City of Elk Grove Public Transit Fares

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

City of Elk Grove Public Transit Fares AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.2 CITY OF ELK GROVE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT AGENDA TITLE: Consider 1) approving a proposal by MV Transportation for a new reverse commute service rate of $25/hour; and 2) authorizing staff to notice new fare rates and services for reverse commuting MEETING DATE: January 25, 2012 PREPARED BY DEPARTMENT HEAD: Richard Shepard, Public Works Director / City Engineer RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Staff recommends the City Council consider: 1) Approving a proposal by MV Transportation for a new reverse commute service rate of $25/hour; and 2) Authorizing staff to notice new fare rates and services for reverse commuting. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On December 14, 2011, City Council heard an item discussing costs of implementing reverse commute services between Elk Grove and Downtown Sacramento in order to support the relocation of the California Correctional Health Care Services (CCHCS) Department. Consistent with existing contract requirements, it was estimated that the net cost of this service would be approximately $94,000 per year. This net cost was estimated assuming the following: 1 Elk Grove City Council January 25, 2012 Page 2 of 6 Estimated Cost of New Reverse Commute Service New service costs at the $190,000 contracted rate of $53.09/hour Less new revenue based on 100 new monthly permits at a reduced <$96,000> cost of $80/month Estimated net annual cost $94,000 Since a majority of the reverse commute service would come from using buses that are “dead-heading” (returning empty), Council requested that staff negotiate with MV Transportation, Inc. (MV) to reduce the contracted rate to a level that would make the service revenue neutral to the City. Council also asked that a history of the MV contract staff be provided for discussion purposes. The purpose of this agenda item is to address these requests and seek approval so that staff can pursue an amendment to the contract with MV and begin the process of implementing the new transit rate and services. REVERSE COMMUTE RATE NEGOTIATION STATUS MV has offered to provide a reverse commute service rate of $25/hour. It should be recognized that this is a significant reduction from the existing contracted rate of $53.09/hour. In exchange for this reduced rate, MV has asked that the City consider approval of the following requests: 1. Waive responsibility of future liquidated damages (LD) potentially incurred on the reverse commute service. In addition, commit to a review and discussion of current proposed liquidated damages and process improvement for the methodology of making LD assessments so that they are made timely; 2. Allow MV to use a standard lease tire in lieu of Michelin XVR tires; and 3. Clarify the contract in the area of responsibility for parts and repairs in excess of $2,500. ANALYSIS: Staff acknowledges MV’s interest in working collaboratively to negotiate a new rate that is revenue neutral to the City even though the Contract 2 Elk Grove City Council January 25, 2012 Page 3 of 6 requirement would encumber the City to pay for the current contracted rate of $53.09. The proposed rate of $25/hour is more than a 50% reduction. In addition to a significantly reduced hourly rate, MV would also cover the additional costs incurred for providing this service. According to MV, these costs will average approximately $40,000 per year and include: • Additional training; • Additional insurance coverage; and • Additional dispatch services. As for the other requests from MV, staff offers the following analysis: ISSUE #1 - A) Waive responsibility of future liquidated damages (LD) potentially incurred on the reverse commute service. B) In addition, commit to a review and discussion of current proposed LD and process improvement for the methodology of making LD assessments so that they are made timely STAFF RECOMMENDATION ISSUE #1 A. City staff supports this request. City staff and MV believe it is important to provide this new reverse commute service at levels that meet or exceed customer satisfaction. However, because the reverse commute rate is significantly less than the normal contracted service rate and MV will have to absorb the additional costs incumbent upon providing the new service, MV would like the City to consider granting a relief of LD assessments specifically related to the on time performance of this service. As a means to monitor the quality of this new service existing performance metrics will still be maintained and evaluated and routes adjusted as needed but the actual assessment of LDs for on-time performance would not be made. B. City staff supports this request. The contract allows for a very formal dispute resolution process that relies on binding arbitration through Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (JAMS). Staff and MV believe it best to have a lower level dispute resolution process that can be used to determine the validity and appropriateness of LD assessments. It is proposed that this 3 Elk Grove City Council January 25, 2012 Page 4 of 6 lower level of dispute resolution be resolved at the City Manager or designee level. Beyond that, any unresolved disputes shall use the dispute resolution process established in the contract. Both MV and City staff also agree that it is in the best interest of both parties to make timely assessments of LD. On future invoices, LD should be identified by MV since the data to determine LD originates with MV. These self assessments will be reviewed by City staff and approved or disapproved, with specific reasons. This will provide more timely feedback and additional transparency to the purpose and reason for LD assessments which in turn will allow MV to improve performance so that LD can be minimized or completely eliminated in future invoices. ISSUE #2 - Use standard lease tires in lieu of Michelin XVR tires. MV would like to use tires that can be obtained through a standard lease agreement with their nationwide vendors. The MV contract requires that the Orion and New Flyer buses have tires that are speed rated at 73 mph or greater. The only tire which meets this requirement is the Michelin XVR which is approximately six times more costly to operate for MV. MV’s current cost to operate the Michelin XVR tires runs approximately $8,000 per month, the cost to operate a standard lease tire would be $1,333 which is a net monthly savings of $6,667. Though the standard lease tires are not speed rated for 73 mph, the prevailing speed on the freeways in the region is 65 mph and the standard lease tires would meet or exceed the 65mph speed rating. STAFF RECOMMENDATION ISSUE #2 City staff supports this request as long as the standard lease tire meets industry standard quality levels and will be able to operate at the 65mph speed limit used on the surrounding freeways, and provided that MV indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City from any claim that may result from use of the standard lease tires. Furthermore, the City expects that MV will warrant that it will not operate the buses under conditions that would exceed manufacturer warranties of the buses or the tires and that at the end of the contract term, the buses will be returned to their original manufactured settings with new XRV tires. 4 Elk Grove City Council January 25, 2012 Page 5 of 6 MV has agreed to these terms. ISSUE #3 - Clarify the contract in the area of responsibility for parts and repairs in excess of $2,500. The MV contract requires that MV provide all parts under $2,500, and that the City will pay for all parts over $2,500. This is not in dispute. The MV contract also requires the City to pay for capital repairs which would include all parts and labor regardless of cost. For example, the City has paid all parts and labor necessary to refurbish older buses. The City has also paid for major repairs to buses when prior approval is obtained. The City does not pay for routine maintenance (i.e., brakes, calipers, misc engine repairs) Current practice requires the City to approve of capital repairs prior to initiating work. MV has asked that the City consider preapproval of certain repair activities which would streamline the execution of the work. STAFF RECOMMENDATION ISSUE #3 City staff and MV support this request and are working to define a list of pre-agreed services that would be considered capital repairs. HISTORY OF CONTRACTED MANAGEMENT POSITIONS BY MV Council asked that staff provide a history of MV management. Staff and MV have realized that there are some discrepancies in their respective data sets that describe the history and are therefore working to resolve these discrepancies before they are presented to Council. Regardless of the discrepancies, both City and MV staff will be available to discuss during the meeting this item is presented, if needed. IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW REVERSE COMMUTE RATE The staff report for the December 14, 2011 Council Meeting is attached. In that report staff asked for direction on providing the reverse commute service to the CCHCS at a rate of $80/month which is less than the regular rate of $100/month. Should this rate be approved for implementation, staff will begin the outreach process in accordance with Federal Transit Administration requirements and City policy. 5 Elk Grove City Council January 25, 2012 Page 6 of 6 FISCAL IMPACT: Assuming Council approves of the new $25/hour reverse commute rate, and assuming 100 new monthly fares will purchased at $80/month, the annual service costs should have no net cost to the City. If monthly fares are purchased at a lesser quantity or price, the Transit Fund has no funding mechanism other than General Fund subsidy to provide this service.
Recommended publications
  • Ridership Report (October 2019)
    Ridership Report (October 2019) Year to Date Summary Category FY20 YTD FY19YTD Difference % Change Trailing 12 Month Trend Bus 3,518,921 3,415,852 103,069 3.0% 11,500,000 Light Rail 3,848,176 3,641,112 207,064 5.7% Rail Bus System Total 7,367,097 7,056,964 310,133 4.4% 11,000,000 10,500,000 Current Month Summary 10,000,000 Category October 2019 October 2018 Difference % Change Bus 1,059,668 1,014,352 45,316 4.5% 9,500,000 Light Rail 1,063,740 1,025,613 38,127 3.7% System Total 2,123,408 2,039,965 83,443 4.1% 9,000,000 Daily Summary Category October 2019 October 2018 Difference % Change Bus (M-F) 41,415 40,275 1,140 2.8% Bus (Sat) 15,390 13,266 2,124 16.0% Bus (Sun) 10,371 7,915 2,456 31.0% October Ridership by Mode Light Rail (M-F) 40,939 40,510 429 1.1% 6% Light Rail (Sat) 17,127 13,500 3,627 26.9% Light Rail Light Rail (Sun) 12,229 9,500 2,729 28.7% Fixed Route 48% Other Services E-Tran Ridership Summary (E-Van included) 46% Category Current Year Prior Year Difference % Change E-Tran (YTD) 280,319 266,440 13,879 5.2% E-Tran (Monthly) 84,775 81,648 3,127 3.8% Other services include E-Tran, Folsom, SmaRT Ride, CBS and Special Services E-Tran (Weekday) 3,560 3,426 134 3.9% Route Level Ridership Comparison (Bus) Weelday Route Comparison Saturday Route Comparison Route Oct 2019 Oct 2018 Difference % Change Route Oct 2019 Oct 2018 Difference % Change 1 2,067 2,190 (124) -6% 1 768 777 (9) -1% 11 972 715 257 36% 11 447 282 165 59% 13 678 315 362 115% 13 426 - 426 15 795 1,215 (420) -35% 15 381 558 (176) -32% 19 423 658 (234) -36% 19 209 271
    [Show full text]
  • Folsom Short Range Transit Plan Update Project Appendix G.1 Public
    Folsom Short Range Transit Plan Update Project Appendix G .1 Public Comments Summary BUS SERVICE Commuter Feeder Service to Folsom Light Rail Stations Feeder bus essential for Folsom residents to take advantage of light rail; should run all day. Need fast, quick feeders to/from light rail during peak commuter hours only . Local feeder routes need to be within walking distance of residences, not just businesses. Draft bus service plan seems to cater to commercial traffic much more than commuters . Why can't the commuter public be covered during peak time (i.e ., 6 AM - 7 :30 PM & 4 PM - 5 :30 PM) and commercial traffic off-peak. Consider different routes for commuters (5am - 9 am, 3pm - 7pm) than for in-town customers (run all day). Commute routes should be designed to serve largest neighborhood populations possible and travel quickly to L.R. stations . Daytime in-town routes would serve major retail, city hall, college, etc. Early a.m. pick up (bus stop) at East Natoma & Briggs Ranch to light rail to get me to work by 6:30 a.m. Maintain service on Folsom-Auburn Road from Folsom Dam Road and provide feeder service to Historic Folsom light rail station. Add a peak-only loop up Folsom-Auburn, Oak Avenue Parkway, American River Canyon, Greenback, right on Folsom-Auburn, up unused center lane ramp to the Historic Folsom light rail station. Residents in Orangevale seemed to get better service even though they already have current RT service ; RT and Folsom could make arrangements so Folsom would no longer have to loop out to Madison/Main (e .g.
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT Minutes TCC Meeting 4-28-21
    TCC Agenda April 28, 2021 Transit Coordinating Committee April 28, 2021 – TCC 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. Hosted via Zoom Members of the public wishing to address the committee on any item not on the agenda may do so at the beginning of the meeting. We ask that members of the public request to speak and keep their remarks brief. Testimony will be limited to a total of ten (10) minutes. Conference Call Option – SACOG Zoom Meeting 3 - Join Zoom Meeting via laptop, computer, or smartphone: https://zoom.us/j/96333495161 Meeting ID: 963 3349 5161. Join with one tap mobile +16699009128, 96333495161# US. Dial in with your phone +1 669 900 9128 US, +1 669 219 2599 US, +1 651 372 8299 US, 888 475 4499 US Toll-free, 877 853 5257 US Toll-free. Meeting ID: 963 3349 5161. Please do not put your phone on hold during the meeting; instead please hang up and call back when you’re free. Attendees: Glenda Marsh, public transit advocate/SMART Lisa Cappellari, Paratransit, Inc. James Drake, SacRT Jose Perez, YCTD Keith Martin, Yuba-Sutter Transit Mikki McDaniel, SCT/Link Jamie Wright, Placer County David Smith, Caltrans D3 Brett Bernegger, SacRT Mike Costa, e-tran Mike Dour, Roseville Transit Kristen Mazur, YCTD Erik Reitz, SacRT Matt Mauk, El Dorado County Transit Tiffani Fink, Paratransit, Inc. Will Garner, Placer County Transit Brian James, El Dorado County Transit Virginia Wieneke, ACC Rides Leah Barrett, 50 Corridor TMA Ed Scofield, Roseville Transit Allison Winter, Roseville Transit Sabrina Bradbury, SACOG Mike Rosson, SACOG Chris Dougherty, SACOG Caroline Payne, SACOG Nicholas Whitty, TransLoc Nirit Glazer, LookingBus Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • GOLD Light Rail Time Schedule & Line Route
    GOLD light rail time schedule & line map GOLD Downtown - Folsom View In Website Mode The GOLD light rail line (Downtown - Folsom) has 6 routes. For regular weekdays, their operation hours are: (1) Historic Folsom Station (Wb) →8th & K Station (Nb): 10:00 PM - 11:30 PM (2) Historic Folsom Station (Wb) →Sacramento Valley Station (Wb): 5:00 AM - 9:30 PM (3) Sacramento Valley Station (Eb) →Historic Folsom Station (Eb): 3:49 AM - 10:19 PM (4) Sacramento Valley Station (Eb) →Sunrise Station (Eb): 4:04 AM - 10:49 PM (5) Sunrise Station (Wb) →8th & K Station (Nb): 5:58 PM - 6:58 PM (6) Sunrise Station (Wb) →Sacramento Valley Station (Wb): 4:58 AM - 5:28 PM Use the Moovit App to ƒnd the closest GOLD light rail station near you and ƒnd out when is the next GOLD light rail arriving. Direction: Historic Folsom Station (Wb) →8th & K GOLD light rail Time Schedule Station (Nb) Historic Folsom Station (Wb) →8th & K Station (Nb) 25 stops Route Timetable: VIEW LINE SCHEDULE Sunday 8:00 PM - 9:30 PM Monday 10:00 PM - 11:30 PM Historic Folsom Station (Wb) 300 Reading St, Folsom Tuesday 10:00 PM - 11:30 PM Glenn Station (Wb) Wednesday 10:00 PM - 11:30 PM Thursday 10:00 PM - 11:30 PM Iron Point Station (Wb) Friday 10:00 PM - 11:30 PM Hazel Station (Wb) Saturday 10:00 PM - 11:30 PM Sunrise Station (Wb) Cordova Town Center Station (Wb) GOLD light rail Info Zinfandel Station (Wb) Direction: Historic Folsom Station (Wb) →8th & K Mather Field/Mills Station (Wb) Station (Nb) Stops: 25 Trip Duration: 55 min Butterƒeld Station (Wb) Line Summary: Historic Folsom Station
    [Show full text]
  • City of Folsom Core Values, Goals and Appendix H Performance Measures
    City of Folsom Core Values, Goals and Appendix H Performance Measures Core Values 1) Integrity - We act with integrity, doing what is legally and ethically correct. We recommend the right course of action even if it is unpopular. 2) Professionalism - We are committed to excellence. We are responsive and accountable . 3) Teamwork - Collaboration, communication and cooperation are essential to our success. We consider all stakeholders to be an integral part of serving the public. 4) Trust and Respect - We are free to express opinions, we listen to understand and we encourage responsible decision-making at all levels . 5) Innovation - We foster innovation as a means to achieve quality and cost effectiveness . We value employees who demonstrate initiative and creativity. 6) Workplace of Choice - We have a sense of purpose, take pride in accomplishments, demonstrate compassion for each other and celebrate our successes . Goals 1) Fiscal Management - Ensure and promote the long-term financial health of the City of Folsom. 2) Organizational Efficiency - Create a strong corporate culture emphasizing customer service, professionalism, cost efficiency and accountability . 3) Land Use and Planning - Plan future development to meet the needs of residents and businesses in terms of jobs-housing balance, environmental considerations, equal housing opportunities, and quality of life. 4) Transportation and Traffic - Provide transportation services that will meet mobility needs, maintain existing transportation infrastructure, and provide mitigation programs to reduce traffic impacts on neighborhoods . 5) Infrastructure - Provide and maintain sewer and water infrastructure to meet the City's existing and future capacity needs . 6) Public Safety/Emergency Service - Provide appropriate levels of public safety services to protect our citizens and ensure a high level of response to any emergency .
    [Show full text]
  • Amtrak/Folsom Light Rail Corridor Project Folsom Extension Station Fact Sheet
    Amtrak/Folsom Light Rail Corridor Project Folsom Extension Station Fact Sheet The Sacramento Regional Transit District’s 7.3-mile extension from Sunrise Boulevard to Historic Downtown Folsom was designed to improve public transit service within a 23-mile corridor following Highway 50 between the Amtrak Station in Downtown Sacramento and the city of Folsom. The $261 million Amtrak/Folsom Corridor Project consists of four areas of improvement including 10.7 miles of additional track, 10 stations, enhanced signaling and 14 new light rail vehicles. Completed in 2006, the Amtrak/Folsom Corridor Project added more than 6,000 daily passengers. Hazel Station 12500 Folsom Blvd., Rancho Cordova, CA 95742 Park-and-Ride: 432-space park-and-ride lot Points of Intrest: Nimbus Winery Mall, Garbeau’s Dinner Theater, shopping, dining Area: Retail, entertainment, residential, major employer Glenn Station Transit Oriented Development Opportunities: Com- 1025 Glenn Drive, Folsom, CA 95630 muter supportive: residential, retail, office Development Opportunities: Some vacant parcels; Park-and-Ride: 165-space park-and-ride lot housing, retail, and office Area: Retail, Residential Architect: Acanthus Studio, Inc. Bus Connection: Folsom Stage Line Artist: Sam Tubiolo, “Transitions” Architect: Acanthus Studio, Inc. Station Ammenties: 10 Bike rental lockers Artist: Charlotte Cooper, “Oak Leaf Fall” Iron Point Station Historic Folsom Station 150 Iron Point Road, Folsom, CA 95630 930 Leidesdorff Street, Folsom, CA 95630 Park-and-Ride: 216-space park-and-ride lot Park-and-Ride: 102 spaces in 3 park-and-ride lots Points of Intrest: Folsom Premium Outlets, Century Points of Interest: Lake Natoma, American River Bike Trail, Folsom 14 Theatre, Folsom Visitors Center, Lake Natoma, Folsom Railroad Museum, Folsom Powerhouse, Folsom Chamber of Commerce, shopping, dining, hotels shopping, dining, hotels Area: Retail, entertainment, residential Bus Connections: Folsom Stage Line Bus Connection: Folsom Stage Line Area: Retail, entertainment, residential, major employer Architect: Acanthus Studio, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    Sacramento Regional Transit District 5-Year Capital Plan (FY 2008 – FY 2012) Table of Contents Section I: Introduction & Overview • Overview.............................................................................................................. I-1 • Process to Develop the 5-Year Capital Plan ............................................................ I-2 • Structure of the 5-Year Capital Plan........................................................................ I-3 • District Profile .........................................................................................................I-4 to I-5 • Funding Summary...........................................................................................................I-6 • Funding Sources .............................................................................................................I-7 • Guiding Documents ................................................................................I-8 to I-10 Section II: 5-Year Capital Plan Summary (FY 2008 – FY 2012) • 5-Year Plan Index...................................................................... Index-1 to Index-6 • 5-Year Plan Project Summaries .......................................................... II-1 to II-106 Tier I: Fund thru FY 2012: System Expansion: Light Rail: Northeast Corridor Enhancements (Phase 1) II-1 South Sacramento Phase 2 Light Rail Extension II-2 Downtown-Natomas-Airport Light Rail Extension II-4 Fleet Program: LR Vehicle Mid-Life Overhauls/Improvements: Siemens Light Rail Vehicle Mid-Life
    [Show full text]
  • Review the Draft Network Integration Plan Here
    Draft Network Integration Plan Network Integration Plan June 8, 2021 Executive Summary The 2018 California State Rail Plan articulates a vision of intercity rail, commuter rail, and local mass transit integration, making the rail system easier to access and use. To further this vision, the California State Transportation Agency (CalSTA) and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) have been funding rail integration plans in various parts of the state to better integrate transit with the state rail system. The Sacramento Regional Transit (SacRT) Network Integration Plan is one of those plans. SacRT Network Integration Vision The common theme running through all state-sponsored Network Integration Plans is how to provide better connections between local transit and the state rail system. In Sacramento, that system consists of the Capitol Corridor and the San Joaquins intercity trains, which are sponsored by Caltrans and operated by their respective Joint Powers Authorities. In the future, two new San Joaquins roundtrips will be added on the Union Pacific Railroad’s Sacramento Subdivision, stopping at a Midtown Station along the 20th Street corridor. Additionally, the Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) commuter rail service, operating today between Stockton and San Jose, is planning an extension to Sacramento with multiple arrivals and departures. These trains also will stop at the Midtown Station. SacRT serves Sacramento Valley Station (SVS) today with the Gold Line light rail transit (LRT) service and two local bus routes, the 30 and the 38. The Gold Line operates with mostly 15-minute headways between SVS and Sunrise and 30-minute headways between Sunrise and Folsom.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary
    Executive Summary City of Folsom Short-Range Transit Plan Update This transit planning document has been prepared for the City of Folsom to meet State and Federal planning requirements, to provide a management tool and a policy guideline for on-going development of the City's transit system. Typically, short-range transit plans are updated about every five to seven years. The last short-range transit plan (SRTP) for the City of Folsom was prepared in 1999 for fiscal years 1999-2000 through FY2004/05 . This plan has been prepared to cover FY 2005/06 through FY 2009/10. The planning process for this SRTP update began about 12 months ago with an initial meeting of SACOG and Folsom Stage Line staff. Background research was conducted that included identifying the study area in terms of geography, community and demographic characteristics (Chapter 1). The existing Folsom transit services were analyzed and ridership trends were identified (Chapter 2). An analysis of transit demand based on the mobility needs of target population segments was performed (Chapter 3). An on-board passenger survey was conducted on Folsom Stage Line downtown commuter routes, Butterfield light rail connector route, local fixed route (Route 10) and Dial-A-Ride service (Chapter 3). Two on-line surveys were also conducted, one with Intel, the largest employer located in Folsom, and the other with Franchise Tax Board employees who live in Folsom and work at FTB located adjacent to the Butterfield light rail station in Sacramento . The survey results were helpful in the development of a restructured local fixed-route bus system to provide connections with the RT light rail system at the three new Folsom light rail stations.
    [Show full text]
  • Ridership Report (August 2019)
    Ridership Report (August 2019) Year to Date Summary Rolling 24 Month Trend Category FY20 YTD FY19YTD Difference % Change 12,000,000 Bus** 1,542,508 1,530,603 11,905 0.8% Rail Bus Light Rail 1,859,238 1,700,126 159,112 9.4% 11,500,000 System Total 3,401,746 3,230,729 171,017 5.3% 11,000,000 10,500,000 Current Month Summary 10,000,000 Category August 2019* August 2018 Difference % Change 9,500,000 Bus** 806,687 815,472 (8,785) -1.1% 9,000,000 Light Rail 946,115 927,742 18,373 2.0% Jul18 Jul19 Jan18 System Total 1,752,802 1,743,214 9,588 0.6% Jan19 Sep17 Sep18 Nov17 Nov18 Mar18 Mar19 May18 May19 *August 2019 had 1 less weekday than August 2018. Accounts for approximately 2.3% reduction in ridership Daily Summary August Ridership by Mode 2% Category August 2019 August 2018 Difference % Change Bus (M-F) 32,379 32,138 241 0.7% Light Rail Bus (Sat) 12,425 11,499 927 8.1% Fixed Route Bus (Sun) 7,578 7,404 174 2.4% 44% Other Services 54% Light Rail (M-F) 37,374 36,330 1,044 2.9% Light Rail (Sat) 15,940 13,300 2,640 19.8% Light Rail (Sun) 10,994 9,600 1,394 14.5% Etran services will be included in the summary next month. August ridership was flat. **Bus includes Fixed Route, CBS, SmaRT Ride, Folsom Fixed Route, Folsom DAR and other special services, Folsom ridership not complete.
    [Show full text]
  • Ridership Report (January 2020)
    Ridership Report (January 2020) FY20 Year to Date Summary Category FY20 YTD FY19 YTD Difference % Change Trailing 12 Month Trend Bus 6,172,715 5,812,472 360,242 6.2% 11,500,000 Light Rail 6,538,014 6,185,385 352,629 5.7% Rail Bus System Total 12,710,729 11,997,857 712,871 5.9% 11,000,000 10,500,000 Current Month Summary 10,000,000 Category January 2020 January 2019 Difference % Change Bus 909,004 813,453 95,551 11.7% 9,500,000 Light Rail 907,018 890,563 16,455 1.8% System Total 1,816,022 1,704,016 112,006 6.6% 9,000,000 Daily Summary Category January 2020 January 2019 Difference % Change Bus (M-F) 37,527 34,044 3,483 10.2% Bus (Sat) 14,597 11,369 3,228 28.4% Bus (Sun) 10,265 7,098 3,167 44.6% January Ridership by Mode Light Rail (M-F) 37,016 35,860 1,156 3.2% 6% Light Rail (Sat) 15,361 16,400 (1,039) -6.3% Light Rail Light Rail (Sun) 10,869 11,400 (531) -4.7% Fixed Route 49% Other Services 45% E-Tran Ridership Summary (E-Van included) Category Current Year Prior Year Difference % Change E-Tran (YTD) 466,820 439,796 27,024 6.1% Other services include E-Tran, Folsom, SmaRT Ride, CBS E-Tran (Monthly) 65,292 57,380 7,912 13.8% and Special Services E-Tran (Weekday) 2,996 2,613 383 14.7% Route Level Ridership Comparison (Bus) Weekday Route Comparison Saturday Route Comparison Route Jan 2020 Jan 2019 Difference % Change Route Jan 2020 Jan 2019 Difference % Change 1 1,651 1,562 89 6% 1 700 774 (74) -10% 11 929 589 340 58% 11 452 265 187 70% 13 716 240 476 199% 13 464 - 464 15 737 1,042 (305) -29% 15 410 494 (84) -17% 19 364 581 (217) -37% 19
    [Show full text]
  • American City Business Journals - Not for Commercial Use
    JANUARY 22, 2010 | SUPPLEMENT TO THE SACRAMENTO BUSINESS JOURNAL Years of Business © American City Business Journals - Not for commercial use S PONSORED BY: PROVIDED BY US — DISTRIBUTED BY YOU. ® SHAREPOINT 2010 — • ASSESSMENTS • BUSINESS & TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPS • DEPLOYMENTS • TECHNICAL EDUNARSSM • DESIGN & BRANDING • DASHBOARDS • DEVELOPMENT & INTEGRATION • SECURITY © American City Business Journals - Not for commercial use IN COOPERATION WITH: WWW.KIEFERCONSULTING.COM 916.357.6767 © American City Business Journals - Not for commercial use S-2 | 25 YEARS OF BUSINESS SACRAMENTO BUSINESS JOURNAL | JANUARY 22, 2010 25 events, people and companies Contents | from the past quarter-century S-4 Publisher’s foreword S-30 Galleria at Roseville S-6 Sacramento Kings S-32 Elk Grove S-8 Joe Serna Jr. S-34 Raley Field S-10 Air base closures S-36 The state budget S-12 Angelo Tsakopoulos S-38 Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger S-14 Tower Records S-40 Casinos S-16 Dan Crowley S-42 Housing on the march S-18 The Money Store S-44 Downtown hotels S-20 The Benvenuti family S-46 1984 S-22 Midtown S-47 Green biz S-24 Raley’s Inc. S-48 The McClatchy Co. S-26 Southwest Airlines S-50 Light rail S-28 Buzz Oates S-52 The Blueprint © American City Business Journals - Not for commercial use ■ 25 Years of Business is published by The Sacramento Business Journal. Copyright © 2010 by The Sacramento Business Journal, 1400 X Street, Sacramento, CA 95818 • 916-447-7661 • sacramento.bizjournals.com Publisher: Joanna Wessman • EDITORIAL: Editor: Ron Trujillo • Senior associate editor/
    [Show full text]