Annual Operating and Capital Budget Fiscal Year July 1, 2003 Through June 30, 2004

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Annual Operating and Capital Budget Fiscal Year July 1, 2003 Through June 30, 2004 Annual Operating and Capital Budget Fiscal Year July 1, 2003 through June 30, 2004 San Mateo County Transit District San Carlos, California Cover Photo: SamTrans articulated bus picks up customers along El Camino Real. Inside Cover Photo: While the transit district is working within a constrained budget, the fiscal year started off on a positive note when the district officials named it’s bus rodeo course in memory of veteran employee James V. Castagno, who died last year after a hard-fought battle with cancer. ANNUAL BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2003 Adopted by the Board of Directors June 11, 2003 Finance Division Roger Contreras, Chief Financial Officer SAN MATEO COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT FISCAL YEAR 2004 BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents . 1 Budget Guide Document Organization . 5 Budget Planning and Development Process . 6 Budget Assumptions for Fiscal Year 2004 . 8 Budget Calendar . 9 Board Resolution, Operating Budget . 11 Board Resolution, Capital Budget . 13 Section One - Introduction Budget Message . 15 FY2004 Budget Highlights . 16 Service Area Map . 19 General Organization Chart . 20 Board of Directors . 21 General Manager/CEO and Key Staff . 23 Board Secretaries and General Counsel . 23 Major Milestones in District Evolution . 24 Core Values . 27 Vision Statement . 28 Mission Statement . 28 District Goals . 28 FY2004 Operating Budget Summary . 29 Distinguished Budget Presentation Award . 32 Section Two - Financial Plan Operations and Summary of Accounting Policies . 33 Operating Revenues and Expenses as a Percent of Totals . 37 FY2004 Operating Revenue Budget . 38 Revenue Line Item Explanations . 39 Five-year Comparison of Operating Revenue. 44 FY2004 Operating Expense Budget . 45 Expense Line Item Explanations . 47 Five-year Comparison of Operating Expenses . 52 FY2004 Sources and Uses of Funds Summary . 53 Sources and Uses of Funds Explanations . 54 Long-Term Debt . 57 1 Section Three – Department & Division Budgets Department & Division Budgets with Supporting Detail . 61 Performance Measurements for FY2003 Goals & Objectives . 63 FY2004 Organization Chart Field . 64 Administration Division . 66 Communications Division . 76 Development Division . 84 Executive Department . 97 Finance Division . 103 Operations Division . 116 Section Four - Capital Budget & Program FY2004 Capital Budget . 151 FY2004 Capital Budget Summary . 152 FY2004 District Capital Project Descriptions . 154 Long Term Capital Planning . 161 Section Five – Supplemental Information Personnel Summary by Division . 163 Demographic Data . 164 Operating Statistics . 166 Bus System and Fares . 169 Bus Route Descriptions . 170 Private Sector Participation Policy . 175 Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Policy . 178 Glossary of Transit Terms . 182 List of Tables and Charts Budget Preparation Calendar . 9 San Mateo County Map . 19 General Organization Chart . 20 FY2004 Operating Budget Summary . 29 Distinguished Budget Presentation Award . 32 Revenues and Expenses as Percentages of Totals . 37 FY2004 Operating Revenues Budget . 38 Five-year Comparison of Operating Revenues . 44 FY2004 Operating Expenses Budget . 45 Five-year Comparison of Operating Expenses . 52 FY2004 Sources and Uses of Funds . 53 Long-Term Debt . 57 Debt Service Requirements . 58 Organization Chartfields . 64 Administration Division Organization Chart . 67 Administration Division Personnel . 69 Administration Division - Administration Expense Budget . 70 2 Administration Division - Human Resources Expense Budget . 71 Administration Division - Information Technology Expense Budget . 72 Administration Division - Contracts and Procurement Expense Budget 73 Administration Division - Risk Management Expense Budget . 74 Administration Division – Non-departmental Activities . 75 Communications Division Organization Chart . 77 Communications Division Personnel . 78 Communications Division - Administration Expense Budget . 79 Communications Division - Customer Service Expense . 80 Communications Division - Marketing Expense Budget . 81 Communications Division - Public Information Expense Budget . 82 Communications Division - Distribution Expense Budget . 83 Development Division Organization Chart . 85 Development Division Personnel. 87 Development Division - Administration Expense Budget . 88 Development Division - Engineering Expense Budget . 89 Development Division - Facilities Expense Budget . 90 Development Division - Strategic and Long Range Planning Expense Budget . 91 Development Division - Grants & Capital Project Funding Administration Expense Budget . 92 Development Division - Property Management Expense Budget . 93 Development Division - Capital Project Management Expense Budget 94 Development Division - Colma BART Station Expense Budget . 95 Development Division - Sequoia Station Program Expense Budget . 96 Executive Department Organization Chart . 98 Executive Department Personnel . 99 Executive Department - Administration Expense Budget . 100 Executive Department - Board of Directors Expense Budget . 101 Executive Department - Legal Services Budget . 102 Finance Division Organization Chart . 105 Finance Division Personnel . 106 Finance Division - Administration Expense Budget . 107 Finance Division - Audit Department Expense Budget . 108 Finance Division - Accounting Administration Expense Budget . 109 Finance Division - Accounting Department Disbursement Center . 110 Finance Division - Accounting Department General Ledger . 111 Finance Division - Finance and Budget Administration Expense Budget 112 Finance Division - Budget Department Expense Budget . 113 Finance Division - Treasury and Debt Service Expense Budget . 114 Finance Division - ICAP Administration . 115 Operations Division Organization Chart . 119 Operations Division Personnel . 123 Operations Division - Administration Expense Budget . 125 Operations Division - Quality Assurance Expense Budget . 126 Operations Division - Transit Operations Training Expense Budget . 127 Operations Division - Operations Planning . 128 Operations Division - Service Planning Expense Budget . 129 Operations Division - Bus Transportation-North Base Expense Budget 130 Operations Division - Bus Transportation-South Base Expense Budget 131 Operations Division - Bus Communications Expense Budget . 132 3 Operations Division - Bus Maintenance-North Base Expense Budget 133 Operations Division - Bus Maintenance-South Base Expense Budget 134 Operations Division - Bus Maintenance-Unit Repair Expense Budget 135 Operations Division - Bus Maintenance-Stores Expense Budget . 136 Operations Division - Bus Maintenance-Fixed-Route Accessibility Expense Budget . 137 Operations Division - Contracted Urban Bus Service Expense Budget 138 Operations Division - Contracted-Coastside Service Expense Budget 139 Operations Division - Contracted-La Honda/Pescadero Expense Budget 140 Operations Division - SamCoast Community Bus Expense Budget . 141 Operations Division - ADA Programs-Administration Expense Budget 142 Operations Division - ADA Coastside Service Expense Budget . 143 Operations Division - Redi-Wheels North Base Expense Budget . 144 Operations Division - Redi-Wheels South Base Expense Budget . 145 Operations Division - ADA Sedan Service Expense Budget . 146 Operations Division – Peninsula Commuter Rail-Samtrans Expense Budget . 147 Operations Division - Shuttles Expense Budget . 148 Operations Division - Dumbarton Express Service Expense Budget 149 Composition of SamTrans FY2004 Capital Budget . 153 Personnel Summary by Division . 163 Demographic Data . 164 Fixed-route Ridership . 166 Bus Passenger Fares . 166 Fixed-route Farebox Recovery . 167 Fixed-route Total Miles . 167 Fixed-route Hours . 168 Redi-Wheels Ridership . 168 SamTrans Bus System and Fares . 169 4 BUDGET GUIDE The San Mateo County Transit District fiscal year begins July 1 and ends June 30. The adopted budget contains an abundance of information regarding the District. To assist the reader in locating subjects of interest, this guide has been provided to help in understanding how this budget document is structured. DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION The Fiscal Year 2004 Budget has five major sections: Introduction, Financial Plan, Department & Division Budgets, Capital Budget & Program and Supplemental Information. The Introduction contains the Budget Message for the District, a map of the District service area, the overall organizational chart, a listing of the Board of Directors, major milestones for the District, the Vision and Mission statements, and a comprehensive Executive Summary of operating and capital budgets with all sources and uses of funds. The Financial Plan contains the FY2004 Operating Budget in much greater detail than the Executive Summary Budget. The District revenues and expenses are presented in more detail showing resources allocated to expense categories and major programs. Explanations of all major revenue sources and expense justifications are included in this section. A summary of the debt obligations is presented along with the debt service requirements. The Department & Division Budgets are presented including the organizational structure, a list of key staff members in the organization, division responsibilities and objectives for FY2004, a comparison of the prior year adopted budget and projected expenses to the adopted budget, and the department staffing requirements. The amount and percent of budget change is indicated on the department financial budget presentations. The Capital Budget & Program for FY2004 is presented showing major capital programs
Recommended publications
  • 2021 Roster of Appointments
    2021 ROSTER OF APPOINTMENTS BY THE SAN MATEO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND CITY SELECTION COMMITTEE David J. Canepa, President Sue Vaterlaus, Chairperson San Mateo County Board of Supervisors City Selection Committee Sukhmani S. Purewal, Secretary City Selection Committee Northern Judicial Cities Central Judicial Cities Southern Judicial Cities Brisbane Belmont Atherton Colma Burlingame East Palo Alto Daly City Foster City Menlo Park Pacifica Half Moon Bay Portola Valley San Bruno Hillsborough Redwood City South San Francisco Millbrae San Carlos San Mateo Woodside TABLE OF CONTENTS 2021 VACANCY LISTING ..................................................... 3 ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS (ABAG) .............................. 4 BAY AREA AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (BAAQMD) ........................ 5 CALIFORNIA IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM (CAL-ID) .................................. 6 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COUNCIL (DVC) .......................................... 7 HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE .......................... 9 HOUSING ENDOWMENT AND REGIONAL TRUST (HEART) .......................... 11 LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCo) .............................. 12 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (MTC) .......................... 13 PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD (CALTRAIN) ....................... 15 SAN MATEO COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT (SAMTRANS) ........................... 16 SAN MATEO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (SMCTA) ..................... 17 ADDITIONAL APPOINTMENTS BY CITY SELECTION COMMITTEE ...................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix a of the Caltrain Corridor Vision Plan
    THE CALTRAIN CORRIDOR VISION PLAN Appendix A Rail: Existing Conditions and Vision Plan Methodology Appendix A describes today’s Caltrain rail system and service. It also explains the assumptions and methodology used to develop the Caltrain Corridor Vision Plan recommendations for future rail service in the corridor. 1. Caltrain Today The following existing conditions form what this study assumes to the baseline conditions that the Vision Plan elements are built upon. This information and the assumptions were based on what was available in 2016. 1.1 Physical Infrastructure The Caltrain Corridor is an approximately 48-mile rail corridor between the San Francisco 4th and King Station and San Jose Diridon Station. Between San Francisco and CP (Control Point) Coast1, a short distance north of the Santa Clara station, the corridor is owned and controlled by the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (i.e., Caltrain). Between CP Coast and Diridon Station, the corridor is a portion of Union Pacific Railroad’s (UP’s) Coast Subdivision (i.e., its rail line from Oakland to San Luis Obispo). The entire right-of-way and all main tracks in this section are owned by Caltrain, with the exception of Main Track 1, which is owned and maintained by UP2. Caltrain owns all stations in the corridor, all of which it received from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in 19933. The corridor is primarily a two main track corridor. Major track infrastructure components and stations are shown in Figure 1. At eight locations, the corridor includes main tracks or sidings other than two main tracks, also shown in Figure 1.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Redwood City
    City of Redwood City Proposal for Ferry Financial Feasibility Study & Cost-Benefit and Economic Impact Analyses October 11, 2018 Acknowledgments City of Redwood City Council Members Project Team Diane Howard, Mayor Christopher Dacumos, Management Analyst II, City of Redwood City Shelly Masur, Vice Mayor Jessica Manzi, Transportation Manager, City of Alicia C. Aguirre, Council Member Redwood City Ian Bain, Council Member Radha Mehta, Management Fellow, City of Janet Borgens, Council Member Redwood City Giselle Hale, Council Member Kristine A. Zortman, Executive Director, Port of Redwood City Diana Reddy, Council Member Kevin Connolly, Planning & Development Port of Redwood City Commission Manager, WETA Arthi Krubanandh, Transportation Planner, Ralph A. Garcia, Chair WETA Richard (Dick) Claire, Vice Chair Chad Mason, Senior Planner & Project R. Simms Duncan, Port Commissioner Manager, WETA Richard “Dick” Dodge, Port Commissioner James Connolly, Project Manager, COWI Jessica Rivas, Marine Engineer, COWI Lorianna Kastrop, Port Commissioner Ashleigh Kanat, Executive Vice President, EPS San Mateo County Transportation Jason Moody, Principal, EPS Authority Kate Traynor, Senior Associate, EPS Jennifer Williams, Analyst II, San Mateo County Lindsey Klein, Project Planner, PlaceWorks Transportation Authority Charlie Knox, Principal, PlaceWorks Peter Skinner, Director of Grants and Funding, Bill Hurrell, Vice President, CDM Smith San Mateo County Transportation Authority Piyali Chaudhuri, Project Manager, CDM Smith Peter Martin, Project Technical
    [Show full text]
  • Train Sim World: Peninsula Corridor, You Can Control the Passenger Entry and Exit Doors on Each Side Independently I.E
    1 © 2019 Dovetail Games, a trading name of RailSimulator.com Limited (“DTG”). All rights reserved. "Dovetail Games", “Train Sim World” and “SimuGraph” are trademarks or registered trademarks of DTG. Unreal® Engine, © 1998-2019, Epic Games, Inc. All rights reserved. Unreal® is a registered trademark of Epic Games. Portions of this software utilise SpeedTree® technology (© 2014 Interactive Data Visualization, Inc.). SpeedTree® is a registered trademark of Interactive Data Visualization, Inc. All rights reserved. Use of the CALTRAIN name, the CALTRAIN logo, and the CALTRAIN 'C' is with permission of the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board. The CALTRAIN name, the CALTRAIN logo, and the CALTRAIN 'C' logo are service marks and registered marks of the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board. The Union Pacific shield is a registered trademark, used under license. All other copyrights or trademarks are the property of their respective owners. Unauthorised copying, adaptation, rental, re-sale, arcade use, charging for use, broadcast, cable transmission, public performance, distribution or extraction of the product or any trademark or copyright work that forms part of this product is prohibited. Developed and published by DTG. The full credit list can be accessed from the TSW “Options” menu. 2 Contents Topic Page Introducing Peninsula Corridor .............................................................................................. 4 Peninsula Corridor Route Map & Key Locations ...................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Resolution No. 2021-29 Board of Directors, San Mateo
    RESOLUTION NO. 2021-29 BOARD OF DIRECTORS, SAN MATEO COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT STATE OF CALIFORNIA * * * AUTHORIZING THE ACTING GENERAL MANAGER/CEO TO SEEK WRITTEN RESPONSES AND INFORMATION FROM THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, SANTA CLARA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (“VTA”), AND THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (“MTC”) CONCERNING REIMBURSEMENT OF THE DISTRICT’S ADDITIONAL CONTRIBUTION TO THE PURCHASE OF THE CALTRAIN CORRIDOR WHEREAS, in the late 1980’s, San Francisco, VTA, and the San Mateo County Transit District (“District”) jointly decided that it was in the interests of their residents to locally operate the Peninsula Commute Service (“Caltrain”); WHEREAS, San Francisco, VTA, and the District created a joint powers board (“JPB”) to study and purchase the necessary property and rights from Southern Pacific Transportation (the “Caltrain Corridor”); WHEREAS, because San Francisco and VTA asserted that they had no available funds at that time, the District subsidized the acquisition of the Caltrain Corridor by contributing $82 million to fill the gap between the purchase price and the amount of money provided by the California Transportation Commission for use in the purchase; WHEREAS, the JPB, San Francisco, VTA, and the District entered into a contract in 1991 providing for methods by which the District would be reimbursed with interest, and that prior to reimbursement the District would hold an equity interest in the Caltrain Corridor and act as the JPB’s Managing Agency to protect the District’s position as the only
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B.Doc
    B BACKGROUND MATERIAL SECTION 2 – PLAN ADMINISTRATION GUIDELINES 2.1 Governance It is assumed for the purposes of this System Plan that the ownership of commuter rail assets throughout the State of Minnesota would be in the public interest. In other words, the citizen taxpayers of the state would own the system – specifically those commuter rail assets that are separable from the freight rail facilities, systems, equipment and/or rights-of-way that are owned by the relevant freight railroads. There are several considerations that validate the assumption of public ownership: • The public sector is the logical administrator and overseer of public transportation services provided over rights-of-way owned and operated by multiple freight rail carriers. • Public policy dictates that commuter rail service be provided within the framework of a regional and potentially statewide, publicly funded multi- modal transportation system. • The public sector is the appropriate and responsible choice as manager of the expenditure of public funding required to plan, design, construct, operate and maintain such a system. • The provision of commuter rail service is not viable without substantial public sector financing, which would not likely be available under the auspices of private ownership. The commuter rail service sponsor is the public entity or combination of entities that serves as the public’s principal agent for or overseer of such service. As such, a sponsor serves at a minimum as the lead administrator or contracting entity for all services to be provided. All commuter rail services operated throughout the nation are owned by the public sector and sponsored by one or more public agencies through a variety of intergovernmental agreements.
    [Show full text]
  • Be Rail Each Direction Per Day-The PV South and Through to Fort Nelson and the M420s Will VP North
    'OJ Scale Power Amtrak AMTRAK "F40PH" Phase /I Nos. 230-328 OMI #0430.2 Features factory paint and lettering appli ed with head li ghts and Kadee couplers installed. ATCHISON, TOPEKA & SANTA FE "5040-2" Nos. 5020-5027 with 116-lnch "Snoot" Nose (Left) OMI #0500 ATCHISON, TOPEKA & SANTA FE "5040-2" Nos. 5028-5172 with 81-lnch "Snoot" Nose (Right) OMI #0501 NORFOLK & WESTERN "5040-2" High Hood Version Nos. 1625-1639 (Left) OMI #0509 NORFOLK & WESTERN "5040-2" Low Hood Version Nos. 6189-6207 (Center) OMI #0510 SOUTHERN "5040-2" High Hood Version Nos. 3250-3328 (Right) OMI #0512 All of these fine are handcrafted in brass by Ajin Precision of Korea in 0 scale with a 26-inch minimum operating radius. Photos by Mardan Photography. PACIFIC RAIL Fro m the H ear t I and tot h ePa c i fie NEWS PACIFIC RA/lNEWS and PACIFIC N EWS are regis­ tered trademarks of Interurban Press, a California Corporation, PUBLISHER: Mac Sebree Uncle Pete's Feather River GP35s EDITOR: Don Gulbrandsen ART DIRECTOR: Mark Danneman These ex-WP units are the last GP35s on Union Pacific's roster ASSOCIATE EDITOR: Mike Schafer EDITORIAL ASSISTANT: Michael E, Folk 18 Ken RaHenne CONTRIBUTING EDITOR: Elrond Law rence EDITORIAL CONSULTANT: Dick Stephenson CONTRIBUTING ARTIST: John Signor PRODUCTION MANAGER: Ray Geyer CIRCULATION MANAGER: Bob Schneider BN's Mississippi River Route RAILROAD COLUMNISTS Busy action and great scenery along BN's Lakes Division-3rd Sub AMTRAK/PASSENGER-Dick Stephenson 655 Canyon Dr .. Glendale, CA 91206 Courtland Sears AT&SF-Elrond G, Lawrence 24 908 w.
    [Show full text]
  • Capacity Challenges on the California High-Speed Rail Shared Corridors: How Local Decisions Have Statewide Impacts by Samuel J
    Capacity Challenges on the California High-Speed Rail Shared Corridors: How Local Decisions Have Statewide Impacts by Samuel J. Levy B.S. Civil Engineering, Minor in Economics University of Southern California, 2013 Submitted to the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Transportation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology June 2015 © 2015 Massachusetts Institute of Technology. All Rights Reserved. Signature of Author: …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering May 19, 2015 Certified by: ……………………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………. Dr. Joseph M. Sussman JR East Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Engineering Systems Thesis Supervisor Accepted by: …………………………………………………….………………………………………………………………………… Heidi Nepf Donald and Martha Harleman Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering Chair, Graduate Program Committee Capacity Challenges on the California High-Speed Rail Shared Corridors: How Local Decisions Have Statewide Impacts by Samuel J. Levy Submitted to the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering On May 19, 2015 in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Transportation Abstract In 2012, as a cost-control measure and in response to local opposition in the San Francisco Bay Area, the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) adopted a "blended system" at the north and south bookends of the planned first phase of its high-speed rail line. In this blended operation, the high-speed rail line will share track and other infrastructure with commuter rail, intercity rail, and freight on the 50- mile Peninsula Corridor in Northern California and on 50 miles of right-of-way between Burbank, Los Angeles, and Anaheim in Southern California.
    [Show full text]
  • THE CALTRAIN CORRIDOR VISION PLAN How to Keep the Bay Area’S Innovation Economy Moving Contents
    REPORT FEBRUARY 2017 THE CALTRAIN CORRIDOR VISION PLAN How to keep the Bay Area’s innovation economy moving Contents Acknowledgments 2 Executive Summary The Caltrain Corridor Vision Plan was generously supported by Stanford University, Silicon Valley 4 The Caltrain Corridor Is Poised for Transformation Community Foundation, Facebook, Ron Conway, Steven The Caltrain Corridor Vision Plan 6 CHAPTER 1 Denning and Reid Hoffman. How We Got Here The SPUR Executive Board adopted this report as How to keep the Bay Area’s innovation economy moving official policy on August 1, 2016. 14 CHAPTER 2 Our Vision for the Caltrain Corridor Project Partners Silicon Valley Leadership Group 16 CHAPTER 3 San Mateo County Economic Development Association Opportunities and Challenges Stanford University SPUR 22 CHAPTER 4 Rail Primary Author Ratna Amin 33 CHAPTER 5 Rail Stations and Last-Mile Connections Vision Plan Steering Committee Bob Reidy / Stanford University VP Land, Buildings and 38 CHAPTER 6 Real Estate Highway 101 Jim Morgensen / LinkedIn Head of Global Workplace David Radcliffe / Google Vice President Real Estate 46 CHAPTER 7 John Tenanes / Facebook Vice President Real Estate, Ferries Facilities & Security Carla Boragno / Genentech Vice President Site Services 47 CHAPTER 8 John Martin / SFO Director A Seamless Transit Experience Kim Walesh / City of San Jose Director Economic 50 CHAPTER 9 Development What the Vision Costs Ed Reiskin / City/County of San Francisco CEO SFMTA Rosanne Foust / SAMCEDA President & CEO 52 CHAPTER 10 Carl Guardino / Silicon Valley Leadership Group President How Do We Fund the Vision? Gabriel Metcalf / SPUR CEO 55 Next Steps and Phasing We are grateful to the staff and leadership of the transportation agencies in the Caltrain Corridor for 56 Plan of Action participating in this research and to the many advocates, experts and elected officials who participated in 58 Endnotes interviews and workshops that informed this study.
    [Show full text]
  • Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board State of California * * * Peninsula Commute Service (“Caltrain”) Codified Tariff
    Adopted – May 6, 1992 Last Revised – July 1anuary 1, 2011 Effective – July 1, 20112012 PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA * * * PENINSULA COMMUTE SERVICE (“CALTRAIN”) CODIFIED TARIFF This tariff covers the sale of tickets, along with parking and bike locker fees, between San Francisco and Gilroy, California, and the intermediate stations on the Peninsula Commute Service ("Caltrain") right of way. For fares, refer to Chart “A.” For parking fees, refer to Chart “B.” I. FARE CATEGORIES A. FULL FARE Full fares will apply to all customers 18 years of age or older except those who qualify for an Eligible Discount ticket. Fares published in this tariff are Full fares, except as otherwise shown herein for Eligible Discount fares. B. ELIGIBLE DISCOUNT FARE 1. Qualifying customers for the Eligible Discount Fare shall pay one-half of the Full Fare, rounded down to the nearest $0.25 increment. A customer may qualify for the Eligible Discount Fare by meeting or possessing one of the requirements below. Proof of age or appropriate identification may be necessary when ticket is requested by the conductor or fare inspector. a. 65 years of age or older. b. 17 years or younger. c. Current Disabled Person Placard Identification Card issued by the California State Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). d. Medicare Card. e. Regional Transit Connection (RTC) Discount Card, including Clipper cards that are designated as RTC Discount Cards. An RTC Discount Card marked with an attendant symbol indicates that the person with a disability may be accompanied by an attendant, who also will be eligible for the Eligible Discount Fare.
    [Show full text]
  • The Downtown Rail Extension, High-Speed Rail, and the Path Less Traveled
    THE DOWNTOWN RAIL EXTENSION, HIGH-SPEED RAIL, AND THE PATH LESS TRAVELED Joe Mathews How is California ever going to finish high-speed rail when it still can’t finish the Downtown Rail Extension? I can’t read Gavin Newsom’s mind, much less divine what he meant, or meant to mean, when he offered confusing and much-debated comments in the State of the State speech about the future the state’s high-speed rail project. But I can tell you that he is intimately familiar with the Downtown Rail Extension, or DTX, which means he comes by his skepticism of transportation projects honestly. Because the history of DTX is so messy that it makes California High-Speed Rail look like a Swiss watch by comparison. DTX, which is a vital but unrealized proposal for a 1.3-mile rail extension connecting a commuter rail station near the Giants ballpark with a new transit center downtown, embodies the massive failure of California transportation planning and execution. For all the struggles of this state and its local communities to build big infrastructure projects like high-speed rail or the Delta water tunnels, we Californians are even worse at the little stuff. Ours is a state that has constructed two rail lines that reach the edge of LAX, but don’t go into the airport. Disneyland has its own railroad but no rail link to the park itself. San Diego’s signature trolley doesn’t go to its world-famous zoo. The failure to complete DTX is even more embarrassing than those gaps.
    [Show full text]
  • Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Public Scoping Meetings Scoping Report for the Environmental Impact Report
    PENINSULA CORRIDOR ELECTRIFICATION PROJECT PUBLIC SCOPING MEETINGS SCOPING REPORT FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FEBRUARY-MARCH 2013 Prepared for: Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board Prepared by: ICF International 620 Folsom Street, Suite 200 San Francisco, CA 94107 Circlepoint 1814 Franklin Street, Suite 1000 Oakland, CA 94612 Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Scoping Report 2 Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Scoping Report Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................. 3 2.0 Outreach .................................................................................................................................................................. 4 3.0 Meetings .................................................................................................................................................................. 5 4.0 Scoping Comments .................................................................................................................................................. 6 5.0 Next Steps .............................................................................................................................................................. 13 Appendix Notice of Preparation Noticing Materials Factsheet PowerPoint Presentation Exhibit Boards Sign‐In Sheets Agenda List of Commenters Submitted Comment Forms Comments submitted via Email Letters Speaker
    [Show full text]