CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS

Transit Solutions Team

Summary and Recommendations
March, 2012

Transit Solutions Team

SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS

Team Members
Robert Shonkwiler Craig Whitney Frank ODonnell Steve Cox Nick Kittle Craig Blewitt

Objective
The Solutions Teams are headed by community leaders who will work with staff to reinvent our delivery of quality services to our Citizens on a limited budget. The Transit Solutions Team is headed by Robert Shonkwiler, a retired business man with a comprehensive understanding of reinvention of customary practices. The team is charged with rethinking our transit system to achieve optimum customer service efficiently. The team members will look at the feasibility of using smaller buses, van pools, cab vouchers and other options.

RS/CB/ew

Contents
Team Members ......................................................................................................................................... 4 Objective ................................................................................................................................................... 4 Documents Attached: ................................................................................................................................... 2 Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................... 1 Objective ....................................................................................................................................................... 2 Process .......................................................................................................................................................... 2 Findings ......................................................................................................................................................... 2 FREX .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Paratransit - Contracting ........................................................................................................................... 4 Paratransit - Coordination ........................................................................................................................ 5 Vehicle Management ................................................................................................................................ 6 Administrative Financial Auditing .......................................................................................................... 7 Service Planning Performance Standards .............................................................................................. 8 Tickets & Fares .......................................................................................................................................... 9 Revenue Enhancement - No-Advertising Zones ..................................................................................... 10 Priorities to Expansion of Service................................................................................................................ 11 Evening Service ....................................................................................................................................... 11 Expand Northeast, Including the Powers Boulevard Corridor ................................................................ 11 Serve Centennial VA Facility ................................................................................................................... 11 More Saturday Service ............................................................................................................................ 11 Add Sunday and Holiday Service............................................................................................................. 11 Increase Frequency ................................................................................................................................. 11

Documents Attached:
MMT. (2012). Small Bus Project Report. Transit Plus. (February 2012). Interim Specialized Transportation Analysis. Colorado Springs.

Executive Summary
The Transit Solutions Team (TST) was appointed by Steve Bach, Mayor of Colorado Springs, to work with the Transit Services Division to review and evaluate the current approach to providing transit services to our community. The objective was to recommend innovative approaches or measures to provide a more cost-effective service. The comprehensive review of the division revealed that Transit provides a very efficient and effective service. Staff consistently reviews and adapts procedures, policies and strategies to both overcome the challenges faced and to improve the delivery of the services provided. The configuration and operation of the local fixed-route bus system appears to be balanced to meet the objective of maximizing efficiency. The current philosophy is to obtain the greatest fare-recovery ratios (farebox revenue versus costs of operations), and therefore the system is based on demand and is geared to maximum ridership, which is a reasonable strategy that seems to be working. The farebox return on the local fixed route system is approximately 25%. The resulting TST recommendations are listed below. Cease local funding of the FrontRange Express (FREX). Institute a competitive process for contracting for specialized transportation services. Coordinate the creation of a new brokerage model for specialized transportation services to enhance competition and require payment based on provision of service. Target 20% of fixed-route fleet to be 30 buses when replacing aging vehicles; consider alternative fuel and hybrid technology in all bus purchases. Eliminate unnecessary redundancies in PPRTA Transit Budget oversight and auditing. Adopt and adhere to the Service Performance Standards. Streamline ticket and fare options; adopt fare adjustments; maximize accommodation of electronic payment options. Eliminate uncompensated no-advertising zones.

Given the efficiency of the current operation, the cost savings and additional revenue resulting from implementation of the above recommendations will be limited and should be used to support the sustainability of local services provided. It is important to note all realized savings must be reinvested in Transit per federal grant regulations. None of the recommendations provide the City additional contribution toward maintenance of effort, and there will be no impact to the Citys general fund.

Objective
In late 2011, Mayor Steve Bach appointed four separate Solutions Teams that would work with the City to find innovative ways to provide better services with the existing budgets in place. These teams were each led by a community member that was interested in helping our city provide the very best services to our citizens as possible with the limited resources that currently exist. The Transit Solutions Team (TST), headed by Robert Shonkwiler, a retired community businessman, was appointed to work with the Transit Services Division (Transit) to review and evaluate the current approach to providing transit services to our community. The other members of the team included Citizens Craig Whitney and Frank ODonnell, and the Citys Steve Cox, Nick Kittle, and Craig Blewitt. The objective was to recommend innovative approaches or measures to provide a more cost-effective service using the existing budget. Our goal is to achieve both optimal customer service and outstanding efficiency within the transit system, said Mr. Shonkwiler.

Process
The Transit Solutions Team first convened on November 1, 2011 and then nearly every week thereafter through March, 2012. Over the course of this period the team conducted a comprehensive review of all transit services and activities. Staff presentations were offered to provide detailed information regarding the services Transit offers, and the service model of each. The team examined and discussed all of these services and the procedures associated with administering them in depth. The local fixed-route bus system is branded as Mountain Metropolitan Transit, and is supplemented by the Metro Mobility program, which is required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to provide those with disabilities equal access to the bus system. Transit also administers the FrontRange Express (FREX), the commuter line between Colorado Springs and Denver. Another program that Transit provides is Metro Rides, which is a grant-funded commuter vanpool program. Transits funding is derived from the Pikes Peak Rural Transportation Authority (PPRTA), prior years carryover, federal grants, farebox and advertising revenues, the Citys general fund, and state grants.

Findings
After the comprehensive review of the division, the Transit Solutions Team concludes that, overall, the services provided by the Transit Services Division are delivered in an effective and efficient manner. Staff members at Transit consistently review and adapt procedures, policies and strategies to both overcome the challenges faced and to improve the delivery of the services they provide. Nonetheless, the Team has identified areas where changes could be made to provide more effective transit services with the limited community resources available.

FREX
After the comprehensive review of the division, the Transit Solutions Team concludes that, overall, the services provided by the Transit Services Division are delivered in an effective and efficient manner. Staff members at Transit consistently review and adapt procedures, policies and strategies to both overcome the challenges faced and to improve the delivery of the services they provide. Nonetheless, the Team has identified areas where changes could be made to provide more effective transit services with the limited community resources available. In addition to the local fixed-route system, there is one service that extends outside the City boundaries and beyond the PPRTA tax-payers area. The FrontRange Express (FREX) service is a commuter line that runs between Colorado Springs and Denver, extending well beyond City and PPRTA boundaries. Revenues for the operation of FREX in 2011 were derived from PPRTA, farebox collections, FASTER grants, Town of Monuments contribution, one-time funds from sale of assets, advertising revenue, and carryover funding from the prior year. Retaining local funding that currently is dedicated to FREX will add a significant amount of sustainability to the local system. FREX, as an intercity service, should be not be disproportionately supported by a single entity, and the state is currently reviewing options for funding FREX.

RECOMMENDATION: Cease local funding of the FrontRange Express.

This does not preclude other governmental agencies from providing the necessary support to continue the service. Discontinue Local Funding to FREX Timeframe: If no replacement funding is eminent and the service is to be discontinued, the public process must begin no later than three months prior to ceasing. Since the existing contract expires on August 31, 2012, a decision is requested by Transit staff no later than April 15, 2012. Financial Impact: Savings of $800,000 - $1,300,000 per year Customer Impact: Displaced riders Staff Impact: A significant amount of staff time will be required regardless of whether the funding is replaced or service is ceased

Paratransit - Contracting
Current practice of the City for acquiring specialized transportation varies. Metro Mobility, the ADArequired paratransit service is operated by a private, for-profit company selected through a competitive bid process. The non-profit Human Service Providers (HSPs) that provide transportation services aboveand-beyond the ADA requirements are funded based on their requests during the Citys annual budgeting process; there is no formal competition. Given the limited amount of funding available and the growing needs of the community for these services, the TST recommends competitively acquiring all of those services, assuring that the opportunities are presented to private transportation organizations such as taxicab companies with the goal of offering more diversified services and opening the options for the riders. This will reduce the amount of flexibility and accommodation for HSPs, but will allow the City to manage the number and types of rides provided in the most cost effective manner, based on the needs of the customers.

RECOMMENDATION: Institute a competitive process for contracting for specialized transportation services.
Competitively acquire all specialized transportation services. Implement the competitive contracting process; define standards of service; disperse existing annual funds to community organizations and businesses as defined by those contracts. Timeframe: Financial Impact: Customer Impact: Staff Impact: 6 Months Revenue Neutral; more rides provided for same amount of funding More consistent service Cost additional staff time in contracting and contract compliance oversight

Paratransit - Coordination
The current practices of providing specialized transportation are disjointed. Switching to a brokerage model would coordinate all of the agencies rides, eliminating redundancies. The consolidation of scheduling and dispatch would lower overhead costs and allow agencies to focus on providing quality services. With consolidated tracking and billing of rides, the brokerage could pursue additional funding options such as Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement or grants. The brokerage model is also more user-friendly by providing a single point of contact for all the agencies clients, making it easy to obtain information about services, find options, and schedule rides. The report attached, Specialized Transportation, by Transit Plus (February 2012) includes a summary of the existing circumstances, alternative options for coordination efforts, and implementation recommendations.

RECOMMENDATION: Coordinate the creation of a new brokerage model for specialized transportation services to enhance competition and require payment based on provision of service.
Integrate the Citys ADA paratransit with human services providers and community businesses to provide specialized transportation. Coordinate the existing efforts of local agencies to establish a centralized brokerage and call center Timeframe: Financial Impact: Customer Impact: Staff Impact: 1-5 years Revenue Neutral for transition period; Savings of $74,000 - $130,000* annually thereafter Single point of contact allows customers easy access to more options for the most appropriate service to meet their needs. Implementation will require significant amounts of staff time to coordinate with the external agencies involved as well as communicate with and educate the riders. Ongoing additional staff time required in contracting and contract compliance oversight.

* Includes local and grant funding (Transit Plus, February 2012)

Vehicle Management
The team requested an on-the-road field project to demonstrate whether smaller, less expensive buses could work and add efficiency to the system. Test routes were selected for optimum possibility of success, and performance metrics were identified to include occupancy levels and on-time performance. For more information, please see the attached Small Bus Test Project report. Testing demonstrated that smaller vehicles could service the 22 and 24 routes. However, they were not sufficient for the interlined (connected) 15/16 routes, and that portion of the test was discontinued after several instances of passengers being left at stops. It is important to consider flexibility as well as efficiency. Too many smaller vehicles would limit the ability to provide backup to busier routes or respond to increased ridership. Alternative fuels and hybrid technologies are constantly evolving and should be considered at the time of purchasing any replacement vehicles. Additionally, excess vehicles not anticipated for use in the near-term should be disposed of. If any of the excess vehicles have not yet reached the useful life and are not fully depreciated, costs for maintenance should be compared to costs of disposal, and the lesser of the two should prevail.

RECOMMENDATION: Target 20% of fleet to be 30 buses when replacing aging vehicles; consider alternative fuel and hybrid technology in all bus purchases.
Vehicle management Purchase smaller vehicles as appropriate when aging fleet is replaced. Dispose of vehicles unnecessary to anticipated service requirements within 12 months Consider alternative fuel and hybrid technology when purchasing buses. Timeframe: Financial Impact: Customer Impact: Staff Impact: Begin in 2014 with next scheduled purchase to replace aging buses Savings of $30,000 $50,000 annually Decrease in quality of service if buses continually provide standing-room only Additional staff time in managing a diversified fleet

Administrative Financial Auditing

Approximately one third of Transits overall budget comes from federal and state grants that require meticulous financial tracking and reporting. Processes in place at Transit are thorough and efficient in order to maintain eligibility for these grants. Duplicative efforts could be eliminated by consolidating audits. Accountability would be maintained if an independent audit report were submitted to the PPRTA annually versus the current practice of providing daily audits. The painstakingly detailed Federal Transit Authoritys Triennial Audit or the annual National Transit Database audits could provide the required accountability for other auditing purposes, reducing the amount of staff time both within transit and also other areas of the City.

RECOMMENDATION: Eliminate unnecessary redundancies in PPRTA Transit Budget oversight and auditing.
Incorporate PPRTA Transit budget into the Citys financial system to eliminate redundancies. Eliminate daily audit from PPRTA staff over Transits financials. Eliminate additional invoice copies sent to PPRTA. Reduce paperwork and tracking for City Finance staff. Annual independent audit report would provide accountability in lieu of daily audit. Timeframe: Financial Impact: Customer Impact: Staff Impact: 6 months 1 year Budget Neutral; better accountability with a single system for tracking Shorter turnaround to payment on vendors invoices Significant savings of staff time

Service Planning Performance Standards

Transits Service Performance Standards define system expectations and offer guidelines to operational service adjustments. These standards have been developed but not formally adopted. Adherence to these guidelines will add efficiency and consistency to staff by allowing actions under certain circumstances without additional, time-consuming justifications and approvals. Transits Service Performance Standards include: Service planning polices and performance goals Prioritization for mix of services (balancing types of services to be offered) Prioritization for expansion of service (frequency vs. area, et.al.) Identification of the target service audience Identification of customer service goals and policies Identification of authority for establishing transit policy Criteria for whether actions require administrative actions or full public process

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt and adhere to Service Performance Standards.

Adopt Service Performance Standards to add efficiency and consistency. Streamline staff decisions Timeframe: Financial Impact: Customer Impact: Staff Impact: 6 months 1 year Budget Neutral More reliable, consistent service Improved efficiency

Tickets & Fares

Certain strategies may be used to support sustainable transit operations and encourage the ridership of all citizens and from visiting guests. Strategies recommended include streamlining ticket and fare options, adjusting fares as appropriate and expanding payment options. Develop and implement more streamlined fare structure, including a new full-day fixed-route pass fare. Riders nationwide average 2.5 trips used on an all-day pass, and therefore the ticket should be priced near to 2 times the existing fixed-route fare. Adopt fare adjustments including bringing the Metro Mobility ADA paratransit fare to the standard two times the existing fixed-route fare. Continue current plan to upgrade fare media; maximize accommodation of smart cards and electronic fare payment capabilities.

RECOMMENDATION: Streamline ticket and fare options; adopt fare adjustments; maximize accommodation of electronic payment options.
Streamline Options: New Day Pass Timeframe: Minimum 6 months, including public process Financial Impact: Budget Neutral if priced between $4.50 and $5.00 Customer Impact: New, attractive option for customers Staff Impact: Minimal but positive impact Fare Adjustments: Metro Mobility Fare Timeframe: Minimum 6 months, including public process Financial Impact: Additional $75,000 $125,000 per year in fare revenue Customer Impact: Price change from $3.00 to $3.50 presents hardship to some customers Staff Impact: Significant staff time required for Title VI analysis Implement technological improvements; start using smartcards and expand payment options. Timeframe: 6 months 1 year Financial Impact: Budget Neutral; accounted for in 2012 budget Customer Impact: Additional options, streamlines fare media, reduces boarding times Staff Impact: Additional staff time in capturing increased data; net result is increased efficiency

Revenue Enhancement - No-Advertising Zones

There are some areas of the city where no ads are placed on the bus stop benches and shelters, these at the request of advocates of the affected areas. There were no considerations toward replacing the lost revenue that would have been generated. These areas should not receive an exemption from advertising being posted on the benches and shelters without compensating for revenues lost.

RECOMMENDATION: Eliminate uncompensated no-advertising zones.

This would not preclude neighborhood or business organizations from purchasing the space themselves. Maximize advertising revenue opportunities by eliminating uncompensated no-advertising zones. Timeframe: Financial Impact: Customer Impact: Staff Impact: 6 months Additional $25,000 $50,000 per year in advertising revenue N/A N/A

Priorities to Expansion of Service

The current TST recommendation is to utilize any cost savings or additional revenues resulting from implementation of the measures identified in this report to ensure sustainability of the existing local transit service. In the event the above recommendations produce calculated and verified savings or revenues, the following list of prioritized additional services may be considered based on continued sustainability and available resources.

Evening Service
Add service on all operational days to at least 9:00 pm. Expected Ridership: 120,000 per year Financial Impact: $1,110,000 less revenue nets cost of $990,000 per year. Customer Impact: Would provide many riders with the opportunity to work additional hours.

Expand Northeast, Including the Powers Boulevard Corridor

Expand to the northeastern area, including employment hubs along the Powers Boulevard corridor. Expected Ridership: 90,000 per year Financial Impact: $1,800,000 less revenue nets cost of $1,620,000 per year Customer Impact: Allow citizens access to more jobs and shopping centers

Serve Centennial VA Facility

Rework routes as necessary to provide service to the proposed VA facility on Centennial Boulevard. Expected Ridership: 40,000 Financial Impact: $560,000 less revenue nets cost of $525,000 per year Customer Impact: Would provide access to the new VA facility (Fillmore and Centennial area)

More Saturday Service

Add more routes to the currently limited Saturday service. Expected Ridership: 100,000 per year Financial Impact: $900,000 less revenue nets cost of $810,000 per year Customer Impact: Would provide access to the full service area on Saturdays as well as weekdays.

Add Sunday and Holiday Service

Add limited service similar to the current limited Saturday service to Sundays and holidays. Expected Ridership: 95,000 per year Financial Impact: $800,000 less revenue nets cost of $720,000 per year Customer Impact: Allow citizens the opportunity to work any day of the week; offers dependent riders mobility seven days a week.

Increase Frequency
Increase the frequency of service along primary routes. Expected Ridership: 150,000 per year for each adjusted route Financial Impact: $500,000 less revenue nets cost of $450,000 per year for each route adjusted Customer Impact: Decrease travel time when using transfers, offer citizens more flexibility in scheduling for work, shopping, medical appointments, and recreation.