s 2019 Transit Efficiency and Innovations Study for Stanislaus Council of Governments Prepared by McGuire Management Consultancy and Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates This page intentionally left blank. P a g e | i Transit Efficiency and Innovations Study Draft September 19, 2019 Author’s note: A number of data sources were used in the preparation of this Study. All were provided by participants in the process. Due to variations in definition of the original data recipient (State Controller’s Office, StanCOG), some slight discrepancies in reported values may exist. They are not believed to have a material impact on the Study conclusions. Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. 1 Chapter 1 Senate Bill 903 ...................................................................................................... 1 Recommendations: SB 903 ................................................................................................... 2 Chapter 2 Paratransit Efficiency Strategies ........................................................................... 3 Recommendations: Paratransit.............................................................................................. 4 Chapters 3 and 4: Fixed Route and New Transit Strategies .................................................. 6 Recommendations: Fixed Route Operations ......................................................................... 9 Chapter 5 Transit Consolidation ............................................................................................11 Recommendations: Transit Consolidation ............................................................................12 Chapter 1 Senate Bill 903 ...................................................................................................15 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................15 Background ...........................................................................................................................15 Description of Transit Routes ................................................................................................23 Transit Operating Budgets .....................................................................................................40 Transit Salary Issues .............................................................................................................41 Observations and Conclusions ..............................................................................................46 Recommendations.................................................................................................................48 Chapter 2 Paratransit Efficiency Strategies ......................................................................61 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................61 Existing Paratransit Services .................................................................................................62 Recommendations.................................................................................................................72 Transit Efficiency and Innovation Study 2019 McGuire Management Consultancy – Nelson/Nygaard P a g e | ii Chapter 3 Analysis of Fixed Route Operations .................................................................77 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................77 System-Level Analysis ..........................................................................................................77 Demographic Analysis ...........................................................................................................85 Route-Level Analysis ........................................................................................................... 101 Planned or Implemented Route Consolidations ................................................................... 106 Recommendations............................................................................................................... 113 Evaluation of Fixed-Route Systems ..................................................................................... 126 Chapter 4 New Transit Strategies .................................................................................... 132 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 132 Microtransit Integration Opportunities .................................................................................. 132 Opportunities for Stanislaus County .................................................................................... 134 Chapter 5 Transit Consolidation ...................................................................................... 138 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 138 Transit Organizational Models ............................................................................................. 138 What is Transit Consolidation? ............................................................................................ 140 Alternative Approaches to Consolidation ............................................................................. 140 Consolidation Considerations for Stanislaus County ............................................................ 145 Consolidation Scenarios ...................................................................................................... 153 Recommendations............................................................................................................... 154 . Transit Efficiency and Innovation Study 2019 McGuire Management Consultancy – Nelson/Nygaard P a g e | 1 Executive Summary The Stanislaus Council of Governments (StanCOG) Transit Efficiency and Innovations Study (Study) was prescribed to fulfill a number of objectives. The first of these was to satisfy requirements of SB 903 of the 2018 legislative session. That legislation granted StanCOG the authority to adjust the farebox recovery ratio (FRR) for the transit operators in the County for a limited period if they were unable to meet the State mandated levels through all available means. If StanCOG did grant relief from the State level, that action triggered the requirement that StanCOG report back to the legislature the results of the process by January 2020. The contents of that report to the legislature were specified in the statute. The next major objective of the Study was to assess opportunities to improve transit efficiency throughout the County. This objective was approached as a continuum of options. At the simple or low end of the continuum are steps to improve the coordination and communication among the transit operators. As one moves up the continuum, the next level is coordination. At this step, agencies would formally work together to achieve efficiencies. Streamlined management of such functions as demand response/paratransit service delivery would be a coordination step. Finally, at the most complex step on the continuum, consolidation is reviewed. This would involve the complexity of new agency formation and full integration of service delivery under a consolidated organization. Consolidation has the potential to achieve the greatest level of customer and service delivery efficiency. Chapter 1 Senate Bill 903 Chapter 1 of this study is constructed to fulfill that requirement. It specifically addresses each item specified through the compilation of substantial statistical information as well as technical input from the transit operators and other contributors. The SB 903 analysis documented the efforts taken by local transit operators to achieve compliance with the fare recovery requirements of the Transportation Development Act (TDA). In so doing, the Study revealed the negative influence of the fare recovery requirement (FRR) on transit planning. It further illustrated the extent to which transit operators would go to adjust services simply to meet the requirement. The Study concluded that FRR is not an appropriate performance measure for transit operators of the size and focus of those in Stanislaus County. Other performance measures that are more commonly used by transit professionals to measure their own efficiency were mentioned as options. An example of this is passengers per revenue hour. This measure is a common tool used by operators to gauge the effectiveness of their services. It is not a performance metric required by TDA. Yet even a measure such as passengers per revenue hour varies in its applicable scale depending upon other measures of the community in which the service operates. For example, the passengers per hour of individual routes will be far higher in a large urban area such as San Francisco than in a suburban/rural environment such as Stanislaus County. The lowest productivity route in a large metropolitan area would perform at a much higher level than the Transit Efficiency and Innovation Study 2019 McGuire Management Consultancy – Nelson/Nygaard P a g e | 2 highest route in a suburban/rural area. Thus, such a metric must be scaled according to other measures of community size possibly including population,