DOCSLIB.ORG

Monthly Report Attac

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Monthly Report Attac Agenda # 7-1 October 12, 2020 Meeting To: Board of Directors From: C. Sedoryk, General Manager/CEO Subject: Monthly Report Attached is a summary of monthly performance statistics for the Transportation, Maintenance and Administration departments for August 2020. A presentation update on current performance will be at your meeting. Staff was pleased to be informed on October 2, 2020 that the U.S. Department of Transportation (“DOT”) approved a loan of up to $8.45 million to Monterey-Salinas Transit District (“MST”) for the South County Operations & Maintenance Facility Project. This is the second loan approved under the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (“TIFIA”) Rural Project Initiative (RPI). Staff is in the process selecting strategic planning consultants to assist in the facilitation of a 3 Year Strategic Planning Workshop currently planned to be conducted at the Board meeting of January 11, 2021. The CEO will work with the board chair to identify an Adhoc Strategic Planning sub-committee to work with the consultant on workshop planning and preparations. Attachment #1 – Dashboard Performance Statistics – August 2020 Attachment #2 – Operations Dept. Report – August 2020 Attachment #3 – Facilities & Maintenance Dept. Report – August 2020 Attachment #4 – Administration Dept. Report – August 2020 Attachment #5 – Senator Diane Feinstein Correspondence A complete detail of Monthly Performance Statistics can be viewed within the GM Report at http://www.mst.org/about-mst/board-of-directors/board-meetings/ PREPARED BY: _____________________________ Carl G. Sedoryk MST Fixed Route ATTACHMENT 1 YTD Dashboard Performance Comparative Statistics July - August Fiscal Years 2019-2021 Ridership 900,000 Goal = 793,918 800,000 133,860 700,000 154,005 passengers 600,000 500,000 680,344 Military 639,913 Minimum = 754,222 400,000 FR 300,000 passengers 200,000 - 100,000 199,375 - FY2018 FY2019 FY2020 (Passenger Boardings - Fixed Route and Military ) Passengers Per Hour 25.00 Goal = 20 passengers p/h 20.00 15.00 16.37 17.42 Minimum = 15 passengers p/h 10.00 5.00 6.39 - FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 (Passengers per hour of service) On Time Performance 95.0% 90.0% Goal = 90% on time 91.9% 85.0% 88.3% 86.1% 80.0% Minimum = 75% on time 75.0% 70.0% FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 (Percent of passengers within 5 minutes of scheduled arrival) Percentage of Service Delivered 102.00% 100.00% Goal = 99% completed 98.00% 99.96% 99.93% 99.99% 96.00% Minimum = 95% completed 94.00% 92.00% FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 (Percentage of scheduled trips completed) MST Fixed Route YTD Dashboard Performance Comparative Statistics July - August Fiscal Years 2019-2021 Fare Box Recovery Ratio 30% 25% Goal = 25% 20% 22% 22% 15% 10% Minimum = 15% 5% 3% 0% FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 (Ratio of passenger fares to total operating cost) Cost Per Revenue Hour $200.00 $180.00 Goal = $178.58 per RH $160.00 $197.23 $140.00 $154.70 $120.00 $139.29 $100.00 Maximum = $196.43 per RH $80.00 $60.00 $40.00 $20.00 $- FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 (Total operating cost per hour of service) Miles Between Preventable Collisions 300,000 250,000 Goal = 200,000 Miles 200,000 150,000 178,442 192,408 MST 100,000 MV Minimum = 100,000 Miles 123,176 124,262 100,174 50,000 84,829 - FY2018 FY2019 FY2020 (Total miles travelled between preventable collisions) Miles Between Road Calls 50,000 45,000 47,420 Goal = 15,000 Miles 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 31,073 26,892 20,000 Minimum = 7,000 Miles 15,000 10,000 5,000 - FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 (Miles travelled between mechanical failure) COVID-19 MST Statistics and Projections 13 Month Rolling Boardings and Scheduled Trips 450,000 35,000 Trips Trips 400,000 30,000 350,000 300,000 25,000 250,000 20,000 200,000 150,000 15,000 100,000 10,000 50,000 Boardings 0 5,000 FR Boardings FR Scheduled Trips Cash Flow Projections Jan 20 - June 22 15,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 0 -5,000,000 -10,000,000 Jul-20 Jul-21 Jan-20 Jan-21 Jan-22 Jun-20 Jun-21 Jun-22 Oct-20 Oct-21 Apr-21 Apr-20 Apr-22 Sep-21 Feb-20 Sep-20 Feb-21 Feb-22 Dec-20 Dec-21 Aug-20 Aug-21 Nov-20 Nov-21 Mar-20 Mar-21 Mar-22 May-20 May-21 May-22 Revenue Disbursments Unrestricted Reserve Reserve Target MST RIDES YTD Dashboard Performance Comparative Statistics July - August Fiscal Years 2019-2021 Ridership 35,000 Goal = 29,461 30,000 passengers 25,000 28,603 26,322 20,000 15,000 Maximum = 32,407 10,000 13,724 passengers 5,000 - FY 2019 FY 2020 FY2021 (Total cumulative YTD passenger boardings) Passengers Per Hour 2.50 Goal = 2.0 2.00 passengers p/h 1.86 1.94 1.50 1.50 Minimum = 1.8 1.00 passengers p/h 0.50 - FY 2019 FY 2020 FY2021 (Passengers per hour of service) On Time Performance 95.0% 90.0% Goal = 90% on time 91.0% 93.7% 85.0% 90.1% 80.0% Minimum = 80% on time 75.0% 70.0% FY 2019 FY 2020 FY2021 (Percent of trips within 15 minutes of scheduled arrival) One Way Trips 30,000 Maximum = 25,889 25,000 one-way trips 20,000 21,840 22,850 15,000 Goal = 23,536 10,000 one-way trips 10,651 5,000 - FY 2019 FY 2020 FY2021 (Total cumulative YTD one-way passenger trips completed) MST RIDES YTD Dashboard Performance Comparative Statistics July - August Fiscal Years 2019-2021 Fare Box Recovery Ratio 12.0% Goal = 11% 8.0% 5.8% Measure Q 4.1% 9.0% Fare Box Minimum = 10% 4.0% 7.5% 4.2% 1.0% 0.0% FY 2019 FY 2020 FY2021 (Ratio of passenger fares to total operating cost) Cost Per Revenue Hour $100.00 $90.00 Goal = $80.67 per RH $80.00 $70.00 $77.72 $82.07 $60.00 $73.81 $50.00 Maximum = $88.74 per RH $40.00 $30.00 $20.00 $10.00 $- FY 2019 FY 2020 FY2021 (Total operating cost per hour of service) Miles Between Preventable Collisions 140,000 120,000 128,203 Goal = 110,000 Miles 100,000 80,000 79,188 60,000 Minimum = 100,000 Miles 40,000 59,067 20,000 FY 2019 FY 2020 FY2021 (Total miles travelled between preventable collisions) Miles Between Road Calls 100,000 Goal = 60,000 Miles 80,000 88,244 60,000 40,000 Minimum = 30,000 Miles 42,940 20,000 37,392 - FY 2019 FY 2020 FY2021 (Miles travelled between mechanical failure) MST Fixed Route Financial Performance Comparative Statistics July - August Fiscal Years 2019-2021 MST Fixed Route Total Revenue YTD Actual and Budget $7,700,000 $7,600,000 $7,624,704 $7,500,000 $7,400,000 $7,300,000 $7,200,000 Minimum 95% $7,100,000 $7,078,239 $7,000,000 $6,900,000 $6,800,000 YTD Actual YTD Budget MST Fixed Route Total Expenses YTD Actual and Budget $9,000,000 $8,000,000 $7,000,000 Maximum 105% $7,592,108 $6,000,000 $6,152,462 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $0 YTD Actual YTD Budget MST RIDES Financial Performance Comparative Statistics July - August Fiscal Years 2019-2021 MST RIDES Total Revenue YTD Actual and Budget $1,160,000 $1,150,000 $1,140,000 $1,149,606 $1,130,000 $1,120,000 $1,110,000 $1,110,231 $1,100,000 $1,090,000 $1,080,000 $1,070,000 Minimum 95% $1,060,000 YTD Actual YTD Budget MST RIDES Total Expenses YTD Actual and Budget $1,400,000 $1,200,000 Maximum $1,149,606 $1,000,000 105% $800,000 $600,000 $749,181 $400,000 $200,000 $0 YTD Actual YTD Budget ATTACHMENT 2 September 29, 2020 To: Carl Sedoryk, General Manager / C.E.O. From: Robert Weber, Chief Operating Officer Cc: MST Board of Directors Subject: Transportation Department Monthly Report − August 2020 FIXED ROUTE BUS OPERATIONS: System-Wide Service: (Fixed Route & On-Call Services): Preliminary boarding statistics indicate that the ridership fell to 103,571 in August 2020, which represents an 74.89% decrease as compared to August 2019, (412,397). For the fiscal year, passenger boardings have decreased by 74.89% from FY 2020. Productivity decreased from 17.8 passengers per hour in August 2019 to 6.6 passengers per hour in August of this year. Note: The sharp decline in passenger boardings and productivity is directly attributed to the COVID-19 county-wide shelter in place order that went into effect on March 18th. Supplemental / Special Services: All supplemental and special services were suspended for the month of August due to the COVID-19 pandemic. System-Wide Statistics: . Ridership: 103,571 . Vehicle Revenue Hours: 15,689 . Vehicle Revenue Miles: 235,203 . System Productivity: 6.6 Passengers Per Vehicle Revenue Hour . One-Way Trips Provided: 16,574 Time Point Adherence: Of 83,693 total time-point crossings sampled for the month of August, the Transit Master system recorded 8,718 delayed arrivals to MST’s published time-points system-wide. This denotes that 89.62% of all scheduled arrivals at published time-points were on time. (See MST Fixed-Route Bus ~~ On Time Compliance Chart FY 2020 - 2021.) Note: Service arriving later than 5 minutes beyond the published time point is considered late.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Field Operations Program -- Overview Of
    July 2000 • NREL/MP-540-27962 Field Operations Program― Overview of Advanced Technology Transportation CY2000 K. Kelly L. Eudy National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617 Cole Boulevard Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 NREL is a U.S. Department of Energy Laboratory Operated by Midwest Research Institute • Battelle • Bechtel Contract No. DE-AC36-99-GO10337 NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof. Printed on paper containing at least 50% wastepaper, including 20% postconsumer waste Field Operations Program—Overview of Advanced Technology Transportation, CY 2000 The transportation industry’s private sector is adept at understanding and meeting the demands of its customers; the federal government has a role in encouraging the development of products that are in the long-term interest of the greater public good. It is up to the government to understand issues that affect public health, well-being, and security.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiesel Fleet Durability Study
    Draft Final Report Biodiesel Fleet Durability Study Prepared for: Mr. Bob Okamoto California Air Resources Board 1001 "I" Street P.O. Box 2815 Sacramento, CA 95812 July 2010 Submitted by: Dr. Thomas D. Durbin Dr. J. Wayne Miller Ms. S. Michelle Jiang University of California CE-CERT Riverside, CA 92521 951-781-5791 951-781-5790 (fax) Disclaimer This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the California Air Resource Board. The statements and conclusions in this report are those of the contractor and not necessarily those of California Air Resources Board. The mention of commercial products, their source, or their use in connection with material reported herein is not to be construed as actual or implied endorsement of such products. Acknowledgments We acknowledge funding from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) under the grant No. G06-AF38. i Table of Contents Disclaimer i Acknowledgments i Table of Contents ii List of Tables iv Table of Figures v Abstract vi Acronyms and Abbreviations viii Executive Summary ix 1 Introduction 1 2 Biodiesel Use in Use in Compression Ignition Engines 3 2.1 Biodiesel Basics 3 2.1.1 What is Biodiesel? 3 2.1.2 Properties of Commercial #2 Diesel and Biodiesel Fuels 3 2.1.3 Biodiesel Fuel Standards 5 2.2 Engine and Fuel System with Biodiesel Use 7 2.2.1 Biodiesel Use in Compression Ignition Engines 7 2.2.2 Statement of the Diesel Fuel Injector Manufacturers 9 2.2.3 Warranties 9 2.2.4 Engine Performance 12 2.2.5 Biodiesel Solvency & Filter Plugging 12 2.2.6 Materials Compatibility 12 2.3
    [Show full text]
  • Bill No. 85-33 (COR)
    I lWINA'TRENTAI TRES NA LIHESLATURAN GUAHAN 2015 (FIRST) Regular Session Bill No Introduced by: T. C. Ada AN ACT TO AUTHORIZE THE GUAM REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY (GRTA) TO ENTER INTO A LONG TERM PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP THAT WILL ENABLE AN INVESTOR FINANCED IMPLEMENT A TI ON OF THE GOVERN~1ENT OF GlJAivl TRANSIT BUSINESS PLAN 2009-2015. '~ 1 Section I. Findings & Intent. 1 Lihes/aturan Guahan finds that an effec'\iii-e \:o\_ 2 and efficient public transit system is needed to support Guam· s growing popu.J)i{ion '• '°'\%, 3 and economic development. •" 4 And I Liheslaturan Guahan further finds that a similar observation was 5 made by the Governor of Guam on February 20, 2014 through Executive Order 6 2014-04 noting that despite millions of dollars of annual subsidies, Guam's public 7 transit system is: ( J) "lacking in timeliness, re!iahi/i(y. accessibility··· al! necessary 8 fi111ctions of'transportation and economy ... ". and (2) " ... As the demand [f(Jr 9 transportation related services} grows. so do the concerns over traffic 10 congestion ... ". and 0) " ... improving acccssihi!i(v to contemporary transportation 11 to all Guamanians is a priority .. 12 1 Lihes/aturan Guahan further finds that the island's public transit system is 13 rapidly deteriorating. Consequently the eJlectiveness of the current system is being 14 negatively impacted and is losing its ability to eHiciently serve as an alternate 1 1 mode of transportation. This is evidenced by the fact that ridership has declined 2 30% in the past 4 years. 3 I Liheslaturan Guahan additionally finds that in a December 2008 study, 4 jointly commissioned by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the 5 Department of Public \Yorks (DP\V) and which formed the basis for the 2030 6 Guam Transportation MasterPlan, the following findings were made.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020-2025 Transit Development Plan
    2020 - 2025 TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN Wheaton Way Transit Center Grand Opening Nov. 2019 Photo By All American Marine Table of Contents Contents Glossary 3 Section I: Organization 3 Section II: Physical Plant 6 Section III: Service Characteristics 7 Section IV: Service Connections 10 Section V: Activities in 2019 12 Section VI: Proposed Action Strategies, 2020 – 2025 14 Section VII: Capital Planning 16 Section VIII: Operating Data, 2019 – 2025 17 Section IX: Operating Revenues and Expenditures, 2019 – 2025 19 Section X: Transit System Vision Map 20 Appendix I: Routed System Map 21 Appendix II: Equipment & Facilities Asset Inventory 22 Appendix III: Fleet Inventory 23 Appendix IV: SK Ride Service Area Map 24 Appendix V: Kingston Ride Service Area Map 25 Appendix VI: Kingston Fast Ferry Commuter Service Area Map 26 Kitsap Transit 60 Washington Avenue, Suite 200, Bremerton, WA 98337 Date of Public Hearing: September 1, 2020 Pursuant to RCW 35.58.2795 2 Glossary ACCESS – Kitsap Transit’s ADA demand ORCA – One Regional Card for All regional response bus service fare payment card used on Puget Sound area transit systems and WSF ADA – Americans with Disabilities Act PSNS – Puget Sound Naval Shipyard APC – Automatic Passenger Counters ROW – Right of Way AVL – Automatic Vehicle Locator RRFP – Regional Reduced Fare Permit ORCA BTC – Bremerton Transportation Center Card for qualified persons to ride for reduced cost at ½ the normal fare. CRA – Comprehensive Route Analysis TAM – Transit Asset Management Plan CTR – Commute Trip Reduction TIP – Transportation Incentive Program for DOD – Department of Defense Department of Navy employees to help reduce their daily contribution to traffic DSHS – Department of Social and Health congestion and air pollution, as well as Services expand their commuting alternatives.
    [Show full text]
  • Chassis Catalog
    Parts for Trucks, Trailers & Buses ® BUS PARTS 7 CHASSIS Proven, reliable and always innovative. TRP® offers reliable aftermarket products that are designed and tested to exceed customers’ expectations regardless of the vehicle make, model or age. FENDERS • SUSPENSION & RIDE CONTROL • WHEEL END Tested. Reliable. Guaranteed. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chassis CHASSIS FENDERS Choosing the right Half Fenders - Poly ............................7-5 replacement part or service for your vehicle—whether you own Full Fenders - Poly ............................7-6 one, or a fleet—is one of the Single Axle Fenders - Poly ......................7-7 most important decisions you can make for your business. Super Single Fenders - Half . 7-9 And, with tested TRP® parts Super Single Fenders - Full .....................7-9 it’s an easy decision. Super Single Fenders - Quarter .................7-11 Regardless of the make you drive, TRP® quality Half Fenders ................................7-13 replacement parts are Full Fenders ................................7-17 engineered to fit your truck, trailer or bus. Choose the Single Axle Fenders ..........................7-21 parts that give you the best Quarter Fenders . 7-26 value for your business. Check them out at an approved Fender Mounting Kits .........................7-29 ® TRP retailer near you. Top Flap for Quarter Fender ....................7-39 Mudflap Hangers ............................7-40 The cross reference information in this catalog is based upon data provided by several industry sources and our partners. While every attempt is made to ensure the information presented is accurate, we bear no liability due to incorrect or incomplete information. Product Availability Due to export restrictions and market ® demands, not all products are TRP North America always available in every location.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Service
    TRANSIT SERVICE Transit services in Glendale include the Beeline local transit system and the services provided by the MTA. These systems combine to provide frequent transit service on many key streets in downtown Glendale. Transit service is offered at least every 10 minutes on Brand, Central south of Broadway, San Fernando, 4 Glendale Boulevard, and Broadway. With service this frequent, riders do not need to carry a schedule, but can depend on the next bus arriving soon after they reach their bus stop. Figure 4-1 shows the existing transit services in the study area, including services provided by MTA and the City of Glendale. Despite this network of high frequency transit services, many residents in Glendale find transit services inadequate, or are unaware of the level of service actually provided. GLENDALE DOWNTOWN MOBILITY STUDY | 4-1 4.1 PRINCIPLES The key principles for improving transit service in Glendale include increasing awareness about the services that are avail- able, and marketing a complete system to riders who can choose whether an MTA or Beeline route serves them best. The Downtown Mobility Study recommends operating a new shuttle route which will be dedicated to downtown travel, and linking regional transit corridors with the commercial, entertainment and employment opportunities in the Glendale core. The shuttle route, which can begin service almost immediately using exist- ing resources, should ultimately be improved and expanded for a long term future that may include streetcar operations. Create and market a comprehensive system of coordinated re- gional and local transit that takes advantage of the relatively high level of service that already exists in Glendale, and emphasizes new linkages where needed.
    [Show full text]
  • An Evaluation of the Market for Small to Medium Sized Cutaway Buses
    An Evaluation of the Market for Small-to-Medium-Sized Cutaway Buses FINAL REPORT FTA Project Number: MI-26-7280.07.1 December 21, 2007 FTA Project #: MI-26-7208.07.1 An Evaluation of the Market for Small-to-Medium-Sized Cutaway Buses Form Approved REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202- 4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED December 21, 2007 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS Evaluation of the Market for Small-to-Medium-Sized Cutaway Buses 6. AUTHOR(S) Hidalgo & DeVries, Inc. – Primary Contractor Frances Kernodle Associates, Inc. – Sub Contractor 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) REPORT NUMBER Hidalgo & DeVries, Inc. Frances Kernodle Associates, Inc. 560 Fifth Street 113 N. Alfred Street FTA -003 Suite 401 Alexandria, VA 22314 Grand Rapids, MI 49504 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING US Department of Transportation AGENCY REPORT NUMBER Federal Transit Administration Office of Program Management MI-26-7280.07.1 Washington, DC 20590 11.
    [Show full text]
  • TCRP Report 38: Guidebook for Evaluating, Selecting, And
    43 CHAPTER 7 LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GAS 7.1 OVERVIEW LPG and natural gas are often quite similar; the major difference is that the CNG system must be calibrated for a LPG is a by-product of both petroleum refining and higher volumetric fuel flow rate at a given load. natural gas processing plants. Approximately 60 percent of Automotive fuel-grade CNG has a substantially higher the LPG produced in North America comes from natural octane rating than automotive LPG; therefore, to prevent gas processing. Processing removes most of the ethane and combustion knock, a heavy-duty LPG engine is normally heavier HCs as well as carbon dioxide, which may exist in designed for lower peak combustion pressures than a the gas at the wellhead, to produce a pipeline gas with a similar CNG engine. This is accomplished by using a lower relatively consistent heating value. In North America, LPG compression ratio or a lower turbocharger boost pressure. is formulated to consist mainly of propane with minor Because of this octane limitation, an LPG engine would be amounts of propylene, butane, and other light HCs. LPG is expected to have somewhat lower fuel efficiency than a gaseous at room temperature and atmospheric pressure, but CNG engine operating in similar service. Because the LPG it liquefies at pressures greater than 120 psig. This property vehicle would almost certainly have a lighter fuel storage makes it convenient to store and transport LPG as a system than a similar CNG vehicle, the LPG vehicle would pressurized liquid. The stored liquid fuel is easily perform less work, with the result that actual in-service fuel vaporized into a gas with clean-burning combustion consumption (on a Btu/mi basis) probably would be quite properties similar to those of CNG.
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda # 8-1 July 12, 2021 Meeting To
    Agenda # 8-1 July 12, 2021 Meeting To: Board of Directors From: C. Sedoryk, General Manager/CEO Subject: Monthly Report – May 2021 Attached is a summary of monthly performance statistics for the Transportation, Maintenance, and Administration departments for May 2021. (Attachments 1 – 4) On May 4, I attended a meeting with the US Department of Intergovernmental Affairs staff to discuss bus rapid transit and other major projects within Monterey County. Throughout the month, I attended several meetings to discuss State of California federal legislative priorities with: • Zac Commins, Office of Senator Alex Padilla. • Robert Edmonson and Owen Beal, Office of Speaker Pelosi • Rishi Sahgal and Freda Pachter Hawver, Office of Senator Feinstein Finally, I attended a meeting with state Senator Maria Elena Durazo to discuss the potential unintentional consequences of her bill, SB 674, and conflicts with Federal Transit Administration procurement regulations. Attachment #1 – Dashboard Performance Statistics – May 2021 Attachment #2 – Operations Dept. Report – May 2021 Attachment #3 – Facilities & Maintenance Dept. Report – May 2021 Attachment #4 – Administration Dept. Report – May 2021 A complete detail of Monthly Performance Statistics can be viewed within the GM Report at http://www.mst.org/about-mst/board-of-directors/board-meetings/ PREPARED BY: _____________________________ Carl G. Sedoryk Blank Page ATTACHEMENT 1 Blank Page ATTACHMENT 2 Date: June 29, 2021 To: Carl Sedoryk, General Manager / C.E.O. From: Norman K. Tuitavuki, Chief Operating Officer Cc: MST Board of Directors Subject: Transportation Department Monthly Report − May 2021 FIXED ROUTE BUS OPERATIONS: System-Wide Service: (Fixed Route & On-Call Services): Preliminary boarding statistics indicate ridership reached 127,422 in May 2021, which represents an 81% increase compared to May 2020’s ridership of 70,264.
    [Show full text]
  • AC TRANSIT DISTRICT GM Memo No. 08-044 Board of Directors Executive Summary Meeting Date: March 12, 2008
    AC TRANSIT DISTRICT GM Memo No. 08-044 Board of Directors Executive Summary Meeting Date: March 12, 2008 Committees: Planning Committee Finance and Audit Committee External Affairs Committee Operations Committee Rider Complaint Committee Paratransit Committee Board of Directors Financing Corporation SUBJECT: General Manager’s Quarterly Report, 2nd Quarter, October-December 2007 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Information Only Briefing Item Recommended Motion Receive General Manager's Report for quarterly reporting purposes. Fiscal Impact: None Background/Discussion: Attached is the General Manager’s Quarterly Report for the period ending December 31, 2007. Per Board action, this report serves to replace various quarterly and semi-annual reports that were formerly submitted to the Operations or Finance Committees. The full bound report was distributed to the Board prior to this meeting. Two additional reports are presented with this memo as attachments: East Bay Paratransit Quarterly Summary addendum to the Accessible Services Report, and the Purchasing Dept. report. Prior Relevant Board Actions/Policies: N/A Attachments: 1. East Bay Paratransit Quarterly Summary 2. Purchasing Dept. Quarterly Report 3. GM Quarterly Report – 2nd Quarter, October-December 2007 (cover page only) Approved by: Rick Fernandez, General Manager Prepared by: Jim Gleich, Deputy General Manager Date Prepared: February 29, 2008 BOARD ACTION: Approved as Recommended [ ] Other [ ] Approved with Modification(s) [ ] The above order was passed on: . Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary By GM Memo No. 08-044 Attachment 1 Department: Submitted by: Extension: Accessible Services M. Nestor-Brush 7213 Quarterly Report Summary 2nd Quarter - FY 2007-08 Prepared for AC Transit Ridership and Productivity Total ridership in the period was equal to 162,587 passengers which is higher than the same quarter last year; 158,628 passengers.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Transit Development Plan
    2018-2023 TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN Serving the growing Tri-Cities region in Benton and Franklin Counties for over 35 years. Ben Franklin Transit 1000 Columbia Park Trail Richland, WA 99352-4798 509.735.5100 | www.bft.org BFT Transit Development Plan (TDP) – 2018-2023 Table of Contents A Brief Timeline of Ben Franklin Transit’s Transformation ............................................................. 1 Function and Requirements of the Transit Development Plan Document .................................... 2 Public Participation ......................................................................................................................... 3 Organization of Ben Franklin Transit .............................................................................................. 4 Coordination with State Planning ................................................................................................... 6 Existing Conditions .......................................................................................................................... 7 Customer Comments, Commendations and Complaints ............................................................... 8 Existing Services and Service Standards ......................................................................................... 8 Standard TDP Performance Indicators Using Latest Available NTD Data ..................................... 16 Fuel Consumption Trends ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Report – March 2016
    Agenda # 9-1 May 9, 2016 Meeting To: Board of Directors From: C. Sedoryk, General Manager/CEO Subject: Monthly Report – March 2016 Attached is a summary of monthly performance statistics for the transportation, maintenance, and administration departments and a status update on progress made in pursuit of the FY 2016 Action Plan for March 2016 (Attachments 1-5). March 3 – 4, 2016 I attended a meeting of the California Transit Association Executive Committee in San Diego, CA to discuss strategic planning for the association. March 11 – 15, 2016 I attended the American Public Transit Association Legislative Conference in Washington, DC to participate in meetings of the APTA Executive Committee, the APTA Board of Directors, various committees and informational meetings. March 29, 2016 I attended the California Association for Coordinated Transportation conference in San Diego, CA where I participated on a panel presentation on local transportation sales tax measures. March 30, 2016 I met with Josh Shaw, executive director of the California Transit Association to discuss changes in State Transit Assistance allocations and other matters related to the association. Later that day I participated in a meeting of the Oversight Committee of the California Transit Indemnity Pool. Attachment #1 – Dashboard Performance Statistics Attachment #2 – Operations Dept. Report – March 2016 Attachment #3 – Facilities & Maintenance Dept. Report – March 2016 Attachment #4 – Administration Dept. Report – March 2016 Attachment #5 – FY 2016 Action Plan Status Update
    [Show full text]