson Office of Education have to wake up very early in order to catch the 91 bus going to school. I am exhausted during school because of this. I get
Page 7 of 8
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 10E
Subject: FY 2014 - FY 2015 Unmet Transit Needs Summary Report Page 8 of 8
Venture Auditorium at up at 5:30 a.m. There was a time where I once got on the 2:40pm wrong bus going home because I accidently took the Manteca one. I was supposed to go home on the Stockton bus. I was not able to get back home until 8:00pm at night. 22 Magdalena San Joaquin County 11/10/2014 Please wish to have adjustment on Route 85 time 1:19pm to Foules Office of Education 1:45pm because my child gets off school at 1:35pm and also Venture Auditorium at on the evening route because of the athletic program for the 2:40pm kids from schools around the Transworld area. Thanks a lot. More student discount would be great. 23 Jesse Lopez San Joaquin County 11/10/2014 I am satisfied with the service RTD is providing. Office of Education Venture Auditorium at 2:40pm 24 Bridget San Joaquin County 11/10/2014 Route 91 needs to have a 1:45 pickup. Propose a Dial-A-Ride Nichols Office of Education route to start as a pilot program. Fees: propose transfer with Venture Auditorium at neighboring cities Manteca, Lathrop, Tracy etc. to Manteca 2:40pm Station to ride 91 to Transworld. 25 Jesse Lopez UJ's Family Restaurant 11/12/2014 No comments.
Page 8 of 8
RESOLUTION NO. ____ DATED: JANUARY 9, 2015
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS OF THE FY 2014–FY 2015 UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS PUBLIC HEARINGS
WHEREAS, San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) requires public transit agencies in San Joaquin County to hold public hearings regarding Unmet Transit Needs; and
WHEREAS, San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) is a public transit agency in San Joaquin County and is responsible for Unmet Transit Needs in the unincorporated County as well as within the Stockton Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, RTD staff conducted in November 2014 nine public hearings to receive comment regarding Unmet Transit Needs; and
WHEREAS, the summary and findings of the public comments are documented and recorded within this report.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the San Joaquin Regional Transit District Board of Directors that the Findings of the FY 2014-FY 2015 Unmet Transit Needs Public Hearing be, and hereby are, approved.
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 11A Subject: Award a Contract to Valley Power Systems North, Inc. Page 1 of 2
RECOMMENDATION: AWARD A CONTRACT TO VALLEY POWER SYSTEMS NORTH, INC. FOR THE PURCHASE OF 13 MOTOR COACH INDUSTRIES (MCI) ENGINES, WITH AN OPTION TO PURCHASE UP TO FOUR ADDITIONAL ENGINES FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $575,346.07
LEAD STAFF: ADRIANA DeBORBA CONTRACTS SPECIALIST
FINANCIAL IMPACT: $575,346.07 100% STATE: FY 2010-FY 2011 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION MODERNIZATION, IMPROVEMENT, AND SERVICE ENHANCEMENT ACCOUNT PROGRAM (PTMISEA) - MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT
BACKGROUND:
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has certified the engines used in San Joaquin Regional Transit District’s (RTD’s) coaches in accordance with emission regulations. As a condition of this certification, the engines must be replaced when they reach life expectancy and mileage requirements, with engines that meet or produce fewer emissions than the unit being replaced.
Currently, RTD’s fleet has thirteen MCI engines from 2001 due for replacement. RTD’s maintenance staff also identified up to four additional engines that may become due for replacement during the course of this Contract.
DISCUSSION:
In accordance with RTD’s procurement threshold for materials, supplies, and equipment requiring formal solicitation, staff identified the Invitation for Bid (IFB) process as the procurement strategy.
Staff conducted outreach to fifty-three registered vendors within RTD’s E-Bid Procurement system, and contacted an additional forty-one unregistered vendors. The IFB was also publicly advertised in The Record. As this project is 100% state funded, no Disadvantage Business Enterprise (DBE) participation goal was established; however, staff included DBE firms in outreach as part of RTD’s normal practice.
On October 3, 2014, RTD staff released the Invitation for Bid (IFB) for the purchase of MCI engines on RTD’s E-Bid website and a total of ten vendors downloaded the IFB. RTD staff held a pre-bid conference/teleconference on October 16, 2014.
On November 13, 2014, RTD received one Bid from Valley Power Systems North, Inc of Sacramento, CA. Staff conducted a single-bid analysis and determined that adequate and fair competition was solicited for this Project. As part of the standard pre-award process, staff San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 11A Subject: Award a Contract to Valley Power Systems North, Inc. Page 2 of 2
checked the Bid for debarment, price accuracy*, references, current licenses, and deemed each responsive.
*The Bid received from Valley Power Systems North, Inc. contained a minor mathematical error resulting in a $0.04 difference. Bidder corrected and initialed the revised total in the time frame allotted by RTD. RTD waived this as a minor irregularity and determined the correct Bid amount as $575,346.07.
Staff performed a cost/price analysis as a part of the pre-award evaluation and determined that the price provided by Valley Power Systems North, Inc. is fair and reasonable.
Attached is a resolution, for the Board’s consideration, authorizing the General Manager/CEO and Board Chair to award and execute a Contract to Valley Power Systems North, Inc. for a total Contract amount not to exceed $575,346.07 for the purchase of 13 MCI engines, with an option to purchase up to four additional engines. RESOLUTION NO. ____ DATED: JANUARY 9, 2014
RESOLUTION TO AWARD A CONTRACT TO VALLEY POWER SYSTEMS NORTH, INC. FOR THE PURCHASE OF THIRTEEN MCI ENGINES, WITH AN OPTION TO PURCHASE UP TO FOUR ADDITIONAL ENGINES, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $575,346.07
WHEREAS, San Joaquin Regional Transit District’s (RTD’s) fleet contains thirteen MCI engines from 2001 due for replacement in accordance with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) emission regulations; and
WHEREAS, RTD’s maintenance staff identified up to four additional engines that may become due for replacement during the course of this Contract; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with RTD’s procurement threshold for materials, supplies and equipment requiring formal solicitation, staff identified the Invitation for Bid (IFB) process as the procurement strategy; and
WHEREAS, on October 3, 2014, staff released the Invitation for Bid (IFB); and
WHEREAS, on November 13, 2014 RTD received one responsive and responsible Bid from Valley Power Systems North Inc.; and
WHEREAS, RTD procurement staff performed a price analysis and deemed the Bid from Valley Power Systems North Inc. in the amount of $575,346.07 to be fair and reasonable.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the Board of Directors of RTD as follows:
1) That a Contract with Valley Power Systems North, Inc. for the purchase of thirteen MCI engines, with an option to purchase up to four additional engines, for a total Contract amount not to exceed $575,346.07, be, and hereby is, approved.
2) That the Board Chair and the General Manager/CEO be, and they hereby are, authorized and directed to finalize and execute the Contract with Valley Power Systems North, Inc. for the purchase of thirteen MCI engines, with an option to purchase up to four additional engines, in a total Contract amount not to exceed $575,346.07.
3) That the Board Chair and the General Manager/CEO, acting separately be, and they hereby are, authorized and directed to finalize and execute such other agreements and amendments to this agreement, and to take such other actions as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the intent and purpose of this resolution.
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 11B Subject: Approve an Eighth Amendment to the Contract of Paratransit, Inc. Page 1 of 1
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AN EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT WITH PARATRANSIT, INC. FOR LARGE URBAN AREA TRAVEL TRAINING SERVICES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $95,970.00 IN A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $685,900.00
LEAD STAFF: SHARON MILLER DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT
FINANCIAL IMPACT: $40,776.00 (80% FEDERAL 5317) $10,194.00 (20% LOCAL) $45,000.00 (OPERATING)
BACKGROUND:
On October 21, 2008, the San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) Board of Directors awarded a contract to Paratransit, Inc. for Large Urban Area Travel Training in an amount not to exceed $438,000.00. The contract provides for the identification and training of individuals within RTD’s service area to use fixed route bus service or appropriate demand response Dial-A- Ride (DAR) service; extend outreach efforts with public schools, service agencies, and care providers within RTD’s service area; and identify and refer customers to the travel training program.
DISCUSSION:
On November 19, 2013, the RTD Board of Directors approved Resolution 5493 to award to RTD the grant “Stockton Large Urban Section 5317 New Freedom (NF) Funds for Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2012.” RTD received the grant and partial funds were awarded as Amendment 7 of the subject contract on January 3, 2014, by the RTD Board of Directors under Resolution 5505.
Staff would like to add the remaining grant funds to the contract to continue the Large Urban Travel Training Services and perform an assessment of the program. Paratransit will conduct follow up surveys on each successful trainee after the completion of training to determine the effectiveness of the training and whether RTD should pursue future grants of this nature.
Staff recommends the Board approve an eighth amendment to the contract with Paratransit, Inc. for Large Urban Area Travel Training Services in an amount not to exceed $95,970.00 in a total contract amount not to exceed $685,900.00. RESOLUTION NO. _____ DATED: JANUARY 9, 2015
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AN EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT WITH PARATRANSIT, INC., FOR LARGE URBAN AREA TRAVEL TRAINING SERVICES
WHEREAS, on October 21, 2008, the San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) Board of Directors awarded a contract to Paratransit, Inc. for Large Urban Area Travel Training Services in an amount no to exceed $438,000.00; and
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2013, the RTD Board of Directors approved Resolution 5493 to award the grant “Stockton Large Urban Section 5317 New Freedom (NF) Funds for Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2012”; and
WHEREAS, on January 3, 2014, the RTD Board of Directors approved Resolution 5505 to award a portion the grant to Paratransit, Inc. for Large Urban Area Travel Training Services; and
WHEREAS, staff would like to add the remaining grant funds to the contract to continue the Large Urban Travel Training Services and perform an assessment of the program; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends the RTD Board approve an Eighth Amendment to the contract with Paratransit, Inc. for Large Urban Area Travel Training Services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the Board of Directors of RTD as follows:
1) That the Eighth Amendment to Contract No. S-2008-017 with Paratransit, Inc. for Large Urban Area Travel training Services, increasing the contract not to exceed amount by $95,970.00, in a total contract amount not to exceed $685,900.00, be, and hereby is, approved.
2) That the Chair of the Board and the General Manager/CEO be, and they hereby are, authorized and directed to award and execute the Eighth Amendment to the contract with Paratransit, Inc. for Large Urban Area Travel Training Services, increasing the contract not to exceed amount by $95,970.00, in a total contract amount not to exceed $685,900.00.
3) That the Chair of the Board and the General Manager/CEO, acting separately be, and they hereby are, authorized and directed to execute such other agreements and amendments to this agreement, and to take such other actions as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out in the intent and purpose of this resolution.
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 11C Subject: January 2015 Service Improvements Page 1 of 1
RECOMMENDATION: ADOPT JANUARY 2015 SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS
LEAD STAFF: NATE KNODT SERVICE DEVELOPMENT MANAGER
FINANCIAL IMPACT: NONE
BACKGROUND:
In August 2014, San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) implemented temporary service changes to Route 71 and Route 85. These changes were significant enough to require a public hearing process to seek and review any customer comments before seeking Board adoption.
DISCUSSION:
RTD’s Fare and Service Change Public Comment Policy requires RTD to seek public comments prior to the implementation of “any permanent change which increases fares or results in 1) a 25 percent or more reduction of the number of daily transit revenue vehicle miles of a route for the day(s) of the week for which the change is made, or, 2) a 25 percent or more reduction of the number of transit route miles of a route.”
During November 2014, RTD Planning and Service Development staff conducted nine public hearings: six in Stockton, and one each in Tracy, Manteca, and Lodi as part of the Unmet Transit Needs hearing process. Staff took this opportunity to additionally seek comments regarding the proposed January 2015 service changes.
RTD staff received no comments regarding the temporary service modifications during the public hearing process; however, staff did receive many helpful comments regarding other routes. In addition to customer comments received during the public hearing process, Service Development staff carefully reviewed the effectiveness of the temporary service changes. This review included analysis of recorded ridership totals and numerous bus observation trips to plan complementary service improvements that will better meet customer needs.
Based on the staff review, staff recommend the formal adoption of those changes with minor modifications: modifying Route 85 and adding an additional peak-hour route (Route 385) to improve the effectiveness of service delivery in south Stockton. No changes are proposed to Route 71. Additional minor service changes are planned for January 2015, including a schedule adjustment on many routes, to improve connections for RTD customers.
Staff was able to design these improvements without increasing overall service costs. RESOLUTION NO. _____ DATED: JANUARY 9, 2015
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS OF THE PROPOSED JANUARY 2015 SERVICE CHANGE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND TO IMPLEMENT THE PROPOSED SERVICE CHANGES EFFECTIVE JANUARY 25, 2015
WHEREAS, San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) implemented temporary service changes to Route 71 and Route 85 in August 2014; and
WHEREAS, RTD staff conducted public hearings and reviewed public comments regarding the proposed January 2015 service changes in accordance with RTD’s Fare and Service Change Public Comment Policy; and
WHEREAS, RTD received no comments about the August 2014 service changes, reviewed additional customer route comments, and reviewed performance metrics for the modified routes; and
WHEREAS, staff was able to design the January 2015 service changes to improve customer connectivity without increasing overall service costs;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the RTD Board of Directors that the findings of the proposed January 2015 service change hearings are approved, and that the General Manager/CEO be, and hereby is, authorized to implement the proposed service changes effective January 25, 2015.
San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) January 2015 Board Meeting Item 12A Subject: Regional Transportation Center (RTC) Update Page 1 of 1
INFORMATION ITEM: REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION CENTER (RTC) UPDATE
LEAD STAFF: WENDELL KRELL DIRECTOR OF FACILITIES
FINANCIAL IMPACT: NONE
DISCUSSION:
A presentation will be provided to the Board. San Joaquin RTD
FINANCIAL REPORT
November 30, 2014 FISCAL YEAR 2015 San Joaquin RTD
November 30, 2014
Revenue and Expense Summary …………………………………………………………………………………………. 1 Graph ( Total YTD Expenses vs. Annual Budget ) ………………………………………………………….………… 2 Graph ( YTD Expenses Composition) ………………………………………………...……………………….………… 2 San Joaquin RTD Revenue & Expense Summary Year to Date Comparison to Annual Budget For the Period Ending November 30, 2014 (41.67% of Fiscal Year )
% of YTD Year to Date Annual Budget Annual Budget Amount vs. Amount Balance Annual Budget
REVENUES PASSENGER FARES & SPECIAL FARES 4,774,992 1,902,755 2,872,237 39.85% NON-TRANSPORTATION REVENUES 149,680 46,975 102,705 31.38% FEDERAL GRANTS (5307) 4,378,621 1,824,425 2,554,196 41.67% OTHER FEDERAL GRANTS 997,504 415,838 581,666 41.69% PROPERTY TAXES 786,730 347,875 438,855 44.22% TDA - STA 3,000,000 1,250,000 1,750,000 41.67% TDA - LTF 12,937,330 5,390,554 7,546,776 41.67% OTHER LOCAL GRANTS OPERATING 1,374,280 - 1,374,280 0.00% MEASURE K 4,837,975 1,961,373 2,876,602 40.54%
TOTAL REVENUES 33,237,111 13,139,795 20,097,316 39.53%
EXPENSES WAGES AND FRINGE BENEFITS 17,112,684 6,350,764 10,761,920 37.11% SERVICES 3,033,116 1,088,311 1,944,805 35.88% MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 3,622,714 1,356,647 2,266,067 37.45% UTILITIES 652,564 221,442 431,122 33.93% INSURANCE 991,317 234,373 756,944 23.64% TAXES 265,256 99,174 166,082 37.39% PURCHASED TRANSPORTATION 6,678,959 2,976,046 3,702,913 44.56% MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES 880,501 241,671 638,830 27.45%
TOTAL EXPENSES 33,237,111 12,568,428 20,668,684 37.81%
Net Revenue (Deficit) - 571,368
Page 1 Total YTD Expenses as of November 30, 2014 (41.67% of Fiscal Year) Actual Expenditures for five months 41.67%
Remaining se months 58.3
FY2015 Expenses as of November 30, 2014 ($12,568,428)
WAGES AND FRINGE BENEFITS 50%
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES 2%
SERVICES 8% PURCHASED TRANSPORTATION 24% MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 11% TAXES 1%
INSURANCE UTILITIES 2% 2%
Page 2
City of Escalon, Development Services Department PRESS RELEASE
Contact: John Andoh FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Transit Coordinator October 15, 2014 Cell (209) 321-1334
UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS PUBLIC HEARING IN ESCALON
The City of Escalon along with the San Joaquin Council of Governments is sponsoring an unmet transit needs public hearing to hear from its residents comments regarding how transit services can be provided better in the City and to other areas in San Joaquin County. This hearing is held on an annual basis. Once transit needs are met, the Transportation Development Act (TDA) funding that is used to operate and maintain eTrans is then distributed to fund roadway, bicycle and pederstrian projects within the City limits.
The hearing will be held on Monday, November 17, 2014 at 7:00 PM, at the Escalon City Hall, 2060 McHenry Avenue, Escalon.
For more information or to submit comments, please contact John Andoh, Transit Coordinator at City of Escalon, Development Services Department, 2060 McHenry Avenue, Escalon, CA 95320, call (209) 321-1334, email [email protected] or fax to (209) 691-7439.
For information on eTrans, please call (209) 541-6645 or visit www.cityofescalon.org.
# # # #
CITY OF LATHROP CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY OCTOBER 6 2014 700 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY HALL 390 Towne Centre Drive Lathrop CA 95330
MINUTES pi Fecc NOTE Thep Ns a Ctsed Session which commenced at 500 nm The Reaular Meetina reconvened at 703 vm
1 PRELIMINARY
1 CALL TO ORDER Vice Mayor Ornelas called the meeting to order at 500 pm
12 CLOSED SESSION
12 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL Anticipated Litigation Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Government Code Section 549569b 4 Potential Cases
RECONVENE Mayor Dhaliwal reconvened the meeting at 703 pm
12 REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Salvador Navarrete reported that staff was provided with direction and no other reportable action was taken
13 ROLL CALL Present Mayor Dhaliwal Vice Mayor Ornelas Councilmembers Akinjo Dresser and Salcedo
Absent None
14 INVOCATION Reverend Lucius Davis provided the invocation
15 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Reverend Lucius Davis led the pledge of allegiance
16 ANNOUNCEMENTS BY MAYOR CITY MANAGER
City Manager Steve Salvatore announced public information meeting regarding Manthey Road Bridge Replacement Project to be held at the Lathrop Generations Center on November 5 2014 at 600 pm
17 INFORMATIONAL ITEMS None
18 DECLARATION OF CONFLIGTS OF INTEREST None
October 6 2014 Lathrop Ciy Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 2 PRESENTATIONS
21 PROCLAMATION DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AWARENESS MONTH
Vice Mayor Ornelas presented the proclamation to Diane ORourke Womens Center Youth Family Services Ms ORourke commented on services available
2 LATHROP ROAD GRADE SEPARATION AND LATHROP ROAD WIDENING PROJECT UPDATES
Public Works Director Patrick Flynn introduced Senior Civil Engineer Michael King who provided the updates A question and answer period ensued throughout the presentation City Manager Steve Salvatore and Public Works Director Patrick Flynn provided additional information Mayor Dhaliwal opened for public comment Dan Doyle Lathrop CA requested clarification on proposed road closures Reverend Lucius Davis Lathrop CA expressed concern with condition of Harlan Road There were no other speakers
23 SOLAR PROGRAM UPDATE
Public Works Director Patrick Flynn provided an update A question and answer period followed City Manager Steve Salvatore City Attorney Salvador Navarrete and Doug Stoecker Terraverde Renewable Partners provided additional information
24 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT UPDATE
Community Development Director Rebecca Willis provided an update A question and answer period ensued throughout the presentation City Manager Steve Salvatore and City Attorney Salvador Navarrete provided additional information
3 CITIZENS FORUM
Dr Willie Anderson Image Changers Church commented on Domestic Violence Awareness Month the various programs provided by the ministry and Image Changers Church 3r anniversary celebration Reverend Lucius Davis Lathrop CA expressed appreciation for the City Council and City staff and expressed various concerns including size of street light banners and graffiti in Stonebridge neighborhood Craig Weis Lathrop CA expressed concern with graffiti in Sangalang Park and Stonebridge neighborhood
4 CONSENT CALENDAR
On a motion by Councilmember Akinjo seconded by Vice Mayor Ornelas the City Council approved the Consent Calendar by the following roll call vote unless otherwise indicated
Odober 6 2014 Lathrop City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 Ayes Akinjo Dresser Ornelas Salcedo and Dhaliwal Noes None Absent None Abstain None
41 WAIVING OF READING OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
Waived the reading of ordinances and resoluYions on agenda unless otherwise requested by the Mayor or a Councilmember
42 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approved Minutes for the Regular Meeting of September 15 2014
43 LATHROP CONSOLIDATED TREATMENT FACILITY EXPANSION WW 1015 AGREEMENT AMENDMENTS WITH RMC AND STANTEC
A question and answer period ensued Public Works Director Patrick Flynn provided information
Adopted Resolution No 143823 approving Agreement Amendment No 2 with RMC Water and Environment and Agreement Amendment No 4 with Stantec Inc to provide engineering services for the Lathrop Consolidated Treatment Facility Expansion Project WW 1015
5 SCHEDULED ITEM
51 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS FOR FY 1516
Public Works Director Patrick Flynn introduced Senior Civil Engineer Michael King who provided the overview A question and answer period followed City Manager Steve Salvatore and Daniel Meza San oaquin Council of Governments provided additional information Mayor Dhaliwal opened the public hearing Reverend Lucius Davis Lathrop CA commented on the need for direct bus routes between Lathrop and Manteca Yvette Sharifnejad Lathrop CA commented on process for submitting unmet transit needs Mayor Dhaliwal closed the public hearing Councilmembers commented on the matter No further action was taken
6 COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
61 COUNCIL REFERRALS None
62 MAYOR COUNCILMEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS
Council of Governments DresserDhaliwal
Councilmember Dresser reported discussions related to development of agricultural land
October 6 2014 Lathrop City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission Dresser
Councilmember Dresser reported that rider is increasing and the potential realignment of ACE train routes
63 MAYORS COMMITTEE REPORTS
Memorial Day Veterans Day Celebration Committee
Parks and Recreation Director Zach Jones reported event to be held on November 11 2014
Lathrop Holiday Parade Committee
Parks and Recreation Director Zach Jones reported event to be held on December 13 2014
64 MAYOR COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
Councilmember Salcedo expressed appreciation to Lathrop Police Services Councilmember Dresser commended the community on its involvement in reporting crime Councilmembers thanked those in attendance
7 AD70URNMENT Mayor Dhaliwal adjourned the meeting at 848 pm
Mitz Oftiz 1C City Clerk
October 6 2014 Lathrop City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4
MINUTES OF THE MANTECA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING HELD OCTOBER 21, 2014
The regular meeting of the Manteca City Council held October 21, 2014, in the Manteca City Council Chambers, located at 1001 W. Center Street, Manteca, California, was called to order by Mayor Weatherford at 7:00 p.m. Invocation was given by Fire Chief Kirk Waters and was followed by the flag salute.
ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Harris, Hernandez, Moorhead and Mayor Weatherford were present. Mayor Pro Tempore DeBrum was absent (excused).
PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
1. South San Joaquin Irrigation District (SSJID) – Accept donation of pickup truck from SSJID to Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) Program
General Manager Jeff Shields and Communications Coordinator Troylene Vallow of SSJID were present to accept a Certificate of Recognition from the City Council for the donation of a pickup truck to the CERT Program.
2. Retirement Certificate – Jeff Koester
Jeff Koester was present to receive a Retirement Certificate of Recognition for many years of service to the City of Manteca.
A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approve regular meeting minutes of the Manteca City Council of October 7, 2014. 2. Waive the final reading by substitution of the title and adopt Ordinance No. 1547, an ordinance amending Manteca Municipal Code 2.04 City Council, Section 2.04.010, Meetings – Time and Place. 3. Waive the final reading by substitution of the title and adopt Ordinance No. 1548, an ordinance amending Manteca Municipal Code Title 17, Section 17.48.060(F)(2)(A-C), Landscape Care, Maintenance, and Replacement, Title 13, Section 13.04.210 and 13.04.21(B)(2) and (7), Unlawful Water Use, and Section 13.04.20, Penalties. 4. Approve a budget appropriation of $2,250,000 from PFIP Transportation Zone 3 Designated Reserves to Account No. 580.00.00.900.8150.13 (Capital Improvements Zone 3), determine George Reed, Inc. to be the lowest responsible bidder for the Existing Austin Road/State Route 99 (SR99) Interchange Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Project No. 11035, award contract to same for an amount MINUTES OF THE MANTECA CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 21, 2014 PAGE 2
not to exceed $2,213,180 and authorize the Mayor to sign all necessary documents. 5. Approve an amendment to the FY 14/15 CIP Project No. 14041 (Union Road Pump Station Improvements) increasing the budget by $160,230 for a total of $450,230, approve a budget appropriation of $160,230 from Sewer Maintenance and Operation Fund Undesignated Reserves to Account No. 640.00.00.900.8050.10 for the Union Road Pump Station Improvements (CIP No. 14041), determine Conco West, Inc. to be the lowest responsible bidder for the Union Road Pump Station Improvements Project (CIP) No. 14041, award contract to same for an amount not to exceed $323,000, authorize the Mayor to sign all necessary documents and authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed 10% of contract amount. 6. Approve plans and specifications and authorize a call for bids for the Parking Lot Rehabilitation at 173 E. Yosemite Avenue and 114 N. Grant Street. 7. Approve changes to the HOME First-time Homebuyer (FTHB) Down Payment Assistance program, administered by San Joaquin County Community Development administered by San Joaquin County Community Development Department, effective immediately. 8. Waive the first reading by substitution of the title and introduce Ordinance No. 1549, Amending Ordinance No. 1513, Appendix A, Designated Positions to the Conflict of Interest Code for the City of Manteca. 9. Adopt a resolution amending the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP) development fees for 2015. 10. Approve a budget appropriation of $5,000 from the Vehicle Fund Undesignated Reserves to Account No. 820.11.00.000.7000.01 to cover the balance of the purchase of two police motorcycles. 11. Approve First Amendment to Fire and Emergency Medical Dispatching Services Agreement.
Councilman Harris pulled Item No. 11 for further discussion.
ACTION: APPROVE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS NOS. 1 THROUGH 10 AS PRESENTED. (Moorhead/Hernandez)The motion carried unanimously.
Discussion of Item A.11 Councilman Harris pulled Item A.11 and questioned the cost effectiveness of the current arrangement for fire and emergency medical dispatching services. The Fire Chief responded.
ACTION: APPROVE ITEM NO. A.11. (Harris/Moorhead) The motion carried unanimously. MINUTES OF THE MANTECA CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 21, 2014 PAGE 3
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Consider making the required findings to file the Notice of Determination for the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND-04-17) as adequate environmental documentation in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and approving the Tesoro Park Tentative Subdivision Map; 1201 Tesoro Drive.
The City Manager introduced the duly noticed public hearing to consider approval of the Tesoro Park Tentative Subdivision Map. The Community Development Director provided a brief overview of the proposed subdivision and related conditions of approval.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
Ron Cheek, RLC Associates representing the applicant/developer addressed the Council requesting approval of the proposed tentative subdivision map and concurring with staff’s recommendations.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
ACTION: ADOPT A RESOLUTION MAKING THE REQUIRED FINDINGS TO FILE THE NOTICE OF DETERMINATION FOR THE PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DELARATION (MND-04-17) AS ADEQUATE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA); AND APPROVE THE TESORO PARK TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. (Harris/Moorhead) The motion carried unanimously.
2. Receive input and testimony from the public whether there are unmet transit needs within the City of Manteca.
The City Manager introduced the duly noticed public hearing on unmet transit needs within the City of Manteca.
Georgia Lantsberger, Project Analyst, introduced herself to Council and spoke to the process followed each year related to unmet transit needs within the City.
The Mayor opened the public hearing. No one appeared to speak at this time.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER NOTED THE CITY COUNCIL HAS ALLOWED THE PUBLIC THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE MINUTES OF THE MANTECA CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 21, 2014 PAGE 4
TESTIMONY ON WHETHER THERE ARE UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS WITHIN THE CITY OF MANTECA AND SAID TESTIMONY WILL BE TRANSMITTED TO THE SAN JOAQUIN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS.
3. Approve a budget adjustment reducing Account No. 140.03.00.920.8005.14 (MAN 14-01, Lincoln Park Picnic Area Rehabilitation – CIP No. 15018) by $22,304, approve a budget adjustment reducing the 2014-15 HOME funds by $354; and approve a budget transfer of $25,000 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds from Account No. 140.03.00.920.8005.16 (MAN 12-06 Street Light Retrofit funds CIP No. 11029) to Account No. 140.03.00.920.8005.14 (MAN 14-01, Lincoln Park Picnic Area Rehabilitation – CIP No. 15018).
The City Manager introduced the duly noticed public hearing regarding CDBG and HOME funds for the Lincoln Park Picnic Area Rehabilitation Project.
The Mayor opened the public hearing. No one appeared to speak.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
ACTION: APPROVE A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REDUCING ACCOUNT NO. 140.03.00.920.8005.14 (MAN 14-01, LINCOLN PARK PICNIC AREA REHABILITATION – CIP NO. 15018) BY $22,304; APPROVE A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REDUCING THE 2014-15 HOME FUNDS BY $354; AND APPROVE A BUDGET TRANSFER OF $25,000 IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUNDS FROM ACCOUNT NO. 140.03.00.920.8005.16 (MAN 12-06, STREET LIGHT RETROFIT FUNDS - CIP NO. 11029) TO ACCOUNT NO. 140.03.00.920.8005.14 (MAN 14-01, LINCOLN PARK PICNIC AREA REHABILITATION – CIP NO. 15018). (Hernandez/Moorhead) The motion carried unanimously.
C. POLICE
1. Receive report and consider taking action to waive the first reading by substitution of the title and introduce Ordinance No. 1550, an ordinance amending Manteca Municipal Code, Title 9 Public Peace Morals and Welfare, adding Chapter 9.13, Offenses Against Decency and Morality, prohibiting Public Urinating or Defecating.
The City Manager introduced proposed Ordinance No. 1550. The Police Chief provided a brief overview of the proposed Municipal Code Amendment related to prohibiting urinating or defecating in public.
ACTION: WAIVE THE FIRST READING BY SUBSTITUTION OF THE TITLE AND INTRODUCE ORDINANCE NO. 1550, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING MINUTES OF THE MANTECA CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 21, 2014 PAGE 5
MANTECA MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 9 - PUBLIC PEACE MORALS AND WELFARE, ADDING CHAPTER 9.13, OFFENSES AGAINST DECENCY AND MORALITY, PROHIBITING PUBLIC URINATING OR DEFECATING. (Hernandez/Moorhead) The motion carried unanimously.
2. Receive report and consider taking action to waive the first reading by substitution of the title of Ordinance No. 1551, an ordinance amending Manteca Municipal Code, Title 12 Streets, Sidewalks, and Public Places, Chapter 12.20, Camping, Section 12.20.020 Definitions and adding Section 12.20.35, Unlawful Construction or Occupation of Homeless Encampments.
The City Manager introduced the proposed Ordinance No. 1551. The Police Chief provided an overview of the proposed ordinance relating to homeless encampments and information on the Homeless Summit to be held on October 29, 2014 at the Manteca Transit Center.
ACTION: WAIVE THE FIRST READING BY SUBSTITUTION OF THE TITLE OF ORDINANCE NO. 1551, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING MANTECA MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 12 - STREETS, SIDEWALKS, AND PUBLIC PLACES, CHAPTER 12.20, CAMPING, SECTION 12.20.020 DEFINITIONS AND ADDING SECTION 12.20.35, UNLAWFUL CONSTRUCTION OR OCCUPATION OF HOMELESS ENCAMPMENTS. (Hernandez/Moorhead) The motion carried unanimously.
At 7:29 p.m. Mayor Weatherford, Mayor Weatherford opened the Successor Agency to the Manteca Redevelopment Agency meeting. The meetings ran concurrently.
D. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Rich Silverman, Manteca resident, spoke to the removal homeless encampments related to the ordinance introduced by Council earlier on the agenda.
Leonard Smith, Manteca resident and Planning Commissioner, commented on the homeless situation and the upcoming Homeless Summit.
E. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS
The City Manager spoke to the Homeless Summit scheduled for October 29, 2014 at the Transit Center from 9:00 a.m. to Noon with an open mic for public input and 1:00-4:00 p.m. for discussion with various resource groups regarding possible solutions and sharing of available resources.
The City Manager highlighted the Downtown Summit held last week, hosted by the Chamber of Commerce.
MINUTES OF THE MANTECA CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 21, 2014 PAGE 6
F. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilman Harris asked questions regarding the Homeless Summit.
Councilman Hernandez commented on the positive outcomes of the Downtown Summit.
Mayor Weatherford urged the public to vote on November 4.
G. ADJOURNMENT
With nothing further to come before the City Council, the Mayor adjourned the meeting, at 7:38 p.m. to the next meeting of the City Council to be held November 4, 2014 at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers at 1001 W. Center Street, Manteca.
JOANN TILTON, MMC WILLIE W. WEATHERFORD CITY CLERK MAYOR
Ripon City Council Minutes
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2014
REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. with Troop 414 presenting the flag and leading the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
INVOCATION: Pastor Bret Lamsma gave the invocation.
ROLL CALL: Council Members, Dean Uecker, Jake Parks, Leo Zuber, Vice Mayor Elden R. Nutt, Mayor Chuck Winn
OTHERS PRESENT: City Administrator Kevin Werner, City Attorney Tom Terpstra, Planning Director Ken Zuidervaart, Recreation Director Kye Stevens, Director of Public Works Ted Johnston, Police Chief Ed Ormonde, City Clerk Lisa Roos, Deputy City Clerk Tricia Raymond, Information Systems Technician Dan Brannon, John Heida, Daniel Meza, Bret Lamsma, Raman Dhindsa, Desiree Garcia, Robert Taylor, Zach Horwood, Courtney Winters, Julia Brada, Maddison Flonders, Cheyenne Carter, Kyle Petroboni, Cameron Brooks, Gabe Bernett, Mackenzie Sweetin, Jordyn Wall, Elizabeth Eichi, Skyler Cendana, Andrew Garcia, Mireya Tavizon, Andrea Poyorena, Rebekah Thompson, Nathan Thompson, Jacqueline Carmon, Emily Hoogendoorn, Steven Daggett, Ashley Borgos, Shaun Vaught, Harrison Salvador, Joseph Laswell, Dylan Lucas, Alyssa Harris, Shayla Da Roja, Jeff Hutchinson, Troop 414 from Ripon, CA – 17 members.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION: No one from the public wished to speak at this time.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOTION: MOVED/SECONDED (NUTT,UECKER) AND CARRIED BY A 5-0 VOTE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR RIPON CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 16, 2014.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA AS POSTED (OR AMENDED):
Council Member Zuber requested that Items 2B, 2C, 3A be pulled for discussion from the Consent Calendar.
MOTION: MOVED/SECONDED (ZUBER,NUTT) AND CARRIED BY A 5-0 VOTE TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED.
CONSENT CALENDAR NOTES:
1. Income A. STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Department of Transportation $1,340.81 Jack Tone Park and Ride Lot Department of Transportation $54,204.15 Main Street, Phase 2 Enhancements POST Reimbursement Police Officer Training $1,205.45 Retail Sales Tax $254,363.18 (September 2013 $252,867.61) TOTAL $311,113.59 B. CCATT Holdings Acacia Avenue Cell Tower Lease $943.54
2. Bills, Invoices, Payments A. CENTRAL SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY RISK MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
Workers’ Compensation Program $88,869.00 Liability Program $31,304.00 TOTAL $120,173.00
B. BASECAMP ENVIRONMENTAL Item 2B pulled for discussion
North Pointe Specific Plan EIR $3,195.00 Progress Payment – Invoice #00807
C. GATES + ASSOCIATES Item 2C pulled for discussion North Pointe Specific Plan $12,947.50 Progress Payment – Invoice #36369
D. UNION BANK California Statewide Community Development Authority $370,955.00 Water and Wastewater Revenue Bonds Series 2006C
Minutes 10-7-14 1
CONSENT CALENDAR 2. Bills, Invoices, Payments, continued: E. UNION BANK
California Statewide Community Development Authority $235,459.28 Water Revenue Refunding Bonds Series 2012
F. BANC OF AMERICA LEASING
Ripon Public Financing Authority $158,640.00 2011 Waste Water Bonds
G. THOMAS H. TERPSTRA General Matters $6,729.50 Police Matters $1,810.43 Receivership Matters $4,366.67 Farm Service Matters $275.00 v. J-M Manufacturing Co. et al. $831.25 v. Vanna Rae Johnson $773.09 TOTAL $14,785.94
H. BASECAMP ENVIRONMENTAL Handicap Ramp Project 2014 $2,700.00 Progress Payment – Invoice #00806
I. WGR SOUTHWEST, INC. Phase II MS4 NPDES City Stormwater Permit Assistance $96.00 Progress Payment – Invoice #15919
J. O.C. JONES & SONS, INC. Mistlin Softball Fields Retention Payment - Invoice #65839 $34,078.06 Progress Payment - Invoice #69330 $173,054.85 TOTAL $207,132.91
Minutes 10-7-14 2
CONSENT CALENDAR, continued:
3. Resolutions A. RESOLUTION NO. 14-61 Item 3A pulled for discussion RESOLUTION OF THE CITY Adopt the Resolution approving an Amendment COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIPON to the WRCOG Joint Powers Agreement to add CONSENTING TO THE INCLUSION OF the City of Ripon as an Associate Member in PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY’S order to authorize the City’s participation in the JURISDICTION IN THE CALIFORNIA California HERO program. HERO PROGRAM TO FINANCE DISTRIBUTED GENERATION RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES, ENERGY AND WATER EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS AND ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE AND APPROVING THE AMENDEMENT TO A CERTAIN JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT RELEATED THERETO
B. RESOLUTION NO. 14-58 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL This resolution adopts Amendment No. 1 of the OF THE CITY OF RIPON ADOPTING 2014-2016 Memorandum of Understanding for AMENDMENT NO. 1 OF THE all employees of the City of Ripon Police MEMORANDUM OF Officer’s Association. UNDERSTANDING 2014-2016 FOR ALL EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF RIPON POLICE OFFICER’S ASSOCIATION
C. RESOLUTION NO. 14-59 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL This resolution adopts Amendment No. 1 of the OF THE CITY OF RIPON ADOPTING 2014-2016 Memorandum of Understanding for AMENDMENT NO. 1 OF THE all employees of the City of Ripon Police MEMORANDUM OF Sergeant’s Association. UNDERSTANDING 2014-2016 FOR ALL EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF RIPON POLICE SERGEANT’S ASSOCIATION
D. RESOLUTION NO. 14-60 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL This resolution adopts Amendment No. 1 of the OF THE CITY OF RIPON ADOPTING 2014-2016 Memorandum of Understanding for AMENDMENT NO. 1 OF THE all Public Works Maintenance and Public Works MEMORANDUM OF Foreman employees. UNDERSTANDING 2014-2016 FOR ALL EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF RIPON WORKING IN THE CLASSIFICATION OF PUBLIC WORKS MAINTENANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS FOREMAN Minutes 10-7-14 3
CONSENT CALENDAR, continued:
4. Miscellaneous Items A. PROCLAMATION Women’s Center of San Joaquin County Present Proclamation to the Women’s Center to Raman Dhindsa, Focus Program Manager announce October as Domestic Violence Awareness Month.
End of Consent Calendar
MOTION: MOVED/SECONDED (ZUBER,PARKS) AND CARRIED BY A 5-0 VOTE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
Discussion on Items 2B and 2C
Council Member Zuber asked from which fund were the two North Pointe Specific Plan bills being paid out of.
City Administrator Werner said the General Fund.
Zuber asked if these bills will be charged back to the property owners or will these be a City expense.
Director of Planning Zuidervaart said there has been no decision from the City on this matter yet. Once it is finalized it will come before Council for a decision.
MOTION: MOVED/SECONDED (ZUBER,NUTT) AND CARRIED BY A 5-0 VOTE TO APPROVE ITEMS 2B AND 2C NORTH POINTE SPECIFIC PLAN PROGRESS PAYMENTS.
Discussion on Item 3A
Council Member Zuber said he wanted more clarification on sections 3A and C1 of the agreement. Particularly the language being used in section C1 where it discusses Withdrawal. This section states “City or Authority may withdraw from this JPA Amendment upon six months written notice to the other party; provided, however, there is no outstanding indebtedness of Authority within City”.
John Law, HERO Program said the City can withdraw from the program completely if no projects have been funded to a property owner. If projects have been funded for a property owner the City could cease all future projects, but remain an associate member so assessments could get paid legally on that existing project.
Zuber asked if the section about Mutual Indemnification and Liability means that if problems arise we work together with the JPA.
John Law said the JPA takes the risk in this.
Assistant City Attorney Henderson said the City’s liability is connected to the JPA. If the JPA is sued we have exposure as a member. The City’s personal liability exposure is limited to circumstances where the City does something inappropriate in administering the program.
Minutes 10-7-14 4
MOTION: MOVED/SECONDED (ZUBER,UECKER) AND CARRIED BY A 5-0 VOTE TO APPROVE ITEM 3A ON THE AGENDA HERO PROGRAM RESOLUTION AND AMENDMENT.
PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION
Mayor Winn presented the proclamation to Raman Dhindsa, FOCUS Program Manager for the Women’s Center Youth & Family Services, announcing October as Domestic Violence Awareness Month.
Raman Dhindsa thanked the City of Ripon and the Council for its continued support and invited the community to a candlelight vigil on October 15, 2014 in Stockton honoring those who have been affected by domestic violence.
Minutes 10-7-14 5
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS Notes:
A. UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS San Joaquin Council of Governments This is a public hearing to consider whether there Daniel Meza, Associate Regional Planner are unmet transit needs within the City of Ripon.
Daniel Meza, with the San Joaquin County Council of Governments said that this step is part of the annual analysis required by the Transportation Development Act to determine unmet transit needs throughout districts and counties. He said this process starts in August and runs through December and is an opportunity for the public to comment on any unmet transit needs. The information gathered will be presented to the COG Board, and then forwarded to CalTrans. After the review, funds will be released for various projects. Meza coordinates public outreach, such as the Public Hearing tonight, in order to access the public transit needs.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
No one from the public wished to speak at this time.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
Minutes 10-7-14 6
B. DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT AMENDMENT (TAZ 14-01) Ken Zuidervaart, Director of Planning This is a public hearing to consider amendments to *Council will take action on the following Title 16 (Development Title), Chapter 16.20, item at the conclusion of the Public Hearing. Office and Commercial Districts as it relates to building/structure setback requirements.
Director of Planning Zuidervaart said this is a public hearing to consider amendments to Title 16 (Development Title), Chapter 16.20, Office and Commercial Districts as it relates to building/structure setback requirements. Zuidervaart said after receiving an application to expand an existing facility, Staff reviewed City Standards and found that the Office and Commercial District does not allow for adjusting building setbacks, however these setback adjustments are allowed under certain instances within our Mixed Use and Industrial Districts. Staff believes that it was an oversight on Staff’s part that the Office and Commercial Districts did not have this setback adjustment allowance included in our ordinance. Zuidervaart along with the project review committee created an example of language to be used in the Office and Commercial District ordinance, and then the Planning Commission held a Public Hearing where a 3-0 vote took place to recommend the City Council adopt the environmental determination and approve the proposed amendment. Zuidervaart did receive a question from Council in regards to if it’s a requirement to notify the adjacent property owners when there’s a variance request. As the ordinance reads now in Mixed Use and Industrial Districts, plus Office and Commercial Districts, no notification is required, but Zuidervaart said this will be included.
Council Member Zuber said in the recommended language, it states “Building setbacks may be reduced at the discretion of the Planning Director and Ripon Consolidated Fire Department, upon approval by the City of Ripon Planning Commission.” Zuber said we might want to add language about setting precedent, even though it’s at the discretion of the Planning Director and Ripon Consolidated Fire Department to make the decision. It would be helpful in differentiating between projects.
Zuidervaart said he will work with the City Attorney on the language and bring the ordinance back to the October 21st meeting for a first reading.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
No one from the public wished to speak at this time.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
Minutes 10-7-14 7
6. DISCUSSION ITEMS Notes:
A. LOVE RIPON LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE Committee Members The Love Ripon Leadership Committee will Discussion/No Action discuss plans for the April 18, 2015 event.
Joseph Laswell with the LOVE Ripon Leadership committee wanted to invite the Council, Staff, and community to take part in next year’s LOVE Ripon event on April 18th. Laswell said there are over 700 community members signed up to take part in the day’s activities. The goal is to grow and get volunteers out in the community more than twice a year. The committee will continue to work with volunteers, City Staff, and organizations to come up with City needs for the April 18th event.
Mayor Winn encouraged the community and especially the younger generations to get involved in this opportunity to meet and work with fellow neighbors in making a difference.
Minutes 10-7-14 8
B. RMC WATER AND ENVIRONMENT Wastewater Facility Planning The consultant preparing the Wastewater Facility Discussion/No Action Planning study will make a presentation to City Council. The presentation will include a discussion on capacity of the existing facility, proposed upgrades to meet anticipated wastewater demands, along with the recommended phasing to meet the future demands.
City Administrator Werner said RMC Water and Environment is on time and budget, plus experts in planning and looking at the future.
Dave Richardson with RMC Water and Environment gave an overview of the City’s wastewater system, which is currently operating effectively year-round. The goal of the study is to look at the capacity of the existing facility, provide upgrade options to meet anticipated wastewater demands, and recommend phases for future demands. Richardson said as growth increases the City has to look at its current system in two parts: treatment and disposal. After reviewing the current system, RMC said the disposal side has plenty of capacity, but the treatment capacity is a future issue. RMC suggests postponing a new permit through continued success of the current treatment system, but said the City should replace mechanical equipment and aerators over the next three years and look at extended aeration by putting diffused aerators at the bottom of the pond with clarifiers, so the treatment process has more capacity. By taking these steps it should increase treatment capacity for the next 5-10 years. Richardson said if a permit was required there are three programs to look at which will be higher in capital costs and maintenance. The proposal being presented is to postpone the need for a new permit, which in turn will postpone higher capital costs, maintain and meet the current limits and growth by beginning to plan for near term treatment, consider pilot testing extended aeration in the treatment system, and continue monitoring and evaluating the disposal system. The last step is to finalize a report and coordinate with Tom Pavletic on a rate study for the potential impacts for the City.
Minutes 10-7-14 9
REPORTS
Department Heads: Public Works Director Johnston announced the City-Wide Yard Sale is on Saturday, October 11th. The City’s free yard waste pick-up program begins on October 15th through February 1st.
Planning Director Zuidervaart said Diamond Pet Food installed the equipment to help with the odor and the Air District has begun testing. They are still waiting on final permits but invited City Staff to their offices on October 14th at 10:00 a.m. for a presentation on the equipment. Zuidervaart reported a second questionnaire went out for the North Pointe Land Use plan. There will be a Workshop on October 30th at 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, where consultants will listen to community feedback. The Planning Commission will have a booth at Main Street Day to discuss the plans and speak with community members. Plans will come to the Council in November for review, in order to move forward.
City Council:
Council Member Zuber said he liked the water conservation flyer that went out to all the residents. It was a nice reminder that we are still in a drought and measures have not been lifted.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:16 p.m.
(Signed) Chuck Winn Mayor
ATTEST:
(Signed) Tricia Raymond Deputy City Clerk
Minutes 10-7-14 10
TRACY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
October 21 2014, 7:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers, 333 Civic Center Plaza Web Site: www.ci.tracy.ca.us
Mayor Ives called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
The invocation was offered by Pastor Tim Heinrich, Crossroads Baptist Church
Roll call found Council Members Manne, Rickman, Young, Mayor Pro Tem Maciel, and Mayor Ives present.
Mayor Ives presented a proclamation to Dr. Brian Stephens, Superintendent for TUSD, declaring the month of October 2014 “Anti-Bullying Month.”
1. CONSENT CALENDAR – Following the removal of items 1.A by Council Member Rickman, and 1.G by Dave Helm, it was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Maciel and seconded by Council Member Rickman to adopt the Consent Calendar. Roll call vote found all in favor; passed and so ordered.
B. Authorization for Submitting Assessment Ballots for the Proposed Assessment for Reclamation District 2058 – Resolution 2014-174 authorized the ballots be submitted.
C. Acceptance of the Bessie Avenue Building Demolition Project – CIP 78142, Completed by Modesto Sand & Gravel Inc., of Modesto, California, and Authorization for the City Clerk to File the Notice of Completion – Resolution 2014-175 accepted the project.
D. Authorize an Appropriation of Funds for Replacement of Water Filter Media at the John Jones Water Treatment Plant – CIP T5pp-105, from Water Fund F105 in FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16, and Authorize Construction of the Project – Resolution 2014-176 authorized the appropriation
E. Approve an Offsite Improvement Agreement for the Cordes Ranch Offsite Waterline Improvements on Old Schulte Road, Hansen Road, and Road “E”, and Authorization for the Mayor to Execute the Agreement – Resolution 2014- 177 approved the agreement.
F. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing Amendment No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement and Software License Agreement With Spillman Technologies, Inc. for the Computer Aided Dispatch / Records Management System to Dis- continue Further Work and Obtain a Partial Refund for Completed Work and Authorize the Mayor to Execute the Amendment – Resolution 2014-178 authorized the amendment.
H. Approve the Final Subdivision Map and Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Primrose - Phase 1, Tract 3772, Authorize the Mayor to Execute the Regular Meeting Minutes 2 October 21, 2014
Agreement, and Authorize the City Clerk to File the Subdivision Improvement Agreement with the San Joaquin County Recorder – Resolution 2014-179
A. Approval of Minutes – Council Member Rickman stated he was opposed to the option the Council agreed to on the August 19 City Council agenda, item 8, “Accept Status Report on the Youth Sports Leagues Legacy Fields Project, Provide Direction on Possible Assistance to the Leagues, and Authorize Termination of the Lease with the Tracy Futbol Club.” The meeting minutes of August 19, will be amended to reflect Council Member Rickman’s opposition to Option 1, and brought back for Council approval on November 5. Regular meeting minutes of June 17, 2014, and closed session minutes of October 7, 2014, were approved.
G. Adopt a City Council Policy for Filling City Council Vacancies and Vacancies Occurring in the Office of Mayor – On October 7, 2014, the City Council considered a draft policy regarding filling City Council vacancies and vacancies occurring in the office of Mayor. At that time, the City Council directed staff to make changes to the draft policy to clarify the following two provisions: (1) that the order of interviews is to be determined based on a random drawing; and (2) the voting procedure. The policy attached to the staff report includes clarifications to these two provisions.
Dave Helm questioned whether it was the Council’s intent to appoint someone as Mayor who was not sitting on the Council. Mayor Ives asked if Council has the authority to appoint the Mayor. Dan Sodergren, City Attorney, responded the Council has two options. Within 60 days, the Council can either fill a Council vacancy by appointment or call a special election. A similar process is included in the Government Code for vacancies occurring in the Office of the Mayor. Staff would request from the Council whether they wanted to hold a special election or use the appointment process. However, state law does not specify a procedure for selection of appointees and the Council may choose any method it desires.
Mr. Helm questioned the procedure regarding the number of signatures required for the application process, and asked who would verify the signatures and the residency requirements. Mr. Sodergren stated the City Clerk’s office in conjunction with the Registrar of Voters office.
Mayor Ives suggested removing the Office of Mayor from the policy. Mr. Helm suggested a Council Member fill the Mayor’s seat until the term expires. Mayor Pro Tem Maciel stated he had no problem either removing the Office of Mayor from the policy, or leaving it in.
Mayor Pro Tem Maciel motioned to adopt item I.G as written, adopting a City Council Policy for Filling City Council Vacancies and Vacancies Occurring in the Office of Mayor. Motion died for lack of a second.
Mayor Pro Tem Maciel motioned to adopt item I.G as amended (Resolution 2014-180), adopting a City Council Policy for Filling City Council Vacancies. Council Member Young seconded the motion. Regular Meeting Minutes 3 October 21, 2014
Council Member Young asked if staff would bring back a policy for appointing a Mayor. Troy Brown, City Manager, responded Council could remove the Office of the Mayor from the policy, but would have to revisit the issue in the future.
Mr. Sodergren stated Council could defer adopting a policy for the Office of the Mayor until it became necessary.
Mayor Ives suggested removing the Office of the Mayor from the policy.
Mr. Sodergren stated the intent of the policy was to give the Council a headstart on conducting an appointment process if and when it becomes necessary. However, at the time an appointment becomes necessary Council will have the option to either to create an appointment process or conduct a special election.
Mayor Pro Tem Maciel referred to the requirements of term limits and added he would like to see term limits revisited since an appointment made for a limited amount of time counts as one full term.
Mayor Ives stated he had a motion and a second to adopt item 1.G as amended. Voice vote found all in favor; passed and so ordered.
Mr. Sodergren stated he would remove the reference to the Office of the Mayor from the staff report and the resolution.
2. ITEMS FROM THE AUDIENCE - Rhodesia Ransom, extended two invitations to the Council to attend a red carpet event in support of anti- bullying. The event will take place at Kimball High on Nov 5, beginning at 6 p.m., and Tracy United will hold “Make a Difference Day” on Saturday. Participants are invited to gather outside City Hall at 8:30 a.m.
Steve Nicolaou, 1068 Atherton Drive, suggested an item be placed on the agenda to consider a censure policy.
Dave Helm referred to a workshop he had attended in June regarding credit card issues and asked when a report would be brought back to Council. Assistant City Manager, Maria Hurtado, responded a report will be brought to Council on November 18.
3. THAT COUNCIL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING DECLARING THE EXISTENCE OF WEEDS, RUBBISH, REFUSE AND FLAMMABLE MATERIAL ON EACH OF THE PARCELS LISTED IN EXHIBIT “A” TO THIS AGENDA ITEM A NUISANCE; CONSIDER OBJECTIONS TO ABATEMENT OF SAID NUISANCE, AND ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FIRE DEPARTMENT STAFF TO ORDER CONTRACTOR TO ABATE SAID NUISANCES – Steve Hanlon, Division Chief, Fire Department, presented the staff report. On September17, October 2, and October 6, 2014, pursuant to Tracy Municipal Code, Section 4.12.280, the Fire Department sent notices to the property owners listed in Exhibit “A” to the staff report. Mr. Hanlon noted three properties need to be removed from the parcels listed since they have been cleared. That notice required owners to abate weeds, rubbish, and flammable material on the parcels listed within 20 days, and informed the property owners that a Public Hearing would be conducted on October 21, 2014, where any protests regarding the notice to abate would be heard. The Tracy Regular Meeting Minutes 4 October 21, 2014
Municipal Code provides that upon failure of the owner, or authorized agent, to abate within 20 days from the date of notice, the City will perform the necessary work by private contractor and the cost of such work will be made a personal obligation of the owner, or become a tax lien against the property.
Under the provisions of Tracy Municipal Code, Section 4.12.290, the Fire Department will proceed at Council’s direction with instructing the City’s contractor to perform weed, rubbish, and flammable material abatement on the parcels listed in Exhibit “A”. Per the Tracy Municipal Code, property owners are liable for the cost of abatement and will be billed for the actual cost of the City contractor’s services, plus a 25 percent administrative charge. All unpaid assessments will be filed with the San Joaquin County Auditor Controller’s office to establish a lien on the property.
There is $12,100 budgeted in Fiscal Year 2014-15, Grounds and Maintenance account, 211-52110-252-0000. Sufficient funds remain to accomplish abatement services.
Mayor Ives opened the public hearing.
Robert Tanner, 1371 Rusher Street, asked whether the City ever receives any money from liens against properties which the City has abated, and how much is still owed. Bill Sartor, Assistant City Attorney, stated the City does receive money from properties which have been abated when the property is sold, and added the Finance Department would keep a record of how much is outstanding.
Mayor Ives closed the public hearing.
Motion made by Mayor Pro Tem Maciel, seconded by Council Member Rickman to adopt Resolution 2014-181, Declaring the existence of weeds, rubbish, refuse and flammable material on the parcels listed in Exhibit “A”, amended to remove the three parcels which have been brought into compliance, a nuisance and authorizing Fire Department staff to order contractor to abate. Voice vote found all in favor; passed and so ordered.
4. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY MULTI-SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION AND OPEN SPACE PLAN (SJMSCP) DEVELOPMENT FEE, RESULTING IN AN INCREASE IN FEES FOR 2015 - Vicki Lombardo, Senior Planner, Development Services Department, presented the staff report. In 2001, the Council approved a resolution to establish the authority to collect a development fee for the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP). That fee was established in 2001, and updated in 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014.
The formula for updating the fee was categorized into three distinct components to better calculate an accurate fee per acre [FEE = Category A (acquisition) + Category B (assessment and enhancement) + Category C (management and administration)]. The final mitigation fees reflect true costs in each category and other real costs associated to fulfill the goals of the plan.
Category A (acquisition) – This category is directly related to land valuation based on comparables which occur in specific zones of the plan. The final weighted cost per acre of each zone is calculated into a blended rate under Category A (acquisition) figure for each habitat type. The criteria used to determine the weighted calculation results in an Regular Meeting Minutes 5 October 21, 2014
increase to the Agricultural/Natural Habitat type of Category A component from $8,288.74 to $9,427.21.
Category B (assessment and enhancement) - This category is an average of the California Consumer Price Index (CPI), as reported by the California Department of Finance, for a 12 month period following a fiscal year (July – June) to keep up with inflation on a yearly basis. The California CPI calculation increased 2.2%. The calculation results in an increase to the Category B component from $3,189.59 last year to $ 3,259.76.
Category C (management and administration) - This category is an average of the California Consumer Price Index (CPI), as reported by the California Department of Finance, for a 12 month period following a fiscal year (July – June) to keep up with inflation on a yearly basis. The California CPI calculation increased 2.2%. The calculation results in an increase of the Category C component to $1,856.24, up from $1,816.28 in 2014.
All land within and adjacent to the current City limits is classified as Open Space or AG/Natural. The 2014 per-acre fees are $6,656 per acre for Open Space, and $13,295 for AG/Natural. The mitigation fee to be adopted for 2015 is $7,281 per acre for Open Space and $14,543 for AG/Natural.
In addition, the SJMSCP is required to monitor the plan to address funding shortfalls. SJCOG, Inc. undertakes an internal review of the SJMSCP funding plan every three years to evaluate the adequacy of each funding source identified in the plan, identify existing or potential funding problems, and identify corrective measures, should they be needed in the event of actual or potential funding shortfalls. This will be reported to the permitting agencies for review in Annual Reports.
Mayor Ives opened the public hearing. Since there was no one wishing to address the Council Mayor Ives closed the public hearing.
Motion made by Mayor Pro Tem Maciel, seconded by Council Member Rickman to adopt Resolution 2014-182, Approving amended development fees for the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan. Voice vote found all in favor; passed and so ordered.
5. RECEIVE PUBLIC TESTIMONY FROM PUBLIC HEARING FOR ANNUAL UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS, CITY OF TRACY, FISCAL YEAR 2014-15 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Ed Lovell, Management Analyst II, Public Works Department, presented the staff report. Under provisions of the State of California Transportation Development Act (TDA), local public hearings must be held annually to review any unmet transit needs prior to the allocation of TDA funds. The hearings were held on October 21, 2014, at 10:30 a.m. in the Tracy Transit Station Conference Room 105, and again at 7:00 p.m. in City Hall Council Chambers during the regularly scheduled City Council meeting. The City requested TDA funds for Fiscal Year 2013-14 amounting to $4,114,452.
The TRACER Public Transit System provides Fixed Route and Paratransit Bus services Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m., and Saturdays from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. The Paratransit Subsidized Taxi service operates during the days and hours that the Paratransit Bus service is not in operation. Regular Meeting Minutes 6 October 21, 2014
The purpose of the public hearing is for the Council to receive public testimony concerning any unmet transportation needs which may exist for the Tracy community. The minutes of the public hearing on October 21, 2014, shall be forwarded to the San Joaquin County Council of Governments (SJCOG) which has the responsibility of determining whether transit needs remain unmet and would be reasonable to meet by the applicable jurisdiction. Staff members from SJCOG attended the Tracy public hearings to witness the community responses and to answer specific questions concerning the TDA process.
Council Member Rickman inquired if funding was available to purchase additional buses. Mr. Lovell responded the City has received funding through FTA grants which should be available within 18 months.
Mayor Ives opened the public hearing.
Dave Helm stated the numbers in the staff report for the total claim for 2013-14 did not add up, and there was a discrepancy of approximately $69,000. Mr. Lovell explained the total figure for the FY13-14 TDA claim was listed in the staff report as $4,114,452 while it should have read $4,183,867. The difference of $69,415 is the amount the City claimed under State Transit Assistance (STA) and was inadvertently left off when transferring the data from the TDA claim to the staff report. The City did in fact receive all of the money from the submitted FY13-14 TDA claim.
Mayor Ives closed the public hearing.
Motion made by Mayor Pro Tem Maciel, seconded by Council Member Manne to accept the report. Voice vote found all in favor; passed and so ordered.
6. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPLICATION TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN, APPROVE A VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP ON A 10.15-ACRE SITE TO CREATE 51 LOTS AND AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE STERLING PARK AND SAN MARCO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS FROM A SCHOOL SITE TO A 51 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION KNOWN AS BARCELONA INFILL, AND APPROVAL OF THE CONCEPT, PRELIMINARY AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE BARCELONA INFILL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT; THE PROJECT IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BARCELONA DRIVE AND TENNIS LANE, ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBERS 252-520- 44 AND 240-390-33; THE APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER IS TVC TRACY HOLDCO, LLC; APPLICATION NUMBERS GPA14-0003, PUD14-0002 AND TSM14-0002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY – Vicki Lombardo, Senior Planner, Development Services Department, presented the staff report. The subject property consists of two parcels of vacant land totaling 10.15-acres at the intersection of Barcelona Drive and Tennis Lane. The property is bordered by the Sterling Park residential subdivision to the north and the San Marco residential subdivision to the south. The northerly five acres of the site is contained within the Sterling Park Planned Unit Development (PUD), and the southerly five acres is in the San Marco PUD, both of which were approved in the late 1990’s.
The total 10.15-acre site was designated for a K-6 school in the respective PUDs at the request of the Tracy Unified School District. In 1994, the City annexed the Sterling Park and San Marco areas and designated both properties Residential Low in the General Plan. In 2006, the City updated the General Plan and designated the subject 10.15-acre Regular Meeting Minutes 7 October 21, 2014
site and other planned or developed public school sites citywide as Public Facilities. To maintain the reservation of a school site, the School District must enter into a binding agreement to purchase the land at the approval of the final map (Per Government Code Section 66480). That agreement reserves the land for the School District for two years. The final maps creating the two lots that make up the site were approved on July 5, 2000 (San Marco Unit 1) and July 2, 2002 (Sterling Park Unit 6). The School District did not enter into any agreements with the property owners, and the two-year time frames have long lapsed.
On April 9, 2014, the property owner submitted an application to amend the land use designation from Public Facilities to the Residential Low designation and to amend the Sterling Park and San Marco Concept Development Plans (CDP) from a school site to a residential subdivision known as Barcelona Infill. The application included a Concept Development Plan, Preliminary Development Plan (PDP), a Final Development Plan (FDP); and a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map for 51 lots.
City staff referred the application to TUSD and has received no objection to the proposed project. With the site no longer reserved to be a school, a General Plan amendment to Residential Low to accommodate the developer’s proposal for single-family homes is required. This designation is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. The applicant has requested to amend the Sterling Park and San Marco CDPs from a school site to a residential site and wishes to establish a separate PUD comprised of a CDP, PDP, and FDP for the purposes of constructing 51 single-family homes. The proposed project would be consistent with the density allowed under the Residential Low designation, which ranges from 2.1 to 5.8 units per gross acre. The average density of the proposed Barcelona Infill subdivision is 5.03 dwelling units per gross acre.
The proposed development plan is consistent with the City’s Design Goals and Standards and the following General Plan policies for residential design.
The proposed residential land use is compatible with the residential neighborhoods in the Sterling Park and San Marco subdivisions. The proposed lots range between 5,500 and 16,954 square feet with an average lot size of 6,818 square feet. The lots are sized to be similar to the surrounding subdivisions, with particular attention to lots adjacent to existing homes. The Barcelona Infill subdivision proposes minimum lot sizes of 55 feet in width by 100 feet in depth. In consideration of the homes that back up to the proposed subdivision, the applicant proposes deeper rear yards than typical to provide greater privacy to the existing homes. These lots are between approximately 121 feet and 191 feet in depth, which is significantly deeper than most residential lots in the city.
The subdivision would have its primary access from Corral Hollow Road by way of Tennis Lane or Cypress Drive.
Upon submittal of a vesting tentative subdivision map, as well as a PUD, the applicant is required by Tracy Municipal Code Sections 12.28.040(b)(2) and 10.08.1830 to submit architectural floor plans and elevations for review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. The proposed architecture for the 51 lots contains four floor plans. Each of the four plan types would have four distinct elevation styles, giving the subdivision 16 different exterior house designs. The proposal includes one single-story plan and three two-story plans with sizes ranging between approximately 2,126 and 3,369 square feet of living space (2,563-4,288 total square feet). The Regular Meeting Minutes 8 October 21, 2014
proposed architectural styles are Spanish, Craftsman, English Country, Italian and Farmhouse. The garages are deemphasized with all four plans designed with garage facades five or more feet behind the leading edge of the house. At least one of the plans features a garage that is even more recessed, allowing the project to meet the requirements of the City’s Design Goals and Standards that some garages be set back 30 feet from the street. The proposed architecture is consistent with the City’s Design Goals and Standards and applicable General Plan policies for residential design.
The proposed project is located within the Tracy Unified School District. To mitigate the proposed developments’ impacts on school facilities, Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) were executed with the Tracy Unified School District when the Sterling Park and San Marco subdivisions were developed, which included this 10.15-acre site. Per the MOUs, a per-unit fee will be charged for each of the 51 units constructed.
Parks are required to be established within residential neighborhoods and projects are either required to build their own park or pay park in-lieu fees. In this case, staff has determined that no dedication of park acreage is desired within the proposed project because the parks established for the Sterling Park and San Marco subdivisions already exceed the City’s requirement for park land. In lieu of providing park land, the applicant would be required to pay the park in-lieu fees which would provide funds for the creation and maintenance of parks and recreation facilities consistent with the Parks Master Plan and the City’s General Plan.
The applicant conducted several private meetings and two neighborhood-area meetings on August 26, 2014, at the Sports Complex meeting room, and on September 7, 2014, at Verner Hanson Park to introduce the proposed project to nearby residents and to collect feedback. According to the applicant, the primary interests of the neighbors in attendance related to development timing, density, lot size, architecture, and home price.
Concerns related to vehicular speeding on Tennis Lane adjacent to the vacant subject site were raised. When the new subdivision is constructed, nine homes will face onto Tennis Lane, and the future through-street will intersect Tennis Lane. These improvements will increase cross-traffic and encourage more careful driving that will cause traffic to slow down along Tennis Lane. According to the applicant, no comments were offered related to traffic congestion.
The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15162 pertaining to projects with a certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) where the project does not propose substantial changes that will result in a major revision of the previous EIR. The project does not propose new significant changes to the environment that was not analyzed in the General Plan EIR, including the areas of traffic, air quality, and aesthetics. Therefore, no further documentation is needed.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the project on September 24, 2014, and discussed traffic, architecture, and a neighbor’s concerns. Some traffic concerns already exist within the neighborhood, including speeding on Tennis Lane and turning movements at the Barcelona and Cypress intersection. Those concerns will be addressed with a traffic study to be completed and its mitigation measures implemented during construction of the project. Commissioner Vargas provided architectural suggestions for enhancements on some front and side elevations that the developer agreed to implement. Finally, a neighboring property owner noted that he would prefer Regular Meeting Minutes 9 October 21, 2014
to have single story homes built adjacent to his existing house. The Commission suggested that this request would be best addressed by the developer rather than required per the project approval.
This agenda item will not require any expenditure of funds. The applicant paid the application fees for the staff time that was required for review of the proposed project. The applicant will also pay approximately $2.7 million in building permit and development impact fees upon the commencement of construction of the dwelling units and other improvements.
In response to a question from Mayor Ives regarding public outreach Ms. Lombardo gave an overview of the outreach conducted by the applicant and the City.
Mayor Ives opened the public hearing.
Chris Tyler, 3208 White Cliff Drive, Modesto, applicant, gave a brief overview of the project and offered to answer questions. In response to the question posed by Mayor Ives regarding public outreach, Mr. Tyler stated two public outreach sessions had been held and a flyer offering to meet with residents at any time had been sent to neighbors adjacent to the project.
Mayor Ives closed the public hearing.
Motion made by Mayor Pro Tem Maciel, seconded by Council Member Rickman to adopt Resolution 2014-183, Approving a General Plan land use designation amendment of a 10.15-acre site for the Barcelona Infill Subdivision (APNs 240-520-44 and 240-390-33) from Public Facilities to Residential Low. The applicant and owner is TVC Tracy Holdco, LLC. Application Number GPA 14-0003. Voice vote found all in favor; passed and so ordered.
Motion made by Mayor Pro Tem Maciel, seconded by Council Member Rickman to adopt Resolution 2014-184, Approving the 51-Lot Barcelona Infill Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map and Amendment to the Concept, Preliminary and Final Development Plans for a 10.15-acre site located at the northwest corner of Barcelona Drive and Tennis Lane – Application Numbers TSM14-0002 and PUD 14-0002. Voice vote found all in favor; passed and so ordered.
7. COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING THE TRANSFER OF FEDERAL USE RESTRICTIONS AND REVERSIONARY RIGHTS FROM THE SCHULTE ROAD PROPERTY, APN 209-230-29 AND 30, TO THE UNDEVELOPED 300 ACRES OF LEGACY FIELDS APN 212-150-04 – Andrew Malik, Director, Development Services Department, presented the staff report. The Schulte Road property is approximately 200 acres and is located on the south side of Schulte Road, west of Lammers Road. In 1998, the United States Congress authorized the General Services Administration (“GSA”) to convey 200 acres to the City via special legislation for “economic development” purposes and the remaining 150 acres at no cost to the City, but specifically for recreational and/or educational “public benefit” purposes. The City purchased the 50 acres with no restrictions and has land banked the 50 acres for the past 14 years. The City explored several projects over the years, which focused on recreational and educational activities on the remaining 150 acres, but no viable project emerged from those efforts. Regular Meeting Minutes 10 October 21, 2014
On October 7, 2008, staff began to work with Congressional Delegates to amend the existing property conveyance legislation to allow for renewable and/or alternative energy uses and began exploring a City project that involved renewable and/or alternative energy uses. Consequently, over the next two years, the City began negotiations to sell or lease the site to GWF for a private project that involved renewable and/or alternative energy uses. Ultimately, on November 16, 2010, a Purchase and Lease Option Agreement with GWF to develop the 200 acre site as a solar farm was executed and included the option for GWF to acquire the property. Over the course of the next couple of years, GWF proceeded with renewable and alternative energy development plans on the site. However, on June 27, 2012, GWF informed the City that after an exhaustive and expensive effort to secure a mutually acceptable Power Purchase Agreement with a utility provider, they were unable to obtain the agreement. Although a solar project was not a viable option for GWF, they stated that their research showed that the property still had good potential for a smaller renewable energy project 2 and GWF agreed to transfer their solar resource data and analysis, including engineering studies and environmental reports to the City for use by the City or a new development partner in order to explore a similar, but smaller, project on the site.
On May 15, 2012, Congress enacted Public Law 112-119, authorizing GSA to offer the City the option to acquire the 150 acres at appraised fair market value, thereby releasing any reversionary interest retained by the United States on the property. The June 27, 2012, letter from GSA to the City requested that the City consider acquiring the property for $1,115,250 (appraised value of $1,100,000, and the appraisal expense of $5,250).
On September 18, 2012, Council appropriated $1,105,250 RSP funds to pay the cost to remove use restrictions and Federal reversionary rights on 150 acres of the 200 acre City-owned Schulte Road property. A Request for Proposals was issued by the City in early 2013 to determine if there was interest from alternative energy companies to purchase the site for solar or other alternative energy uses. While there was some private interest, no proposal included fronting funds to pay the GSA to remove the use restrictions and allow alternative energy facilities on the site. At the September 18, 2012, Council meeting, Council directed staff to appropriate the $1,105,250 and to continue to work with GSA to try to reduce the amount requested to remove the use restrictions.
Following numerous discussions between GSA and the City to reduce the cost to remove the use restrictions on the Schulte Road property, GSA and staff have identified a concept whereby the use restrictions and reversionary rights recorded on the Schulte Road property could be transferred to other undeveloped park property in the City. On July 22, 2014, staff provided a tour of Legacy Fields to Clark Van Epps, GSA Regional Director, and his support staff. On September, 10, 2014, the City received a letter from GSA outlining certain requirements and documents necessary to proceed with the transfer concept. The following represent those requests:
1. Confirmation from the City Council to proceed with the use restrictions and reversionary interest transfer from the Schulte Road property to 300 acres of the undeveloped Legacy Field project. 2. Provide a public use plan that details the City’s plans for the entire replacement property with a development schedule. Regular Meeting Minutes 11 October 21, 2014
3. Complete a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment to determine whether the property is environmentally safe and not contaminated. 4. Provide a title report and legal description of the replacement property.
Staff is currently working on items 2-4 above. Item 1 is the subject of this discussion.
Following receipt of the requested documentation, GSA will commission a market appraisal of both parcels to ensure the replacement property is of equal or greater fair market value than the current park property. Once the market analysis is complete GSA will draft the deeds and a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to finalize the transfer/ abrogation. It is anticipated that a new abrogation agreement, removing the use restrictions on the Schulte Road site, can be executed by December 2014, provided GSA can expedite their market analysis/appraisal of the Legacy Fields site and the City and the GSA are in agreement on the MOA.
Mr. Malik stated the goal is not to give GSA the property but to effectuate the development of these properties.
There is no impact to the General Fund. If the City and GSA can agree on this transfer concept there is a balance of $565,000 of unused funds which would go back to RSP.
Mr. Malik concluded his presentation by recommending that Council support the concept of transferring the use restrictions and revisionary rights from the City’s Schulte Road property to the undeveloped 300 acre Legacy Field property and direct staff to work with GSA on the next steps in the process.
Mayor Pro Tem Maciel asked whose idea this was. Mr. Malik stated it came from a concept proposed by GSA that they could sell this idea to the National Parks Service.
Mayor Ives invited public comment.
Steve Nicolaou, 1068 Atherton Drive, stated he agreed this was a good way to resolve the issue, but questioned whether by dealing with the Federal government there could be restrictions placed on the property in the future. Mr. Nicolaou asked if changing the use would still have to go to a vote of the people, for example, to convert Legacy Fields to a shopping center.
Dan Sodergren, City Attorney, responded State law would prevail.
Motion made by Council Member Manne, seconded by Council Member Rickman to adopt Resolution 2014-185 supporting the concept of transferring the Use Restrictions and Reversionary Rights from the City’s Schulte Road property to the undeveloped 300 acre Legacy Field property. Voice vote found all in favor; passed and so ordered.
8. APPOINT AN APPLICANT TO THE TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMISSION FROM THE COMMISSION’S ELIGIBILTY LIST – Troy Brown, City Manager, presented the staff report. There is a vacancy on the Transportation Advisory Commission due to Commissioner Frankel resigning on October 8, 2014. The last time appointments were made to the Transportation Advisory Commission was April 15, 2014. At that time the subcommittee nominated two applicants to fill vacancies on the Transportation Advisory Commission and recommended three applicants be placed on an eligibility list. Council Regular Meeting Minutes 12 October 21, 2014
confirmed the subcommittee’s nomination and the creation of an eligibility list. Resolution 2004-152 includes direction on the “Selections Process for Appointee Bodies,” and also states that if an appointee will fill an un-expired term with six months or less remaining, the appointment shall be deemed to be for the new term. Staff recommended Council either appoint Mr. Ball to the Transportation Advisory Commission to serve the remainder of Commissioner Frankel’s term commencing on October 22, 2014, and expiring on April 30, 2017, or direct staff to open a new recruitment.
Mayor Ives invited public comment – None
Motion made by Council Member Young, seconded by Council Member Rickman to appoint Mr. Ball to the Transportation Advisory Commission. Voice vote found all in favor; passed and so ordered.
9. ITEMS FROM THE AUDIENCE – None.
10.A CITY MANAGER’S REPORT – Troy Brown, City Manager presented the report. Mr. Brown began with business activity related to new construction and expansions, continued with community-wide informational updates, and closed his presentation with special events at the Grand Theatre.
Commercial construction activity remains active in Tracy, including the Amazon Expansion and Grace Baptist Church.
Business improvements include Delta Brews (downtown brew pub), Red Robin (new Building replacing Chevy’s in the I-205 area), Sweethearts Bakery (downtown on B Street), Sports Clips (I-205 area), I Live for Desserts (downtown on Central), Hair Club for Men, Extreme Pita & Ono Hawaiian BBQ.
A Resident Survey will be issued to a randomly selected pool of Tracy residents during the Fall 2014. The National Research Center, Inc. will administer The National Citizen Survey™ (The NCS) on behalf of the City. The NCS measures resident opinion across eight aspects including public safety, community engagement, recreation, and mobility. Results of the survey will be used to measure the quality of City services, help to establish the budget and set future priorities and direction for the City.
The City has begun pre-storm maintenance clearing trash and debris from storm drains and channels. Beginning on November 17, 2014, a limited quantity of sandbags and plastic sheeting will be available to residents to help protect homes from storm related damage. Materials will be available for pickup at the Public Works Department, Boyd Service Center, 520 N. Tracy Boulevard, when inclement weather is forecast.
Work continues on the new Tracy Animal Shelter. The project is on schedule with an anticipated opening date of early this December.
“Tracy's Child,” one of Tracy’s first public commissioned sculptures, was re-installed at William Larsen Park today. The commissioned bronze statue depicting a girl flying a kite suffered extensive damage after it was vandalized and removed from the park in 2012. Regular Meeting Minutes 13 October 21, 2014
Finally, upcoming performances at the Grand Theatre include a “Haunting Masquerade Ball” on November 1, 2014. The Grand Theatre will be transformed into a haunting castle with guests arriving in medieval ball gowns, classy men's attire and gorgeous masks. Tickets cost $25 and include music, entertainment, dancing, appetizers and two drink tickets.
On November 8, 2014, Joni Morris & the After Midnight Band will perform at the Grand Theatre. Joni Morris of Stockton, California, will pay tribute to “Legendary Ladies in Country Music” including Patsy Cline, Kitty Wells, Loretta Lynn, Tammy Wynette and more. Tickets cost $18-$22 and the show begins at 7:30 p.m.
Council accepted the update.
11. COUNCIL ITEMS – Council Member Rickman commended the Bulldog project which has been recognized at the state level for their anti-bullying efforts.
Council Member Young pointed out that since November 4 is election day the Council meeting will be held on November 5, and added that anti-bullying events will take place at Kimball High on November 5. Council Member Young also stated that the opening ceremonies for Make a Difference Day begin at 8:00 a.m. on Saturday, outside City Hall.
Mayor Ives stated that recently the City applied for funding from the Safe Routes to School programs for the Mount Oso and Mount Diablo area. The Council of Governments has awarded funding in the amount of $950,000, and the project has been forwarded to the California Transportation Commission for approval.
12. ADJOURNMENT – Motion made by Council Member Manne and seconded by Council Member Rickman to adjourn. Voice vote found all in favor; passed and so ordered. Time 8:24 p.m.
The above agenda was posted at the Tracy City Hall on October 16, 2014. The above are summary minutes. A recording is available at the office of the City Clerk.
______Mayor
ATTEST:
______City Clerk
SOCIAL SERVICES TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE (SSTAC)
San Joaquin Council of Governments 555 E Weber Avenue, Stockton, CA 95202
Wednesday, December 3, 2014
MINUTES
1. Call Meeting to Order/Introductions:
The SSTAC meeting was called to order at 2:40 p.m. by Julia Tyack. Introductions were made.
Committee Members Present:
Jayne Pramod City of Tracy Julia Tyack City of Lodi Daniela Romero RTD Melissa Ogren Human Services Agency- Department of Aging Richard Demonte United Cerebral Palsy UCP Joni Bauer Community Center for the Blind George Lewis State Council on Development Disabilities Robert Balderama State Council on Development Disabilities Nicolas Fung Caltrans District 10 Joshua Swearigen Caltrans District 10 Committee Members Not Present:
Wilma Murray Valley Mountain Regional Center Nathan Atherstone RTD Sara Hunter UCP Mary Bailey UCP John Andoh City of Escalon Johanna Ferriera City of Manteca Ann Fisler San Joaquin ARC Barbara Schneider City of Ripon Annette DePauli Human Services Agency –Department of Aging Barbara Hempstead Caltrans Metropolitan Planning Nick Phalm Caltrans Metropolitan Planning Deborah Gurley Transit user 60 years or older Georgia Lantsberger City of Manteca Joga Singh Community Center for the Blind Adam Doi RTD
SJCOG Staff Present: Ryan Niblock Associate Regional Planner Daniel Meza Associate Regional Planner Sandra Rodriguez Office Assistant I
2. Approval of Minutes from June 2, 2014: It was approved/seconded (Bauer /Demonte) to approve the minutes of the September 3, 2014 meeting.
3. Public Comment: There were no public comments received. Ms. Bauer Thanked Daniel Meza for all the participation on all the events a special thanks for no other comments were made. Mr. Lewis
4. FY 2013/14 Unmet Transit Needs Public Hearing:
This item was for information only, no action was taken.
5. FY 2015/16 Unmet Transit Needs (UTN) Process Update: Mr. Meza mentioned that he expects a few more comments by the end of the day and he will start collecting meeting from public hearing notices from all of San Joaquin County and make a report and that leads to the comment review subcommittee which will be on Wednesday, January 21, 2015. He explained that he creates a matrix and organizes by category. He added that he will send all the transit operators to review all their corresponding comments. Mr. Meza stated that he will create and draft and send everyone a digital copy for review and any comments. Mr. Meza added that there is a 30 day public notice at the beginning of April then it will be presented to SJCOG Board for approval at the end of April.
This item was for information only, no action was taken.
6. FY 2013/14 UTN Advisory Subcommittee Formation:
This item was for information only, no action was taken.
7. FTA 5310 Scoring Committee: Mr. Meza stated that there are 2 applications for the large UCA for service first and a small UCA urban from Davis. He needs a scoring committee then it’s passed on to SJCOG Board for approval. He has a sign-up sheet for this as well. Ms. Baer asked if there was a date set. Mr. Meza wants to do a doodle pole for that first and then set up a date. He will send out digital copies to smooth out the process. Mr. Meza stated that the application has all the bonus Dec. 13 University Park Gymnasium. Mr.t stated that he represents the people and meet every other month. Mr. Lewis added that different people come from all over the state and bring new ideas the table.
This item was for information only, no action taken.
8 Reports/Updates from Committee Members: Ms. Bauer stated that there will be a crab feed and ride on Feb. 28th. She also shared The news that the center for the blind has hired a new Executive Director on November 17, 2014. Her name is Michelle Micelles. Mr. Demonte stated there is a Rap Dance and there will be at 9:30-11am. Mr. Ogren stated that they have a new director. Dec. 13 University Park Gymnasium. Mr.t stated that he represents the people and meet every other month. Mr. Lewis added that different people come from all over the state and bring new ideas the table. Ms. Julia Tyack tomorrow will be the Parade of Lights in downtown Lodi and holiday light tours De. 16-19 to take off from Lodi Transit Station at 7:00pm. It’s a fixed route comes around the lights. Ms. Bauer stated
Ryan stated that he is responsible for the transit performance demand. That lines up with Daniels UTN. That doesn’t always work with every transit provider. He stated hat in April when the document will be wrapped. Mr. Balderama asked if there was any info for the mtg. Mr. Niblock answered that SJCOG just hired a consultant. Mr. Balderama asked if there was any one with disabilities in the committee or Boar. That could take those things into consideration and maybe there’s any new ideas. Ms. Bauer asked if Ryan was aware of the______. Mr. responded That there will be chance to get all the ideas. Mr. Balderama stated that there might be any
Mr. Swearingen stated that there is a fewer of them and that we will be seeing of Nicolas Fnng
This item was for information only, no action was taken.
9. Reports/Updates from Transit Providers: Ms. Pramond stated that there was an increase by 33 % in ridership and also City of Tracy is offering free rides one month free for the Month of December. Ms. Romero st
This item was for information only, no action was taken.
10. Access Advisory Committee Update: Ms. Daniela Romero stated that the Access mtg is scheduled for Dec. 12, 2014. At 10:30 am. To discuss the service changes that will take place for 2015.
No other Updates were discussed or mentioned.
11. Adjourn: There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 3:32 p.m. to reconvene on Wednesday, April 1 , 2014.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Annually, the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) is required, under Sections 99238.5 and 99401.5 of the Public Utilities Code, to determine if there are any UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS in the County that can reasonably be met.
UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS are defined as transportation services not currently provided to those residents who use or would use public transportation regularly, if available, to meet their life expectations. This includes, but is not limited to: trips for medical and dental services, shopping, employment, personal business, education, social services, and recreation.
6 Reasonable to Meet Criteria: 1. Persons should have an equal opportunity to provide themselves with the necessities to sustain life; 2. Any transportation system should be based on the feasibility of a continuing service; 3. Any transportation system must enjoy some degree of community acceptance; 4. A transportation system must not prove excessive in capital and operating costs; 5. A transportation system should be provided when a need is demonstrated; and, 6. Any service provided should be able to be funded on both a short and long-term basis.
Unmet Transit Needs that are identified as reasonable to meet must be funded before the Transportation Development Act fund can be used for non-transit purposes. Local public hearings will be held throughout San Joaquin County in the cities of Stockton, Lodi, Escalon, Tracy, Lathrop, Ripon and Manteca.
The Public is invited to comment on any unmet transit need at a public hearing to be held at the regularly scheduled Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee Meeting: Wednesday, December 3t", 2014, 2:30pm at the San Joaquin Council of Governments located at 555 E. Weber Avenue, Stockton, CA.
In lieu of testifying at the public hearing, written comments and statements may be submitted to SJCOG at 555 E. Weber Avenue, Stockton, CA 95202, emailed to mezaC~sicog.or~, on the SJCOG website (www.sico~.or~) or via phone by calling the SJCOG office at 209-235-0600.
A draft document is anticipated in February 2015, with final action to betaken by the SJCOG Board at their regularly scheduled monthly meeting in April 2015.
For the further information contact Daniel Meza at (209) 235-0389. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Annually, the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) is required, under Sections 99238.5 and 99401.5 of the Public Utilities Code, to determine if there are any UN- MET TRANSIT NEEDS in the County that can reasonably be met.
UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS are defined as transportation serv- ices not currently provided to those residents who use or would use public transportation regularly, if available, to meet their life expectations. This in- cludes, but is not limited to: trips for medical and dental services, shopp ink, employ- ment, personal business, edu- cation, social services, and rec- reation. 6 Reasonable to Meet u Criteria: ~ ~,, ~, 1. Persons should have an equal opportunity to provide ,`:. ~ themselves with the necessities ~~ to sustain life; 2. Any transportation system should be based on the feasibil- ity of a continuing service; 3. Any transportation system must enjoy some degree of community acceptance; 4. A transportation system must not prove excessive in capital and operating costs; 5. A transportation system should be provided when a need is demonstrated; and, 6. Any service provided should be able to be funded on both a short and long-term basis. Unmet Transit Needs that are identified as reasonable to meet must be funded before the Transportation Development Act fund can be used for non-transit purposes. Local public hearings will be held throughout San Joaquin County in the cities of Stockton, Lodi, Escalon, Tracy, Lathrop, Ripon anri AAantara KI ~~A IYIM~ ITV V4M1.
The Public is invited to com- ment on any unmet transit need at a public hearing to be held at the regularly scheduled Social Services Transportation Advi- sory Committee Meeting: Wednesday, December 3th, 2014, 2:30pm at the San Joa- quin Council of Governments located at 555 E. Weber Ave- nue, Stockton, CA. In lieu of testifying at the public hearing, written comments and statements may be submitted to SJCOG at 555 E. Weber Ave- nue, Stockton, CA 95202, emailed to [email protected], on the SJCOG website ( www.sjcog.org) or via phone by calling the SJCOG office at 209-235-0600. A draft document is anticipated in February 2015, with final ac- tion to be taken by the SJCOG Board at their regularly sched: uled monthly meeting in April 2015. For the further information con- tact Daniel Meza at (209) 235-0389. October 31, 2014 - 141764 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIN
Annually, the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) is required, under Sections 99238.5 and 99401.5 of the Public Utilities Code, to determine G if there are any UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS in the County that can reasonably be met. UNMETTRANSITNEEDS are defined as transportation services not currently provided to those residents who use or would use V public transportation regularly, if available, to meet their life expectations. This includes, but is not limited to: trips for medical and dental services, shopping, employment, personal business, education, social services, and recreation.
6 Reasonable to Meet ri rla• 1. Persons should have an equal opportunity to provide themselves with the necessities to sustain life; 2. Any transportation system should be based on the feasibility of a continuing service; 3. Any transportation system must enjoy some degree of community acceptance; 4. A transportation system must not prove excessive in capital and operating costs; 5. A transportation system should be provided when a need is demonstrated; and, 6. Any service provided should be able to be funded on both a short and long-term basis.
Unmet Transit Needs that are identified as reasonable to meet must be funded before the Transportation Development Act fund can be used for non-transit purposes. Local public hearings will be held IhroughoutSanJoaquin County in the cities of Stockton, Lodi, Escalon, Tracy, Lathrop, Ripon and Manteca.
The Public is invited to comment on any unmet transit need at a public hearing to beheld at the regularly scheduled Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee Meeting: Wednesday, December 3th,2014, 230pm at the San Joaquin Council of Governments located at 555 E. Weber Avenue, Stockton, CA.
In lieu of testifying at the public hearing, written comments and statements maybe submitted to SJCOG at 555 E. Weber Avenue, Stockton, CA 95202, emailed to mezarasicoa.ora. onthe SJCOG website (www.sicoa.ora) or via phone by calling the SJCOG office at 209-235-0600.
A draft document is anticipated in February 2015, with final action to be taken by the SJCOG Board at their regularly scheduled monthly meeting in April 2015.
For th~,(yrlber information ,,,. 't~nta'ct Daniel Meza at (209) 235-0389. ,~ ~liiain: {~Ol)~~9~500
~~ Fa=:{209) 249-3551
P.O. Boa.1958` S31 E;. Yosemite Av~.~ ~4 an~Eeca, C~ 9~33b
SAN JOAQUIN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS Classified Insertion Order MB#10-73/Notice Of Public Hearing
Contact: Sales Rep: MB -Liz Mora Order Date: 10/28/2014 Address: SAN JOAQUIN COUNCIL OF Phone: 209-235-0600 Order Number: 43369 GOVERNMENTS 555 E. WEBER AVE. STOCKTON, CA 95202 Fax: 468-1084 Advertiser No: 250
"Naof Start Date End Runs Date No."of Publications Description Classification Ad Size P~fce 10/31/2014 10/31/20143 3 MB#10-73/Notice Of Public Miscellaneous Legals 12.4236 Inches $107.12 Hearing Publications: MB -Manteca Bulletin, MB -Manteca Bulletin Online, MNC -Marketplace 209 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Annually, the San Joaquin Council of Governments(SJCOG) is required, under Sections 99238.5 and 99401.5 of the Public Utilities Code, to determine if there are any UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS in the County that can reasonably be met. UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS are defined as transportation services not currently provided to those residents who use or would use public transportation regularly, if available, to meet their life expectations. This includes, but is not limited to: trips for medical and dental services, shopping, employment, personal business, education, social services, and recreation. 6 Reasonable to Meet Criteria: 1. Persons should have an equal opportunity to provide themselves with the necessities to sustain life; 2. Any transportation system should be based on the feasibility of a continuing service; 3. Any transportation system must enjoy some degree of community acceptance; 4. A transportation system must not prove excessive in capital and operating costs; 5. A transportation system should be provided when a need is demonstrated; and, 6. Any service provided should be able to be funded on both a short and long-term basis. Unmet Transit Needs that are identified as reasonable to meet must be funded before the Transportation Development Act fund can be used for non-transit purposes. Local public hearings will be held throughout San Joaquin County in the cities of Stockton, Lodi, Escalon, Tracy, Lathrop, Ripon and Manteca. The Public is invited to comment on any unmet transit need at a public hearing to be held at the regularly scheduled Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee Meeting: Wednesday, December 3th, 2014, 2:30pm at the San Joaquin Council of Governments located at 555 E. Weber Avenue, Stockton, CA. In lieu of testifying at the public hearing, written comments and statements may be submitted to SJCOG at 555 E. Weber Avenue, Stockton, CA 95202, emailed to [email protected], on the SJCOG website (www.sjcog.org) or via phone by calling the SJCOG office at 209-235-0600. A draft document is anticipated in February 2015, with final action to be taken by the SJCOG Board at their regularly scheduled monthly meeting in April 2015. For the further information contact Daniel Meza at(209) 235-0389. Publication Date: October 31, 2014 MB#10-73 Run Count: 3 Publication Count: 3 Total Price: $107.12
`:,~ _. ~- Authorization To Run Advertisement- ;
Printed Name Signature
APPENDIX D
Come to Escalon’s Transit Unmet Needs Meeting!
Do you need better public transportation in Escalon? Does transit services currently meet your needs? Do have a wish list for better public transit in Escalon? Come and express yourself on how we can provide better transit to you!
Join us at the Escalon City Hall at 2060 McHenry Avenue, Escalon on Monday, November 17, 2014 at 7:00 PM. For more information, please call (209) 321-1334.
If you cannot attend, please mail, fax or email your comments to: John Andoh, City of Escalon, 2060 McHenry Avenue, Escalon, CA 95320, fax to: (209) 691-7439 or email: [email protected] City of Escalon, Development Services Department PRESS RELEASE
Contact: John Andoh FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Transit Coordinator October 15, 2014 Cell (209) 321-1334
UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS PUBLIC HEARING IN ESCALON
The City of Escalon along with the San Joaquin Council of Governments is sponsoring an unmet transit needs public hearing to hear from its residents comments regarding how transit services can be provided better in the City and to other areas in San Joaquin County. This hearing is held on an annual basis. Once transit needs are met, the Transportation Development Act (TDA) funding that is used to operate and maintain eTrans is then distributed to fund roadway, bicycle and pederstrian projects within the City limits.
The hearing will be held on Monday, November 17, 2014 at 7:00 PM, at the Escalon City Hall, 2060 McHenry Avenue, Escalon.
For more information or to submit comments, please contact John Andoh, Transit Coordinator at City of Escalon, Development Services Department, 2060 McHenry Avenue, Escalon, CA 95320, call (209) 321-1334, email [email protected] or fax to (209) 691-7439.
For information on eTrans, please call (209) 541-6645 or visit www.cityofescalon.org.
# # # # City of Lathrop Department of Public Works (209) 941-7430
The San Joaquin Council of Governments & The City of Lathrop wants to know if
YOU have any Unmet Transit Needs!
SJCOG CONTACT: DANIEL MEZA REGIONAL PLANNER 555 E. WEBER AVENUE STOCKTON CA PHONE (209) 235-0389 FAX (209) 235-0438 EMAIL: [email protected] WWW.SJCOG.ORG
Annually, the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) is required, under Sections 99238.5 and 99401.5 of the Public Utilities Code, to determine if there are any UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS in the County that can reasonably be met. Reasonable unmet transit needs must be funded before Transportation Development Act funds can be used for non-transit purposes. Local public hearings will be held throughout San Joaquin County in Stockton, Lodi, Escalon, Tracy, Lathrop, Ripon, and Manteca.
The public is invited to comment on any unmet transit need at a public hearing to be held at the following regularly scheduled City of Lathrop City Council Meeting:
Monday, October 6, 2014 7:00 p.m. City of Lathrop 390 Towne Centre Drive – Lathrop, CA COUNCIL CHAMBERS
In lieu of testifying at the public hearing, written comments and statements may be submitted to SJCOG Attn: Daniel Meza, Regional Planner for San Joaquin Council of Governments at 555 E. Weber Avenue, Stockton, CA 95202, emailed to [email protected], submitted online at www.sjcog.org, or via phone by calling the SJCOG office at 209-235-0389.
For further information you may also contact the Lathrop Public Works Department at (209) 941-7430.
Unmet Transit Needs Hearings
Do you or someone you know have a transit need that is not being met? Administrative The San Joaquin Council of Governments and the City of Hearing Manteca would like to hear from you!
Date: Please join us to share your comments and suggestions on any October 21, 2014 unmet transit needs at one of two public hearings to be held on
Location: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 Manteca Transit Center 220 Moffat Blvd. Manteca, CA
Time: 2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m.
Public Why do we hold Unmet Needs Hearings? Each year, the San Joaquin Council Hearing of Governments (SJCOG) is required to hold meetings to receive public testi- mony to determine if there are any UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS in the County that can be reasonably met. This is required in accordance with the Transpor- Date: tation Development Act (TDA), a major source of public transportation fund- October 21, 2014 ing. TDA requires that a finding of any reasonable unmet transit need must be funded before TDA funds can be used for non-transit related purposes. Location: Manteca City Hall If you are unable to testify at one of the public hearings, written City Council Chambers comments and statements may be submitted to 1001 W. Center St. Daniel Meza at the San Joaquin Council of Governments: Manteca, CA Mail: 555 E. Weber Avenue, Stockton, CA 95202 Telephone: (209) 235-0389 Time: Email: [email protected] 2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. Online: www.sjcog.org
For further information or questions, please contact Georgia Lantsberger at the City of Manteca at (209) 456-8775 or [email protected]
UUNNMMEETT TTRRAANNSSIITT NNEEEEDDSS
The San Joaquin Council of Governments Wants to Know if YOU Have Any Unmet Transit Needs!
Did you know that......
· You can voice your opinion about unmet transit needs at public hearings held throughout the County during the months of September, October, November, and the beginning of December. Check out our public hearing schedule and location updates at www.sjcog.org under Programs>Planning & Funding>Transit Planning>Unmet Transit Needs
· Local officials will consider resolving all unmet transit needs that are considered reasonable to meet.
What is an Unmet Transit Need?
- UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS are defined as transportation services not currently provided to those residents who use or would use public transportation regularly, if available to meet their life expectation. This includes, but is not limited to: trips for medical and dental services, shopping, employment, personal business, education, social services, and recreation.
What is a “Reasonable to Meet” transit need?
The SJCOG adopted a “Reasonable To Meet” standard based on several criteria that analyze how accommodating that transit need will affect the rest of the transit system that it relates to. If it passes the criteria then it is found reasonable to meet and changes will be made to accommodate the need.
There are other ways to make your opinions on Unmet Transit Needs heard and become public record.
· Call the SJCOG office at (209) 235-0600 and voice your opinion to Daniel Meza, Regional Planner. Please feel free to call if you have any questions or concerns regarding this process.
· E-mail your views to [email protected]
· Submit your opinions via an on-line survey on the SJCOG website at www.sjcog.org
- Fill out the following survey and mail it to the SJCOG office:
Daniel Meza, Regional Planner San Joaquin Council of Governments 555 E. Weber Avenue Stockton, CA 95202
UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS SURVEY (Cycle 2015/16) 1) DO YOU USE PUBLIC TRANSIT? YES NO 2) IF YES, CHECK THE TYPES OF PUBLIC TRANSIT YOU USE.
A) REGIONAL TRANSIT DISTRICT FIXED ROUTE (WITHIN STOCKTON) INTERCITY (DEVIATED FIXED ROUTE) DIAL-A-RIDE HOPPER SERVICES INTERREGIONAL TRANSIT (TO OTHER (GENERAL STOCKTON METRO COUNTIES) PUBLIC) B) CITY OF LODI (GRAPELINE) FIXED ROUTE DIAL-A-RIDE VINELINE ADA C) CITY OF MANTECA TRANSIT FIXED ROUTE DIAL-A-RIDE D) CITY OF TRACY (TRACER) FIXED ROUTE DIAL-A-RIDE E) CITY OF ESCALON (E-TRANS) FIXED ROUTE DIAL-A-RIDE F) COMMUTER TO BAY AREA TO SACRAMENTO G) OTHER (LIST BELOW)
3) PLEASE CHECK THE ACTIVITIES YOU USE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FOR. WORK SHOPPING MEDICAL APPOINTMENTS SCHOOL RECREATION SOCIAL ACTIVITIES OTHER
4) ARE THERE PLACES IN SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY OU WANT TO ACCESS BUT CANNOT? YES NO 5) IF YES, PLEASE FILL IN THE BLANKS IN THE FOLLOWING SENTENCE. I WOULD LIKE TO GO FROM ______TO ______AT THIS TIME OF DAY (______), ON THIS DAY (______) OF THE WEEK.
6) PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD OF COMMENT: Name ______Address and City: ______
7) OPTIONAL QUESTIONS (CIRCLE ONE): AGE: <25 26-35 36-45 46-55 56-65 >65 ETHNICITY: WHITE AFRICAN ASIAN/ HISPANIC NATIVE OTHER AMERICAN PACIFIC AMERICAN ISLANDER INCOME: <$25,000 $25-35,000 $35-50,000 $50-$75,000 >$75,000
Thank you for taking the time to fill out this survey! Please mail to: Daniel Meza, Regional Planner San Joaquin Council of Governments 555 East Weber Avenue Stockton, CA 95202
Necesidades Insatisfecha de Transporte Público (Cycle 2015/16) 1) ¿UTILIZA TRÀNSITO PÚBLICO? SÍ NO 2) SÍ USTED CONTESTO SÍ, VERIFIQUE LOS TIPOS DE TRÁNSITO PÚBLICO QUE USTED UTILIZA.
A) REGIONAL TRANSIT DISTRICT RUTA FIJA (DENTRO DE LA CUIDAD) INTERCITY (DESVIÓ DE RUTA FIJA) DIAL-A-RIDE SERVICIOS DE HOPPER TRÁNSITO INTERREGIONAL (A OTROS (GRAN PÚBLICO) STOCKTON METRO CONDADOS) B) CITY OF LODI (GRAPELINE) RUTA FIJA DIAL-A-RIDE VINELINE ADA C) CITY OF MANTECA TRANSIT RUTA FIJA DIAL-A-RIDE D) CITY OF TRACY (TRACER) RUTA FIJA DIAL-A-RIDE E) CITY OF ESCALON (E-TRANS) DESVIÓ DE RUTA FIJA DIAL-A-RIDE F) DE CERCANIAS AREA DE LA BAHIA SACRAMENTO G) OTRO
3) VERIFIQUE POR FAVOR PARA QUE TIPO DE ACTIVIDADES USTED UTILIZA TRANSPORTACIÓN PÚBLICA TRABAJO COMPRAS CITAS MÉDICAS ESCUALA RECREACIÓN ACTIVIDADES SOCIALES OTRO
4) ¿HAY LUGARES EN EL CONDADO DE SAN JOAQUIN DONDE USTED DESEA IR, PERO NO PUEDE? SÍ NO 5) SÍ USTED CONTESTO SÍ AL NUMERO CUATRO, POR FAVOR LLENE LA ORACIÓN SIGUIENTE. QUIERO IR DE ______A ______A ESTAS HORAS (______), EN ESTE DÍA (______) DE LA SEMANA.
6) PARA ENTRAR SUS COMENTARIOS EN EL REGISTRO PÚBLICO, POR FAVOR DENOS SU NOMBRE Y SU DIRECCIÓN: Nombre: ______Dirreción y Cuidad: ______
7) PREGUNTAS OPCIONALES: AÑOS: <25 26-35 36-45 46-55 56-65 >65 ETNIA: WHITE AFRICAN ASIA/ HISPANO NATIVO OTRO AMERICAN ISLEÑO DEL AMERICANO PACÍFICO INGRESOS: <$25,000 $25-35,000 $35-50,000 $50-$75,000 >$75,000
¡Gracias por completar esta encuesta! Por favor envie la encuesta a: Daniel Meza, Regional Planner San Joaquin Council of Governments 555 East Weber Avenue Stockton, CA 95202
APPENDIX E
Times FY 2015/16 UTN COMMENTS Unmet Need Supported by the Item # Comment Public Yes No
City of Escalon No Comments at Public Hearing
Times FY 2015/16 UTN COMMENTS Unmet Need Supported by the Item # Comment Public Yes No
City of Lathrop 1) Need for connection between Lathrop and Manteca 1 X
Times FY 2015/16 UTN COMMENTS Unmet Need Supported by the Item # Comment Public Yes No
City of Lodi
No Comments at Public Hearing
Times FY 2015/16 UTN COMMENTS Unmet Need Supported by the Item # Comment Public Yes No
City of Manteca
1) Manteca does not have enough stops 1 X
2) Why doesn’t Manteca DAR take you to Stockton? 1 X
3) Route 2 needs to service Railey’s 1 X
4) More Bus Frequency 1 X
5) A stop is needed at the Manteca Post Office 1 X 6) Add phone numbers on buses 1 X
7) Translate advertising to Spanish in Manteca 1 X
8) Shuttle between Manteca and Lathrop 1 X
Times FY 2015/16 UTN COMMENTS Unmet Need Supported by the Item # Comment Public Yes No
City of Ripon No Comments at Public Hearing
Times FY 2015/16 UTN COMMENTS Unmet Need Supported by the Item # Comment Public Yes No
City of Tracy
1) Route F in Tracy Needs more frequency 1 X
2) I cannot walk to the nearest bus stop 1 X
3) Tracy to Modesto/Manteca 1 X
Times FY 2015/16 UTN COMMENTS Unmet Need Supported by the Item # Comment Public Yes No
City of Stockton (RTD – SMA)
1) Stereos and rude music from phones 3 X
2) More frequency on buses 26 X 3) More weekend runs 13 X
4) Better Connectivity 16 X
5) More Evening Services 5 X
6) Better Ramps on buses 3 X
7) Needs for disabled are not being met 2 X
8) Littering at Triangle Station 1 X
Times FY 2015/16 UTN COMMENTS Unmet Need Supported by the Item # Comment Public Yes No
Stockton Metropolitan Area Dial-A-Ride
1) Operator issues 4
2) Problems with dispatch 13
3) Only provides one day service 1
4) Bus drivers should know CPR 1
Times Supported by the FY 2015/16 UTN COMMENTS Public Unmet Need
Intercity – RTD Ripon to Stockton 1) 1 X Tracy Walmart and Target need more frequency on weekends 2) 1 X Hopper pick up time window is too small 3) 1 X Hoppers should be parked in numeric order by the mall 4) and DTC 1 X Earlier hours 5) 1 X Lathrop to Escalon 6) 2 X Tracy to Manteca 7) 2 X Lathrop to Manteca 8) 19 X Tracy to Stockton 9) 1 X Manteca to Modesto 10) 1 X Stockton to Modesto 11) 1 X
Times FY 2015/16 UTN COMMENTS Unmet Need Supported by the Item # Comment Public Yes No
Non-Taxi Paratransit Services (Regional) No Comments Received
Times FY 2015/16 UTN COMMENTS Unmet Need Supported by the Item # Comment Public Yes No
County-Wide General Public Dial-A-Ride – RTD 1) Elderly and disabled children needs are not being met in Lathrop 1 X 2) DAR not available in Lathrop 6 X
Times FY 2015/16 UTN COMMENTS Unmet Need Supported by the Item # Comment Public Yes No
Interregional Transit Service – RTD Stockton to Sacramento
1) 1 X Request for RTD Bart Commuter to add Frequency 2) (11am, 2pm, 3pm,5pm) 11 X Stockton to Modesto 11am 3) 1 X Stockton to San Leandro 6am 4) 1 X
Times FY 2015/16 UTN COMMENTS Unmet Need Supported by the Item # Comment Public Yes No
Other Transit Services
No Comments Received