Sacramento Regional Transit District Board Meeting - December 8, 2016

The Sacramento Regional Transit District (RT) Board of Directors met on December 8, 2016, with a quorum of 95 votes (Director Miller absent). The meeting covered the consent calendar, an Elk Grove service agreement amendment, the General Manager's report including charity presentations and student art contest awards, an informational update on the 7th and K light rail station, and the combined informational items on the 2015 passenger fare survey and a proposed fare change with Title VI equity analysis. The fare proposal drew substantial public testimony, with most speakers opposing the 20% increase and the elimination of the paratransit monthly pass. Board members expressed concerns about the proposal's impact on low-income riders and suggested phased increases and alternative revenue strategies.

Consent Calendar

• Item 3 (Elk Grove service agreement amendment) was pulled from the consent calendar for separate consideration.
• Public comment on the consent calendar: Karina DeLa Torre, Vice President of ATU Local 256 and a 35-year RT employee, spoke on item 5 (delegation of authority to the General Manager to approve job descriptions), expressing concern that delegating job description modifications could bypass the long-standing negotiated process between the district and ATU regarding bargaining unit positions.
• The consent calendar (minus item 3) was approved unanimously by voice vote.

Discussion Items

• Elk Grove Service Agreement Amendment (Item 3): Director Hume described the culmination of work involving legislation changes to determine how Elk Grove's proportional share payments to RT would be calculated, resulting in a savings of just shy of $500,000 for the city of Elk Grove (a revenue loss for RT). He commended RT and ETRAN staff for a new period of cooperation and noted a separate proposal to bifurcate the transit provider contract to separate paratransit services. The resolution was approved unanimously.
• General Manager's Report (Item 8): RT presented a check of approximately $1,100-$1,200 and roughly 1,000 pounds of non-perishable food to Eileen Thomas of River City Food Bank from the holiday bus collection. RT employees donated $23,086 to local charities through seven events in 2015, including 140 cases of food to River City Food Bank. Twelve students were recognized as winners of the MLK 365 art and poetry contest (nine present); their artwork and poetry will be displayed on RT buses throughout the year. Laura Ham provided a system-wide improvement initiatives update, including renderings of the 7th and Capitol station going out to bid the next day. Mr. Spangler noted that changes to meeting start time, closed session placement, and public comment order would require amendments to Title III of the administrative code, and staff could develop an issue paper if the board desired.
• Appointments to Boards and Commissions (Item 9): Director Hansen stepped down from the retirement board (alternate) due to scheduling conflicts; Director Jennings replaced him. Director Jennings also left the Capitol Corridor committee; Director Miller was placed on it (in his absence), and Director Hume volunteered to fill the second seat, requiring him to leave the streetcar committee. Director Harris was placed on the streetcar committee (contingent on checking for conflicts with a city appointment). The appointments were approved unanimously.
• 7th and K Light Rail Station Update (Item 10): Laura Ham presented the operational concerns at the St. Rose of Lima Park 7th and K station, which serves blue, gold, and green line trains. The station is compressed due to track curves, and four-car trains block intersections. The Golden One Center EIR estimates 40% of event attendees (roughly 5,000-7,000 people) will exit at 7th and K. The downtown Sacramento Partnership has formally recommended closing the station; SACOG and the City of Sacramento may issue formal positions. An online survey (November 4-22) received 293 complete responses: 54% used the station frequently or occasionally, 46% did not use it at all. Overall results: 40.96% favored closing the station permanently, 41% favored moving the boarding area north, 15.96% favored closing for major events, and 25.94% favored leaving as is with crowd management. Among regular users, 42% preferred leaving it open. The RT Mobility Advisory Council opposes closure (options 3 and 4). Concerns included safety/security and walking distance for disabled passengers. RT will complete outreach and present a recommendation in January. Public speakers: Jeff Tartigia criticized the lack of a public workshop and systemic assessment; Mr. McKeever (SACOG) emphasized the importance of travel times and system-level guidance, noting SACOG's board included a contingency in federal funds requiring RT to consider eliminating existing stations.
• Combined Fare Survey and Fare Change Proposal (Items 11 & 12): James Drake presented the 2015 annual passenger fare survey. Key findings: 95% of fares are used for more than one ride; the monthly pass is a $10 million item (about one-third of fare revenue) with an average fare of $2.52; senior/disabled semi-monthly passes have average fares of $1.04 and $0.71, indicating riders get more than their money's worth; on rail, about one-third of single-ride ticket users make just one ride, with others transferring, making round trips, or handing off tickets; the system is transfer-dependent (about half of rail riders and two-thirds of bus riders transfer). Brent Berniker presented the financial overview: FY17 projected revenue of $162.4 million against expenses of $164.7 million, a $2.4 million shortfall, growing to about $19.6 million over five years absent changes. Consultant Doug Carter (via phone) noted the fare box recovery requirement of 23% under the California Transportation Development Act; fares have been held constant since September 2009, and RT's buying power has declined about 20%. Revenue Manager Mr. Yancey detailed the proposal: a 20% increase for most fares; senior/disabled discount reduced from 50% to 42%; student lunch program discount decreased to 67%; daily pass increased 25% to $7.50; two-hour rail ticket reduced to 90 minutes; elimination of the paratransit monthly pass (saving about $409,000 annually); paratransit single fare raised to $6 (at the FTA limit of double the single ride fare), raising paratransit fare recovery from 12.3% to just over 15%. Estimated impacts: ~6% fewer passenger trips, ~13% fare revenue increase. Future options include a central city fare, distance-based fares, and penalty fares. The Title VI analysis found no disproportionate impact on minority or low-income populations. A 30-day public review period (February) with public meetings (staff planning five geographically based workshops) will precede a staff recommendation in March.

Public Comments & Testimony

• On the consent agenda: Karina DeLa Torre (ATU Local 256 VP) expressed concern about delegating job description authority to the General Manager, citing past diminishment of bargaining unit departments.
• On the 7th and K station: Jeff Tartigia argued RT should have held a public workshop and should assess all transportation needs systematically; Mr. McKeever (SACOG) encouraged RT to consider travel times and system-level guidance.
• On the fare proposal (two minutes per speaker):
  • Stacy Shaw (President, Autistic Self-Advocacy Network Sacramento) described the impact on people with disabilities on SSI ($889/month), saying elimination of the paratransit monthly pass would force choices between dialysis rides, groceries, and food.
  • Resmi Singh (VP, ASAD) expressed concern about paratransit pass elimination and fare raises affecting seniors and disabled riders.
  • Shayana Mendez noted that not all Los Rios students receive discounts and challenged the board to spend a day in the shoes of disabled individuals.
  • Nick Bryant said people want cheaper fares, not higher.
  • Linda O'Neill (Capital Chapter, California Council of the Blind) opposed eliminating the monthly pass, citing multiple doctor appointments and working disabled people; recommended keeping the $125 pass.
  • Kathleen Berman (California Council of the Blind) urged rethinking the pass elimination and the senior monthly increase to $70, noting fare machine accessibility issues.
  • Barbara Stanton said the group does not support the 20% increase, paratransit pass elimination, or student lunch program raise; noted SSI recipients received only 8.5% total increase since 2009; requested comparison data on senior/disabled/paratransit fares from other major systems (citing Portland's $28 senior/disabled pass).
  • Roger Blackwell called for a comprehensive audit of RT spending.
  • Jeff Tartigia said information provided is inaccurate (e.g., Los Angeles pass cost) and urged customer convenience and ridership development.
  • Ralph Niz (President/Business Agent, ATU Local 256) clarified that union wages were frozen during interest arbitration for two years after 2009, and labor opposes the rate increase.
  • Steve Munez said the central city fare didn't work before, questioned fare box data methodology, noted light rail is an open system with limited revenue collection, and said the proposed increase is the highest in the nation per KFBK.
  • Carol Moss noted inflation is up but SSI recipients had no COLA, gas prices are under $2, and questioned why senior/disabled rates were raised more than regular rates.
  • Lori Jones said a flat increase is disproportionately negative for low-income riders and noted utility rate increases (10% per year for four years) coming at City Hall.
  • Pam Haney argued the proposal places the heaviest burden on those least able to afford it, erodes discounts for poor children, and removes the paratransit monthly pass without replacement options.
  • Janelle Smith (Wellspring Women's Center) said the change is not incremental, lacks a low-income provision, and the paratransit pass is a lifeline for community integration.
  • Chris Jensen (Resources for Independent Living) supported the central city fare but called the fare regressive, suggested a means-tested fare, and cited the issue paper's estimate of 3.5% ridership decrease per 10% price increase.
  • Fabrizio Sasso (Executive Director, Sacramento Central Labor Council, representing 170,000 union members) asked for smaller incremental increases (5% per year), a ballot proposal for new tax revenue, and implementation of cost-saving measures from Doug Carter's recommendations.
  • Tammy Dramer (Chair, Organize Sacramento) reported outrage from constituents over the 20% increase and paratransit pass elimination, and called for alternative funding like a regional gas tax.
  • Arthur Ketterley suggested phasing fare increases and bringing back the central city fare.
  • Tiffany Finkers (Deputy Executive Director, Paratransit Inc.) noted the state standard for demand-responsive systems is 10% fare box recovery (with a 5% goal for ADA systems), compared to RT's current 12.3%; noted paratransit passengers pay 76% of base fare on average with no fare evasion; and offered to partner with RT on creative solutions.

Key Outcomes

• Consent calendar (minus item 3) approved unanimously; item 3 (Elk Grove service agreement amendment) approved unanimously.
• Board appointments to various boards and commissions approved unanimously with changes (Jennings to retirement board, Miller and Hume to Capitol Corridor, Harris to streetcar contingent on conflict check).
• No action taken on the fare proposal (informational item); it will proceed to a 30-day public review with at least five public workshops in February, and a staff recommendation is expected in March.
• Board members expressed consensus that the 20% increase is too high and suggested phased increases, a target revenue number, modeling of options, comparison data from other systems, and exploration of alternative revenue sources (including a potential November ballot measure). Director Hansen proposed 5% increases in July and January, contingent on a November ballot initiative. Director McGlashin and Director Budge supported distance-based fares. Chair Shaneer requested a target figure and modeling of different phase-in scenarios with triggers.
• Staff will consider board feedback and incorporate options into public outreach materials.